By Drew Moody
For the Hur Herald
drewmoody@verizon.net
I've known many great legal minds, and counted
among my friends several judges including the
late Charles H. Haden II, former Chief Judge of
the U.S. Southern District (WV). He was a truly great
man, courageous judge, and loved the law.
I've worked as a paralegal and investigator for a
law firm, covered many court cases during my years
as a journalist, and witnessed judges 'dressing down' several
attorneys. Once I inadvertently halted the proceedings of a
murder trial because the judge thought my camera was too
loud. "Can't the newspaper afford to buy you a Leica?" he sternly
asked.
Out of all these experiences, and many others, I feel I have
an appreciation for the awe a judge must feel in his courtroom.
For it is in a courtroom that "the law" comes to life. In the best
sense it's a hallowed place; a place of respect and honor.
Of course not all courts rise to the respect owed to it.
The most egregious incident I've witnessed in this
regard occurred during the Larry Chapman trial held
in Gilmer County not long ago.
He was charged under a
West Virginia law that forbids county commissioners
from directly or indirectly benefiting from business transactions
with county agencies that he, as a commissioner, may have
control or influence over.
Before I continue, let me first state that Mr. Chapman
was a perfect gentleman throughout the proceedings.
And nothing contained herein should be seen as a
negative reflection on him whatsoever. He was
simply an onlooker to all the events I describe below.
I also believe Mr. Chapman did consult with the WV Ethics
Commission regarding Western Auto sales to county agencies,
and like those facing the same situation in other counties, he was
told "just keep the sales small."
The only problem is the Ethics Commission can only give a waiver
to the "Ethics Act" but not the West Virginia Code.
It's also worth noting in Mr. Chapman's case most of the
sales were minuscule and nearly all were for a unique service
that only his Western Auto business offers in the county. (One exception
was a cell phone contract.)
For the record, the jury found Mr. Chapman innocent of all
charges. But I believe he knows, and his lawyer knows,
"technically" the statute was violated.
However, I agree with Wood County Commissioner Rick
Modesitt's assessment of this type of situation. He essentially
said there were instances where literal application of the
law isn't in the best interest of the taxpayers. He also indicated
in Wood County if there were business dealings with commissioners
they would no longer cast votes or sit on the boards of those
agencies.
Beyond this, I found the tenor of the courtroom that day
and, in particular, the conduct of a few members of the jury pool
very disturbing.
Actually 'very disturbing' doesn't adequately
describe my feelings.
I'm angry and disappointed. I'm certain Judge
Haden and others would be too. Anyone with a reverence of
the integrity of "the law" would be.
Had I been seated as the magistrate I would have stopped the
proceedings and disqualified the entire jury, but there are other
issues as well.
And I think people have a right to know what happened.
My greatest disappointment is with Denny Pounds, owner of the
Glenville McDonald's. He acted like the whole affair was a waste
of his and everyone's time.
Pounds made a few light-hearted remarks
prompting laughter throughout the courtroom. Perhaps he possesses
a great sense of humor, but it more closely resembled a patronizing
"class-clown"
attitude to me.
One remark that prompted an outburst of laughter, though not part
of the partial transcript below, is when he commented, "I know him, I
feed him,"
referring to how he knew Chapman. Of course the words alone miss the
scope of the event - inflection and body language.
Deliberately disrupting the decorum of a courtroom is kind of like talking
"a little too loud with your wife about sex" during a church service, as
far as I'm concerned.
His other "haunting" comment you'll read in the transcript below,
"I think everybody in the room probably has the same feeling," taking it
upon himself to become jury spokesperson, and casting a shadow
over the entire jury.
Leslie Maze was an abysmal failure as special prosecutor. Not once
did she utter the words, "conflict of interest," or attempt to explain the
law in 'common language.'
And she apparently didn't realize the
defense was arguing the case based on a different statute than Chapman
was charged with. Or, maybe she was just "playing stupid?" If so, she
gave an oscar-winning performance.
Lastly, the 'special' magistrate was clearly in over her head. She wasn't
prepared as she painfully stumbled over reading the charges.
Unfortunately
she wasn't even sure how to pronounce "pecuniary," but gave
it several creative interpretations. It may as well have been read in Latin.
The magistrate's court was packed. The proceedings should have been
moved to the county courthouse, but wasn't. The jurors didn't have adequate
room and were packed like canned sardines.
Denny Pounds was seated nearly on top of defense attorney, Greg Campbell.
He briefly acted as Campbell's defacto assistant helping him identify
jury members
and other significant players at the trial. Before you pass completely over
this paragraph, here we have a jury pool member aiding the defense.
Mr.
Chapman
could have appropriately assisted his attorney, but it was ultimately
the Court's
responsibility to identify those present. It certainly wasn't Mr. Pounds'.
Also worth mentioning, I saw one of the trial jurors talking with a defense
witness outdoors, prior to the start of the courtroom drama.
Let's skip pondering unknown possibilities and let the facts do the talking.
The following is a certified transcript of a portion of the beginning of
the
proceedings.
This occurred prior to the final jury selection. Those present
were members of the remaining 'jury pool' prior to final selection of
the trial jury.
Beginning Of Partial Transcript:
MAGISTRATE: The defendant is Larry B. Chapman. Are any of you related
by blood or marriage to the defendant, or do you know the defendant from
any business or social relationship?
MR. SUMMERS: I've known him.
MAGISTRATE: In what capacity have you known him?
MR. SUMMERS: Well when I was in school I played ball with him, and I've
dealt with Larry. Bought appliances and stuff off him.
