WINONA — Attorneys were preparing for closing arguments this morning in the sixth murder trial of Curtis Giovanni Flowers.
Flowers, 40, is accused of killing four people at Tardy Furniture in 1996, allegedly over money withheld from his paycheck for damaging goods. He faces the death penalty if convicted.
Circuit Judge Joseph Loper denied a defense motion for a mistrial today. Flowers’ attorneys had claimed the investigation of the case was never completed.
Loper also rejected an attempt by the defense to allow testimony from Robert Johnson, a former Jackson police chief who is now a consultant for law enforcement practices.
During a hearing apart from jurors Thursday, Johnson testified that certain practices during the investigation didn’t measure up to standards accepted in law enforcement.
The prosecution argued that Johnson’s opinions were not admissible.
Johnson said Thursday that he saw three basic problems with the investigation: a lapse in organization and management, failures to meet investigative standards and an early focus on one potential suspect.
He said there were several instances in which officers did not sufficiently document their actions during the investigation. He said a prevalent motto in law enforcement is that “if there’s no report, it didn’t happen.”
Johnson said investigators did not identify a central leader on the investigation to handle incoming information. Based on witness testimony he had heard, “no one owned responsibility for this investigation,” he said.
He also criticized the investigators for not keeping an extensive case file that was centrally located and examined by someone in charge of the investigation.
The prosecution argued that investigators held regular meetings at the Winona Police Department to brief all agencies involved and a central file was kept at the district attorney’s office.
Johnson said based on his analysis of the testimony, the investigation is not yet completed.
“Some of the flaws in the case could be corrected, but some are way past due,” he said.
He said focusing on Flowers early “to the exclusion of all others” may have prevented a fuller investigation. The prosecutors said they had examined other suspects and followed proper procedure.
A specific example given by the defense was that Doyle Simpson, the owner of a gun that is consistent with bullets found at the murder scene, was never given a gunshot residue test.
The defense also attacked the use of a photo array used to identify Flowers in a lineup. Johnson said that in his opinion, the lineup was suggestive.
When asked by the defense if he thought that the identification of Flowers as a suspect was premature, Johnson responded, “No, I can’t say that.”
When questioned by the prosecution, Johnson said there are no minimum standards for an investigation. He said he could not definitively say that the outcome of the investigation would have been different had the investigators followed all guidelines.
The prosecution argued to the judge that the guidelines Johnson listed are to be followed under ideal circumstances but that not following them doesn’t mean the investigation should be disregarded. The prosecution also said Johnson should not be allowed to testify before the jury on the reliability of the officers’ investigation. They said assessing witnesses’ credibility is the duty of the jury.
The defense also examined other witnesses Thursday.
Connie Moore, the girlfriend of Flowers at the time of the slayings, testified that shoes purportedly collected from Flowers when he was brought in for questioning did not belong to him.
She said that if officers claimed the pair of size 10.5 Nike tennis shoes admitted into evidence were taken from Flowers’ feet, they were lying.
Moore further said Flowers did not wear a size 10.5.
Bloody footprints found at Tardy Furniture after four people were fatally shot in the head there match up with size 10.5 Grant Hill Filas.
In 1996, Moore provided investigators with a shoe box for that pair of shoes from inside her home, which she shared with Flowers. Officers said the box was empty, but Moore said it contained bows.
The shoes themselves were never recovered. Moore said she bought them for her son.
The defense also spent more than three hours questioning John Johnson, an investigator for the district attorney, about his methods in collecting evidence and interviewing potential witnesses. At several points, he admitted “it may have been a good idea” to document events more thoroughly.
He disputed the defense’s theory that the investigation was too narrow. “We didn’t rule anyone out as a suspect in the beginning,” he said. “We tried to keep an open investigation.”
He said Simpson was not given a gunshot residue test because he had collected information indicating that Simpson was working during the time of the murders.
The defense asked if Johnson had used a $30,000 reward to influence potential witnesses. He said he had nothing to do with the reward and “wasn’t made aware of it before it was announced or proposed.”
Johnson also showed the prosecution locations on a map witnesses had testified to seeing Flowers on the morning of the murders. He said he walked around the area, canvassing for witnesses.
Liz Van Horn, a former Winona police officer, said she accompanied John Johnson during an interview with Latarsha Blissett. Blissett testified Wednesday that she was told about the $30,000 reward during her interview. Van Horn said the reward was not discussed, and she had been in Blissett’s company the entire time.
• Contact Taylor Kuykendall at tkuykendall@gwcommonwealth.com.
