In this chapter I am going to show you a step by step list of questions
that I gave Paul Petty to ask each person that may or may not testify against
us , all he needed to do was to ask them these questions or at a minimum put
them in his own words and ask at least some of them, but every question I felt
needed to be asked and were pertinent to this case, to establish the reasons
they were lying and to discredit their testimony to at a minimum expose their
character. Paul Petty for whatever reason Ego or just plain not giving a shit didn’t
use any of it, and in hindsight just a few of the questions would have made a
monumental difference, actually one question in Particular would have more than
likely changed the entire outcome.
This one question was to Josh Yandell, Justin Yandells brother. You see
two weeks or so prior to this altercation he was involved in a shootout with
another one of his neighbors. during the trial there was a recess, Paul Petty
met me in the hall way and told me that Josh Yandell was on the stand and asked
me if I could think of any questions to ask him, I asked him if he had asked
him about the shootout he was involved in two weeks prior to this incident,
Paul Petty said that’s a great point I will ask him, which immediately told me
he didn’t have those questions with him and was not using them.
Paul Petty went back in and said nothing about to Josh about his
involvement in the other shooting, didn’t say a word about it, which further
leads me to think that this whole deal was made before the trial and it didn’t matter
what we did we were not going to win!
To have had the brother be involved in this same kind of altercation
with another neighbor is way beyond coincidence it shows the character of this
family, I am also going to post another incident that was reported in the
newspaper about Josh Yandell in which he was involved in pulling a gun on some
other people in a road rage incident, not coincidence folks it’s a pattern of behavior in this family that they
can do whatever they want and get by with it
Here is the list.
Jeff
Williams
1. Did you
tell Jesse Wood that if he did not come to his office and tell him what he
wanted to hear he was going back to prison?
2. Why would
he not return phone calls from Skip Doty and attorney Bryce Brewer regarding
this case?
3. Why did
he not interview Skip Doty, Adam Doty, or Jesse Wood about this incident?
4. Why, was
what happened after the incident more Important than the incident?
5. Why did
he decide to choose sides in this case?
6. Why did
he throw Mr and Mrs Doty out of his office after not returning there calls for
weeks?
7, other than
the 911 recording of Josh Yandell, what did all the other people who talked to
911 dispatch say, where is the recording of that? and what did they say?
8. Why didn't
you charge Justin Yandell with a crime?
9. Why didnt
you charge Jerry yandell with a crime when he tried to run over Adam Doty and
Skip Doty and admitted such in his statement and also fought with Skip Doty
trying to take his shotgun?
9b. Why did’nt
you charge Josh Yandell with fighting with Skip Doty trying to take his shotgun
as he admitted to in his statement?
10. Why
didn't you charge Berry Reynolds with trespassing after he admitted such in his
statement?
11. When
Gayle Stokes told you that Berry Reynolds had filed a civil case against this
family to steal their land, why did you not investigate this further she is
Berry Reynolds Cousin and would KNOW this for a fact and tried to tell him
that.
Johnny
Quattlebaum
1. What was
his agreement with his brother’s wife and children about herding his cattle on
their land?
2. Had he
ever been asked to remove them from the land because he failed to honor that
agreement?
2b. Had he
ever been asked to help repair the fence and refused to do so?
2c. Had he
ever given them any form of payment for using their land for 26 years?
3. How many
and what are the names of people he gave permission to be on that land for
doing work and how many and what are the names of people he gave permission to
be on the land recreationally or other than to do a specific job?
4. Has he
ever told anyone to keep people run off the land and if so who?
5. Did he
own any of the land where this incident happened?
6. Was he
called by Yandells and asked if he had given anyone permission to be on the
land to hunt that day? Keep in mind he didn’t own any of the land nor the right
to give nor deny permission to anyone on land he does not own or legally lease.
7. Did he
tell Yandells to run us off?
8. Has he
ever told any of the Yandells or anyone else That Skip Doty has no rights to either
be on or give permission to anyone to be on that land?
9. Were the
Yandells ever given permission by him to be on that property for anything other
than doing work?
Josh Yandell
1. Have you
ever been told you could hunt and fish on this land by Johnny Quattlebum?
2. Have you
ever been told by Skip Doty not to hunt or fish on this land and that Johnny
Quattlebum did not own the land nor did he have the right to give anyone
permission because it did not belong to him?
3 A few
weeks prior to this incident did you have a shootout with someone as reported
by the white county Sherriff's office?
Justin
Yandell
1. Did you
talk to Jesse Wood at the fence and his son Triston and tell them there were
pellets hitting your garage or house the day of this incident?
