State-administered death is always a greater horror than any other by virtue of the methodical reasoning that precedes it. French philosopher Albert Camus wrote that "capital punishment is the most premeditated of murders". "The United States' concept of justifiable homicide/Executions in criminal law stands on the dividing line between an excuse, justification and an exculpation. In other words, it takes a case that would otherwise have been a murder or another crime representing intentional killing, and either excuses or justifies the individual accused from all criminal liability or treats the accused differently from other intentional killers.

www.DeathRow-USA.com

All Names A - Z

HOME

People Not on Death Row

www.deathrow-texas.com

Fakten zur Todesstrafe(pdf)

Best videos on the theme

Anonym

Books written on Death Row

Contact

Upcoming Executions US
IMPRESSUM and Partner
Conditions on DR AZ, Ohio

Ohio Executionschedule

Visiting Death House  Arizona
Guestbook  First 150 entries..

Death Row NEWS on the message and discussion board!

How to send money to an inmate account or write an e-mail:
An Execution Date set

Daniel Clate Acker # 999381

Polunsky Unit D.R.
3872 FM 350 South
Livingston -  Texas  77351
U.S.A.

Editorial: Shoddy legal work matter of life, death

Web Posted: 09/07/2006 
San Antonio Express-News

If the legal services Toby C. Wilkinson of Greenville performed on behalf of recently executed death row inmate Justin Chaz Fuller are representative of the work he does, he should be removed from the list of attorneys the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals uses to assign appellate cases.
Wilkinson is not a rookie in the legal profession. He has been licensed to practice law in Texas since shortly after his graduation from Pepperdine School of Law in 1980.

His less-than-stellar appellate work at taxpayer expense warrants review by the State Bar of Texas.

There will not be any more appeals for Fuller. He received a lethal injection Aug. 24 for the abduction, robbery and shooting death of 21-year-old Donald Whittington III of Tyler.
......
The work Wilkinson performed in the case of another death row inmate, Daniel Clate Acker, is no better. Acker made a smart move in asking a California lawyer to represent him as his appeal moves to federal court.

It's unconscionable that the courts would allow the work Wilkinson submitted to go unchallenged, especially in cases where defendants' lives are at stake.

It makes you wonder if anyone is reading the petitions being filed on behalf of death row inmates — including some of the lawyers submitting them.

http://www.mysanant onio.com/ opinion/editoria ls/stories/ MYSA090706. 1O.lawyer1ed. 1e72912.html

The Injustice That Has Befallen Daniel Acker

 

In this report I will show how I (Daniel Clate Acker) was convicted & sentenced to death for something I did not do, because of the prosecutors “DECEPTIVE; MISLEADING & DISHONEST” description of how MARKIE GEORGE’s death occurred. I will show how the prosecutor knowingly & willingly “FALSIFIED & CONCEALED EVIDENCE” – deliberately misleading the jurors to obtain this wrongful conviction. I will show the prosecutor not only knew he was altering and putting on false – evidence, -- he went all out to prevent me from putting on any testimony as to what really happened – on March 12, 2000.

Now I will try with all my heart to present to you the in-justice that has befallen me.

As I write about mine & Markie’s brief relationship I do not so to vilify Markie, or disrespect her in any way, but there is a great desire in my heart to show and tell the truth of what happened on this Sunday morning of March 12, 2000 – in order to do so you will need to know a little about mine & Markie’s STORMY relationship.

My ex-wife (SHIRLEY) was instrumental in turning my life around. I will always & forever love her for her love, help and dedication to see me through my problems. This instilled in me the desire to help others.

I was living with my Mother – I had a good job & a nice pick-up truck. When I met Markie – she & her 2 kids were living with her mom & step-dad. I got along well with Markie’s 2 kids & enjoyed taking them fishing & being with them in many other activities. Markie had a very impulsive personality that can be testified to by many people. Markie had a drug problem and I had been there – done that & because of the help I received from my ex-wife I wanted to help Markie. Because I was good with her kids and we had a lot on common Markie & Me got them a place and we moved in together.

On the Sunday morning of March 12, - Markie had not came home the night before & I had been to her family looking for her. I had bought a ceiling fan, but did not have all the material that was needed to install it. So I went to my place of employment and got my utility (electrical) work truck. I pulled the truck up close to our side door & got it stuck. Our neighbours had to get their tractor to pull it out of the mud. Then a man that I knew drove up with Markie. As I was trying to find out where Markie had been all night & why was Robert bringing her home. All I get is one lie after the other. Markie turns & goes into the house & I stay outside talking to Robert. All I wanted to know was – did they sleep together. Robert tells me that they did not – that he took her to her Daddy’s house to spend the night & is solely giving her a ride home this morning – Robert then leaves. I then go into the house – Markie had already changed into her sweatpants that she always wore around the house. We talk for a few minutes and I say “look quit lying to me and just tell me where you stayed last night”. Markie said “I stayed at Robert’s”. I ask her again if she had slept with him. Markie said “NO” I asked does Robert live in Sulphur Springs? Markie said “Yes” & I ask her where? Markie got her Sulphur Springs live-stock jacket – put it on and said I will show you. As she walked in the direction of the front door to get her purse and shoes she turned & darted out the front door.

