Payton was convicted February 28, 2013, of Second Degree Murder in the death of his mother, Kathie Payton, a chronic drunk/dope user, in June 2011, after she was attacking him and he fought back.

Terry Payton, being escorted off the elevator this morning.

Today’s motions were to have been to petition the court for an acquittal, or, short of that, a new trial, all based on reversible errors Payton’s attorney claims were incurred during the two-week jury trial in February.

Instead, both sides (Bob McIntire for the defense, Mark Isaf for the state) appeared today and agreed that there was more preparation that needed to be done before they could proceed. So the case was set over another month, to June 21. At that time, Judge Steven Garst told the attorneys, they needed to have any case citations already to him so he could review. It’s going to be a tricky situation; as we said in the post last night, a circuit judge rarely reverses himself on any decisions (such as whether there was cause for a mistrial, one of the points McIntire made in his motion) and even more rarely reverses a jury’s decision; that’s usually best left up to an appeals court. And it’s unclear whether or not Payton will be able to take it to an appeals court.

Jan Burno/Mills/whatever, of slash-lipstick fame

One thing we were told we missed out on today (because we had to get out of the courtroom quickly in order to obtain photos of Terry being escorted back over to the Edgar County Jail): the obstinate and repulsive Jan Burno/Mills/Payton/whatever, sister of Kathie Payton, came huffing and puffing into the courtroom a full 22 minutes after  court was set to start (11 a.m.; they did start on time, but it was over in about nine minutes and Terry was escorted from the courtroom immediately after it was over). Burno, who never had anything to do with her nephew Terry in the 16 years of his existence up until the death of her sister, suddenly was all over the situation as soon as her sister (whom she never had anything to do with prior to her death, either; read about the whole thing here in this article from the March/April 2013 issue) was dead. Burno was capitalizing upon her sister’s death, of course, and the ridiculous charge Isaf filed against Terry, which prompted much media coverage…and Burno apparently wanted her 15 minutes of fame. Since she’s done nothing but make a nuisance of herself in the two ensuing years, now she’s looking at taking her last stab at glory by delivering a “victim impact statement” at the sentencing. How she can claim to be a “victim,” since she wasn’t involved in the lives of either her sister nor nephew, is beyond most logically-thinking people, but of course, the key word here is “logically,” which is the one thing Jan is anything BUT.

There’s been no sentencing set because the probation office hasn’t concluded their presentencing investigation. It’s unclear why; however, often, PSIs involve talking to family when it involves juveniles, and since Terry literally has none (here in the states, anyway, and his family in England doesn’t really know him enough to contribute to a PSI), it’s probably been fairly difficult for a PSI to be done. It might also have proven to be somewhat traumatic as well as puzzling for whomever in probation is doing it, as it made no sense for Terry to ever have been charged, let alone convicted…or even left in the presence of the violent and vile Kathie Payton, who had another child removed from her a couple of years before Terry was born, since she was a useless and negligent drunk at that time as well.

We’ll keep you posted on what shakes out in Terry’s case…in the meantime, please feel free to send a donation, no matter how small, to his legal defense fund, located at First Bank of Paris, 101 South Central, Paris, Illinois, 61944. It’s account number 01-60070813  …we just contributed today; please do so if you can.

Terry Payton going to the elevator after the verdict was over.

Payton was 16 at the time he was charged as an adult with murdering his mother, Kathie Payton, a chronic and violent alcoholic and drug user, in June of 2011. Payton claimed she was physically attacking him and was going for a knife kept in a cabinet when he grabbed a steak knife and delivered a series of six stabs, one of which punctured an artery near her lung and killed her within a matter of moments. His claim was self-defense; he was charged with First Degree Murder, but lesser charges were included for the jury, and they went with second Degree, which meant that the jury believed that Terry believed he was acting in self-defense, but there was no cause for self-defense.

Payton’s attorney, Bob McIntire of Danville, filed a motion in March asking for the court to grant Payton an acquittal, or short of that, a new trial, based on several reversible errors McIntire claimed occurred during the jury trial proceedings, which took up the better part of the end of February.

One of the most egregious errors was the presentation by Edgar County state’s attorney Mark Isaf of an autopsy photo late in the trial of Kathie Payton. It had been previously agreed upon not to display that particular photo, but Isaf did so during the state’s case, and McIntire actually called for a mistrial in a sidebar. Edgar County judge Steven Garst denied it, so McIntire used that, as well as six other points that occurred in the trial, as reversible error.

The sad fact is that the lower court judges don’t often reverse themselves, so this probably won’t be the case tomorrow; any reversal will likely have to go through an appeals court, and it’s unclear whether Payton—through his family—has the money to pursue that.

The relentlessly annoying Isaf, apparently seeking to capitalize on the fact that McIntire has the floor tomorrow, today filed a motion to “set cause for sentencing” of Terry. For whatever reason, the presentencing investigation isn’t done, as was promised would be the case by the end of April. Whether Isaf’s prodding will make it go a little faster is unknown….or, whether McIntire’s motion has slowed things down on it is ALSO unknown. So we’ll see what happens tomorrow…the girls are on it, and will be reporting as soon as they know something.

In the meantime, you can still donate to Terry’s defense fund by depositing any amount at First Bank and Trust, 101 South Central, Paris, Ill., account number 01-6007081…or, you can visit these lovely ladies at Terri’s Threads across the street on the east side of the courthouse, where they have these t-shirts that are fundraisers for Terry Payton.

Terry T-shirts

Adonna Bennett, former Edgar County board chairperson, is a recent appointee to the Edgar County Airport advisory board, the beleaguered entity that seems on the verge of a civil rights violation lawsuit because of inexplicable action taken against one of its lesees, the Bogue family of RSB Aviation.

On May 8, Bennett attended the Edgar County board meeting and put in her two cents worth during a nine-minute presentation that provided no opportunity for anyone to give rebuttal, as she’d placed herself on the agenda—as a public official—in order to do it…and it seems that all she did was alienate the people who feel she should be representing their interests.

Further, folks believe she set a foul tone during the presentation, attacking a business owner (Rusty Bogue of RSB) who is doing all he can to keep his business local.

The fallout from this presentation has had repercussions across the county and is being said to reflect badly on the county board (who appointed Bennett), the county’s legal counsel (state’s attorney Mark Isaf, who is abdicating any authority he has in the matter; which is to say, final word, since he is the county’s legal counsel), and airport manager Jimmy Wells.

The Wells/Patrick/Bennett combine

Wells is the petulant old man who started the harassment of RSB months ago when he discovered Mrs. Bogue in the aviation business’s office, nursing her infant daughter. From that incident, it’s been one attempt after another to create as much havoc as possible for the Bogues, who have a reputation as excellent business people in the community and who have done nothing to violate airport policy or regulations…unlike Wells, whose continued infractions at hangars at the airport come to light the longer he fusses about the situation.

Bennett was said to have been appointed to the airport advisory board as a ‘ringer’ in order to ensure that the wills of Wells and Edgar County board chair Chris Patrick—who is said to be and have been, over the past several years, very close to Bennett—were carried out.

The nine-minute soliloquy that offended so many on May 8 was very obviously part of that “will”…but it’s being said to have backfired on those who prompted it. Bennett offended so many people in Edgar County (those in particular who have long memories) with her glorification of entities and programs that she was a part of (extolled by her in an effort to “lend credence” to the castigation she was giving RSB) that Wells and Patrick may just as well have opened the books on many of their antics they’ve been trying desperately to hide for years…because Bennett touched upon sore subjects for Edgar Countians, many of whom are still feeling the pain in the form of tax increases for years now.

Sore spot 1: Health department

The first sore spot was the healthcare business in Edgar. It appeared to those listening that Bennett took pride in the expansion of the county health department, which occurred under her watch on the county board.

However, the “expansion” did little to help private healthcare providers in the area, and in fact ran them off, reducing the options of qualified providers to the area.

Worse, the “health care” creation that occurred under Bennett’s watch was one of the first of many governmental entities to be exposed for theft of funds in Edgar County.

Sore spot 2: Ambulance

Bennett’s praise for the county ambulance service also was met with derision by those who knew better.

“What she’s talking about was the very ambulance that had more corruption than anything we have ever seen,” said Kirk Allen, Kansas resident who is one of the Edgar County Watchdogs, “to include the theft of funds through what they called ‘Administration Fees.’”

Allen said the county board itself stole thousands and thousands of dollars because the county was so broke, and finally, when there were limited funds left to steal, it was time to get rid of it because it was “costing money.”

Allen brought up a resignation letter from Dr. Haskell, who left the county’s ambulance board in September 1999, which reads in part:

“I was appointed to the original Ambulance Board and have continued to serve on it until today. Although I plan to continue serving the citizens of Edgar County and the surrounding area by continuing my service on the Edgar County Public Health Department, the Illinois Region Six Trauma committee, and the Illinois Region Six Ambulance Morbidity and Mortality Review committee, I find it necessary to resign my position on the Edgar County Special Services Ambulance Board. I now feel that the Ambulance board is being manipulated by a few politicians for their own reasons. Therefore, I can no longer in good conscience continue my association with the Edgar County Special Services Ambulance Board.”

