[The proceedings of November 19, 2008 end and the November 20, 2008
session begins at BMHR 1055, cross-examination of Dan Stidham continues.]
Problems were being caused in our approach to the case because Mr.
Misskelley, Sr. was making statements to the press, and we were geared towards
negotiating a plea. (BMHR 1072-1073). The records I reviewed prior to my
ABSTRACT 113

testimony including some of the tapes indicate that in August, I was talking to
Misskelley about an offer to waive the death penalty, and how I preferred a
specific term of years. (BMHR 1074).
I did have an ‘epiphany’ around the time I found out that his DNA was not
on the T-shirt, which was some time in late September. [The Court then hears an
audio tape of the August 19, 1993 meeting between Mr. Stidham and his client Mr.
Misskelley]. Misskelley relayed in that conversation that he had never seen the
victims before, and never saw them riding their bikes. (BMHR 1077-1078). He
then said that he had seen one bike. He never did anything with their bikes. He had
left walking by the Blue Beacon.
On the tape, Misskelley said that he did not recall a stick in the creek. Echols
carried a carved stick, but Misskelley did not remember if he had it with him that
day.
When he left, the boys’ clothes were piled up by the creek. Baldwin had a
pocket knife, a Buck knife. (BMHR 1081). Baldwin’s knife was one he sometimes
carried with him.
Misskelley denied knowing anything about cult activities, and peoples’ faces
painted in a manner described by Vickie Hutchison. He said he went to wrestling,
not to cult meetings. Misskelley also described his being at Hutchison’s house once
ABSTRACT 114

with Damien.
Misskelley explained he had been there when the police came to get him.
Misskelley explained that Mike Allen had picked him up. They then had a lie
detector test. He had then spoken with the detectives, one of whom was Detective
Gitchell. They had showed him a picture of one of the boys. He had started crying.
One of them had later said that they would see him executed. That was after
Misskelley explained ‘what happened’. (BMHR 1091-1092).
Misskelley explained that he had a white T-shirt on that day, and that he
often cut himself. He did not have any blood on him that day.
Misskelley explained that there was a lot of blood at the scene where all the
hitting and cutting took place.
I described my conversation with the prosecutor, and relayed to Misskelley
that the prosecutor might recommend life, and that a decision would need to be
made soon. If the prosecutor did make a recommendation of years, it would be
something like 40 years. The prosecutor might insist on a life sentence. Misskelley
responds by stating that he does not want to spent “almost all of my life in jail.”
(BMHR 1098). Misskelley then indicates that he would be willing to consider a
sentence in the 40 to 50 year range.
ABSTRACT 115

The conversation just heard took place in the big room of the Clay County
detention facility.
While it is true that on that tape he answered my question about blood on the
T-shirt by indicating that there was none, every day I talked to him, I would get
different answers. I was frustrated by the interaction.
I didn’t record every conversation. His version of events would change.
(BMHR 1110-1111). When I had the conversation with him that we just heard, my
concern was that he could not testify. I hadn’t yet figured out that he was giving
me a false confession. I didn’t understand the dynamics of false confessions.
I recall the occasion where I went to Pine Bluff with the prosecutors in
February, four days after Misskelley was convicted. That was the day I requested a
Bible. I taped that statement.
[The Court permitted this tape to be played over Misskelley’s objection that
it post-dated the conviction. Baldwin also objected to the evidence, and the Court
rules that “it’s certainly directed towards the defense of Misskelley, not Baldwin.
BMHR 1120]
As far as I know the tapes that produced the CD that we’re going to be
hearing are my original tapes. They may have been placed on the CD out of order.
[The tape of the February 8, 1994 session then begins. BMHR at 1127, and
ABSTRACT 116