2. After
explaining this fact to them why did you feel the need to go further and
confront Mr Doty, how do you know him?
3. A couple
of years before this incident took place did you ever threatened to slit the
tires of Jesse Wood truck if he did not come out to meet you when he was out
there hunting on this land?
3b. Did Mr
Wood show you the written permission slip he had been given by Skip Doty giving
him permission to hunt on the land?
3c. Did you
then call Mr. Doty?
4. Did you
tell Skip Doty over the telephone that Johnny Quattlebaum had told him that
Skip Doty had no rights to that land and could not give permission to anyone to
hunt there?
5. Did Skip
Doty tell you to not be on that land that you did not have permission to be
there and would be charged with trespassing?
6. Why did
you go in your house and get your pistol before going to talk to the hunters?
7. When Mr
Wood mentioned Skip Doty name why did that make you so mad? Why did you say, “he
is gonna get what he has coming to him”?
8. Why did
you feel like you had the right to come across the fence, when in fact you had
already told two people your grievance about the pellets hitting your property?
9. Why did
you take your pistol?
10. Did you
talk to Johnny Quattlebaum before you went over the fence? And if so what did
he tell you to do?
11. Did you
call Berry Reynolds and tell him what you were going to do before you went over
the fence? And if so what was your conversation about?
12. Did your
brother Josh Yandell tell you not to go down there and show out?
13. When you
had possession of Adam Doty's shotgun why did you not put it down when they
told you to?
14. Why
would you lay your gun on the ground before confronting them after you had
taken the time to go get it from your house before you went over there?
15. What was
your intention when you confronted Skip Doty? If it was about the pellets
hitting your house and you had already told others in the hunting party about
it?
16. Before
the day this incident took place had you ever seen or met Skip Doty in person?
Or just talked to him on the phone?
17. What did you know about Skip Doty or what had
you heard about Skip Doty and from whom did you hear it?
Jerry
Yandell
1. Did you
try to run over Adam Doty and Skip Doty on your atv?
2. Did you
attempt to take Skip Doty guns from him?
If you had been successful what were your intentions since you had
already tried to run them over?
3. Did you
talk to Johnny Quattlebum the day of this incident? And what did he tell you to
do?
4. Why did
you say to Justin that Josh went to talk to someone at the fence but didn’t
take a gun with him? Why did he need a gun?
Below is an
article by the daily citizen of a recent court case against Josh Yandell.
A 33-year-old Romance man accused of
loading a weapon and aiming it at three people in a road-rage incident was
found not guilty by a jury in White County Circuit Court on Thursday.
Joshua D. Yandell was facing a charge
of class D felony aggravated assault after Guy Duffel, his wife Amanda and
Stephen Baker claimed that Yandell grabbed a 9 mm semiautomatic weapon,
chambered a round, and pointed it them April 1.
“This is not a case about open carry
versus concealed carry or Second Amendment or anything else,” 17th Judicial
District Prosecuting Attorney Rebecca McCoy said in her opening remarks. “This
is a case of what is reasonable and what is not reasonable and what is not
acceptable in society. Today, it is not acceptable to point a gun at somebody
just because they make you mad.”
Yandell’s attorney Victoria Leigh said
it was a “simple case of mistaken identity.”
“Josh is not saying that Mr. Duffle or
Mrs. Duffle or his friend is lying, “ Leigh said. “He’s not saying it didn’t
happen, just that it wasn’t him. He wasn’t on that road. He doesn’t take that
route home and, in fact, he was home.”
The prosecution called Arkansas State
Police Trooper Jay McAllister as the state’s first witness. McAllister was on
duty on the date of the incident traveling just suth of East Cleveland on
Arkansas Highway 5 at approximately 7 p.m. when he observed Yandell speeding,
running a red light and not wearing a seat belt. He initiated a traffic stop
with Yandell.
The prosecution played a video of the
traffic stop recorded from McAllister’s dash camera. On the video, Yandell is
heard asking the trooper to “be gentle,” to which he replied, “I’m not going to
be gentle. Don’t tell me to be gentle. That’s not the way this works. That’s the
wrong thing to ask a trooper. Don’t do that.”
McAllister then asks Yandell where he
worked and where he was going. Yandell, who is employed at Guillermo’s Coffee
House in Little Rock, tells McAllister that he was on his way to his home in
Romance. At that point in the video, Yandell informs the trooper that he has a
9 mm handgun in the glove compartment of the vehicle because he is carrying a
large amount to money to deposit from his work. After Yandell received a
citation, the traffic stop was completed without incident.