Our neighbours were in their front yard and she called out to them too – call the sheriff – call the sheriff. I went out right behind her – I was shocked and could not understand why she would have these sudden outbursts – as I had seen her do many times in public. The first time was on our first date – I wanted to take Markie to a nice restaurant – when we got in there Markie just went off on one of the nice waitresses & got up on the table. I had to pick Markie up off the table and carry her out. I then took her to another café where I knew the waitress. When we sit down the waitress came over and said, “What have you 2 been up to” – Markie says, “don’t worry about what we’ve been up to just poor our coffee”. This was going through my mind as I caught up with her – picked her up – took her to my work Utility Truck – opened the door – Markie got in and moved over to the passenger side. I got in right behind her. I started the truck and as we were leaving Markie tried to jump out, but I reach over & catch her by the back of her hair and jacket. And I am able to pull her back into the truck. While this was going on I lost control of the truck – running off the road on both sides before I was able to regain control. I then accelerated and turned left without stopping at the stop sign onto FM 1537. I then ask Markie to move the light bulbs on the seat between us over and sit next to me. Markie said “NO” – I again ask her to move the light bulbs over and sit next to me. Markie said “NO” – I will behave. I then ask her where Robert lives & she told me to go towards the Spanish Trail Apartments. 

I then told Markie that if I find out that you slept with Robert I am going to move back in with my Mother. Markie said –“No” – I love you – I need you. I said – No you don’t or you would not do me this way. I then said – I mean it if I find out you slept with him, I am going to move back in with my Mother.

At this time there is an oncoming car, so I take my foot off the gas - & focused my attention on the car – as the two people in the car seem more concerned with talking than they were with watching the road. As they got next to me I turned my head to the left to be sure they would not hit the Utility Bed that stuck out about one foot on each side of the Utility Truck’s Cab. When I did I heard the passenger door open and I turned back to see Markie jumping out. I called out “Markie No” as I was throwing my upper body over to catch her, but I could only touch her with the tip of my fingers. Markie felt me touch her and she turned her head and shoulders to the left as she looked back at me & when she did her hip moved to the left and her warm-ups caught on the door latch which pulled up and out on them causing the legs of her warm-ups to come up around her knees and this tears a hole in the hip area of her pants. As I looked at her I could see by the look on her face that she knew she had gone too far this time. I called out “Markie No” and as I went to push in the clutch my foot hit the break making me roll forward towards the dash & the passenger door shut with the help of the wind. The truck is moving forward as I sit up and regain control – pushing the clutch & the break at the same time I stop as fast as I can, leaving skid marks in the road. Looking back through the rear window I can see Markie laying face down in the road & grass – with the lower half of her body in the grass and her head and right shoulder on the edge of the road. All I can say is “NO – No – No”. This part is graphic in detail, but needs to be told – Please keep in mind that all of this was happening at the same time – all within 2 to 3 seconds.

Markie jumped out and she felt the tip of my fingers touch her, she turned her head and shoulders to the left causing her hip to move to the left and her warm-ups to catch on the door latch pulling up on the seat area – all at the same time pulling her pants legs up to about knee high tearing a hole in the seat area. For a split second she seems suspended in time –she looks back away – feeling the force of the wind and gravity take a hold of her. As the toes of her right foot hits the road the outside sharp bottom corner of the Utility Bed catches her right leg between her foot and her knee – turning her right foot up under the trucks Utility Bed. This makes her feet drag on the road in the direction the truck is going – chewing a hole in her sock and ultimately pulling her sock off. This also causes her feet and legs to have an upper pull on them. At this time her hip area hits the outer edge of the Utility Bed in an impetus motion. Her body is now forcefully & violently moving in four directions as the Truck Bed hits her hip the upper part of her body (chest, shoulders, arms & head) are moving towards the rear of the Truck & at the same time her body is being flipped from an upright stance to a prone downward position violently twisting her body – her left side is being forced out and down from the Utility Bed as her right side is rolling up – her legs come up by the force of the Utility Bed as she is being passed by it. Her right leg is now rolled to where it is being scraped on the inside of her right thigh by the same outer side sharp edge. As this is happening the upper part of her body is now in a downward motion causing her head to hit the road as the rest of her body comes down on it like closing an accordion – causing all the force to be on her head and neck. She then comes to a stop partly in the grass in an almost backwards angle as to the way we were travelling – with her head and right shoulder on the edge of the road and her lower body in the grass. Because she had these multiple forces (pulling, pushing & twisting) her body simultaneously was the cause of her massive internal injuries coupled with the sudden impact of the road. Just as her feet were being dragged on the road caused the road Nash on the top side of her right foot, the bottom sharp corner of the Utility Bed caused the large laceration on her right calf & the outer edge of the Utility Bed caused the large abrasion on her right hip and inter right thigh & the road caused the injuries to her head and neck. I have just briefly described Markie’s injuries and how she received them. I will go into them more as we go over the testimony of the medical doctor. That was manipulated, altered and falsely portrayed by the D.A…

