EP 7: criminal charges to be filed & ‘the list’
HAVE A COMMENT, QUESTION, CONCERN OR JUST A SHOUTOUT? CALL AND LEAVE A MESSAGE ON OUR PODCAST HOTLINE. YOU MAY HAVE YOUR MESSAGE INCLUDED IN AN UPCOMING EPISODE OR SHARED VIA SOCIAL MEDIA….. (405) 466-5622
TRANSCRIPT
Episode 7 ׀ Daniel Holtzclaw: Criminal Charges to be Filed and ‘The List’
[OPENING MUSIC]
Disclaimer: This podcast deals with adult subject matter, including depictions of drug addiction, prostitution, sexual assault, and rape. Parental guidance is suggested.
00:37 [OPENING AUDIO COLLAGE]
Newscaster: Officer Daniel Holtzclaw, with the Police Department for three years, is accused of raping and sexually assaulting women he pulled over while on the job.
Jannie Ligons: He said, ‘Come on, come on, just a minute, just a minute’. I say, ‘Sir, I can’t do this’. I say, ‘you gonna shoot...’
Det. Kim Davis: Tell me your description of him.
Sherri Ellis: He’s black.
Det. Kim Davis: He’s b—okay, he’s a black male.
Det. Kim Davis: What did your daughter tell you?
Amanda Gates: She said, ‘I met this really hot cop’.
Shardayreon Hill: So, this is good evidence?
Det. Rocky Gregory: Well, you tell me.
[OPENING AUDIO COLLAGE ENDS]
Timestamp: The following episode contains investigative events which occurred between July 16th and July 24, 2014.
01:28
Host: Welcome back to season one of Bates Investigates. I am your host, licensed private investigator Brian Bates and I am taking an in-depth look from the perspective of the prosecution, but with the scrutiny of the defense of the case of the State of Oklahoma vs. Daniel Holtzclaw. This is episode seven. Last episode ended with Oklahoma City Sex Crimes Detective Rocky Gregory completing his third and final interview with forty-three year old accuser Terri Morris on July 10th of 2014. In that interview, Terri Morris abruptly changed her allegations, as to time and location, so that she now directly implicated Holtzclaw as the police officer who sexually assaulted her. I'll remind you, that sudden change only came after Detective Gregory suggested a new location and date for her alleged sexual assault during his June 24th meeting with Morris. That meeting, and the new location suggestion, came only one day after accuser Jannie Ligons went public with her allegations during a TV news interview—an interview where she claimed she was sexually assaulted on the Northeast side of Oklahoma City, near Liberty Station Apartments. And we know Morris knew about Ligons' public allegations because she mentions that she and Shelton discussed what was reported on the news. And finally, what's happening in Morris' life when she decides to go with Detective Gregory's new location and timeline? She's been sitting in the Oklahoma County Jail, unable to make bail, for almost a week. Six days after Morris' final interview, Sex Crimes Detectives Kim Davis and Rocky Gregory met with members of the Oklahoma County District Attorney's office. During that meeting, prosecutor Gayland Gieger confirmed he would be filing two counts of felony Forcible Oral Sodomy against then Oklahoma City Patrol Officer Daniel Holtzclaw as a result of Ligons’ and Morris' complaints. To help explain exactly what that means and how that process actually works, I recently sat down with a long-time friend of mine and former prosecutor with the Oklahoma County DA's office, Angela Sonagerra.
03:55 [RECORDING BEGINS]
Brian Bates: How long have we known each other now?
Angela Sonagerra: Well, I don’t want anybody know what our high school reunion is coming up
Both: [laughing]
Angela Sonagerra: But let’s just say quite a while.
Brian Bates: We we—we met in high school—Putnam City High School—was it the newspaper staff?
Angela Sonagerra: Prob—yes, I think it was, cause I think you were a photographer, either that or Yearbook. I was on both so…
Brian Bates: I think I did photography and I did, like, the cartoons.
Angela Sonagerra: Right.
Brian Bates: The little editorial cartoons or something, and, and so, we’ve known each other really ever since then. You went, and, went to law school. Where’d you got to law school at?
Angela Sonagerra: OCU.
Brian Bates: OCU. Uh, just so people know, uh, I actually am finishing up my last semester at UCO and the plan is for me to go to OCU starting next year.
