THE COURT: Miss Lamp?
MS. LAMP: Your Honor, let me just peek out in the hall if I may and see who….
Your Honor, I’m going to call Officer Machell Dunlap to the stand.
THE COURT: Officer, raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you will give in this matter will be the truth, so help you God?
OFFICER DUNLAP: I do.
THE COURT: Watch your step coming up. That chair is on rollers, so be careful. And the microphone won’t make you any louder, so make sure you speak up loudly and distinctly for us. State your full name.
THE WITNESS: Machell Alice Dunlap.
THE COURT: Spell your first name.
THE WITNESS: Machell. M-a-c-h-e-l-l.
THE COURT: Last name?
THE WITNESS: Dunlap. D-u-n-l-a-p.
THE COURT: Thank you. Miss Lamp?
OFFICER MACHELL ALICE DUNLAP
Called at 2:11 p.m. by the People, sworn by the court, testified:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MS. LAMP:
Q. Officer Dunlap, where are you employed?
A.
Q. And in what capacity are you employed?
A. An officer.
Q. How long have you been so employed?
A. October it will be seven years.
Q. Okay. And did you have occasion to be on duty in that capacity on or about March twentieth of 2007?
A. Yes, I did.
Q.
And on that date did you have occasion to be involved in the horse farm
also known as the Turn Three Ranch at
A. Yes, I did.
Q. How did you come to be involved in that investigation on that day?
A. Officer Wheaton had spoken to me about a investigation she was currently involved in at that location.
Q. Okay. And what if anything did you do to assist in the investigation at that location on that day?
A. I had a search warrant that we had signed to go and, go on the property and check the trailers and any other unopened places for verification of ownership of the horses.
Q. And did you happen to be there on that day?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. I guess that’s not what I really meant to ask you. What I meant to ask you was, was that the first time that you happened to be there was on that day.
A. On the twentieth, yes.
Q. Okay. And did you have occasion to come into contact with either a James Henderson or Matthew Mercier on that day?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Okay. And could you describe how that happened please?
A. When we were there on the search warrant Mr. Mercier came on the property and we gave him a copy of the search warrant.
Q. Okay. And did he say anything to you?
A. He tried to ask me questions, but Officer Deering was there also and explained to Mr. Mercier that he needed to stand back at that point in time until our services were done.
Q. And would that be Dan Deering from the sheriff’s department?
A. Yes, it would.
Q. Okay. And did you have occasion to have a conversation with Mr. Mercier at some point?
A. After the search warrant was done and we were leaving the property we had a conversation with Mr. Mercier, me and Officer Wheaton, about getting hay provided for later on for the horses.
Q. Okay. And what if anything happened at that time?
A. I explained to Mr. Mercier that he needed to contact somebody, not him personally, because the property was currently impounded and he could not enter the property himself, to provide someone to bring hay that was adequately equipped and responsible enough to do that for him on that point in time.
Q. Okay. And did you make a special point about somebody who would be responsible and able to bring the hay in?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Okay. And did Mr. Mercier ever indicate to you how often he would come to the farm to care for the horses?
A. Yes. He made the comment that he is there four times a day and that yes, he would be providing hay for those horses.
Q. Okay. And did you have occasion to, did you have occasion to hear Mr. Mercier say anything else?
A. He made a comment that he had an appointment with his vet Dr. Irving to take his horse, the one that had the wire wrapped around its leg, to Dr. Irving.
Q. Okay. Did he say when that appointment was?
A. I believe it was the twentieth.
Q. Okay. The twentieth of March, that day.
A. I believe it was that day.
Q. The same day that you’re there on the search warrant and then later impounding the farm. Is that correct?
A. Correct.
THE COURT: You believe that’s the date he said?
THE WITNESS: I believe that’s the date he said.
THE COURT: Or is that what you concluded from something?
THE WITNESS: No. I believe that’s the date he said, was the twentieth.
BY MS. LAMP:
Q. And that was your understanding.
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. What if anything did you do?
A. I contacted Dr. Irving’s office only to verify that he actually indeed did have a vet appointment for that horse.
Q. Did you confirm that there was one scheduled?
A. I talked to their secretary at Dr. Irving’s office to verify that he did indeed have a vet appointment for that horse.
Q. Okay. And was that the, was that the purpose of the call?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you end up having a further conversation of providing any further information to the person that was there?
MR. DUNGAN: Your Honor, I’ll object at that point on hearsay.
THE COURT: I’m not sure where there is yet. Are we back at the farm now or are we down at the doctor’s office?