This, Allen says, is exactly what’s going on currently with the airport authority amongst the representation of Bennett, Patrick and Mike Heltsley.

Sore spot 3: 911

Bennett also took credit for the 911 creation in Edgar County; those with long memories recall the mess that was, as well.

This was the final reference she made before beginning the tongue-lashing over RSB.

Bennett opined, during her presentation, that not only should RSB Aviation not be allowed to run their business at the airport, but if they were to continue to do so, the county should “capture three to five percent of his gross revenues,” claiming it was commonplace with airports “because she talked to them.”

Bennett took a little tangent to point out all the accomplishments of her father, Russell Leon Magers (who died in 2005) as a businessman in the area (failing to point out that with all his accomplishments, he relied on some pretty hefty financial assistance from the various community coffers; $665,000 in one 13-month time frame, according to documentation the Watchdogs have in hand).

She then attacked RSB with claims of a business loss, and tried to point out all the reasons they should not be allowed to operate…failing to mention that, unlike her father, Mr. Bogue had not at any time asked for one thin dime of taxpayers’ money.

Not renting? Not applicable

Bennett next pointed out that RSB was not renting the office at the airport.

This is a fact; however, she neglected to mention that the office space was provided to RSB; no rental of it was ever mentioned to RSB by the airport manager or authority, as it was never intended to be rented: it’s no more than a 5-by-12-foot closet space overlooking the work area of RSB’s hangar.

Attendant to this was Bennett’s complaint about a video camera that Bogue has placed in his office overlooking the workspace of the hangar.

This, Bennett complained, should not be allowed.

Many believe it odd that the group at the airport advisory board wish to deny RSB the security that such a device provides as a “perk,” when Wells and his ilk continue to enjoy perks of their own that they would never permit others to have, such as:

Space Wells took up for years with his own personal plane, as well as an incredible amount of trash (featured in past issues of Disclosure Heartland) without even paying rent;

A truck that was in Wells’ hangar and later moved to the barn, also not paying rent;

The fact that in the same barn, straw and a hay wagon are still stored rent-free with no lease because the previous lease expired in April 2012;

The fact that the advisory board, as well as Patrick, failed to pay property taxes on the leased farm ground from the airport’s inception, which continued for more than 30 years (until the Watchdogs pointed it out last year);

The fact that the “Airport Booster Club” has been operating and accepting donations illegally since they had their registration revoked by the Secretary of State in 1989;

The claim Bennett made that she was on the Airport Advisory Board for the full eight years she was on the county board. This one was particularly onerous, as for those eight years, Bennett was the county board chairperson and the chair is not allowed to sit on the airport board by law…even though Patrick continues the tradition—illegally.

Made it to local media

The backlash continued beyond the county board meeting and even made its way into the pages of local media, which has been frightened to publish much about Chris Patrick’s illegal exploits, as back in mid-March, Patrick’s conflict of interest of serving on the county board (when serving on the board and voting himself concrete contracts) produced significant problems with the Department of Transportation was published, and “vandals” subsequently tore up the local newspaper’s boxes

In an article appearing three days after the county board meeting at which Bennett spoke, Jimmy Wells was trying to discredit RSB even further by laying waste to their claim that they had proper insurance.

Interestingly, at the same meeting where Bennett spoke, county board member Dan Bruner advised that he’d spoken with Wells following the airport advisory meeting the night before (May 7), and said Wells told him “RSB Aviation has provided all of the required insurance documentation and is current in every obligation to the airport.”

Wells, apparently in backwards-pissing mode, made sure he told the local paper that there was never such a conversation with Bruner.

He then made his own little effort to discredit RSB, stating that “Due to the complications of insurance, he (Rusty Bogue) could drop insurance, change companies or a company could drop him—it’s impossible for me to say he is compliant,” Wells told the paper.

Wells apparently wasn’t aware that RSB had added the county on their policy as a rider.

That means that any changes, including dismissal of insurance, would result in an automatic notification to the county.

Frighteningly, this is the type of person running the airport in Edgar County.

In light of the issues that have plagued the ECIMTD in recent months with the investigations into theft of funds and equipment reaching well into the six-figure range by Kami Miller from Chrisman, Ill., the trustees have determined it is no longer feasible to operate the District. They have plans, contingent on the Edgar and Clark county boards approval, of “merging” with RMT. This will help create a massive mass transit district consisting of 18 counties. Coles County is not interested.

The Edgar County Watchdogs wrote several articles last year (2012) on the investigations (many of which were featured in initial issued of Disclosure Heartland, available by back issue as well as online), and on the illegal trustee appointments to the district board, where a former Edgar County board member, Kevin Trogdon, resigned from that position. It appears the financial turmoil, coupled with the freezing of a grant from DOT/IDOT, was too much for the current district to handle.

RMT has been around for 36 years and formed the first Rural Mass Transit District in Illinois.

The ECIMTD Facebook page has not been updated since June of 2012 when the first of the revealing articles about Miller were published online at the Edgar County Watchdog’s site.

Payton, now 17, remains incarcerated in the Edgar County Jail pending pre-sentencing investigations and an actual sentencing in the case, which was expected to occur at the end of April.

Now, however, it’s unclear which direction the case is headed, as no action has been taken in the newly-filed motion (filed March 29) and no sentencing date had been set as of press time (April 14).

The motion asks specifically for either an acquittal—as opposed to the conviction, meaning the attorney, Bob McIntire of Danville, is asking for a reversal of the decision the jury made on the night of February 28, 2013—or, alternatively, a new trial.

Reversible error No. 1

He states six reversible errors as reasons for the request:

The first is that Payton “was not proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of Second Degree Murder.” While the evidence presented in the six-day trial “established the existence of a mitigating factor (italics ours) by a preponderance of the evidence, for which reason the jury returned a verdict of guilty of Second Degree Murder, the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that (Payton) was not justified in using the force which he used.”

Simply put: Payton was on trial for First Degree Murder, not on trial for Second-Degree Murder, which statute states that the accused still commits murder with intent (First Degree), but that he believed that his life was in imminent danger when the facts show that there really was no imminent danger.

The prosecutor, Mark Isaf, didn’t argue or establish that fact; he only argued/presented the case of First Degree Murder.

Second Degree Murder was added as a lesser charge for the jury to deliberate when the case was handed to them, and offered as an alternative conviction.

Reversible error No. 2

The second error, says McIntire, is that Payton was prejudiced (the jury held it against him) by the court’s (the judge)”sustaining of a prosecution objection to testimony of Dr. Frey, which, had it been admitted, would have established that Payton’s stated behavior during the altercation that led to his mother’s death was consistent with battered child syndrome.”

Payton, the defense proved, was living with an increasingly-abusive alcoholic whose violence was intensifying as Payton reached his teens and outsized his mother; yet she still held sway in his life because of what experts call “Battered Child Syndrome” (BCS) wherein a child in an abusive home continues to do what the abusive parent tells him to do, despite the threat or presence of abuse, because of severe co-dependency. This was what Frey, paid by the state to evaluate Payton while he sat in juvenile detention but whose evaluation was more favorable to the defense than to the state, was set to testify about at length, but an objection by the assisting prosecutor Ed Parkinson was sustained by Judge Steven Garst. The state had tried to suppress Frey’s testimony and appearance altogether, an attempt that failed, but the objection to further divulging Frey’s expert analysis of BCS was upheld, and she couldn’t elaborate further.

“While witnesses may not simply comment directly on the credibility of other witnesses,” the new motion reads, “they may offer testimony that a victim’s account is consistent with accepted knowledge in a witness’ field of expertise,” this, of course, being Frey’s.

Simply put: Because the jury wasn’t afforded the opportunity to hear all of Frey’s explanation on BCS, they were prejudiced against Payton because they didn’t get the chance to fully understand why he acted how he did, his actions being attributable to BCS.

Reversible error No. 3

The motion’s third paragraph states that Payton was prejudiced when the prosecution was “permitted to impeach Dr. Frey by omission by establishing that she had not specifically stated in her report the diagnosis of ‘Battered Child Syndrome.’

“The prosecution did not establish that Dr. Frey ought to have been expected to state a specific diagnosis or that it ought to be expected that she would have done so had that been her diagnosis,” the paragraph concludes.

Simply put: While the prosecution was allowed to ‘impeach’ Frey (turn her testimony invalid by calling into question her credibility) ‘by omission’ (leaving something out; in this case, the specific diagnosis of BCS, which Frey did not put in her 2011 notes, but only brought up in court), the defense says that shouldn’t have happened because her ultimate diagnosis should have been ‘expected’ to be rendered—and it was. That it was rendered in a court setting, the defense is stating, should have been immaterial: the state should have known that she was going to come into the courtroom and give a diagnosis, as that’s what the state had paid her to do in 2011 after Payton was detained. That the defense had called her as a witness FOR Terry Payton, and that the state didn’t call her to be their witness, spoke volumes.