The state then called Nancy VanWinkle,
director of the White County 911 Center, as its next witness. VanWinkle
oversees all aspects of the 911 center and testified that the center received a
call April 1 at approximately 8:33 p.m.
The 911 call was then played for the
court where Amanda Duffle is heard claiming that a man in a white Jeep was
waving a gun at them, but when asked who was waving the gun, she said, “I don’t
know, I didn’t see his face.”
The phone call is then taken over by Guy
Duffle who tells the operator that the Jeep had a black removable top and was
driven by a white male in either a short-sleeved shirt or sleeveless shirt. He
also claims that the man nearly ran into their car so he yelled at him.
According to the call, the driver stopped and Duffle got out of his vehicle and
asked the driver “Do you have a problem?” Duffle said the man yelled, “Don’t
move, don’t move” and then proceeded to reach between the seats and pulled out
the gun. At this point in the confrontation, Amanda allegedly said they are
calling the cops and the driver took off.
The state then called Amanda Duffle to
testify.
Amanda Duffle testified that she and
her husband were at her father’s home April 1 when the scanner went off
alerting them that there had been a fire call. Guy Duffle is a volunteer
firefighter so they left to see if any help was needed. On the way back to her
father’s home, the Duffles, accompanied by Baker, Duffle’s son and her son’s
best friend, had a flat tire.
She stated that they did not have a
spare tire to use so they continued to drive at a slow rate of speed with their
hazard lights on to alert other drivers. Amanda Duffle testified that just as
they were about to arrive at her father’s driveway, a car came up behind them
and they thought he was going to hit them because he was going fast.
“He pulled up beside us and yelled
something out of the window,” Amanda Duffle said.
She went on to say that her husband
then jumped out of the vehicle and she followed. She then told her son to run
to the house and tell her father what was happening.
“That’s when I heard the gun cock,”
Amanda Duffle said. “I heard a bullet go into the chamber and I, like, froze.
My husband moved out of the line of fire, which put me directly in the line of
fire. I stood there for a second and I stepped to the side and yelled for my
dad to call 911 because he just pulled a gun on us. Then he took off.”
The prosecution asked if she had gotten
a good look at who had been driving the vehicle.
“I knew he had short hair and a
sleeveless shirt on,” she said
When the defense then asked Amanda
Duffle if she was sure the driver was Yandell because, according to her own
statement in the 911 call, she did not see his face.
“Yes, I am,” she replied.
The state then called Baker to testify.
Baker told the court that he is a good
friend of Guy Duffle and was with him when they went to answer the fire call
and when the vehicle had the flat tire. He corroborated Amanda’s earlier
testimony of the events that played out with the driver of the Jeep. He also
stated that he did not see the face of the driver of the Jeep, but that when
the driver yelled, “Don’t move,” Baker said that the voice was familiar to him.
He said he recognized the voice because he was “good friends” with Yandell.
When asked to describe the vehicle,
Baker said the Jeep had “after-market rims” that caused the back to be higher
than normal.
Several weeks after the April incident,
Baker testified that he and Guy Duffle were at Moose’s gas station when he
recognized a Jeep in the parking lot as being the same one from the incident in
question and that it was being driven by Yandell. Baker then told Guy Duffle
that Yandell was the one from the incident.
Baker then testified that he gave a
statement to police May 15 and also identified Yandell as the driver from the
incident in a police lineup, but could not give a reason why he did not tell
police that the driver was Yandell until after seeing him at the gas station
nearly a month later.
Under further questioning from both the
prosecution and the defense, Baker was unable to clearly state what the dates
where from when the original incident happened, when he claimed to realize it
was Yandell and when he gave a statement to police.
The state then called Guy Duffle to
testify.
After being asked to identify the
driver, Duffle said he “had short hair, was slender and didn’t have any sleeves
on his shirt.”
When shown a picture of Yandell’s Jeep
taken from the traffic stop, Duffle identified it as the same Jeep that was
driven by the man who pulled a gun on him and that he had never seen anything
similar because the rims were so unique.
The prosecution then asked if Duffle
had seen the Jeep anywhere else. He testified that he had seen it at Moose’s
gas station in May so he went to investigate further and confront the driver.
“Aren’t you the [expletive] that pulled
a gun on me? I think you are,” Duffle said.
Duffle went on to say that the Yandell
denied it was him and that he didn’t have a gun. Duffle also stated that he was
going to be late for a ballgame and didn’t pursue the issue further with
Yandell at the time. He noted Yandell’s plate number and gave it to Detective
Tommy Free of the White County Sheriff’s Office.