MR. POUNDS: He's my next door neighbor and I serve with him on the board
of the GCEDA.
(Hur Herald note: We believe the magistrate may have made a gesture to
indicate
to Mr. Summers that she wanted to know his name - see immediately below.)
MR. SUMMERS: Well it's William Summers
MAGISTRATE: You knew him how?
MR. SUMMERS: Through school. We went to high school together and we played
sports, and I've bought appliances and stuff off of him.
MAGISTRATE: You're Mr. Pounds
MR. POUNDS: Pounds, yes.
MAGISTRATE: How do you know him?
MR. POUNDS: Neighbor and then serve with him on the board of directors
of Economic Development.
MS. ALFRED: Kathy Alfred. I've known him. His wife is my daughter's
teacher. He's on my mother's board.
MAGISTRATE: What is your name?
MS. ALFRED: Kathy Alfred.
MAGISTRATE: His wife is your daughter's teacher?
MS. ALFRED: Uh-huh.
MAGISTRATE: Anyone else?
MR. PLUMMER: Lori Plummer. I have patronized his business for years, and he
has patronized mine.
MR. JAMES: I wasn't picked as one of the 10, but I also have dealt with
Larry and rode horses with him.
MAGISTRATE: What's your name?
MR. JAMES: Elbon James.
MAGISTRATE: Anybody else have any....?
MRS. SPROUSE: My brother worked with Mrs. Chapman at Glenville Elementary.
MAGISTRATE: What's your name?
MRS. SPROUSE: Janet Sprouse
MAGISTRATE: Anybody else?
MR. BRANNON: I wasn't one of the 10 picked. I have purchased some firearms
through the business and I became his friend.
MAGISTRATE: Who are you?
MR. BRANNON: I'm James Brannon. The place I used to work - we bought a lot
of parts.
MAGISTRATE: Anyone else?
LADY: Yes. I've done business with him in his place of business and
purchased things.
MAGISTRATE: Anyone else?
MR. PRITCHETT: I've bought stuff off of him.
MAGISTRATE: And what's your name?
MS. PRITCHETT: Hazel Pritchett.
MRS. MOYERS: I've also done business with him. Joan Moyers.
MAGISTRATE: Okay those of you who have spoke, would your knowledge
of Mr. Chapman prevent you from acting with impartiality in this case? Feel
free to speak honestly if this would cause you to be impartial in any
way if you
feel too close.
MR. POUNDS: It would be difficult. I think everybody in the room
probably has the same feeling.
MR. SUMMERS: Absolutely.
MR. CAMPBELL: (Chapman's attorney) Your honor I think the question is he
gets a jury of his peers. First time in 32 years I've really had a jury
of my
peers. I think, well I know the question is, even though they know him,
even though they've
heard publicity; the two questions are: Can they render a fair and
impartial verdict
based solely on the evidence they hear in the Court room, the exhibits
that you allow into
evidence and the instructions of the Court.
In other words, if the Court says all right this is the law, if it's
broken you can find him guilty
and if they say that they can do that or answer those questions then you
can sit as a juror.
If they can't do it, then they have the duty to say they can't.
MAGISTRATE: All right if you absolutely can't do it, I need to know
that. Although it is a civil duty and I know it's not easy in this
county I think it would
probably be hard to find anybody that hasn't done any business or knows
him in some way,
but if you feel too close feel free to speak up.
Would your knowledge of Mr. Chapman cause you to give greater or lesser
weight to any statement that he or any of his witnesses might make in
this case by
reason of such knowledge?
MR. SUMMERS: It might me 'cause like I said, I've known him. I'm just being
honest with you the way I see it.
MAGISTRATE: Okay the prosecuting attorney is Leslie Maze from Wirt County
and the defense lawyer is Greg Campbell from Kanawha County.
MR. CAMPBELL: Charleston, yes mam.
End Of Partial Transcript
In my opinion, Denny Pounds' statement that everyone felt the
same way, with Mr. Summers' echoing that - and no one disagreeing,
nor anyone making an objection, impugned the integrity of the entire
jury pool, if not literally - by implication.
The jury should have been disqualified.
To his credit, and make no mistake, Mr. Summers was clear and
honest about his feelings, telling the court exactly how he felt.
He was repeatedly asked a question he had previously answered. Then
the magistrate ignored what he said and proceeded with the trial.
And Summers was selected as a member of the final trial jury.
Mr. Pounds was not.
At some point I had the feeling the proceedings were just a formality.
Chapman's attorney, probably realizing the jury pool was at
risk of being dismissed interrupted the proceedings
and effectively massaged the magistrate and the jury into "his"
understanding" of what was required of the jury. (See last
10 paragraphs of transcript.)
It is not the defense attorney's place to speak for the Court.
That responsibility to solely reserved by the judge/magistrate.
The defense attorney gave instructions to the jury, perhaps an
unprecedented event in the annals of West Virginia history.
God help Greg Campbell if he'd attempted such a stunt in
virtually any other court.
The defense attorney also later directly contradicted his statements at
the end of the partial transcript by eventually telling the jury,
(paraphrased),
"Even if Mr. Chapman is guilty do you really want to risk sending
him to jail and ending his career in public service over this?"
Wouldn't it have been refreshing had the jury honestly said
we believe there were violations of the statute, but we won't vote
to convict?
It is my boundless hope one of our highly esteemed circuit judges,
or other justices in positions of authority, will see this and
Hell will rain down because of what happened on that day
in Gilmer County.
| 