Reversible error No. 4

The fourth paragraph elaborates on the third:

Payton was prejudiced by the judge sustaining the objection to testimony, on redirect (by the defense) concerning the content of Dr. Frey’s report, once the “impeachment by omission” had been supposedly established.

“Dr. Frey would have testified on redirect examination that her report contained statements that (Payton) had a history of psychological abuse;

that he felt he had no adult to care for him, so he had to be an adult;

he had nobody else in his life to care for him;

that he was in many ways dependent on his mother;

that he loved his mother;

and that he was terrified of being alone regardless of the fact that his mother was an alcoholic who was frequently abusive.

“This testimony would have demonstrated to the jury that Dr. Frey had made a number of statements in the report supporting a diagnosis of ‘battered child syndrome,’” the motion states.

Simply put: The defense is attempting to bring in that while Dr. Frey may not have written the term “battered child syndrome” in her report, she did write in every fact of the diagnosis…yet she was disallowed to give that testimony from the stand. Had she been able to give it, she would have been able to paint a clearer picture of what Payton was undergoing in his home life, and the jury might have been able to see that he was indeed in fear for his life when he took the actions that he did which ended his mother’s life.

Reversible error No. 5

The motion then states in the fifth paragraph that Payton was prejudiced by Garst sustaining objections to testimony “that Kathie Payton had, on May 20, 2011, telephoned school personnel at Paris High School and stated angrily to ‘tell that female dog to back off,’ that she didn’t need her interfering in her child’s life, and that she knew where the ‘female dog lived’ and ‘that’s not a threat!’”

This testimony, being disallowed, was not elaborated upon in the courtroom and so it’s unclear from whom it would have been elicited, and the motion doesn’t say; likely, it was about to be given by one of the school personnel on the stand (and there were many), the state saw it coming, and stopped it before it could come out, since they already would have learned about it in discovery.

However, it does point out that “in context with other evidence, this would have demonstrated that Kathie Payton threatened potential violence to school personnel either for having telephoned DCFS or for having referred Terry for counseling.

“(Terry) believes the court sustained the objection in part because the threat was not made to or concerning him; however, by analogy, the prior battery convictions in People v. Lynch all had to do with other victims.”

In addition, the motion stated, the proffered testimony would have evidenced Kathie Payton’s controlling and abusive behavior as regards her efforts to keep Terry from exposure to mandated reporters (for DCFS) who would potentially interfered with her control of her son.

Simply put: The state was busy attempting to “sanitize” Kathie Payton for the jury, as it would have been bad for their case if her tendency toward violence and threats of violence became clearly known, both for their frequency and escalation. The fact that these escalated exponentially in the weeks before her death should have been allowed in as evidence by for the defense’s case…but the state sought to—and succeeded, as in this instance—in suppressing such information, so that the jury would be lead to believe by Isaf’s concocted story that Kathie Payton was a helpless, slobbering drunk who was mortally set upon by her raging son and murdered with malice aforethought…instead of the violent, somewhat sadistic woman she actually was, who attacked her son with the intent to do him great bodily harm at the very least.

Reversible error No. 6

The final error McIntire is claiming is a big one, because quite the fuss was made in court over it: “The court erred in admitting those autopsy photos that reflected the work of the autopsy surgeon; such photos were more prejudicial than probative (proving something within the constructs of the law—ed.). In particular, (Terry) objected to and now objects to the admission of People’s Exhibits #33, 34, 35 and 37.”

There had been much arguing about whether the autopsy photos—one of which showed the inside of Kathie Payton’s face after her skull had been cut open and the facial plate had been removed—were even going to allowed in as evidence at all, as the defense objected so strenuously to them. In fact, one of the photos was shown to the jury in the course of the trial that had already been determined to be omitted from the course of the testimony. Isaf called the presentation of that photo an “accident”…yet when the defense began talking about a mistrial in a sidebar about it, Garst shut it down and refused to hear mistrial, merely sustaining the defense’s objection over the photo’s display, and telling the jury to disregard the photo (which, apparently, they did not.)

However, mistrials have been declared upon lesser circumstances; therefore, an overturn of a verdict on a reversible error such as this wouldn’t be out of the realm of possibility.

Can Payton get a new trial upon ruling of the motion?

But, given that Payton has been convicted of a probationable offense (First Degree Murder is mandatory prison; Second Degree can carry, at the low end, probation only for a first-time offender of good character), would a new trial (short of a full-out acquittal/overturning of the jury’s verdict) be a good idea?

Ideally, the acquittal would be the desired outcome. The jury, it’s been revealed since the verdict, was split three ways: four were in favor of acquittal, four in favor of the lesser charge of Second Degree Murder, and four in favor of the initial charge of First Degree Murder. The ones on the outer edges were convinced to go toward the middle, and a unanimous verdict of Second Degree was reached within four or so hours. However, the four giving up the presumption of innocence were the four swayed that bothered so many people in this case. And part of what swayed them, Disclosure has learned since that time, is that Garst was threatening to sequester the jury for as long as it took—including the upcoming weekend if necessary—in a hotel in Champaign until they came to a unanimous verdict. The four in favor of acquittal couldn’t convince, at the very least, one of the male jurors who announced early on in the deliberation process that he “knew that kid was guilty and nothing was gonna change my mind about it!” Someone like that being on a jury, and no amount of evidence displayed being enough to convince him, is oftentimes enough to overturn a conviction, as that juror did not uphold his oath of objectivity from the very outset.

Conversely, it may be the better bet to allow sentencing to take place, and if the sentence is ridiculously long, appeal that instead of appealing the verdict. The possibility remains that Payton may receive time served (two years in June) and with an additional two years incarceration, be on the low end of a Second Degree Murder conviction sentence. He will most likely be allowed to serve the other two years in a juvenile facility, as he will still be a juvenile when sentenced, and of course he was a juvenile when the crime was committed.

Public support is with Terry

Whatever the case, public support is on the side of Terry Payton. In fact, the only ones who appear to have been against him are the authorities, the jury and of course his insane aunt, Kathie Payton’s sister Jan Burno. The corruption being what it is in Edgar County, public sentiment was with him from the beginning, as so many people knew Kathie Payton to be a raging alcoholic and violent and abusive parent, already having had one child taken away from her early on because of neglect.

The general consensus is that there was something hinky going on with the jury and the public officials from the outset. A new trial might rectify some of it; but, as the defense learns from a failure what to do and not to do in a re-trial, so too does the state. And so the defense will have to fight even harder if Payton is afforded a new trial, and such a fight takes investigation…and investigations are expensive. While Payton has received some funding in his defense trust fund, it’s never enough.

Those interested can contribute to the fight by sending monetary help to First Bank and Trust, 101 South Central Avenue, Paris, Ill., 61944 for credit to the Terry Payton Legal Assistance Fund, account number 01-6007081-3. And of course, anyone can put money on Terry’s books at the county jail, where he can purchase minutes for phone calls, stationary and stamps for letters, and other comforts as he awaits the outcome of the latest motion filed in his case.

One of those ballot initiatives was held last year: the Edgar County Watchdogs petitioned to have the Clark-Edgar Rural Water District board be made elected positions, not appointed, as they had been appointed since their existence (22 years) and the corruption was rampant as a result.

Board members were found to be abusing funds for foolish items, as well as taking water tap-on deposits, sometimes hundreds of dollars for a single fee, and never providing water service to the payor.

With the placement of the choice for elected trustees on the ballot last November, the Watchdogs were able to secure spots on the Consolidated Election ballot for April 9 for water district trustees, and those were chosen at that time.

The candidates, winners

Those who ran, and their totals, are as follows:

Edgar County: Anita B. Wester, 255; Richard Wilken Jr., 201; Tom Jones, 357; Sandra Neal, 457; James Griffin, 425; Phil Adams, 358; Roger Brown, 333; Robert Bogue, 238; write-in David Sprigg, 180.

Clark County: Wester, 934; Wilken, 726; Jones, 1255; Neal, 1109; Griffin, 918; Adams, 1116; Brown, 1319; Bogue, 556; Sprigg, 244.

Overall totals by order of total votes, first seven are the trustees: Roger Brown, 1,652; Tom Jones, 1,612; Phil Adams, 1,474; James Griffin, 1,343; Anita B. Wester, 1,189; Richard Wilken Jr., 927; Robert Bogue, 794; David Sprigg, 424.

This means that while Brown, Jones, Adams and Griffin, trustees from the appointed board that were holdovers within the public’s mind and that they automatically voted for in April’s election, are once again on the board, continuation of more of the same might be put off by new members Anita Wester and Richard Wilken Jr.

The next step is for four of the new trustees to draw for four-year terms, and three of the new trustees to draw for two-year terms; this will take place at the May meeting.

Arguments raised over water district election

The issue of the water trustees prompted terrible backlash toward the Watchdogs from the public official crowd, namely, the county’s prosecutor, Mark Isaf, who put himself on the county’s board of elections when it came to questions about eligibility in the water district race, as well as who would be voting on the trustees.

