Wednesday, July 30, 2003
|
Wednesday, July 30, 2003 |
|
Watson seeks new trial, cites 'errors' by judge By JOHN MUNFORD
Attorneys representing convicted murderer Jim Watson have filed a motion seeking a new trial, alleging that several errors during last year's case prejudiced the jury. A Fulton County jury found Watson guilty last June for the murder of his wife, Beverley Watson, whose remains were found in 1999 in a wooded area in south Fulton County. Jim Watson originally told police that his wife walked away from their home in east Fayette County on Jan. 18, 1997 and never returned. In requesting the new trial, Jim Watson's attorneys argue that Fulton County Superior Court Judge T. Jackson Bedford should have issued a directed verdict in Watson's favor at the conclusion of evidence presented by prosecutors. "The state succeeded at trial, not because it produced enough evidence to prove Watson's guilt, but because it was allowed to introduce enough evidence to convince 12 people to dislike him," according to court documents submitted by defense attorneys Lee Sexton, Ricky Morris and Scott Key. Prosecutors didn't present any eyewitnesses to the killing and the medical examiner could not establish a cause of death, the attorneys argue. The medical examiner did testify, however, that she believed Beverley Watson was murdered, partially due to the location her remains were discovered. Prosecutors have yet to reply to the lengthy 137-page filing by Watson's defense team. The defense attorneys are also asking the court to reverse Jim Watson's conviction since prosecutor Sheila Ross argued that he killed his wife in Fayette County and dumped the body in Fulton County. The indictment alleges that the murder occurred in Fulton County, the attorneys said, so they were unprepared to defend an allegation that the killing took place in Fayette. The attorneys also argue that three witnesses should not have been allowed to testify about various detailed claims that Beverley Watson told them of emotional and physical abuse at the hands of her husband. The testimony of those witnesses, Ellen Lord, Debbie White and Krista Hinkle should have been considered unreliable for a variety of reasons, the attorneys argued. Chief among those reasons was that Beverley Watson had a reason to lie to them so she could "strengthen her claim of mental or physical cruelty in a divorce petition," the brief states. "She also had a motive to cast her husband in a negative light in her efforts to win alimony from him as well as the marital home, custody of their children and child support," defense attorneys said. The attorneys also took issue with several comments made by Judge Bedford in the presence of the jury. On one occasion the judge complimented the testimony of an expert witness for the state, defense attorneys said. Attorneys also said Bedford should have allowed them to play the audio of news footage that depicted Watson's reaction to his wife's disappearance and later news of her death. Bedford ruled at the trial that the video portion only could be played since the footage featured Watson proclaiming his innocence and such statements are disallowed as evidence. The attorneys noted that prosecutor Sheila Ross alleged that Jim Watson had no remorse after the disappearance of his wife and later after he learned she had been killed. "Had the jury heard various interviews with the news media, then it could have heard the remorse in his voice," the brief states. The attorneys also allege that Ross committed prosecutorial misconduct by commenting on Watson's lack of remorse, thereby making his character an issue at trial, and by asking the jury to "speak" for Beverley Watson with a guilty verdict, which defense attorneys said played on the jury's emotions.
|
||