I bring the truck to a stop. I look back and can see Markie. I put the Truck in reverse, looking through the back window I steer the Utility Truck making sure not to back over Markie in an oblique angel that puts the rear right hand corner of the Utility Bed in the centre of the road. I see the tail lights of the car that just went past me turn left. I think that they are going to come back to help us. I then look back south and there is a pick-up truck coming. I take the Utility Truck out of reverse & wave my hand & hitting the steering wheel trying to get the man (Brodie Young) in the pick-up to stop. I call out to him “Stop – Stop- she jumped – help us- Stop she jumped”, but the man in the pick-up just keeps on coming out & around me. I’m calling out to him as he goes by, but this man just looks at me and keeps right on going. As soon as this man’s truck clears my door I open it – I get out and I run around to Markie just as fast as I can & I pick her up in my arms – I take a couple of steps with her – reaching with my left hand I open the passenger side door. I need both hands to move some light bulbs on the seat over – so I take a couple of steps back towards the shoulder of the road – I lay Markie down on the edge of the road & this is when I look Markie in her eyes & I realize she is dead – you can not imagine the overwhelming pain that came over me. I’m totally lost, I’m in shock – I look and the man in the pickup is still going – I can not understand why no one stopped to help us- tears are rolling down my face – I mentally call out to GOD. I shut the door on the passenger side. I get back into the truck and I feel the only one that can help, the only one that will help is my Mother. As we all do when things go wrong and there seems to be no one to help – we go to our Mother. I then wave down a passing D.P.S. Officer and tell him what happened and I am placed under arrest for failure to stop & render aid – Then Capital Murder.

What I just told you is true; it is what happened on March 12, 2000. Markie George, jumped from my work Utility Truck causing her own death. Every bit of the evidence when presented truthfully clearly shows, that she jumped and that was the cause of her – Sudden – INSTANT – DEATH.

The LAW States a person is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

This is not the way it is in a count in the UNITED STATES JUDICIAL SYSTEM TODAY.

Money makes all the difference, as a person with money can put on evidence before the jury to prove the prosecution is not telling the truth and a poor person does not have the attorneys on the experts they need to prove they are innocent.

To understand this you must understand that the prosecution in his opening statement will tell the jury what he thinks the evidence will show and then he has to put that evidence on just as he said he would & it must show beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. If the jury obeys the law they must find a person NOT GUILTY if the prosecutor does not prove his case by the evidence.

Now I will present to you the lies, the prosecutor (Frank Long) knowingly & willingly put before the jury and how he went all out to prevent the truth from being told. To start this there is no better place to start than with Long’s opening statement. This is the prosecution standing in front of the jury telling them what he will prove and what witnesses will say to prove what he wants them to believe happened on March 12, 2000.

As Mr. Young passed & met that truck he could see a man in the truck, and the man looked upset. And the man was talking to someone but he couldn’t see anyone else.

Mr. Young will tell you that because he had to pull off in the ditch he began to slow down to go around the truck. That the truck made no effort to get out of his way. As he past he began to look in his side view mirror because this was a little odd to him.

He sees the man in the truck open the driver’s door and run around the front of the truck, opens the passenger door, and began to drag a young female away from the truck. Mr. Young will not tell you that he saw her being taken out of that truck. All he can tell you is that he saw her being taken away from the truck.

He will tell you that he believed, because he could see under the truck, both doors and all around, that there wasn’t anyone there when he went past. And the first thing he noticed was a young lady being drug away in maroon jogging pants by the defendant, and he had her like you would be pulling someone who was asleep with his arms under her arms pulling her towards the front of his truck.

At some point she was placed down on the ground and the defendant drove off. Mr. Young’s going to tell you that at that point he became concerned and drove immediately to the sheriff’s office in Sulphur Springs.

Shortly after that Mr. Ferrell arrived back from dropping his hay off for his cattle. And I think he’s going to tell you that as he began to load another bale of hay he saw what he believed was a person with green jogging pants on laying there on the side of the road. He’s going to tell you that he pulled his tractor over, parked it, and stood there for a minute on so hoping to see some sign of life in that person. But he didn’t.

And then about a hundred and fifty feet down the road there’s a trailer. And he ran from where he was down to that house to make the 9-1-1 call that there was a body in front of his dairy.

That it was about four of five minutes before the sheriff’s office arrived at the scene. How did they get there that quick? Because Mr. Smiddy had already called them about the disturbance that had occurred at his residence and they were on the way to the scene. So we’ve got a period of about four minutes there.

Mr. Ferrell goes back to the body. Says the body is still in exactly the same condition as when he left it.

The Sheriff’s office Officers start to arrive.

 

Mr. Young, will not tell you that he saw her being taken out of the truck. All he can tell you is that he saw her being taken away from the truck. Now keep in mind as these are the very words the prosecutor is telling the jury and this has to be true are the jury must find me not guilty. The prosecutor tells the jury that the autopsy is performed; and the doctor tells us Markie George died from strangulation as well as blunt force trauma. Now you must keep in mind how long it would take to strangle a person to death and when the evidence – presented truthfully does not prove she was strangled then again the jury must find me not guilty. In the court records by all the testimony there were TWO CALLS MADE TO THE 9-1-1-POLICE DISPATCHER. The first call is documented that it was received at – 11:45 AM. The second call is documented that it was received by the police at 11:47 AM. Now unless I am complete stupid that’s a difference of exactly TWO MINUTES. The prosecutor said, that I strangled Markie to death on so near death that she was unconscious and then took her out of my truck in front of Mr. Ferrell’s dairy and ran over her – and the jury convicted me of this and sentenced me to death. Think about this for a few seconds before we move on. Think about how preposterous & unrealistic his ridiculous theory really is.