Attending the board of elections meetings in January, the Watchdogs were then further subject to violations of their civil rights when Isaf refused to allow them to speak during the public input portion of the meeting.

An argument was made by Isaf that there was no public input portion of the meeting designated, therefore no one could speak, even upon request.

However, Illinois law shows that “any person has a right to speak at a public meeting, and any person shall be afforded that opportunity under any rules established and recorded by the public body. Failure of the public body to establish and record their rules does not negate the public’s right to speak and certainly does not allow the public body to disallow public comment at its meetings.”

Filed miscellaneous remedy case

The Watchdogs filed suit against the elections board in a miscellaneous remedy case in Edgar County.

The case is ongoing and has had at least a little activity—and success for the people—since its filing.

On April 8, after the board of elections (represented, not by Isaf as counsel, but by Mattoon attorney William McGrath) had filed for a motion of summary judgment to dismiss the Watchdogs’ case against them, the judge denied that motion.

He unfortunately also denied the Watchdogs’ cross-motion for summary judgment on the same day, meaning that the case is still being argued on its separate merits (as opposed to “summary,” wherein it was requested to be taken as a whole.)

The next hearing in the case is set for May 31 at 9 a.m. in Edgar County.

Disclosure was able to reach the State’s Appellate Prosecutor’s office in Springfield with questions about Parkinson’s presence at the Payton First Degree Murder trial that ended February 28, 2013, with a verdict of guilty of Second Degree Murder against the 17-year-old (for full trial coverage, see the March-April 2013 edition of Disclosure, or check online at www.disclosurenewsonline.com)

The question was regarding the validity of the appointment of Parkinson, as attorneys from the appellate prosecutor’s office don’t just decide on their own to show up at a trial and begin assisting; the request has to be made by the duly-elected prosecutor of the county to have someone appointed to the case.

The Special Prosecution Unit (SPU) of the appellate prosecutor’s office provides assistance when a conflict of interest arises within the state’s attorney’s office; if the state’s attorney wants an independent, detached review and prosecution by an outside person; or if special assistance is needed due to the complexity of a case.

The agency’s website declares that “the unit has been particularly active in downstate Illinois, where personnel and financial resources are more limited than in the more populous counties. Trial assistance has been provided in numerous murder cases, cases dealing with official misconduct of public officials, as well as numerous other criminal and civil matters when the state’s attorney was unable to prosecute.

The Special Prosecution Unit

In order for a duly-elected state’s attorney to obtain service from the SPU, a request form is necessary. It must be completed by the state’s attorney or an individual from that office authorized to complete such a request. The request gets approved by the director, the agency contacts the requesting county’s prosecutor back, and the process begins.

For the special prosecutor to take the lead in prosecution, a court order must be done: the judge in the case (or any sitting judge hearing the petition) must actually review the request and officially appoint that SPU attorney.

If the case or just an investigation requires only assistance or review, there is no court order required, but the request must be made.

Cases have been overturned in Illinois because of improper appointment of special prosecutors. Specifically, the 2006 retrial of Lawrence County woman Julie Rea Kirkpatrick Harper came about because in the initial case—that of her First Degree Murder charge in the 1997 death of her own son—tried in 2002, was overturned in 2004 because Ed Parkinson was improperly appointed to the case: the correct procedure to get an SPU attorney was not followed by then-prosecutor Todd Reitz.

If Reitz hadn’t screwed up, Rea would likely be serving her eleventh year of a 62-year sentence; instead, in a stripped-down case, she won an acquittal in the 2006 retrial.

Nothing on file prompted questions

Because there was nothing on file in Terry Payton’s case indicating a request for an appointment of a special prosecutor, those who were in the know about the matter began questioning his presence at Payton’s trial immediately.

It wasn’t until weeks AFTER the trial that Disclosure was able to find out what exactly happened.

By requesting the form through the SPU’s office, Disclosure obtained the actual fax that Mark Isaf submitted in November 2011, six months after Kathie Payton died in her own home, killed by her own son in what he said was an act of self-defense, and from which claim he’s never waivered.

Isaf had to justify his request, so he submitted reasons behind it as follows:

“16 yr old fractured his mother’s skull and stabbed her to death. Defendant claims self defense. Anecdotal evidence exists suggesting defendant was abused. Popular cause among teens, some educators and other members of community in favor of defendant. LOST part-time ASA (assistant state’s attorney) a month ago.”

Parkinson, as it turned out, was appointed to the case only as an assistant; sources in Edgar state that because Isaf had never tried a murder case before, he was almost as nervous about the Payton trial as he was about Parkinson being there: Parkinson is one of the top-notch prosecuting attorneys in the state of Illinois.

Parkinson didn’t stay for the entire trial, either: he was absent the last two days, when Isaf was on his own both with prosecution and with closing. At this time, some of the reversible errors that defense attorney Bob McIntire brought up in his March 29 filing (see story page 1) were made.

It remains to be seen how the Payton case will shake out; but at least it helps to know that there wasn’t a “reversible error” made in bringing in Parkinson, as that seems just like something someone like Isaf, who called numerous police and DCFS reports of Terry Payton’s abuse “anecdotal,” would do.

Terry Payton

Regular readers will recall that Payton was charged as an adult when he was but 16 years old in June 2011 with the murder of his mother, Kathie Payton. The boy admitted to stabbing him mother about six times in short succession, but as an act of self-defense, as he saw her going for a large butcher knife after she told him repeatedly that she was “gonna kill” him, this following a physical fight over Terry having poured his mother’s alcohol down the sink. Her alcoholism, the defense asserted (and to which numerous witnesses also attested), made her increasingly more violent and Terry’s home life neglectful and at times, dangerous, including an incident shortly before her death during which Kathie Payton was attempting to hit her son with a Jim Beam bottle, but instead struck one of his friends, Jake Shumaker.

Robert McIntire of Danville, the attorney who handled the defense for the now-17-year-old Payton, filed the motion last week in Edgar County court (Paris, Illinois.) The March 29 motion fell within the 30-day window of appeal of the verdict….and while it isn’t an outright “appeal,” it certainly calls into question certain issues that arose during trial, covered extensively by Disclosure, including the displaying of autopsy photos that had been ruled during a sidebar as more prejudicial than probative, as well as a host of other issues even WE didn’t catch…although we caught quite a few of them.

Many of these issues are known as “reversable errors.” The easiest way we can explain a reversable error as it pertains to court action is to reference the Julie Rea Kirkpatrick trial in 2002. At that time, the woman was found guilty of killing her 10-year-old son Joel in Lawrenceville in October of 1997. However, her defense attorney found a “reversible error” in the fact that he’d discovered the state’s request for the appointment of an appellate prosecutor to lead the state’s case (interestingly enough, Ed Parkinson, who assisted Edgar County prosecutor Mark Isaf in his case against Payton) had been made IMPROPERLY. There was a procedure by which the Lawrence County prosecutor (at the time, Todd Rietz) had to follow to the letter. He did not, and the result was a reversible error. The defense for Rea filed for a new trial and got one. This was held in the summer of 2006. Prior to that trial, the defense learned what had worked and what hadn’t in the first trial–and they scrubbed the presentation of certain of the state’s evidence, resulting in a “sanitized” Julie Rea. The new jury didn’t get to hear all of the reality of that woman…and as a result, she was acquitted of the murder. So a “reversible error” can and often does get a person a new trial. And if that doesn’t happen, ongoing appeals might. Anyone who doubts that that can be the case has no further to look than at the Steidl and Whitlock issue….which occurred right there in uber-corrupt Edgar County, too, and in which there have been recent developments.

McIntire’s motion encompasses two pages and will be examined thoroughly—with our input as regards each claim, since we were right there when all of them happened—in the next issue of Disclosure. You can obtain the print version at these locations in the readership area, or, for your convenience, get yourself an online membership and read the e-Edition right here at the comfort of your computer or handheld. The e-Edition of the April-May issue will be available the evening of April 15; print version on stands beginning April 16 and continuing through the 17th until all copies are delivered!

You may recall what happened a little over a year ago with former Edgar County deputy Dee Burgin, who lied to an attorney (by omission, of course) and got him to threaten a lawsuit against not only the Watchdogs, but against us because we were printing documented facts about the errant boob. Poor Deeboy didn’t like what we were saying, so he convinced a Chicago-area attorney to send us a threatening letter advising if we didn’t “cease and desist,” they were going to file a defamation suit against us…to which we responded by telling him “FILE. We’ll see you in court with a trunkful of subpoenas and find out what Deeboy has been having for breakfast the past 40 years, as well as everything he’s been doing in between times.” They of course did NOT file. The reason is clear: there was a lot more Deeboy had to hide, and with subpoena power—which we get when we’re sued in any form, meaning we can request, and obtain, financial, medical, and other personal records from the person who’s stupid enough to sue us—we were going to find it ALL out. Deeboy’s high-powered attorney probably advised him of that, and that we were not your average ordinary dumbasses, and that he’d better back the hell out while the backing was good. This he did; we heard nothing else out of him about the matter. And within six months, he was no longer a deputy for Edgar County. He’s now a pissant cop in Newman, a little burg in Douglas County.