MS. LAMP: No. Your Honor, quite frankly, I’ll withdraw the question. It’s not that big a deal.
THE COURT: Let me ask something. Could you, you got confirmation that he had an appointment March twentieth?
THE WITNESS: Yes, I did.
THE COURT: Okay. The question’s withdrawn. Go ahead.
MS. LAMP: That’s all I had to ask, thank you. Oh, no, it isn’t, Your Honor.
BY MS. LAMP:
Q. I’m showing you what’s been marked as People’s proposed exhibit twenty-nine. Can you identify what that is please?
A. This is a breeding contract that my director had found on the Turn Three Ranch web site.
Q. Okay. And have you had occasion to go to the web site yourself?
A. Only when I was in the room with my director. We went on it together.
Q. You went on it together. And that’s what you printed down from the Turn Three Ranch web site.
A. Yes.
MS. LAMP: I’d move to admit People’s proposed exhibit twenty-nine.
MR. DUNGAN: Relevance.
THE COURT: Mr. Hurst, same objection?
MR. HURST: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Just relevance? Miss Lamp?
MS. LAMP: The relevance is the type of operation that they’re running there at the ranch. I think it’s certainly relevant to this case.
THE COURT: I tend to agree with that. I’m not sure the foundation is there though. She said she got it from the director. I—-
THE WITNESS: We copied it together. We were on the web site together in her office and I downloaded it because I wanted to have verification of some sort of contract that Mr. Mercier and Mr. Henderson both had together.
THE
COURT: Any comment on her position?
MR. DUNGAN: I might be the only one in the room, I just,
I don’t understand the relevance of a breeding contract off the internet to
whether these guys tortured, abused, neglected or failed to provide care for
horses.
THE COURT: Might it not go to who’s in charge? I don’t know what names are on it or anything like that, that’s why I was wondering more about the foundation part of it. But would not that go to who’s operating and what’s in that as far as what type of farm it’s supposed to be relative to how it was found on the first day, March sixteenth?
MR. DUNGAN: If that breeding con--I don’t know that the breeding contract has anything to do with what was found on March fourteenth or March sixteenth. I mean, you’re the trier of fact, Judge, you know what you want to hear and what you don’t and what you consider relevant to the issues you’re going to decide. But I make my objection for the record for that reason.
THE COURT: Have you two gentlemen seen it?
MR. HURST: Yes.
MR. DUNGAN: Yes.
THE COURT: Do you have copies?
MR. DUNGAN: I believe somewhere. Yeah, we’ve seen it.
THE COURT: It has the name of the ranch, the address, it has the name of James E. Henderson, Jr., and a number of locations, signature line for Turn Three Ranch, slash, James E. Henderson, Jr. And the second page, please make all checks payable to James E. Henderson, Jr. The court will admit twenty-nine.
(At 2:19 p.m. PX 29 admitted)
MR. DUNGAN: What’s the number, Your Honor?
THE COURT: Twenty-nine.
MS. LAMP: Nothing further, thank you.
THE COURT: Mr. Dungan?
MR. DUNGAN: Thank you, Your Honor.
CROSS EXAMINATION (At 2:19 p.m.)
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q.
Officer Dunlap, you indicated that March twenty, 2007, was your first
contact with the farm in
A. Yes.
Q. And you had not been out there before previously, not just for this case but for any reason.
A. Never.
Q. And your reason to go on that property was essentially to execute a search warrant.
A. Yes.
Q. And you are the individual who did apply for the search warrant?
A. Yes.
Q. That would have been a search warrant first to seize any and all horses on the property, correct?
A. To seize any and all property on that, at that point in time for the search warrant. Yes.
Q. You went in front of Judge Falahee with an application for a search warrant.
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And in that application, you know, there’s that part in the search warrant where you tell the judge what it is you want to seize.
A. Correct.
Q. And in at least the search warrant that’s in front of me, you said that you wanted to seize any and all horses and, of course, associated equipment and things like that. Correct?
A. Correct.
Q. All right. You went before Judge Falahee with a second search warrant because you also wanted to search Mr. Henderson’s home, right?
A. Correct.
Q. And a truck that was on the property?
A. Correct.
Q. And what you wanted to search the home and the truck for was indications of who owns the horses. Correct?
A. Any and all indications of who owned the horses and any and all information pertaining to the horses.
Q. Do you have copies of the search warrants with you?
A. I do not.
Q. Do not?
A. Oh, not on my person up here, no. In my briefcase, yes.
Q. Would you grab those for me please?
A. Sure.
MS. LAMP: Your Honor, I think I’m going to object to the relevance of the search warrant. I don’t think that we’re--
THE COURT: I’d like to see it.