Angela Sonagerra: What have I told you about going to law school? [laughing]
Brian Bates: I know. Everyone tells me. The lawyers I work with are like, ‘Why would you do this to yourself? Why would you do this to our county?’ Uh, ‘Don’t do it!’ Uh, but it is something I haven’t talked to a lot of people about, but it, but the Holtzclaw case is part of the reason, uh, that got me interested in it. I’ve been a PI for a long time. I’ve, I’ve been a, a, a thorn in the side of the DA’s office for a while. I’ve been all these things, and so I’ve decided, uh, I finally figured out what I want to do when I grow up and…
Angela Sonagerra: Brian Bates with a law degree is very scary thought.
Brian Bates: Yeah, it could be very scary. So that, that is the plan. I’m in my last semester at, at UCO. And then the plan is to go on to law school. So, you, you, though, took the more direct route and actually went straight from college to law school. How long have you been a lawyer now?
Angela Sonagerra: Oh, gosh… 2019, so it would be eighteen years in April. Wow!
Brian Bates: Eighteen years. Now did you immediately go over to the dark side and go to the DA’s office?
Angela Sonagerra: [laughing] No, I did not. I, I bounced around a little bit. I did, actually did civil practice first for a couple of years. Uh, like, consumer protection stuff. You know, suing car dealerships, uh, things of that nature. Uh, then I went to, I did child support enforcement for a little while, for a couple years, and then I joined the, the DA staff in 07 shortly after Mr. Prater was elected.
05:53
Brian Bates: Okay, so right after, which is, our current DA, David Prater, you went to work while he was the DA, and then, when did you leave the DA’s office?
Angela Sonagerra: Uh, almost two and a half years ago.
Brian Bates: So, how many years total were you with the DA’s office?
Angela Sonagerra: Ten.
Brian Bates: Okay. So, ten years. Pretty good amount of time at the DA’s office. All under District Attorney, David Prater.
Angela Sonagerra: Correct.
Brian Bates: Who’s run unopposed ever since he took the office.
Angela Sonagerra: I believe that—yes.
Brian Bates: Right? Which I, I would consider a feather in his cap, no one’s wanted to run up against him, but…
Sure.
Brian Bates: I also don’t know how many people want the workload that comes with it.
Angela Sonagerra: Probably a little bit of both.
Brian Bates: Okay, and then, you left couple years ago, and are you back in private practice now?
Angela Sonagerra: Uh, I’m actually a criminal defense attorney now. I work for the Hunsucker Legal Group.
Brian Bates: You saw the light.
Angela Sonagerra: [laughing]
Brian Bates: You’re out there trying to preserve justice on the right side of the law.
Angela Sonagerra: [laughing]
Brian Bates: Now, is Oklahoma County, is it the largest county as far as for criminal cases in Oklahoma?
Angela Sonagerra: I believe so. Uh, Tulsa is really close, but I think Oklahoma County still is the largest.
Brian Bates: How many actual criminal cases do you all think you pursue in a year?
Angela Sonagerra: I think 2016 was the largest that I can recall and that was the year I think ten thousand charges were filed. Now, I think it’s dropped since then, but I, I would say around seven to eight thousand charges a year.
Brian Bates: Okay. And you were working at the DA’s office during the time of Daniel Holtzclaw’s case, were you not?
Angela Sonagerra: Yes, I was.
Brian Bates: But, just to be clear to everybody, you didn’t work on this case, you didn’t have access to the discovery, it was just something going on in your office. And it was Gayland Gieger and who else that prosecuted this?
Angela Sonagerra: Uh, I…
Brian Bates: Was it Laura?
Angela Sonagerra: I think it—Lori McConnell was what I’ve heard.
Brian Bates: So, Gayland and Laura, they prosecuted it, but you just know what you heard in the office, what you saw on the news.
Angela Sonagerra: Well, and I saw the court room, yeah. I, I had no—I, I prosecuted White Collar c—crimes at the time, so I was literally on the other side of the office from Lori and Gayland and, uh—cause they’re in a separate unit. I had no idea of any specifics, just, if I happened to be in court sometimes when Mr. Holtzclaw was there, I would see what was going on, but I didn’t have any insight whatsoever, I was too busy with my own cases.
08:00
Brian Bates: What units did you work in?
Angela Sonagerra: Well, everyone starts out in misdemeanor, and then you kinda move up to a felony docket after that, and then I worked the felony docket—I worked kinda different places on the felony docket and then ultimately ended up on White Collar, White Collar unit for the longest period of time.