And as we pointed out in the post a year ago, every time someone from a REAL media outlet moves into a county and starts asking real, direct questions about things that impact the taxpayers there, there’s always a backlash. This happens to us at Disclosure, and now it’s happening to the Edgar County Watchdogs. Their presence and expertise was requested in upstate Iroquois County, where there were some alleged problems at the county health department (health departments are like a cash cow for some people; in many of our downstate counties, we’ve had incidents of anything from folks outright stealing from them, such as in the case of Cindy Crewell in Lawrence, to entire entities basing their existence on them, as in Jess Angle and the problematic Lawrence County Emergency Management Agency in that same county, which pretty much wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for the health department giving Angle somewhere to alight). The alleged problems in Iroquois at the Ford-Iroquois Public Health Department (FIPHD) had more to do with some reported shell-gaming and sleight-of-hand of one of their employees (public official, or PO) and her husband, Julie and Stanley Clark. Seems the Clarks own several businesses that were benefiting from grant money that was coming through the FIPHD. Red flags should be going up in front of you right now over the fact of a PUBLIC employee being in a position to filter PUBLIC funds (grant money) into her PRIVATE business. But apparently, this is just de rigeuer for Iroquois County. And so someone brought this to the attention of the Watchdogs, and here we are.

In February, the Watchdogs began submitting FOIAs (freedom of information act requests) to the PUBLIC health department (PUBLIC because it’s funded by, you guessed it, taxpayers’ dollars) and the showdown began. As you can see by the responses, there were matters of what the Watchdogs called “vast questionable expenditures” (by a PUBLIC body—the health department)—chief among these being a health department budget that has been amended for the past two years, but without the approval of the county boards at whose authority the FIPHD serves at all. You can read about many of the other spurious things the health department was doing, and that are being called into question, at this article. One of the most egregious, in our opinion, was an ongoing plan for the FIPHD—an Illinois entity—to provide home health services for two counties across the river in Indiana. The shout-out should go to the Ford and Iroquois county boards, who took action immediately upon learning that their apparently out-of-control health department was doing things with Illinois tax dollars that Indiana was going to benefit from, without, it appears, any influx of Indiana dollars…as well as without county board approval, such as they were doing with their health department budgets, amending them for the past two years without bothering to run the amendments past the county boards.

And from there, it just got worse.

Needs no further captioning.

Apparently, there’s a director of the FIPHD, Doug Corbett, who has done a little more than benefit from inside information on grants like the Clarks were alleged to have done: this guy kind of set up his own little “banking” institution from within the framework of the health department. You can read all about that in this post that appeared today at the Watchdog’s website; our mouths are still agape from this.

As a result of the FOIA investigation into Corbett, the Watchdogs received this letter from another apparently clueless attorney, who doesn’t seem to understand what a PUBLIC BODY is.

Folks, it doesn’t get any more real than this.

This is what happens when real media comes to town, starts asking the tough questions, gets real answers that are undeniable as they are from FOIA’d material…and the PUBLIC officials don’t like it. They whine to an attorney—ostensibly being paid for by taxpayers’ money, our Watchdogs might want to look into THAT aspect of it—and the attorney makes threats. Attorneys think they’re demigods these days. That’s because no one challenges them.

Well by god they’re being challenged now.

We put this out here because we wanted to bring you the report of what the Watchdogs are doing…but also because we wanted to see if these moronic lawyers are going to challenge us, too.

The clock’s ticking.

Let’s see what happens; we’ll keep you apprised.

Terry Payton, who won’t turn 18 until mid-May of this year, was only a month removed from his 16th birthday on June 23, 2011, when he fatally stabbed his mother, 53-year-old Kathie Payton, in the kitchen of their housing apartment in Paris, Illinois, after, he claimed, she threatened to kill him and was reaching for a chef’s knife in a cabinet above her.

The prosecution in the case, however, managed to convince the jury that Payton’s actions were nothing but those of an angst-ridden teen, frustrated with his absent, alcoholic mother who signaled his intent to kill his mother repeatedly in text messages in the months leading up to the murder…and that this didn’t give him cause to believe his life was in danger.

But a huge contingent in Paris, and indeed in Edgar County and even across the nation and the world (as the case has come to the attention of Britons, given Terry’s heritage is directly from that country) is that Terry Payton was completely justified in his actions, having been sorely abused by his mother—his sole relative in the area, at least to his limited knowledge—for the entirety of his life, and when she said on that day “I’m gonna f^*king kill you,” he believed in his heart that she fully meant it, and that he had no other option but, in a split second, to take the steps that he did that unfortunately ended her life.

Faithful to their grandson, Terry and Maureen Lye, of London, England, came to the U.S. to attend the trial of Terry Payton. One or both of the Lyes were in the courtroom every day in support, and were able to visit with Terry at the Edgar County Jail almost daily. He did not know his grandparents while growing up, as his mother Kathie Payton kept him away from his father Steve Lye by accusing him of a crime, then having him deported in 1998.

In limines and misdirection

The lead-up to the trial, for which jury selection began on February 19, 2013, was one of legal wrangling and what’s being called typical misdirection by top officials in Edgar County.

Motions in limine (motions made before a trial begins asking the judge to rule on whether certain evidence can be excluded) had been submitted at the last minute, and were ruled upon Friday, February 15.

One motion had to do with keeping the public out of jury selection, and only allowing “certain” members of the media in, which was never clarified upon actual jury selection…and which generally isn’t done in trials in Illinois.

Of key significance was the motion to exclude opinion testimony from Dr. Marilyn Frey, a clinical psychologist in Paris who also had a practice in Chicago. The state had issued this in limine but were refused exclusion by Judge Steven Garst. The importance of the desire of the state for this exclusion would come to be highly evident during Dr. Frey’s testimony.

Jury selection, including voir dire questioning, was typical, but included, throughout the three panels of 12 that were seated, questions regarding whether the potential jurors had anyone (or they themselves) with problems with alcohol in their family, and of course, whether they were familiar with Terry or Kathie Payton, and had an opinion on the case.

Several potential jurors were, and did.

The question about the stitches

One in particular, a Mrs. Dennison (the spelling is only phonetic; in Edgar County, no court official makes people spell their names, as is done in other counties), a wheelchair-bound woman, advised Terry Payton’s defense attorney, Bob McIntire of Danville, during voir dire that she could not be an objective juror “because I was the one who took him to the hospital when he was four.”

Dennison was on the third (and final) jury panel. A round of questions went through the twelve and McIntire came back around to Dennison.

“And, Mrs. Dennison, could you tell me why you had to take Terry to the hospital?” he asked as if in an afterthought.

“He got hit in the head with a whiskey bottle,” she replied. “I had to take him to get stitches.”

Terry Payton sat stock still at the defense table. McIntire’s question and Dennison’s answer, although powerful, was for naught: all 12 jurors had already been selected from the first two panels; this panel was for alternate selection only. Ray Tapscott and Katy Grott were chosen from the third panel after listening to Mrs. Dennison’s information elicited by McIntire, but they were not involved in the deliberation process.

Instead, the panel of 12 ultimately selected were Mary Ann Magers, Sandra Kulic (spelling only phonetic; although her name was pronounced four different ways during the selection process, the spelling could only be guessed at), Russell Morgan, Marian Cash, Jessica Ford, Brittney Brown, Jon Ellis, Charlene Floyd, Jack Milam, Tiffany Snedecker, Renee Volkman and Angela Long were selected to serve.

They were attentive throughout the trial for the most part (some were at times bored to sleep, literally), but that was apparently the most interesting portion of the entire ordeal for them.

He’s all they have

Edgar County state’s attorney Mark Isaf, newly-reelected this past November after no one ran against him, had one of the most interminable speaking manners likely to be beheld in downstate Illinois. Yet Isaf was all Edgar had to offer as a prosecutor, and he was theirs by default. Many in Edgar revealed that they believed him to be a detestable man: Married to another attorney, Isaf is said to disallow her to practice law, and is extremely critical of how she dresses when she goes out, including sending her back to change if he disagrees with her selection for any public outing.

As well, he’s said to be a somewhat bizarre disciplinarian toward his young children. He’s said to be proud of the fact that they must do a certain number of pushups in order to get TV privileges, and they are otherwise berated and belittled on frequent occasions when he sees fit to do so.

It was little wonder that he didn’t seem to see the wrong behind the way Kathie Payton treated her only son.

Special prosecutor Ed Parkinson’s appearance in Edgar County on the Payton case was a surprise to many…and his minimal involvement was even more of a surprise to those who knew his style.

Dismissal of one count

Isaf was accompanied at the state’s table by one of Illinois’ finest prosecutors, Ed Parkinson.

Parkinson, of the Illinois Appellate Prosecutor’s office in Springfield, generally only shows up when there’s some very serious case such as murder, arson involving death, crimes against children or the like. His job is to provide assistance to county prosecutors in these tough cases.