MR. DUNGAN: Pardon me?
THE COURT: I’d like to see it.
MS. LAMP: Are you looking for a copy of your search warrant?
THE WITNESS: The very first one, yeah. Do you have a copy of that?
MS. LAMP: I do, but I’d like to have one available to look at while you’re testifying.
THE
WITNESS: I have a copy of the
MS. LAMP: Your Honor, I have my copy. Well, let me see if maybe I have an additional copy here in my file. If I may approach, Your Honor, we have a copy of it here.
THE COURT: Are you going to talk about the one on the twenty-first as well?
MR. DUNGAN: Yes.
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q. Do you have three total search warrants then?
A. I have two.
Q.
There should be one for the twentieth for any and all horses, one for
the twenty-first for searching
MR. DUNGAN: Your Honor, and do you have copies of those in the court file?
THE COURT: Apparently I have one on the twenty-first.
THE WITNESS: I only have two.
MR. DUNGAN: Which one are you missing?
THE
WITNESS: I have the twentieth for the
parcel number on
MR. DUNGAN: Okay. And what’s the other one that you have?
THE
WITNESS: I have one for
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q. All right. Now, does that have—-do you see where it says search the following persons, place or thing?
A. To search the person, place or thing
described on
Q. Yes.
A. Yes.
Q. And the first sentence under that starts, the property to be searched is. Do you see that?
A. To seize-—on the search the person, place or thing?
MR. DUNGAN: Your Honor, could I approach her and-—
THE COURT: Sure. Which one have you got there? Let me see.
THE
WITNESS: This is the first. That’s the
MR.
DUNGAN: Okay, Your Honor, this is what
I’m referring to. That’s the one on the
twentieth. The one that she has, okay,
here, there’s two on the twenty-first.
This paragraph that just says I want to search
THE COURT: So there’s one before this one. There’s one before this one on the twentieth?
MR. DUNGAN: Yes. Because you’ve got the one from the twentieth.
THE WITNESS: I have the one from the twentieth.
MR. DUNGAN: okay. And then the only difference between the two on the twenty-first is just that paragraph.
THE COURT: Are you going to work off the affidavit or the search warrant or both?
MR. DUNGAN: Both. As long as she’s got these two, that’s fine.
MS. LAMP: I want to make sure I’m looking at the same, same stuff that you are.
THE COURT: Let’s have them both. We’ve got one from the twentieth and one from the twenty-first? And then there’s a third one?
MR. DUNGAN: There’s two from the twenty-first, but the differences between the two are very minor. There’s just that one extra paragraph--
THE COURT: Everybody got the one from the twentieth?
MR. DUNGAN: Yeah, everybody’s got one from the twentieth.
THE COURT: Well, let’s get one marked.
THE WITNESS: I’ve got this one and I have this one. The twenty-first and the twentieth.
THE COURT: We’ll use the next two numbers, Miss Lamp. Thirty and thirty-one.
MS. LAMP: If you’re marking them as my exhibits, yeah.
(At 2:27 p.m. proposed PX 30, PX 31 marked)
THE COURT: Thirty and thirty-one. Thirty is March twentieth and thirty-one is March twenty-first. Okay. Back to you.
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q. Officer Dunlap, I want to start with the search warrant-—
THE COURT: Can those be admitted, Miss Lamp?
MS. LAMP: Certainly, Your Honor.
MR. DUNGAN: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Thirty and thirty-one are admitted.
(at 2:27 p.m. PX 30, 31 admitted)
THE COURT: All right. Mr. Dungan.
MR. DUNGAN: Thank you, Your Honor.
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q. Officer Dunlap, I’d like you to start first by looking at the search warrant that’s dated March twenty, 2007. Have you got that in front of you?
A. Yes.
Q. And is that a search warrant that you prepared?
A. No, I did not prepare this myself personally.
Q. Is it a search warrant that you signed under oath?
A. It is a search warrant that me and Officer Wheaton went to court together on.
THE COURT: Did you sign it as the affidavit?
THE WITNESS: Yes, I did.
THE COURT: Did you sign the affidavit? Mr. Dungan.
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q. And you were sworn under oath at the time that you signed it that all the facts contained within it were true and accurate. Is that correct?