 

All throughout the rest of this report I will make references to what the prosecution said in comparison to what the witnesses will say in the light of what the truth of the evidence is. There are many more things I will point out about the prosecutor’s mischievous conduct, but I fell that it is better to do so as I put forth the evidence of this misuse of authority.

Starting on page 206 lines /--2 is the prosecutor asking the question --- lines 3—8 is Young’s answer.

  1. Q. Now, as you went past the truck did you continue

  2. To try to see what was going on?

  3. A. After I got back in the road, after I passed the

  4. Truck, I looked down. As I was steadily going up the road

  5. I was looking at my side mirror on the left-hand side,

  6. the driver’s side, and I seen a person get out of the truck

 

 

Shortly after that Mr. Ferrell arrived back from dropping his hay off for his cattle. And I think he’s going to tell you that as he began to load another bale of hay he saw what he believed was a person with green jogging pants on laying there on the side of the road. He’s going to tell you that he pulled his tractor over, parked it, and stood there for a minute on so hoping to see some sign of life in that person. But he didn’t.

And then about a hundred and fifty feet down the road there’s a trailer. And he ran from where he was down to that house to make the 9-1-1 call that there was a body in front of his dairy.

That it was about four of five minutes before the sheriff’s office arrived at the scene. How did they get there that quick? Because Mr. Smiddy had already called them about the disturbance that had occurred at his residence and they were on the way to the scene. So we’ve got a period of about four minutes there.

Mr. Ferrell goes back to the body. Says the body is still in exactly the same condition as when he left it.

The Sheriff’s office Officers start to arrive.

 

Mr. Young, will not tell you that he saw her being taken out of the truck. All he can tell you is that he saw her being taken away from the truck. Now keep in mind as these are the very words the prosecutor is telling the jury and this has to be true are the jury must find me not guilty. The prosecutor tells the jury that the autopsy is performed; and the doctor tells us Markie George died from strangulation as well as blunt force trauma. Now you must keep in mind how long it would take to strangle a person to death and when the evidence – presented truthfully does not prove she was strangled then again the jury must find me not guilty. In the court records by all the testimony there were TWO CALLS MADE TO THE 9-1-1-POLICE DISPATCHER. The first call is documented that it was received at – 11:45 AM. The second call is documented that it was received by the police at 11:47 AM. Now unless I am complete stupid that’s a difference of exactly TWO MINUTES. The prosecutor said, that I strangled Markie to death on so near death that she was unconscious and then took her out of my truck in front of Mr. Ferrell’s dairy and ran over her – and the jury convicted me of this and sentenced me to death. Think about this for a few seconds before we move on. Think about how preposterous & unrealistic his ridiculous theory really is.

 

All throughout the rest of this report I will make references to what the prosecution said in comparison to what the witnesses will say in the light of what the truth of the evidence is. There are many more things I will point out about the prosecutor’s mischievous conduct, but I fell that it is better to do so as I put forth the evidence of this misuse of authority.

Starting on page 206 lines /--2 is the prosecutor asking the question --- lines 3—8 is Young’s answer.

  1. Q. Now, as you went past the truck did you continue

  2. To try to see what was going on?

  3. A. After I got back in the road, after I passed the

  4. Truck, I looked down. As I was steadily going up the road

  5. I was looking at my side mirror on the left-hand side,

  6. the driver’s side, and I seen a person get out of the truck

  7. and rush around to the front side and open the

  8. Door on the passenger side and pull a lady out.

 

Now I refer you back to the prosecutors opening statement to the jury and his precise words are: Mr. Young will not tell you that he saw her being taken out of the truck. Now on just Mr. Young’s statement alone that he saw me, pull a lady out of the truck, if I were rich and had attorneys that had of been efficient they would have right then and there asked for an acquittal. Just on Mr. Young’s testimony alone is grounds for an acquittal. The BIG question is – why did my 2 attorneys just sit there? They should have at – less objected – ask for a mistrial on an all out acquittal. But No they sit and act as if they never so much as even heard this all out lie Young, just told every member of the jury. So the prosecutor plays it off – regains his composure and ask this.

 

  1. Q. Now, you say you saw someone get out of the truck.

  2. Which side of the truck did they get out of?

  3. A. The driver’s side.

 

Now the prosecutor went on to ask other questions that are not German, but he most certainly does not say to Mr. Young – Did you just say you saw Mr. Acker pull Markie George, out of that truck!!!!!  Nor do my two attorneys say anything – No objection – they do not make an issue out of it in any way. Now I am elaborating on this issue because as you read this report I want you to see the great importance of these four words (PULL A LADY OUT) and as you will see he will say this many more times as well as an even greater refuting statement when asked a question by my attorney. But first I want to go over Mr. Young’s testimony with the prosecutor asking these questions.