However, Parkinson’s presence was somewhat surprising in the Payton case, as it came completely unannounced. And, as it turned out, his presence ended up being somewhat unnecessary.

The first action Isaf took on the morning of Feb. 21, prior to opening statements, was a dismissal of the first of two counts of First-Degree Murder against Payton. The move seemed to stun everyone in the courtroom, and left many with the feeling that Isaf believed his case wasn’t strong enough to even proceed against Payton on the second count of First-Degree Murder, but he did so anyway.

Isaf’s opening statement, delivered at times in mumbles and for the most part in soporific tones (thus the snoring jurors on occasion) set the stage for an elaborate tale spun by the state that seemed to center around a handful of out-of-context text messages Terry Payton had sent his friends in the three or so months leading up to Kathie Payton’s death. It completely disregarded anything in Payton’s life that had happened prior to those three or so months.

In this way, all the focus lay on non-contextual messages, and none of it lay on even the remote possibility that Terry Payton simply could have lashed out in a split-second decision with an action that ended his mother’s life.

Isaf’s opening point-blank stated that Payton was not reasonable in using deadly force against his mother, and instead lasted out in anger, rage and frustration against her.

Isaf said that the then-16-year-old Terry Payton argued that day about money Kathie Payton thought he stole from her, placed a phone call to the police about the missing money, argued about the use of alcohol, and he poured it down the drain, which escalated the situation.

Isaf’s boiled-down version of events

“Then Terry Payton’s ‘dark half surges out,’” Isaf said, later to be learned that he was quoting a text message sent in the hours following Kathie Payton’s death, “he stabs her seven times after ‘mercilessly beating the shit out of her.’ There were two stab wounds in the right carotid/jugular veins,” Isaf related (incorrectly, as the jury was to learn; but that would not be the only serious mistake he made in presenting of the evidence, which mistakes the jury completely overlooked, “one stab in the left jugular, an incised wound sweeping across the front of her neck, and three stabs to the upper chest. She lost a lot of blood, her heart stopped and she died. There was no first aid administered, no ambulance was called and no attempt to help her. At the time he was six-foot-three, 130 pounds; she’s five-foot-six, 150 pounds, with a pacemaker, a bad back, and walked with a cane at times. She abused alcohol, and abused pain medications,” Isaf said, venturing into some realm of truthfulness.

“You will hear a recorded interview in which the defendant said that after killing his mother, he dragged her to her bedroom, tried to clean up the blood, walked to McDonalds, had a sandwich, talked to friends, and was convinced to turn himself in,” Isaf droned. He outlined how police responded at that point, and talked about the autopsy of the body and subsequent interviews of Payton.

“Listen to what he doesn’t say,” Isaf directed the jury. “Understand the sequence of events; remember what he texted to his friends.”

‘The rest of the story’

When McIntire took the floor for his opening, he focused on “the rest of the story.”

McIntire described what happened that day in June 2011 somewhat differently than Isaf did, and gave considerably more lead-up than the prosecutor had. Stating that Terry Payton had had a difficult relationship with his chronically abusive mother, he told of how the boy loved her, but wanted her to stop drinking. He’d credited himself for stopping her cigarette habit when he was at a very young age, and believed that at 16, he could take an action that would cause her to abruptly stop drinking like she’d abruptly stopped smoking ten years before, hence the reason he poured out her alcohol.

But, McIntire said in his “Columbo” demeanor (which is to say, somewhat halting speech, with long dramatic pauses as he appears to collect his thoughts), this was where the story diverged from Isaf’s drastically: Kathie Payton, upon seeing her alcohol poured down the sink, attacked her son, scratching, hitting and trying to bite him.

“He was able to fend her off,” McIntire said, “and she went to the floor. When she got back up, he was by the microwave, backed into a corner. She reached up, above and behind him, and he became aware she was reaching up to a cabinet that held a chef’s knife, wide-handled and of significant length. She was telling him she’d kill him. Evidence will show she’d made similar statements before. But evidence will show this was different from things parents and children say to each other when somebody gets mad that somebody didn’t take out the trash. He knew she was reaching for the knife and she meant it. There was a knife by the sink, a steak knife, and he grabbed it while in fear of his own life, and he did stab her. Though it was several times, it took place in a matter of seconds.

“She fell to the floor and didn’t get up.”

McIntire explained that justifiable homicide comes in when a person believes they must defend themselves against imminent deadly force.

“Deadly force can only be used when confronted with deadly force,” McIntire said. “And we will show an element of justification.”

ISP’s Lisa Crowder’s appearance at trial was marked by strange and inappropriate giggling from the witness stand; she got a promotion out of her work on the case.

Local police; CSI; and Crowder, girl investigator

The first two witnesses called by the state were Paris police officers Mike Henness and Phillip Kollenburg. Both recounted how Payton came to the police station and how they turned the scene of the housing apartment at 50 Highland Court over to Illinois State Police Crime Scene Investigators.

Their testimony offered only minimal significance to the evidence, but did show one thing: the failure to secure the back door of the apartment, which, apparently, had been unsecured from about 1:30 (when the crime was estimated to have occurred) until about 6:40, when officers left Payton in custody at the police station and arrived at the apartment.

ISP’s CSI for the scene, DeWayne Morris, explained his expertise in the area of blood evidence, but was never certified as an expert witness by the state…a situation that occurred time and again, and was an apparent oversight in Isaf’s conducting of a trial.

Morris’ highlights in testimony were that he only found “bloodlike stains” on the floor of the kitchen and a trail to the bedroom through the apartment where Payton said he’d dragged his mother’ body. Of interest to Isaf was the fact that there were no “blood spatters”—cast-off blood, which he would expect to see from a stabbing, or pushing in/pulling out of a knife through skin—to be found anywhere in the kitchen.

Morris would not commit to a reason why there were none, although it was growing evident what Isaf was after—that Payton’s version of events was not truthful, and that he hadn’t stabbed his mother in an upright position, but had instead stabbed her while she was down on the floor. Morris could not corroborate that with any certainty, a situation that seemed to frustrate Isaf.

Giving perhaps the most bizarre testimony of that day came from ISP investigator Lisa Crowder. Crowder seemed underqualified to be handling such a high-profile case, having been with ISP for only seven years and handling only five other homicides in her career. It appeared that Crowder only handled Payton’s case because she was the investigator on duty when Paris police called the homicide in.

Crowder testified as to Isaf’s “crucial” text messages Terry Payton sent his friends in the months before the killing and hours after. Her testimony was marked with inappropriate giggling and moments of apparent cluelessness as to what she should say next.

The DVD recording of her very late-night interview with Payton at the police station was played for the jury. During this interview, Payton attempted to tell what had happened in a chronological, sequential order. He was, however, interrupted at nearly every juncture…possibly because Crowder was having difficulty keeping up with the intelligent, yet shaken, young man, but possibly because she was either really tired (it was nearing midnight on the night of June 23), or simply was inept.

Regardless, she got a promotion out of her work on the case, she testified under cross exam by McIntire.

The defense team, lead by Bob McIntire (in forefront), made headway in the premise that Terry Payton, behind McIntire, killed his mother in self-defense, but in the end, it wasn’t enough to convince the larger number of jurors, and they caved to the smaller number.

The experts speak: Dr. Roland Kohr

Day two of the trial saw the emergence of Parkinson taking the lead in the questioning of the state’s first certified “expert” witness, Dr. Roland Kohr, the lab director at Terre Haute Regional Hospital since 1993 and associate pathologist since 1984.

Kohr, his presence marked by the attendance of some sour-looking female students or associates of some sort, who were initially seated on the right side of the courtroom but quickly moved en masse to the left side when they realized they were sitting in defense territory, bore with them notepads and made busy-looking scrawls in them during Kohr’s testimony.

Kohr, giving his background, seemed to be more certified in car crash pathology, as he was highly familiar with blunt force trauma associated with those. But he also testified as to his expertise in determining blood alcohol content in a deceased person, advising that science has discovered that blood taken from the femoral artery is more accurate in testing than that taken from the aorta of the heart, as used to be done.

Kohr conducted the autopsy on Kathie Payton, and discussed the results with Parkinson as the attorney presented a series of gruesome photos taken of Kathie Payton’s stab wounds and post-mortem bruising/lividity.

One thing Kohr noted under direct exam was his lack of awareness of whether scrapings of Kathie Payton’s fingernails, or short of that, clippings, were taken.

However, Kohr pointed out three stab wounds on her neck, two on the right, one on the left, each with a depth of an inch and a half, and “one incise wound, a shallow superficial wound caused by dragging a sharp object across the skin.”

The chest stab wounds were “concentrated toward the middle, with two having horizontal orientation and one having vertical.”

The head wounds

Parkinson seemed focused for a bit on the lack of defense wounds on Kathie Payton’s body, but moved on to a head wound: a skull fracture an inch and a half to the right of her forehead.

Kohr testified that epidural and subdural hemorrhage had occurred in the vicinity of the fracture as more gruesome photos, these of the inside of Kathie Payton’s skull as the facial portion has been removed from the rest, were shown.