ends at BMHR 1193]
The Court then heard a further part of the February 8, 1994 recording.
[Beginning at BMHR 1194, ending at 1201. Cross-examination of Mr. Stidham
resumes]
The persons heard on the February 8, 1994 tape were Misskelley and myself.
There were no law enforcement officers present. A Bible had been brought in, and
Misskelley had his hand on it.
I filed a discovery motion in the case as standard procedure. I later filed a
motion objecting to the taking of bodily fluids from my client to protect his rights.
(BMHR 1203-1204). We filed a motion for change of venue because we felt our
client needed a fair and impartial jury. We also filed some motions that I obtained
from attorney Bobbie McDaniel. We also joined in some of Baldwin’s motions.
(BMHR 1211-1213).
I also did litigate other motions. I don’t feel that I pursued DNA evidence
effectively, because I didn’t understand it well enough at the time. I did file
motions and get hearings on matters like the motion to suppress my client’s
statements and on the issue of my client’s mental retardation.
[Transcript Volume 5 ends at BMHR 1228, and Volume 6 begins at RT
1230]
ABSTRACT 117

Up to and through our conversation with Misskelley on August 19, 1993,
Misskelley did not understand what a lawyer was, and he thought that Mr. Crow
and I were police officers. I also acknowledge that I believe that our client told us
things that were not true.

DIRECT EXAMINATION BY JOHN PHILIPSBORN

There was no information sharing agreement with Baldwin’s lawyers Paul
Ford and Robin Wadley. They refused to work with the Echols lawyers and with
Mr. Crow and myself. (BMHR 1239).
The only thing they did do is to provide me a transcript of the conversation
that Paul Ford had with Dr. Peretti. But otherwise they were unwilling to
participate in a joint defense.
Once the Echols defense allowed us use of Mr. Lax’s services, we did not
share any of Lax’s work product, or that of his investigators, with Ford or Wadley.
(BMHR 1240).
In my view Mr. Ford was not clear in asking for severance. I recall telling
him to ask for severance, but he ignored me.
ABSTRACT 118

I never discussed the tapes that have been played in this hearing with
anyone.
I recall trying to track down the phone records of the call Misskelley said he
had with Baldwin. They were not available. I don’t recall either Ford or Wadley
approaching me about those records.
Ford and Wadley never approached me to ask me if I had any alibi
information that I could share with them. (BMHR 1244).
I don’t recall receiving any information to the effect that a hair had been
found in the ligatures used to bind one of the boys. (BMHR 1244).

REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MICHAEL BURT

At first, it was my understanding that Misskelley was guilty and that my job
was to try to work out a plea agreement for him. In speaking with him, I was trying
to get a version of events that corresponded with what he had told the police. I felt
that my role at that point was to prepare him to testify against the others. (BMHR
1247). I kept getting inconsistent statements.
Misskelley’s father started complaining about his son’s innocence, and then
Misskelley said that he was innocent, and my approach changed. He maintained his
innocence until the conversation on February 8, 1994 after the trial. (BMHR 1248).
Then he again said that he was involved. Even after that, there was another tape
ABSTRACT 119

recorded interview on February 17 . That one was made with their th recorder. That
happened when Joe Calvin, the Clay County Prosecutor called to tell me that
Misskelley was in his office and was going to give a statement. Then after that,
there was another conversation, this one that occurred around March 2, 1994. It
was recorded with a microcassette. In this last recording, Misskelley is explaining
that he was not involved, but that people were pressuring him, and telling him how
he could get out of prison.
When I talked to Misskelley on February 8, I got a copy of the crime scene
map, which I still have. It is Exhibit 43 (BMHR 1255). It was clear to me when we
were talking that he had no idea where the crime scene was. He also talked about
water being over his head. He talked about the pipe going across 10 Mile Bayou as
being as thick as his thigh when it was four or five feet across. In his original
statement, he had said nothing about sperm on pants, but now, having heard the
testimony and arguments at trial, he is referencing sperm on pants.

End of session at RT 1264. The November 21, 2008 session begins on that
same page.