Let’s back up to page 201 – I will not state the question but only what Young will testify to. This testimony is telling the jury when Young first saw the truck and how it was setting in the road as well as what he could see of the area. – No, it wasn’t off in the ditch. It was half & half. In other words, it had the road consumed on covered. – Right, saying he could see the truck from the time he came around the corner and that was about a quarter mile. – No, he did not see anyone in the truck. No, did not see any doors open. He was only driving about fifteen, twenty or twenty-five miles an hour. I could see both sides of the truck. I could see underneath the truck. No, did not see anything that looked like a person. As he got close to the truck he could see a person on the driver’s side. He was fifty feet from the truck when he could see a person on the driver’s side. He was going about twenty and slowed down to about ten on fifteen miles an hour. He had to pull over into the grass, so the right of his truck was off in the grass. The D.A. ask, - when you got close to the truck could you see what was going on in that truck? Mr. Young, - As I passed the truck I glanced over to my left and I seen someone sitting in the driver’s seat just sitting there, you know, and he acted like maybe he was talking to himself. Seemed like his mouth, you know, his chin was moving or something another. I just printed all that Mr. Young, testifies to on lines 13 through 18. Now I ask you to remember back on page 4 when I told you about myself calling out to Young trying to get him to stop and help us: Telling him that Markie had jumped out. Now the prosecutor (Frank Long) has gone over & over with Mr. Young about what to say – when to say it and what not to say, but as his testimony goes on he says things that the prosecutor most definitely does not want said. But Mr. Young has already changed his written statement at less three times or more before the trial began, so now he is saying things to the best of his memory concerning which ever one of those changed statements he gave. On page 228 line – 19 – Mr. Young said, “Because I was exaggerating. I am taking the time to go over his testimony and point these things out because Young’s testimony 100% vindicates me of capital murder as you should see for yourself. Mr. Young is an eye witness for me for at less “ONE MINUTE” as I ask you to remember 11:45 & 11:47 AM. These times are not in dispute by anyone. In fact the prosecutor (Frank Long) puts these times in testimony for the jury to hear time and time again. I ask you to remember the prosecutor by Law has to prove his RIDICULOUS THEORY!! And the prosecutor’s ridiculous theory is that I strangled Markie to death or near death in less than two minutes while driving a five speed truck – stopped the truck got out – went around the truck pulled Markie out – put her on the road, in front of either the front on back tires – then went back around the truck got back in and ran over her. Keep in mind all the injuries Markie had on the outer surface of her body as well as her massive internal injuries. How could placing someone’s head in front of a tire and running over it cause all these other bodily injuries? Ponder on this question for a little while.

Now on page 206, the prosecutor when asking the question he uses the word – “continue” this word will have a big part in what will be put in as evidence by the prosecutor in Mr. Young’s testimony. Continue to see what was going on? Mr. Young said “After I GOT BACK IN THE ROAD” (He said after I got back in the road) Young does not say he was looking the whole time – He clearly states after. Now I will print what Mr. Young, said from lines 3 – 8 – on page 206. First of all the jury is again hearing Mr. Young say he saw – me pull a lady out of the truck from the passenger side – and he clearly states after he gets back on the road and is steadily going up the road he looks in his side mirror. This is what the jury heard & this is what the jury is to consider in making their decision on guilt or innocence. Now (as you will see) Mr. Young’s testimony changes as I walk you through it. – Why is Mr. Young so scared? Why does he change his written statement three or more times as well as his trial testimony? Could it be that the prosecutor has threatened him – with prosecution for not stopping and rendering aid? But regardless of why Mr. Young changes his statement & testimony so many times – the jury never hears any testimony that supports the prosecutor’s ridiculous theory. Another aspect to consider is – that is not in the court record, but everyone in the court room and the jury can testify to is the theatrical display the D.A. put on time and time again -  like the time when Mr. Young totally refuted (Long’s) theory in his trial testimony. I will print most of this page, you be the jury. These questions are being asked by Mr. Ferguson, my lead attorney. 2. Q. You stated: He pulled her out of the truck and laid her on the side of the road. He ran back around to the front of the truck, got in the truck, and sped off? A. Right. Q. Now when he laid her on the road did he run over her when he drove off? A. NO, BECAUSE SHE WAS ON THE SIDE: SHE WAS ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD BETWEEN THE TRUCK AND THE GRASS - SO HE DIDN’T. When Mr. Young, first said NO – the prosecutor raised his arms above his head in a V shape – rocked back & forth shaking his head & hands in a no jester. He then fell over on the table in front of him – face down – and rolled his head from side to side. My attorneys never objected to this theatrical display of the prosecutor’s nor does the Judge admonish him. The BIG question is: Why didn’t my attorneys move for an acquittal. Mr. Young has just completely vindicated Me. Totally disproving the prosecutor’s ridiculous theory. Yet the jury still retard a guilty verdict?-?-? With absolutely nothing but a false impression to support it- as you will clearly see. To show you just how much of a false impression I was convicted of & how much weight Young’s testimony carried as well as the exact word the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS used in affirming my death sentence on the direct appeal level – I will type out for you word for word what the TEYAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS wrote in regard to my direct appeal being affirmed. –“The State’s theory of the case, as expressed in the opening statement and closing argument was that the defendant strangled the victim, pulled her out of his truck, and then ran over her body with the truck, The EXTENSIVENESS of the victim’s BLUNT FORCE INJURIES SUGGESTS that she did not incur them simply by falling or being pushed out of a moving truck. Young’s testimony also bolstered the theory that the victim was never pushed out of the truck but was strangled and then later pulled out of the truck from the passenger side onto the ground. End of print on page 14 of CCA’s more-over opinion.