Kohr postulated on how the skull fracture occurred, but was very clear when he stated that there was “no way to know about the force used to cause that skull fracture.”

A great deal of time was spent discussing the liter of blood found in Kathie Payton’s chest cavity as a result of a lung artery being punctured on one of the stabs.

Kohr opined that “if a body is lying down, there’s only so much blood that can be there. If someone is on their back, air would be expressed out of a wound with the blood. There was a negative finding of an air embolism. To have air bubbles means air entered the venous system. If it’s there, there would be a very unusual sucking wound. It wasn’t there.”

Parkinson attempted to ask Kohr about the difference in being such a sucking wound being present in a person stabbed when vertical versus a person stabbed when lying down, but was successfully stopped by the defense’s medical attorney, Steven L. Blakely of Danville. The jury looked thoroughly confused as a sidebar took a great deal of time, and the entire thing was removed to chambers as the attorneys haggled over the presentation of certain autopsy photos.

Upon return to the courtroom, Parkinson again attempted to establish that Kathie Payton was horizontal when stabbed. A defense objection was overruled but Parkinson tried a different question, asking if Kohr believed Payton was conscious when she was stabbed.

Kohr opined that she was not, based on the lack of defense wounds and the skull trauma.

Steve Blakely lead the questioning of the medical experts who testified as to how Kathie Payton died.

First revelation of just how drunk she was

Blakely, on cross, established right off the bat something the prosecution was studiously avoiding: Kathie Payton’s blood alcohol content, which was found to be 0.228 percent, nearly three times the legal limit for intoxication.

Blakely further established that she was on Hydrocodone, and had in her system at the time of death anywhere from three to thirteen times the therapeutic dosage of that drug; and had also ingested a small amount of Alprazolam and acetominophen.

Blakely, in questioning Kohr, told the jury that such dosages, when combined with alcohol, can cause confusion, agitation, hostility irritability and hallucinations.

He also reestablished that Kohr “didn’t recall” whether fingernail scrapings or clippings were done, “but we did a routine rape kit test, so they must have been, as that’s always done.”

Blakely also got Kohr to admit that it was possible Kathie Payton could have suffered a skull fracture and “been up walking around”; that the seven stab wounds could have been inflicted in a matter of seconds; that a pacemaker could have forced the heart to beat a little longer after death, resulting in the blood in the chest cavity pooling after a stab to the lung artery in an upright position; and that a lack of defense wounds could have no significance whatsoever.

In other words, everything the state had just tried to convince the jury was 100 percent firm and factual was anything but.

The heavy hitter

The state then brought in a second ISP investigator, former Fairfield police officer Matt McCormick.

McCormick had interviewed Payton the day after the incident while he was in Danville juvenile detention, and stated that a next-day interview was conducted because often, after a person has had time to calm down and sleep a bit, they can remember things they may have been too traumatized to recall in an initial interview.

However, as his testimony progressed, it became clear that there was another purpose for McCormick’s second interview with Payton: he was there to establish how Kathie Payton had gotten the skull fracture Kohr had found during the autopsy.

And once again, the state police displayed what has proven to be their downfall in recent years since the 30-somethings have taken over the investigations field: they try to make the story match the evidence, as opposed to investigating everything around the story in an effort to rule it out, then see what matches up with what.

In an interview that the jury listened to but did not see (as no video recording was made, only audio), it was apparent that McCormick was coercing Payton into telling him a story, any story, that Payton could come up with as to how the skull fracture was inflicted.

Instead of letting the boy tell the entire story start to finish, McCormick, like Crowder before him, continually interrupted Payton in the telling, frustrating the boy and making his “version” seem less believable to the jury, as McCormick continued to try to pigeonhole an answer to fit the evidence instead of the other way around.

And Payton, being raised to be in mortal fear of an authority figure and in making that figure angry, relented and basically told McCormick what he wanted to hear: that he “could have been angry” at his mother and slammed her head against the floor (as opposed to her striking her head on the floor upon her first fall, from which she arose, as he later testified occurred), “could have been” turning into that he “was angry” under insistent coercing by McCormick in the interview.

Isaf’s damning evidence: the texts

The prosecution brought back Crowder to present the evidence Isaf was hinging his entire case on: text messages sent by Terry Payton to his friend Jake Shumaker.

Payton used an iPod touch to text when he was able to get a wireless hit, which put him in a league of texting at a lower frequency than a kid his age who has available a regular cell phone. Nevertheless, Crowder testified, they had been able to print out more than 90 pages of text messages to and from Terry Payton on the device.

Of those 90 pages, Isaf’s entire presentation focused on roughly nine, which held, he claimed, text messages that showed Terry Payton’s murderous thoughts, all the way back to March 11, 2011 and up to June 20, 2011…as well as the texts he sent in the hours after the death of his mother.

The key texts Isaf focused on were:

From Terry: Got any mind control tactics I could use?

From Terry: If she doesn’t shut up I’m going to legit snap I’m sick of the alcoholic c^nt.

From Jake: Who is this? From Terry: I need you. Now. I’m going to kill her.

From Terry: People pushing me to the point I’m gonna take a knife to their throat (this text was embedded in an ignored—by the prosecution, anyway—conversation about a boy who was bothering a girl Jake liked).

(Later in that same conversation) From Jake: I’ll get the shovel. From Terry: I’ll get the chloroform. From Jake: Well he messes with me I’m gonna grab a shovel we’ll have a body to bury. From Terry: We might have a mother to bury if she doesn’t stop whining about a tape case. From Jake: I’ll get the shovel.

The messages, Crowder testified, were in no sequence.

It was clear that ISP once again had used evidence to fit their theory, cherry-picking what suited.

It was unclear, if Isaf was pinning all his hopes on a murder conviction based on these texts, why Jake Shumaker wasn’t charged in an Accountability count.

The state rested its case with the presentation of the texts at 3:15 p.m. Thursday, February 21.

There were audible gasps in the courtroom when Isaf first mumbled, then was asked by Garst to speak up and repeat it, that the state rested.

Out of sequence, but the tone was set

The defense put on one witness that afternoon, out of sequence because she would not be available the following week (and McIntire hadn’t expected the state to have presented their case so rapidly, obviously).

Cindy Patrick, administrative assistant at Paris High School, took the stand to testify as to foul phone calls Kathie Payton repeatedly made to the school, asking for her son and calling him “the f^*king bastard,” among other vulgarities that she spewed over the phone at staff about getting her son out of school.

The following Monday, February 25, saw a parade of defense witnesses who merely supported Payton’s story about the events of June 23, 2011, and the steps Terry Payton took after the incident in which he killed his mother.

Collin Hollowell (again, names spelled phonetically), 17, testified about that day wherein Terry came to Shumaker’s place and almost jokingly advised that he’d killed his mother.

Sandra Chapman, a disabled former neighbor of the Paytons, described how Kathie came to her apartment, drunk, after Kathie had locked Terry out and he’d gone elsewhere…and how she realized that if the police learned that, she’d get in trouble, so she changed her story to “he’d run away.”

Witnesses attest to neglect, abuse; phone call played

Shanna Lawrence, another neighbor, described how she took Terry in on the many times he’d been locked out of his own house from the age of 11 by a drunk and enraged Kathie; Tracy Bracken described the same.

Sandy Holloway, a hairdresser, described a heartbreaking incident that occurred not long before the homicide, in which Kathie was forcing Terry to get his head shaved. Between the implorings of the hairdressers and Terry, a compromise was struck and he got a short haircut.

Jessica Barnes described an incident in which she’d seen Kathie wallop Terry after a football game incident, and how Kathie, upon the many DCFS reports being ‘unfounded,’ would stand outside her apartment and yell belligerently about how “no one would take my son away from me!” apparently since she’d already lost a daughter due to neglect.

The defense also played the phone call made to Paris police on the June 23, 2011 date, in which Kathie Payton forced her son to “confess” to stealing money from her.

On the call, Kathie can be heard in the background telling Terry what to say, and Terry complying meekly.

The police, however, knew what was up and asked Terry if Kathie were “coaching” him. When he said she was not, they asked for her to be put on the phone, and in her drunken slur, Kathie told them he was “finally admitting to stealing money out of my safe, $750 and I want him arrested.”

When she was told “I did hear you in the background telling him what to say, Kathie,” by police, she grew enraged and hung up on them.

The doctor sets it straight

Then that afternoon, the defense presented Dr. George Nichols, former state pathologist (under six governors) for the state of Kentucky.

After giving his impressive credentials Dr. Nichols advised that indeed, even with a small skull fracture, a person—especially on three to 13 times the therapeutic dose of painkillers and three times the legal limit of alcohol intoxication—could get up from sustaining such an injury and attack someone with impunity.

He also testified that as regards Kathie Payton’s skull fracture, it would be impossible to tell whether it was from “the fall of an intoxicated person on a concrete floor” (which the kitchen was), or if someone had intentionally impacted it by beating her head on the floor. “The injuries don’t allow us to determine the mechanics of how it happened,” Nichols said, testifying that the same could be said for lack of defense wounds.