Brian Bates: And I won’t put you on the spot to, you know, what’s your opinion of the case, was justice served or denied? My main reason for wanting to talk to you is, you were obviously aware of the case as it was happening, cause probably a lot of people just in the DA’s office talked about it. It was a big deal.
Angela Sonagerra: Sure.
Brian Bates: What I really want is for you to help me better understand, and for the audience to understand, the process of a—a—a DA’s office.
Angela Sonagerra: Yeah, Mr. Prater’s the elected District Attorney, and then everyone who works under him are Assistant District Attorneys. Just kinda like the Public Defender’s office. Mr. Ravitz is the Public Defender, all of his employees are Assistant Public Defenders.
Brian Bates: Okay, now, there’s, like, a next in charge under Prater, and what do they call that position?
Angela Sonagerra: First Assistant.
Brian Bates: And at the time who was the First Assistant?
Angela Sonagerra: Uh, Scott Rowland.
Brian Bates: Okay, and then Scott Rowland left, do you remember what year he left?
Angela Sonagerra: I think it was, I had already left at that point, but I think it was seventeen.
Brian Bates: Okay, and then I think it’s important to note, where did he go right after the DA’s office?
Angela Sonagerra: He is on the Court of Criminal Appeals.
Brian Bates: Right. And, uh, even though we’re doing this podcast in order, there’s really no spoilers, most people know how this case ends, Daniel gets convicted. Actually at this point in real time, uh, here we are in, in August of 2019, the, the decision has come out on, uh, Mr. Holtzclaw’s appeal and it was affirmed, which means it was denied, but the interesting part is Scott Rowland, who was First Assistant at the time during Daniel’s trial, he then moved to the Court of Criminal Appeals, but he had to recuse himself from an opinion on the appeal because he was so closely tied to the, to the trial itself. He would, he, you know, obviously would have been biased because he was in the DA’s office at the time. And I gotta ask, so, have you been listening to the podcast?
10:02
Angela Sonagerra: I have.
Brian Bates: Okay. Are you completely caught up?
Angela Sonagerra: No, I’m not.
Brian Bates: What—what episode are you on?
Angela Sonagerra: Uh, just the latest episode, I think it’s six?
Brian Bates: Yep.
Angela Sonagerra: Is that correct? Uh, I think I’m about halfway through it.
Brian Bates: Okay.
Angela Sonagerra: Cause I listen to it as I’m driving around town or if I’m going out of county on a case, and, uh, I, it’s a very active listening podcast so sometimes I have to rewind to catch stuff and, uh, it sometimes takes me a little longer.
Brian Bates: We’re at the point that they just finished—or Detective Gregory has just finished his interview—his third interview with Terri Morris and this is the interview where she now changes virtually everything. And she now says that it happened on the other side of town, she’s basically describing or pretty detailed describing a stop that Daniel Holtzclaw had committed, uh, with her. So, now that, that, both, uh, Detective Gregory and Detective Davis are done with that part of the investigation, it appears that last episode with Terri Morris happened about July 10th. On July 16th, there is a note in a police report that, uh, basically says that the detectives have spoke with ADA Gayland Gieger and that at this point he has agreed that he is going to file one charge each based on Ligons’ complaint and Terri Morris’ complaint. And he’s agreed that he’s going to file one count each of Forcible Oral Sodomy. Ultimately, there’s additional charges that he also files. I think another important note is those charges weren’t actually even filed until August 21st of 2014. So, we’re talking well over a month after he said he was going to file charges before they’re filed, so what I want the audience to understand is what is the process (myth versus reality) of how you go from allegations and police investigating allegations to the point that a district attorney’s office decides to file or not file or ask for them to do some more investigating. How does all that come about?
Angela Sonagerra: Well, basically, i—it—the process is called screening. Unlike Law and Order, they don’t go out to a crime scene and help the cops investigate, or, you know. Some of—we do h—have—we did have an on-call phone where we would help aid officers or detectives if they had a question, but, uh, for the most part, they don’t go out to crime scenes unless maybe there’s something very, very high profile, but a—a—at the very minimum they would be notified of it. Basically, screening is where the ADA or the team leader would go to the police department once a week and literally screen charges. Like, the detectives would have a stack of, of charges on their blue sheets.
12:38
Brian Bates: And what are blue sheets?