 

What I like about what the CCA Judges wrote in their opinion is: “Young’s testimony also bolstered the theory. Now it has been medically proven that you can not strangle a person to death in 15 seconds (FIFTEEN SECONDS) That’s right – 15 seconds is all the time I would have had to do all the things the prosecutor said I did in his ridiculous theory. Mr. Young was an eye witness for me for at-less ONE MINUTE (1 MINUTE). MR. YOUNG TESTIFIES            TO THIS AND WE KNOW BY THE             COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS on words typed above that they give full weight to Mr. Young’s testimony, when they said Mr. Young’s testimony also bolstered the theory. I myself would very much like to know why (CCA is giving full weight to Mr. Young’s testimony) CCA is turning a ling eye and a deaf ear to the fact that Mr. Young testified that I DID NOT RUN OVER HER SHE WAS ON THE SIDE – SHE WAS ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD BETWEEN THE TRUCK AND THE GRASS – So HE DID’T. The COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS AFFIRMED, my direct appeal supported by a SUGGETION. Later in this report I will point out to you why the CCA judges use the word suggest. I’ll give you a hint – it has to do with just how much my own 2 trial attorneys assisted the prosecutor in this wrongful conviction. Now we will go back to Mr. Young’s testimony on page 211 line 12 with the prosecutor asking this question. Q. Have you had an occasion, Mr. Young, to see a video tape that was made showing the drive that you took with a pickup setting in the road like it was that day? A. Yes. The state made a video tape to show the jury how it looked through Mr. Young’s eyes. This video is at less – ONE MINUTE LONG, and in that one minute Mr. Young gives testimony to what he saw. In this testimony Mr. Young states – That Mr. Acker, ABSOLUTELY DID NOT RUN OVER HER. Also remember one of the most important set of facts in my whole case is the times that the TWO CALLS WERE MADE TO THE 911 POLICE DISPATCHER. They are 11:45 and 11:47 AM. That is just two minutes by anybody’s math. Let’s look at page 218 starting with line 19 – with Mr. Young giving this answer. A. I seen him get out of the truck and rush around in front of it and open the front door and pull the lady out. He had his arms under her arms and he put her down real quick and then he got back in the truck and took off. And that’s when I took off. Now I’ll take you to page 231 line 6 where My attorney ask this question. Q. Now when he laid her on the road did he run over her when he drove off? A. NO, BECAUSE SHE WAS ON THE SIDE: SHE WAS ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD BETWEEN THE TRUCK AND THE GRASS SO HE DIDN’T. Line 11 Q. He didn’t run over her A. Huh-uh (that means no). Q. And that’s the last time you saw the truck as he sped off? A. Right. – Mr. Young’s testimony is very clear to what the question was to the answer he gave. And that is that I DID NOT RUN OVER HER. “If the glove does not fit, you must aquit”. If I had money I would have had attorneys that would have aggressively challenged the prosecutors ridiculous theory and they would have asked Mr. Young these questions (1) Mr. Young why didn’t you stop when you saw the white utility truck in the road? (2) Mr. Young, shy didn’t you roll down your window when you got next to that truck and asks if the person needed any help? (3) Mr. Young, when you saw the lady being laid on the edge of the road and the man get back in the truck & leave, why didn’t you go back and see if the lady needed help? (4) Mr. Young, shy did you not stop and render aid.

Now we will go back to Mr. Young’s testimony and the D.A. is showing him and the jury this homemade video tape. My attorneys do object to this video being put before the jury because the circumstances then as opposed to now are not sufficiently – similar. They go on and argue their point – bringing out the fact that this video tape does keep the utility truck in full view from start to finish and Mr. Young himself states in his testimony there was a period of time that he was not looking at the truck. As he clearly states on page 206 line 3: A. After I got back on the road, after I passed the truck, I looked down. As I was steadily going up the road I was looking at my side mirror. Now let’s look at not only what he just testified to lets think about something my attorneys never pointed out. Mr. Young said he looks in his left hand side view mirror – well we all know there is a blind spot when we look in a side view mirror that prevents us from seeing a vehicle, a person anything that is in the blind spot, even if it is as large as an 18 wheel dies truck and trailer. There has been a many, many wreck caused by people changing lanes without turning their head and looking. They just look in their side mirror. I will go into this – blind spot – more when we look at Mr. Young’s testimony – where it most assuredly comes into play.