“If they don’t appear, they mean nothing,” he said.

Nichols indicated that the head injury was likely not serious enough to cause lack of consciousness, and that Kathie Payton could have indeed gotten back up after sustaining it and attacked her son, just as he’d said in his interviews that she did.

Nichols also had a similar opinion about whether Kathie Payton was upright or horizontal when she was stabbed: there was no way to know for sure, although “a likely occurrence is for her to have been standing for a longer amount of time after being stabbed than for a short amount of time.”

Nichols explained the lack of cast-off blood from the stabs, and the fact that Kathie’s shirt was soaked with blood but not her pajama pants, very simply: she was stabbed with a serrated knife. The knife made one cut in the shirt, but three stabs to the chest…meaning that when it was withdrawn from the body, it was not withdrawn from the shirt, but instead caught. All cast-off blood would have been caught inside the shirt as well.

Further, “her veins were cut in her neck, not her arteries,” Nichols said. “Arteries seep when cut, not spurt. So it’s likely they simply seeped when she hit the floor.”

Revealing testimony

Perhaps the most revealing testimony was given by Dr. Frey, a psychologist of 47 years and one of the most qualified in the state to give psych evals.

She spoke of her interviews with Terry as they were mandated by the state, which is rote when a juvenile is charged as an adult in a crime. Dr. Frey’s intensive analysis, she said, showed that Terry suffered Battered Child Syndrome (BCS), wherein he sought to please adults in his life even though it might mean his own pain, discomfort, deprivation, etc. She opined that he was not deceptive in his testing and could not be, as he’d tested out with a high factor of truthfulness…an aspect of his evaluation that likely prompted the biggest response from the state of wanting to stifle Frey’s testimony.

She explained his actions following the killing as being “dissociative,” meaning that he couldn’t quite assimilate the reality of what had happened, and his wandering to McDonald’s, Walmart and texting his friends were an attempt at grabbing at normalcy in a surreal situation for a 16-year-old.

That he cleaned up the kitchen after the stabbing, dragged his mother to her room and sat next to her apologizing—as he’d revealed in his interviews to police—showed more evidence of BCS, and showed he clearly had a moral code to which he adhered, even after such an awful event.

Parkinson tried to take Frey’s assessment apart. However, he came off as brutalizing her, even while the woman, clearly in her 70s, held her ground against it.

School personnel testify

School guidance counselor Stacie Garzelini-Skelton testified next, to the bitter, drunken phone call Kathie Payton made to her in late March 2011 about Terry “touching mommy’s medicine” and if he did, she would “cut his legs off with an electric knife, because he’s a sound sleeper, and I’ll cut him down to size, he thinks he’s so big.”

Administrative assistant Loretta Boyer testified to similar phone calls. But JoEllen Henson, a school social worker, gave opposite testimony than what her investigative interview stated, confusing McIntire and making for a bad mark on the defense’s case when she stated that Terry had admitted to stealing money (he said he had not), and having thoughts of harming his mother (he’d said he’d had fears of having to defend himself with physical force from her attacks).

Likewise, Shumaker’s testimony did not match his prior interview, and he made Terry seem more forceful toward his mother than a previous interview had indicated, despite an incident in which Kathie had aimed to hit Terry with a Jim Beam bottle and struck Shumaker instead, this a few weeks before her death.

Takes stand in his own defense

On the morning of February 27, Terry Payton took the stand in his own defense.

He explained the frequency and type of abused he experienced at the hand of his mother, dating back to as long as he could remember. While part of the abuse was indeed physical, much of it was mental, with Kathie taunting him with singsong phrases such as “I’m so perfect” about Terry and his poise in the face of said taunts.

He stated that he loved his mother and sometimes they got along, but most of the time, she just grew more distant and her temper worse as her alcoholism and pill addiction increased.

Shortly after questioning began, McIntire took Terry through being kicked out of the house, the first time at age 11. Recounting what she told him (“This is my house, getout you slimy syphilitic bastard!”), he broke down in horrible sobs, causing proceedings to halt temporarily.

Brought back to the stand, he explained the out-of-context texts, and gave them context, stating that if the rest of the conversations were shown, it would explain much about them.

Story never wavered

He explained the sequence of events of the day in question, his detail never wavering from the two previously-recorded interviews with ISP as regards how she was tormenting him that morning about being “I’m so perfect” despite her assertion of having left the front door unlocked; throwing a box of trash bags around the apartment violently, telling him “It’s either you or these trash bags”; how he tried to keep himself under control, venting to Shumaker on his iPod touch in order not to “say something stupid that would set her off”; and finally, realizing how drunk she was, pouring her Jim Beam down the drain. He described the fight in detail as it had been presented many times: He’d flung her off him and she fell to the floor, then when she came back at him, they’d struggled and she’d tripped, falling backwards and taking him with her. When he struggled with her on the floor, she may have struck her head again, as she was flailing, but he was trying to get off her. When he succeeded, he was up only for a few seconds when she came at him again, this time telling him she was going to kill him, cornering him with her right hand while reaching for the chef’s knife (which was found by ISP still in its place) with her left, when he somewhat blindly reached for the steak knife and stabbed her in rapid succession. She looked at him briefly before falling backwards again, from which position she didn’t get up.

“As she reached for the knife, I felt like, my God, she’s really meaning it this time,” he said.

Isaf tried to get a stumble

On cross, Isaf (now alone at the state’s table, as Parkinson hadn’t been present for the proceedings the entire day without explanation) made a weak attempt at getting Payton to stumble over his disparity of size by comparison to Kathie; her multiple physical ailments; her condition under the influence of alcohol; and other factors that “showed” that he overpowered her and “beat her head mercilessly.”

Yet despite what he probably considered his best efforts, Isaf came away from cross exam appearing to have gone over a set of false facts with someone who had lived the truth and knew better; Terry Payton explained more of the state’s gaping holes in the non-contextual texts and why Terry took the actions he did than even the defense had.

The only thing Isaf did differently than McIntire had was: he didn’t make Terry Payton weep on the stand.

Closing

Isaf’s closing focused again on the random text messages. It was the state’s contention that Payton, if not actually planning the murder, had it in his head that this was what he was going to do, and when he saw an opportunity, he took it. Isaf believed Payton changed his story between the two interviews, even though it’d been Isaf who’d elicited testimony from McCormick that sometimes, even police officers who’d had to kill when threatened could think more clearly and remember more the next day.

McIntire somewhat stumbled through his closing, reiterating Payton’s version of events that had never varied from day one, and how Dr. Frey’s exam of the boy had turned up exactly the type of mental abuse that would prompt him to react in the way he did after the stabbing and his mother’s death at his own hand.

Isaf concluded by showing the most salacious texts (about “knife to their throat” and “burying a mother”) on the same projection screen as autopsy photos of Kathie.

Friends and family react to the news that the verdict was ‘guilty’ of Second-Degree Murder, a finding of First-Degree Murder but with mitigating circumstances. The crime is probationable.

Jury wanted to go home

The jury had been instructed that they had the opportunity to find Second-Degree Murder in place of First-Degree, but must find First-Degree (with intent) first, then mitigate it by the factor that Payton himself believed his life was in imminent danger, but the belief was not realistic.

Given the case shortly after noon on Feb. 28, the jury returned with a guilty of Second-Degree shortly after 5 p.m. They had been able to enjoy both lunch and dinner on the county.

Inside information revealed that four of the jurors believed Payton to be guilty of First-Degree; four, guilty of Second-Degree; and four not guilty. The ‘not guilty’ four were swayed by the others when the dinner hour approached and many began expressing a desire to get it over with and go home.

Interestingly, Kathie Payton’s sister Jan Burno was not present for either the closing arguments nor the verdict…as if she had already been advised of how it was going to go, and was satisfied that her nephew, whom she has repeatedly called “a cold-blooded killer” of the sister she hated all her life until her death, was going to have justice served against him.

However, because of Terry Payton’s young age and the fact that he has no criminal history whatsoever, these are factors that may play into his favor.

Second-Degree Murder is a probationable offense, unlike First-Degree Murder. While it’s possible he could be sentenced only to probation, Payton will likely be sentenced to a juvenile facility. His sentencing range is from four to 20 years, depending upon mitigating/aggravating factors. He has spent nearly two years in jail, which will be considered time served. His next-likely sentence could, therefore, have him out in two years.

A petition for Edgar County residents to sign for leniency in sentencing is circulating.

A fund has been set up to assist in legal expenses at First Bank and Trust, 101 S. Central Ave., Paris, Ill., 61944, The Terry Payton Legal Assistance Fund, acct. #01-600708-3

For those interested in sending Terry Payton words of encouragement prior to his April or May sentencing, write to Terry Payton, c/o Edgar County Jail, 228 N. Central Ave., Paris, Ill., 61944.

Friends and family react to the news that the verdict was ‘guilty’ of Second-Degree Murder, a finding of First-Degree Murder but with mitigating circumstances. The crime is probationable.