Angela Sonagerra: That is the, the sheet where the police list all the information, uh, like the, the victim’s name, the suspect’s name, all that. Their vital information, the possible charges, evidence that’s gonna be exhibited, and witnesses, and it is literally a blue sheet, uh, legal size piece of paper. There are stacks of blue sheets and they are like, ‘H—here are some we would like for you to file.’ The ADA would look them over, read the reports, if they, you know, if they’re not really, really, really long, but see if they fit the elements of the crime that they’re alleging has been committed and if it requires follow-up say, ‘Well, there’s not enough there. See if you can find out, you know, this information.’ You know, ‘Go talk to this witness again, or see if you can find some other witnesses, or somebody that knows something else about it.’ If, if they’re okay with it then they’ll agree to, to, to file it. If not, they’ll tell the detective they’re gonna decline those charges. Like I said, it’s literally a blue sheet.
Brian Bates: Do the detectives, do they make the suggestion, ‘We think it’s one count each of Forcible Oral Sodomy’ or do they just present the facts and then the ADA will decide what the appropriate charge would be or is it a mix of the two?
Angela Sonagerra: It’s a mix of the two. Like, a lot of times, what they’ll do is, uh, let’s, just, like, on a traffic stop they’ll present charges of, for example, t—DUI, Speeding, Left of Center, Illegal, uh, you know, Expired Tag. Well, when they talk to the prosecutor, the prosecutor, the ADA may agree well let’s just file the, the, the DUI and the Speeding charge. So, whatever the police list on that blue sheet doesn’t meant that that’s what’s go—actually gonna get filed. Again, for various reasons, it could be that they don’t have enough information on one charge versus the other, or maybe one charge fits better than the other. Because you’re—you’re supposed to file the most specific charge you can according to statute. And, and it may be they presented ten charges to, to somebody and they only felt two were appropriate at that time. Now that doesn’t mean other charges can’t follow as, as information is developed. But at that time they may only have enough, uh, evidence, enough proof of two charges.
14:49
Brian Bates: Okay, which is what I think happened in this case. Because, as the, as the report that Rocky Gregory and, and Kim Davis filed said on, on July 16th that Gayland Gieger, who ultimately prosecutes this case at trial and that he was gonna file one count each of Forcible Oral Sodomy. Now two things happen since then: One, it was actually more charges than that. They, they ended up charging, uh, Daniel with, on, and specifically to Jannie Ligons, they charged him with one count of Forcible Oral Sodomy and one count of Procuring Lewd Exhibition. And then with Terri Morris, again one count of, uh, Forcible Oral Sodomy, and then two counts of Procuring for Lewd Exhibition. Now, kind of to explain to the audience, just because the, the, uh, the, the prosecutor said, ‘We’re gonna file these charges.’ Obviously charges were not filed right away, it was over a month later, so if he’s agreed to file, why, why don’t they file and arrest immediately?
Angela Sonagerra: Well, it, it’s a bit of a process. After the charges are approved by the ADA, they take them back, they take the blue sheets back to the office, they, they go through and just review everything again just to make sure everything’s good and they’ll sign the charges. Then they’re given to a secretary to, to be typed up, because as—when charges are filed there’s specific language that has to be in them. When that’s done it’s given back to the ADA for signature for final approval and to make sure that, that they got everything that they want to file or if they want to change something they can do that at that time, and then they’re taken to the Court Clerk’s office and filed that way. And then at that point a little bit further down the road, you know, an Arrest Warrant is issued. So, it could take several weeks or a month or two, whatever, for charges to be fil—to, to for charges to be actually filed.
Brian Bates: And then that’s kind of a fluid thing. As we saw, initially it was one charge each, well it ends up becoming two charges for one, three for the other, but by the, by the time they file the charges in, uh, in August of 2014, there are several more accusers or victims that have been identified that are added to these charges. So, is this, is this just more or less just a green light for the detectives to continue to investigate this. That, that they are going to file charges, but if there are some additional warranted charges continue to investigate this, or would there be a reason why, why did they present now if they obviously thought there were more victims? Why didn’t they wait til they had this entire list of people they think should be charged? Why did they, did they go, cause they actually amend the charges at least three times in this case.
17:20
Angela Sonagerra: Uh, that’s really not unusual either. I mean, just sometimes more information comes to light. Or, like you just said, some people, uh, come forward a little bit later in the process. Uh, or they, they, they just, they talk to other people and that warrants, uh, more charges. Or more information from the victim comes to light. I mean, cause i—i—when police talk to somebody, a, a victim, you know, they may not be for—very forthcoming at first because they’re scared or your—they’re worried, you know, or something like that. And then later on as the process kinda goes through, they may become a little more relaxed and say, ’Well, you know, I did remember about this, this part too.’ And, I mean, it, it is a very fluid process and, and in fact charges can even be amended well after the fact.