Free, the state’s last witness,
testified that he reviewed the initial complaints and the license plate number
later given by Duffle and that the registered owner of the Jeep was Yandell.
The defense only called one witness,
Yandell.
Yandell testified that he takes the
same route to and from work every day and that he could not have been the
driver of the Jeep in question because it would have been miles out of the way
in the wrong direction. He also testified that his route was the same as
usual and he even got a ticket that same evening that he claims proves he was in
his normal route. He also stated that his Jeep is not unique.
“Those are stock rims, “ Yandell said.
“I bought them that way from Fletcher Dodge. They’ve got four or five identical
Jeeps with the same wheels, same package, everything.”
When asked about the confrontation at
the gas station, Yandell testified that he had never seen Guy Duffle before
that day.
“I had not a clue what he was talking
about,” Yandell said.
After closing statements, the jury
deliberated around 40 minutes before returning with its verdict.
This is a pattern of behavior with this family! Paul Petty could have
asked one question, that would have changed the outcome of this case and put
the prosecution’s case on its heels but he didn’t! Paul Petty was given a list,
that included this question and on the day of trial while still questioning
Josh Yandell told to once again ask about the Shooting he was involved prior to
this incident and he said nothing, never tried to discredit the Yandells in any
way.
We were offered a deal Give the Yandells our land and they would drop the charges
against us!
Paul
Petty said if it was $30,000.00 and his son was in jeopardy of going to jail he
would pay it!
Adam
told Paul Petty it wasn’t his land to give and he asked Paul Petty do you think
we have any chance to lose?
Paul
Petty answered well No!
At the end of the trial he was required to make a simple statement
asking for dismissal of the case, a veteran lawyer of 44 years he didn’t make
this statement making it Impossible for any appeal to be heard. Paul Petty made sure that any appeal would be
denied because of his failure to follow the law, to do what is required in
every case, Ask for a dismissal, you can’t say he didn’t know this he had
practiced law for 44 years, that right there is what you call ineffectual assistance
of counsel Rule 37 when a lawyer Fails to do his job, he failed us in every
way.
The day or two before trial we had a meeting that Adam actually called him
and made him meet with us to go over the trial to prepare all of us for what
was going to happen and what we should expect, at that meeting he said to all
of us just say what you have been telling me, and pointed at me and said just don’t
say that you were going to shoot Justin Yandell!
The Following is the ruling from the supreme court for documentation purposes!
I
The Following is the ruling from the supreme court for documentation purposes!
.
Arkansas Rule of
Criminal Procedure 33.1 (2014) provides as follows:
(b)
In a nonjury trial, if a motion for dismissal is to be made, i t shall be made at the close of all of the evidence. The motion for
dismissal shall state the specific grounds
therefor. Ifthe
defendant moved for dismissal at the conclusion of the prosecution' s evidence,
then the motion must be renewed at
the close of all of the evidence.
(c)
The failure of a defendant to
challenge the sufficiency of the evidence at
the times
and in the manner required in subsections
(a) and (b)
above will constitute a waiver of any question pertaining to the sufficiency
of the evidence
to support
the verdict or judgment. A motion for directed verdict or for dismissal based on insufficiency
of the evidence must
specify the respect in which the evidence
is deficient. A motion merely
I
stating that
the evidence is insufficient does not preserve for appeal issues relating to a specific deficiency such as
insufficient proof on the elements of the offense. A renewal at the close of all of the evidence
of a previous motion for directed verdict or for
dismissal preserves the issue of insufficient evidence for appeal. If for any reason a motion or
a renewed motion at the close of all of
the evidence for directed verdict
or for dismissal
is not ruled upon, it
is deemed denied for purposes of obtaining appellate review on the question of
the sufficiency of the evidence.
Doty
does not deny that he failed to renew his motion for directed verdict in a separate motion at the close of all the evidence. He asserts that it would be form over substance to rule that a request for dismissal in closing argument at a bench trial is not
"one and the same" as a motion for a directed verdict. We have recently ruled,
however, that a
dismissal argument made in a closing argument does not preserve
the issue of sufficiency, even in a bench trial. Hendrix v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 696, 450 S.W.3d
692.
Rule 33.1 is to be strictly construed. Hendrix, 2014 Ark. App. 696, at 4, 450 S.W.3d
at 694 (citing Etoch v. State, 343 Ark. 361, 365, 37 S.W.3d 186, 189 (2001)); see also McClina
v. State, 354 Ark. 384, 123 S.W.3d 883
(2003) (refusing to consider the appellant's closing argument as a dismissal motion in a bench
trial where no motion for dismissal was made). Here, at the conclusion of the evidence, Doty failed to renew his dismissal
motion challenging the sufficiency of the
State's evidence to negate
his defense of justification, and his
justification argument made in his closing argument cannot preserve his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence.
