 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Wilson8/2/2001
on this left hand was in tact , but the fingers next to it had been largely amputated, so that that much of them were gone. There was a little stump of the little finger and very minimal stumps of the other fingers left. So basically, his left hand was palm, little tiny stubs and a thumb.
There was blood on both hands which you would expect from someone still capable of responding with their hands, but on the back of his right hand, multiple knuckles had bruising.
She explained that the bruises on the back of the victim's hands were "consistent with hitting any fairly solid object." Dr. Harlan also told the jury that the victim's blood alcohol level was .23% and that the victim tested positive for marijuana.
On cross-examination, Dr. Harlan testified that a person with the victim's blood alcohol level "would more readily act on his own inclinations." She explained that, if the victim were in a bad mood, he would more likely act on his hostility and become engaged in a fight. She further opined that
Even if he [the victim] were normally not somebody that would get in a fight, if you add a point two three (.23) blood alcohol, he'd be much more apt to land blows or, you know, be verbally abusive and try to get into an argument. And the unfortunate ---- that's the positive side of, you know, being in the fight. The negative side of being in the fight is that he's not as coordinated. So, even though he's more apt to fight, he wouldn't necessarily be a good fighter.
She also stated that it was very possible that the victim did not realize the extent of his injuries due to the alcohol.
Dr. Harlan further noted that none of the wounds suffered by the victim were defensive wounds. She testified that none of the wounds indicated that the victim was blocking the knife or trying to protect himself, because the victim had no cuts on his hands or arms. She explained that the bruises on the victim's knuckles could be consistent with hitting the windshield of a car or hitting a person's face. She also testified that the fatal double-thrust wound could have been made more severe either by the movement of the victim or the person with the knife. On redirect, Dr. Harlan stated that this mortal wound was caused by the full extent of the knife being placed in the victim. She acknowledged that, if the bruising on the victim's knuckles were from hitting someone in the face, then the person hit should also show signs of being hit. However, she also noted that the victim's blood alcohol level might have altered his clotting factors, which would cause him to bruise more easily than other people.
The State rested its case-in-chief.
The Defendant testified that he routinely carried a knife, because his work as a woodworker required him to use a knife. He stated that he did not know Alford and Christein very well, before the day of this incident. Defendant explained that Alford was an acquaintance, who had helped him locate some marijuana on the morning of the incident, and that he had not known or met Christein before that day.
The Defendant stated that, during the ride from Big Creek, the victim (who was intoxicated) and Christein argued. He testified that the victim and Bolling helped them smoke the remainder of the marijuana he had bought earlier, and that as he drove he began talking about getting more marijuana. At this point, Christein said that he could get some marijuana at Steele's Creek Park. The Defendant testified that he assumed Christein was planning to purchase the marijuana from a dealer who lived near Steele's Creek Park, as Defendant had bought some marijuana from there earlier that day. Defendant stated
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Tennessee DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|