Brian Bates: I’ve, I’ve actually seen this too. Where a witness or a victim will testify and say something that was previously unknown and we show up the next morning to court or whatever and they’ve amended the charge and they, they’ve added something. Uh…
Angela Sonagerra: Right, a, a very common occurrence is if it gets to what’s called a Preliminary Hearing. Uh, a witness testifies in court at let’s just say Preliminary Hearing then the ADA can amend the charges right there in court because of new evidence that has come to light. That’s a very common occurrence too. So, they amend at the time and then formally amend it later on with the new documentation. Ultimately, the prosecution, when they go forward with their case, at pretty much every stage—well, every stage, you have to prove the elements of the crime. And when you get to a trial you have to prove the elements of each crime beyond a reasonable doubt. So, yeah, you wanna make that sure your ducks are in a row and that, like I said, when you’re even screening charges you have to see if those elements are present. And if they’re not, like I said, sometimes you can ask for follow-up from the detective to see if they can develop, like that, maybe that missing element, and if they can’t, then you, you can’t charge it, or you shouldn’t charge it. Uh, or if they’re—if they’re all there when you screen the charge then you agree to file it. So, absolutely, you’ve gotta, you’ve gotta have your elements.
Brian Bates: And those are defined under statute.
Angela Sonagerra: Correct.
And then those elements are actually presented to the jury right before the deliberation, are they not?
Angela Sonagerra: Correct. They’re, uh, Uniform, Oklahoma Uniform Jury Instructions (or OUJI’s as we call them) list, I mean, they literally list each element of the crime and those are given to the jury, uh, members in a packet and we go through each of them, the judge will read each of them, and it says if the State doesn’t prove these elements beyond a reasonable doubt then you have to find them not guilty.
19:58
Brian Bates: This is really the first time in the podcast, in, in last episode and really this episode, uh, we’ve introduced the audience to Assistant District Attorney Gayland Gieger. If you’d kind of just give me, so the audience understands, from your perspective, who Gayland is. You know, my perspective is he’s a long-time prosecutor, he’s one of the best in the office. I may have my own personal opinions about him, but it, it doesn’t change the fact that I look at him as a lethal weapon, uh, in the DA’s office. I think he’s really good. He can get up there and just talk and doesn’t have to look at a script and just kinda, you know, goes after the other side. What, I—if you, if someone said, ‘Well, who is this Gayland Gieger guy in the, in the DA’s office?’ What would you tell people?
Angela Sonagerra: Pretty much what you said, he’s an amazing prosecutor. Uh, I—I believe he started out at the Juvenile Division, and, but he’s been in the downtown office for many, many years, and very, very smart. I mean, he’s not head of the Sex Crimes Unit for nothing. You know, that’s a very difficult unit in and of itself. And I’ve seen him in trial before and even now as a defense attorney, I’m still in awe of him because i—you know trial skills are, are very, uh, you know, some people have it and some people don’t, but some people can learn it and, but Gayland, you know, uh, he’s, he’s a great prosecutor and I would be, you know, if I, if I defended, you know, sex crimes, I w—I would be very nervous going up against him in trial. And that’s not to say he wins every case he, he has, nobody does. But, yeah, you’re gonna have to work really, really hard, uh, because he’s gonna have, he’s gonna have his evidence, he’s gonna have his witnesses, he’s gonna have everything ready to go. And you’re gonna have to be, you’re gonna have to bring your A plus game.
Brian Bates: Right. And I, and I’ve, personally, of course, not a lawyer, but I’ve assisted other lawyers directly in the Holtzclaw case which he prosecuted, and we had another big high profile case, uh, a Dr. Burt Franklin, a dentist who was accused of, of Murder and Solicitation of Murder, Gayland prosecuted that one. Uh, I’ve had one or two other ones in there that Gayland prosecuted, and then I’ve watched him prosecute cases. And when we get to the trial part, I certainly take issue with some of the strategies, or some of the things that Gayland does, and, and one of the things he did during closing certainly is a hot button issue with it, but those things aside, I’ve always told people if you’re being charged with a crime one of the first things you want to look at who’s your judge? Cause that makes a difference.