Now we will go to page 228 line 19; This is what Mr. Young said, “I was EXAGGERATING some because the man’s mouth was moving & I ASSUMED that he was talking to somebody”.  Now Mr. Young is not the only person that sees something then assumes the reason why. People will see part of something then assume the rest filling in the blank in their mind. Then later when they tell what they saw, they tell what they saw and what they assumed as if they saw it all. Because in their mind that is what they understood and it becomes their reality. Now if I would have had effective assistance of counsel my attorneys would have brought out how the blind spot in his side mirror prevented Young from seeing me pick Markie up form where she landed & then when Young got back on the road and was able to see me in his side view mirror I had just opened the passenger side door – attempting to put Markie back in the truck – as I laid her down on the edge of the road in order to have both hands to move four two foot long tube shaped light bulbs laying on the seat over. I looked into Markie’s eyes – the pain of realizing she was dead overwhelmed me – I could not withstand the situation – so I ran from it – I did not know what to do so I left her on the side of the road – making me look guilty of a crime & Mr. Young’s assumption that much stronger. I will now briefly go over the last part of Mr. Young’s testimony that needs to be brought out so when we look at what happened in the summary of this report we will be able to clearly see each second of what took place second by second of the whole entire two minutes 11:45 and 11:47 AM.

I know I am spending a lot of time on Mr. Young’s testimony, but it is essential to have a clear and full picture and on understanding of what Mr. Young said how he said it and why.

On page 224 line 7 Q. Now you saw him pull her out of the truck. Could you see her feet hit – leave the seat? A. NO, I didn’t see that. I didn’t see that. I had seen him pull her out of the truck. I was just watching you know, I wasn’t watching the feet, watching the part that I could see. Q. So you couldn’t see her as she came out of the truck? A. Yeah, I seen him pull her out of the truck and he had her in that position. Q. so at anytime did you see him holding her by the arms with her feet out of sight up in the seat of the truck. A. NO. Q Could you tell whether her feet were up on the floorboard of the truck? A. NO, I couldn’t tell either. I just seen them coming out of the truck. Now did you see the lie Young just told? He clearly stated when the prosecutor was questioning him above that he did not see her feet come out of the truck. He is EXAGGERATING once again. Let’s look at how he explains it on page 225 line 2. A. That was after he got her out of the turck and her feet had to hit the ground because he was dragging her. Q. Did you see her feet hit the ground? A. EVIDENTLY. I didn’t exactly see it but it have – with the position he had her in, in his arms her feet had to hit the ground because he didn’t have her clear, you know. Now it is very clear that Mr. Young is assuming and he had filled in the blank in his mind.

All my attorneys needed to do in order to point out this blind spot is aks Mr. Young these Questions. Mr. Young could it have been, that as you were getting back on the road – and you may have been at a distance – that you were in the blind spot of your side view mirror – so you were unable to see Mr. Acker pick the lady up? Mr. Young could it be that when you were again able to see Mr. Acker, he had just opened the door to put her in the truck? Mr. Young, could it be you just assumed Mr. Acker was taking her out of the truck because he takes steps back away from the truck? You see regardless of how Mr. Young answered these questions – My attorneys would have been putting this possiblility before the jury. This would have given the jury the opportunity to consider all this in light of what really happened. It is these unasked questions and many more as you will see as we go through this ridiculous trial that my attorneys were not only inefficient in their performance but they actually did me more harm than good.

For now we leave Mr. Young and go to Mr. Seddell Ferrel. Now I will not spend as much time on mr. Ferrel’s testimony. The only thing that is relevant is the time Mr. Ferrell, takes before he makes the 911 call to the police dispatcher at 11:47 AM. Now I will remind you that the first call to the dispatcher is at 11:45 AM. Let’s start on page 243 line 9 where he states he got to his dairy at about 11:30 AM. – and went to his tractor – goes and picks up a bale of hay and puts that bale out in the pasture. He says that it takes about 10 to 12 minutes to put out a bale. Now when he pulled up in his driveway there was nobody there. He goes and gets his tractor, stars it and goes down pass his driveway, gets the hay and comes back going beside his dairy out ot his field and puts down the hay and when he comes back he sees his dog sitting by the road, he sees a body, - forks another bale – comes back – gets off his tractor over by the body. He said he stood there looking at the girl on the edge of the road for about two minutes to see if the girl had any sigh of life. Her bluse was open and he could see her stomack – the girl was not brathing so he ran or more less trotted to the house and called 9-1-1. he makes the 9-1-1- call that was recorded to have came in at 11:47 AM by the 9-1-1 dispatcher. Mr. Ferrell, tells that he does not see any truck – he tells that there are no vehicles on the road at all. He testifies that he did not see mr. Young’s truck nor did he see my Utility Truck – there are no vehicles on the road at all. Now that is what the jury heard and they heard him tell it over and over. The first call to the 9-1-1 Police Dispatcher was documented by a computerized time clock at 11:45 AM. Now the jury is to concider this two minute time frame and the fact that Mr. Ferrell can not read or write – nor can he correctly judge time or distance. It is exactly 118 feet from where Markie’s body layed to the house the second 9-1-1 call was made to the police dispatcher by Ferrell – The first 9-1-1 call was made at 11:45 AM by Thomas Siddy. The prosecutor says in his opening statement that it is 150 feet from the body to the house. Mr. Ferrell testified that it is 300 feet or so from the body to the house. Threehundred feet is over twice as far as it really is from where the body layed to the house: Mr. Ferrell told the jury he stood there looking at the girl for two minutes. That can not be true for we know without a doubt that it is 118 feet from the place the body layed to the house and there is only two minutes from the first call to the 9-1-1 dispatcher to the second call to the 9-1-1- dispatch. (Mr. Ferrell is openly illiterate). Now the jury heard all this testimony about what other people seen and did in this two minutes. But no one broke it down for the jury and the jury was unable to do it for themselves on they most assuredly would have found me not guilty.