Affirmed.
WHITEAKER and
BROWN, ]]
., agree.
The following is a list of questions that I gave to Paul Petty after the trial, I was extremely upset that he had not done a single thing he said he would do in our pretrial talks, I paid this man several thousand dollars to do a job and in every instance he failed to do that job.
5/7/2014
Paul Petty
I told you
every time we visited together about this case, over and over that I was
pulling the trigger on Justin's head when Adam dropped him out of my line of
sight on my shotgun, but you told me not to say that, I want to understand your
thinking on that?
The judged
said that me not shooting him proved that according to his line of thought that
we weren’t in danger.
Why didn’t
you attempt to discredit Jeff Williams and show he took sides in this case as
the evidence suggest in the changing of the incident reports? and as according
to your own words that he clearly just took sides?
Since Jeff
Williams placed his decision to go after Adam because of his key secret witness
Berry Reynolds, why wasn’t this brought to light?
Since Mr.
Reynolds was the key to this entire investigation and the reasoning for filing
the charges, shouldn’t you have tried to have this entire thing thrown out
right then and there?
Did they
actually subpoena Berry Reynolds to court and are there any charges being filed
against him for not showing up?
Why didn't
you ask Josh Yandell about his shootout with someone a couple weeks prior to
this incident?
You asked me
in the hallway on recess was there anything else to ask Josh about and that’s
what I told you and you didn’t bring it up, Why?
Why didn't
you call all the police officers to testify after having them subpoenaed who
told us all that night that we did exactly the right thing?
Did you in
fact subpoena the officers and if so why were they all on the prosecution side?
Where is the
missing 911 call?
Why wasn’t
Jerry Yandells statement read in court and told how he tried to run us over and
how he fought with me over my gun?
Why wasn’t
Josh Yandells statement read in court?
Why did you
let them continually berate Jesse when it wasn’t even his trial, you never
objected to anything, you never asked Jeff Williams if he threatened Jesse to
try to get him to come talk.
When you noticed that it was Chris Raff that
would be prosecuting this case instead of Cynthia Baker why didn’t you tell the
judge we changed our mind and wanted to do a jury trial?
I said on
the 911 call about Justin " he's not hurt", to me it looked like a
nick and was not bleeding and they vilified me for saying that, but his own
father who actually said the same thing that it was a non life threatening
injury and left his son laying in the field wasn't even asked about that?
This entire
time you have said how you were going to make Jeff Williams look bad, work
Justin over and just basically destroy them yet at the very end just before
trial you convinced Adam to do a bench trial after him and everyone else
wanting a jury trial and based on everything you had told us you were going to
do he agreed, but then you didn’t do any of that and all of a sudden, you were
so worried about upsetting the prosecution or the judge, just wish I knew where
the warrior went when it came time to fight, my son will go to jail because you
threw the fight, threw in the towel when it came time to lace em up and go toe
to toe.
You told my
wife you would take full responsibility after the trial, what exactly does that
mean?
Does it mean
you will send Mike in Adams place to spend his time in prison?
On our way
back from looking at the site where this all happened I told you that this is
my son, and that I wanted you to take care of him like it was your own son, you
agreed! said you had grown fond of Adam.
Why were we
told we could not file any charges against these people?
Bottom line
is this was an easy case to win, I gave you every stitch of evidence you needed
to win this and you used none of it, Justin Yandell pulled a gun on me and my
son saved my life and Justin’s as well, I was going to kill Justin because he
was endangering not only my life but my son grandson and son in law Adam was just
faster at pulling the trigger than I was but he didn’t do it with intention to
kill only to stop Justin from doing what he was doing,
When a man
pulls a gun on you and you know he is angry you have the right according to
Arkansas State law to defend yourself unless you have reasonable means to
escape, Adam and I were both justified in taking this man’s life but we did
not.
The pain and
suffering and mental anguish this family has suffered at the hands of a crazy
idiot with a pistol and a grudge, no one seems to comprehend but those of us
who suffer the anxiety and sleepless nights this has caused us all, and no one
seems to care, surely not you the guy we put our faith and trust in you and all
the money we had.
This Blog is copyrighted and cannot be used in any way without express written permission!
This Blog is copyrighted and cannot be used in any way without express written permission!