22:16
Angela Sonagerra: Right.
Brian Bates: Who’s your prosecutor?
Angela Sonagerra: Right.
Brian Bates: I think going forward, while I may have some criticisms of Gayland, I do want to go on the record and say that, uh, he—there’s a reason he has that position. You know, I don’t understand why he’s not the First Assistant, uh, because I think he is that good. But would you consider him to be one of their A Team, top prosecutors, that when it’s a big case, high profile and they need to win, he’s, he’s on their short list?
Angela Sonagerra: Oh, without a doubt.
Brian Bates: This case has now been going on since June 18th of 2014, and at this point it’s just less than a month later that Gayland’s agreed to file charges. And they have relieved Daniel of duty, they’ve taken his badge and his gun, his uniform and his car away from him. But he’s out free. I mean, my understanding would be, h—I—I assume he could leave the country if he wanted to at this point, could he not?
Angela Sonagerra: Uh, if he wasn’t charged. Yeah.
Brian Bates: Yeah. He hasn’t been charged with anything at this point, but he stays. Is it ever play into the prosecutor’s minds to expedite charges because they know that their defendant has basically been put on notice that they’re being investigated for some very serious crimes, but they haven’t been charged so there’s no restrictions on their movement, does that ever play into a prosecutor’s mind that we need to hurry up and file these charges and place this person under arrest so that we get them off our streets? Because it was, it was, you know, uh, more than a month after they agreed to file charges before they actually did file those charges. Was—w—i —is it surprising at all that they didn’t just go ahead and file these initial two charges, get him in jail, get him off the streets, and then just file more later?
Angela Sonagerra: Well, you don’t really like to file something, just to file something, because, you know, you wanna, you wanna get it right. You wanna make sure you’ve got everything, uh, in order. You can technically amend charges, you know, various times, y—you just don’t wanna do that. I mean, you wanna—because it kind of hurts the credibility of your case if you have to keep amending charges or because you rushed to file something. It’s, it’s better to wait and make sure you’ve got the evidence, you’ve got the elements filled, and Holtzclaw was a police officer so he does have that sense of law and order. Now, I’m not, I—you know, I don’t know him personally, I’ve never met the man, but, you know, that’s probably kind of engrained in him at this point. But, they have a certain amount of time to file charges anyway, so by statute they could wait two and a half years if the statute of limitations is three years to file charges. And unfortunately, people just have to put their lives on hold. Although they us—generally don’t, but they could wait as long as they want.
24:49
Brian Bates: I’m assuming most cases probably are not on the radar of the District Attorney David Prater, but would a case like this have been on his radar from day one? Would he, would he, would they, would Gayland go to him or whatever and then say, ‘Hey, we’ve got something pretty serious involving a police officer that we’re in the investigative stages of right now.’
Angela Sonagerra: Oh sure. That’s, that’s not unusual at all. Again, with any high profile, uh, situation like that. I mean they just want to make sure that, you know, with it being high profile, everyone’s aware of what’s going on, in case, you know, maybe somebody in the press calls or something, you know. But for, like you said, the, the day to day stuff, that’s, that’s, that wouldn’t be taken to, to a team leader or Prater.
Brian Bates: Despite the fact that we’re, we’re friends on this, I, regardless you’re a professional, you know, we all live for our weekends. I really appreciate you taking time out on a Saturday morning in particular to come downtown and meet with me and talk about this case. And hopefully you’ll continue to be a listener. And we’re, we’re ultimately coming up on the charges being filed and they’ll be amended and there’s bonds that are set and bonds that are reduced and things like that, and so, if you’d be willing, I’d love to, uh, just go ahead and extend now an offer for you to return and kind of be our, sort of one of our, legal experts who just pops in from time to time and gives your opinion or at least educates our audience as to why, from a prosecutor’s perspective, why things are happening the way that they are.
Angela Sonagerra: Sure, I’ll be glad to do that. And there are certainly, uh, better educated and smarter lawyers than me, but I’m happy to do it whenever you need me.
Brian Bates: Well, and you know all my high school secrets, so…
Angela Sonagerra: [laughing]
Brian Bates: …I’m gonna keep having you on just so you don’t share those with anybody else.
Angela Sonagerra: [laughing]
Brian Bates: I appreciate it and, uh, we’ll be in touch.
Angela Sonagerra: Glad to do it.