Now there is no way Mr. Ferrell could have stood by the edge of the road looking at Markie for two minutes.  For it has been and is well documented and established over and over that the two 9-1-1 calls were received by the same computerized time clock at 11:45 AM and 11:47 AM. Let’s put his testimony in reality. Mr. Ferrell is coming back from his field and sees his dog sitting beside a body – he forks another bale of hay – comes back – gets off his tractor and stands there by the body – looks at her for about fifteen seconds before trotting to the phone. It takes fifteen seconds or less to fork a bale of hay – and fifteen seconds to trot to the phone. So in all reality we have from the first moment he saw her body till the second the 9-1-1- dispatcher clocked the call is forty-five seconds. This is 45 seconds that I am not by the body. Mr. Young testified to what he was on rather assumed he saw me do in the one minute he was on the road with me and now we have forty-five seconds at less that the body is on the road without me around. This eats up one minute and forty five seconds of the two minute time frame. So all we now have left is fifteen seconds for me to supposedly according to Long’s ridiculous theory to have strangled Markie to death or near death – stop my truck in front of Mr. Ferrell’s dary – GOD – neighbors and everybody else driving up & down the road – run around the truck to the passenger side open the door – pull her out – put her on the road, then run back around the truck – get in and run over her. People this two minute time frame was never in question by anyone and the prosecutor himself puts this two minute time frame before the jury time and time again. Then they heard Mr. Young’s and Fr. Ferrell’s testimony. Mr. Young’s testimony (VIDEO) takes away no less than one minute of the two, and Mr. Ferrell’s testimony takes away no less than forty-five seconds. Equalling 1 minute and 45 seconds! There were at less four more people that had me in their sight during this two minute time frame. Two of these four people were never questioned or brought in to testify. Everyone knew about them – the police – the prosecutor – the Judge – My two attorneys. The Big QUESTION – WHY WAS THESE TWO PEOPLE NEVER BROUGHT IN TO TELL WHAT THEY SAW??? These two people were in the car that passed me just as Markie opened the truck door and jumped out. These two people are in Officer Hill’s police report. These two people were in a red car along side and behind me, in plain view for at less one minute and forty-five seconds of the entire two minutes.

There are several other aspects that have to be taken into consideration, but I will save them until I put all this together second by second. I’ll give you a hint not only are there four two foot long light bulbs on the seat between me and Markie – on the fact that I’m driving a five speed truck – Markie’s little thin gold chain necklace she was wearing around her neck at the time of her death was unharmed – her neck was unmark able – I did not have a scratch on me – the D:A. and the judge refused to furnish me the money or the time to have Markie’s fingernail clippings that were preserved, tested for my DNA – simply because they both know she was not strangled or murdered in any way, had she been, I would have had scratches on me and my DNA would be under her finger nails – and it’s not and they know it – that is why I am being denied the right to have the preserved nail clippings DNA tested. 9-1-1- calls were destroyed.

The next testimony put before the jury is from police Officer Hill. Now Mr. Hill or Officer Hill, - Hill, lies so much & he deliberately tells them. He evades or eludes questions asked of him by my attorney or will all out lie. When the D.A. asks the same questions and/or others, Hill has all the answers and never has a problem. I will go over Hill’s testimony in order to show you how an innocent person such as myself was and is wrongfully convicted and sentenced to death. In the process I will show how all members of the prosecution team had a hand in, put on or gave false testimony – to intentionally and knowingly wrongfully – convict me in their earnest attempt to murder me.  The greatest aspect of Mr. Hill’s testimony is not what he testifies to, but more so to what the prosecutor and the Judge (Judge Newsom) will not allow him to say or my attorneys to ask. This was done in a hearing just before the second day of trial testimony began. I will print word for word what was said and ruled on by Judge Robert Newsom, - The - Trial – Judge of the 8th Judicial District – Hopkins County Texas.

 

1                        The Court: Cause number 00-15026, State of Texas

2                        Versus Daniel Clate Acker.

3                        We’re here on the second day, Tuesday morning,

4                        The 27th of March, 2001.

5                        Mr. Long: Chris Hill is my first witness, your

6                        Honour. There is a matter, which I don’t know that the

7            p;                  Defence would attempt to go into or not, but I would

8                        Object to them going into anything that Mr. Hill was told

9                        By radio dispatch regarding the specifics of what may or may

10                   Not have been going on at the altercation at the trailer

11                   House prior to his response. Other than just the fact

12                   That he received a call of a disturbance and responded,

13                   That’s all that is admissible.

14                   The Court: And your objection would be?

15                   Mr. Long: My objection is it’s hearsay.

16                   Mr. McDowell: Your Honour, The only thing we’ll be

17                   going into will be stuff that’s in his report. It’s a

18                   public record. Any hearsay that may be contained in it

19                   goes to her state of mind. We want the entire – if he’s

20                   going to put in part of the report we want the entire

21                   report coming in.

22                   The Court: it’s a police report. Do you

23                   Anticipate –

24                   Mr. Long: A Police report is not a public record.

25                   An investigative report is not a public record, first of

 

NEXT PAGE