[RECORDING ENDS]
Host: Angela will probably be joining us in future episodes as we discuss the formal filing of criminal charges, Holtzclaw's arrest, bond, the filing of even more criminal charges, and even the trial process from the prosecution's standpoint. The next day, July 17, 2014 investigators claim they inquired with the Springlake Briefing Station's secretary as to the existence of any Field Interview cards from Holtzclaw's May 8th stop of Terri Morris. In fact, she allegedly states she didn't find any FI cards turned in by Holtzclaw for that entire shift. This small detail will become significant as more and more accusers are identified by detectives. On July 18, 2014, Detective Gregory ran Daniel Holtzclaw's name and identifying information through several of their public and private databases.
27:27
One public database that is pretty popular throughout Oklahoma is OSCN.net. That stands for the Oklahoma State Courts Network. It's a publicly accessible online database that provides a very comprehensive list of all interactions individuals have had within the Oklahoma court system. If you've ever been charged with a crime, been sued, gotten married or divorced, changed your name, had a VPO, or really anything that involved a county courthouse in Oklahoma, then it's probably in that database. When investigators entered Holtzclaw's name, all they found was a link to a civil case filed in January of 2014. The case named Holtzclaw, other police officers, then Chief Bill Citty, and the City of Oklahoma City. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a man that died while being taken into custody by Holtzclaw and other officers. I briefly mentioned this death in episode four and that Holtzclaw and the other officers were cleared in the death. That lawsuit was transferred to federal court in April of 2014. Detectives next ran Holtzclaw's name through several less public databases like OSBI and NCIC. Those efforts did not turn up any useful information. On July 22, 2014, Detective Kim Davis calls Holtzclaw's FOP appointed attorney, Susan Knight. Detective Davis tells Knight that DNA belonging to an unknown female was discovered on the fly area of Holtzclaw's uniform pants. Davis asks Knight if Holtzclaw would make himself available to investigators to try and obtain a list of potential DNA contributors. Knight told Davis she would speak with Holtzclaw and then call her right back. According to investigative notes, a few minutes later, Knight called Detective Davis and reportedly told her, "Under the advice of counsel, Daniel Holtzclaw would not come in for an interview." Detective Davis reportedly then asked if Knight would obtain a list of potential DNA contributors from Holtzclaw and then pass that information along to investigators. Knight responded by telling Detective Davis that Holtzclaw had already previously given a statement and that was all he was going to give. Now, before you go criticizing Holtzclaw for allegedly not cooperating, just know that this is pretty standard defense attorney posturing. Knowing Holtzclaw as well as I did during that time, he pretty much went along with whatever his attorneys advised him to do. According to investigative notes and trial transcripts, due to the presence of the unknown female DNA on Officer Holtzclaw's uniform pants, detectives made the decision to seek out yet unknown potential victims.
30:36
I feel compelled at this point to put into clearer context the DNA that has now become center stage in this investigation. Some of you may hear the term DNA and think that means some sort of sexual fluids. That would be incorrect in this circumstance. As will be testified to by police lab analyst Elaine Taylor at trial, the DNA she found is simply skin cells. Exactly what would be transferred to your hand if you and I shook hands right now. And exactly the same type of skin cell DNA that you could then transfer to say a coffee cup, a pen, or even the fly of your pants. In that example it would most likely be an extremely tiny amount of skin cells. And, an extremely tiny amount of skin cells is exactly all that was found in Holtzclaw's case. So, for clarification, there was no physical evidence of any sexual contact found by the prosecution—no blood, no semen, no saliva and no vaginal secretions—just skin cells. I will be digging deep into the DNA when we get to that part of the jury trial. I just felt it was important that you understand what the term DNA means at this point in the investigation. This new phase of the investigation, seeking the contributor of the DNA found, first relied on data that was pulled right after Jannie Ligons came forward on the morning of June 18, 2014. You may remember that in episode four, I mentioned that Lieutenant Muzny requested copies of the names of all females Officer Holtzclaw had run through his computer from April of 2014 to June 18th of 2014. After Detective Gregory had, at least in his mind, connected Holtzclaw to both Ligons’ and Morris' sexual assault allegations, he next began looking more closely at who all Holtzclaw had had contact with to try and identify any additional accusers. According to a report filed by Lieutenant Muzny: "I contacted Unit Eight Hundred and had the Supervisor, Janet Mansfield, look up all females that Two Charlie Forty-Five ran through them from April 2014 to June 18, 2014. She gave me a list and I began checking the names thorough our Varuna system to see if any of the persons checked had a criminal history. I was specifically looking for women who had either a drug history and/or a history of prostitution. I then made a list of women who I felt we needed to make contact with to see if they were a victim of sexual assault. Signed Lieutenant Timothy Muzny."
33:34
I want you to pay close attention to the number of times I quote from the investigator's own reports that they constantly refer to a "list" when reaching out to potential victims. While a list of everyone Holtzclaw ever ran through his computer does exist (and, I've posted a redacted version of that initial list on this episode's homepage at holtzclawtrial.com) detectives will over and over again reference a much more condensed and targeted list provided by Lieutenant Muzny. In fact, I just read that to you. "I then made a list of women who I felt we needed to make contact with to see if they were a victim of sexual assault." In an unbelievable turn of events, Lieutenant Muzny and Detectives Kim Davis and Rocky Gregory will later deny at trial that any such list ever existed—which is pretty remarkable when you consider this quote regarding the next accuser I will be discussing. On July 23, 2014 Detective Davis writes the following in her investigative report: "Lieutenant Muzny gave me a list of several females that he wanted contacted because they could be possible victims of Officer Holtzclaw. When he gave me this list we still had not found a match to the unidentified female DNA on Officer Holtzclaw's pants. Kala Lyles was on the list." Lyles is identified within police records as a twenty-nine year old black female, on probation at the time, with multiple felony convictions for Possession of Cocaine, Possession with Intent to Distribute, and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia. Lyles has also served prison time for her crimes. That said, there is no information in the detectives’ notes, nor was it ever discussed at trial, as to whether or not Lyles ever engaged in prostitution. What most likely made Lyles' name appear on Lieutenant Muzny's list (that he later claims doesn't exist) is the fact Lyles is a black female with a history of drugs, and what is probably most important, she appears to have had contact with Holtzclaw in the early morning hours of June 18th, 2014.
36:06
That’s the same morning Jannie Ligons says she was sexually assaulted by Holtzclaw. This begs the obvious question to detectives - Could Lyles be the contributor of the DNA found on the uniform pants taken from him Holtzclaw on June 18th, 2014? Detectives Davis and Homan drive to the last address listed for Lyles in the Varuna database. This address turned out to be the home of Kala Lyles' parents. Lyles’ parents said that they had not seen their daughter in weeks. Detective Davis gave them her business card and asked them to have her call whenever they saw her next. That call would not come for almost two months. At the same time that Kala Lyles is on the detectives’ radar, another name immediately stuck out to Detective Gregory... Sherry Elllis. Ellis is identified in the police database as a thirty-nine year old black female with a felony conviction for Burglary, and misdemeanor convictions for Transporting a Loaded Firearm, Driving Under Suspension, Transporting an Open Container, and Prostitution. Like Lyles, Ellis too has served prison time for her crimes. Detective Gregory noted in his investigative notes that Patrol Officer Holtzclaw had run Ellis through the Varuna system four times within a two day period: May 7th and May 8, 2014. Those dates correspond with Morris' latest allegations that she was sexually assaulted by Holtzclaw after she walked away from the Liberty Station apartments on May 8th of 2014. Detectives set out to locate Ellis much in the same way they attempted to locate Lyles and Morris. They relied on information contained in their Varuna database. After leaving cards and messages with friends and family members, Ellis finally calls detectives back on August 5, 2014.
[RECORDING BEGINS]
Det. Kim Davis: I have received a tip on—I been workin—I work in Sex Crimes and I been working some cases, and I received a tip that you may have been sexually assaulted by a police officer.
Sherry Ellis: Yes, I have.
[RECORDING ENDS]
Host: I'm going to end this episode here, and you don't want to miss the next episode. You've probably heard about the accuser that described her attacker as a "short black police officer." Well, that's Ellis and her story is next in the investigative timeline.
38:44
If you’ve enjoyed this podcast, please take a moment to subscribe and give us a five star review. If you would like to know more and see many of the files used to compile this episode, please visit this season’s homepage at holtzclawtrial.com. You can also follow updates on our Facebook page at In Defense of Daniel Holtzclaw, or on Twitter @HoltzclawTrial. Bates Investigates - Season One: the Daniel Holtzclaw case is researched, produced, and edited by me, Brian Bates. This has been a bug stomper production.
[child singing] Huh? [squishing sound] [laughing] Bugs!