A. To the best of my knowledge, yes.
Q. Okay. And then Judge Falahee signed it and authorized it. Right?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. If you would go down on the first page towards the section where it says the following facts have been sworn to by affiant in support of the issuance of this warrant. Do you see where I’m at?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. In that paragraph, one of the facts that you put in there for Judge Falahee to read was that Officer Wheaton and Officer DeLand had observed a dead horse laying in the drive of the property. Is that true?
A. Yes, I see that.
Q. All right. At the time that you put that information in there, did you have any cause of death information for that particular horse?
A. That the horse was laying in the driveway?
Q. The dead horse.
A. Officer Wheaton had explained to me there was a dead horse laying in the driveway.
Q. All right. And at the time that you put that information in the affidavit for the search warrant, did you have any information as to the cause of death of that horse?
A. No, I did not.
Q. All right. And for all you knew that horse had died of natural causes. Correct?
A. That’s correct.
Q. But you did not put that information in the search warrant.
A. No, I did not. I didn’t prepare the search warrant so I did not personally put this into the search warrant.
Q. But you took it to Judge Falahee, correct?
A. Correct.
Q. He swore you an oath to tell the truth that everything in that affidavit was true. Correct?
A. Correct.
Q. And then you said yes, it is.
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And then you signed your name.
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Okay. Also in the factual statements that are in there, you put facts in there that say that there was a second horse that had an injury to the left hind leg that had been swollen and untreated. Is that information in there?
A. (No audible response)
Q. About four lines from the bottom of that big paragraph.
A. Yes.
Q. You had information at that time that Mr. Mercier had been treating the horse himself.
A. Did I have information saying he was treating the horse?
Q. Yes, you knew that.
A. No, I did not know that.
Q. You’d never been told that?
A. No.
Q. All right. You knew Dr. Sray had been out there and looked at that horse on March sixteenth.
A. Was I aware of Dr. Sray going out there and looking at the horse on March sixteenth?
Q. Yes.
A. Yes, I was aware that Dr. Sray had gone out and looked at horses on that property on March sixteenth.
Q. And that he had looked at that horse in particular.
A. I don’t know that.
Q. All right. And that information didn’t make it in the search warrant either. Is that correct?
A. If you’re telling me it’s not on the search warrant I will take your word for it.
Q. On the next page, or actually just after that sentence, the next sentence in that affidavit reads that Officer Wheaton did not observe any available food or water for the horses except for one tank with ice. Did I read that sentence correctly in there?
A. I’m following, hang on just a second. That’s what it says.
Q. All right. And that’s what you swore to.
A. That’s what I swore to. Those are the pictures I observed on the twentieth.
Q. All right. At the time that you swore to that, were you aware of Officer Wheaton’s report from when she was out there six days earlier on March fourteenth, 2007, where she stated consistent with how she testified yesterday, that her and Officer DeLand observed twenty-five to thirty square bales of hay on the farm. Are you aware of that information?
A. When you’re asking me to testify was there food or water available to the horses--
THE COURT: That’s not what he said.
THE WITNESS: --no, there was not.
THE COURT: Officer, that’s not what he’s asking you. Repeat it.
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q. You know that Officer Wheaton and Officer DeLand were out there on March fourteenth.
A. Correct.
Q. And that was six days before you went to get the search warrant. Correct?
A. I retract that statement. I did not know they were there on the fourteenth. I knew they were there, that Officer Wheaton had contacted me on the sixteenth about this complaint.
Q. All right. You knew before the twentieth Animal Control had been out there.
A. Correct.
Q. All right. You knew that when Officer Wheaton went out there on the fourteenth based on her report that she observed twenty-five to thirty square bales of hay in a pile inside the barn.
A. There was hay on the property.
Q. Hay is food for horses, correct?
A. There was hay on the property.
THE COURT: Officer, he asked you if you knew from Officer Wheaton’s report that there were twenty—twenty-five?
MR. DUNGAN: Twenty-five to thirty square bales of hay on the fourteenth.
THE COURT: Did you know that from reading Officer-—did you know that from Officer Wheaton’s report? Did you ever read Officer Wheaton’s report?
THE WITNESS: Yes, I did.
THE
COURT: At the time that you signed the
affidavit did you-—is that the time frame you’re talking about, right?
MR. DUNGAN: Mm-Hmm.
THE COURT: Did you know from reading the report that there was twenty-five to thirty bales of hay?
MR. DUNGAN: Yes.
THE COURT: Did you know that?
THE WITNESS: No.
THE COURT: She didn’t know that.
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q. All right. Did Officer Wheaton tell you that?
A. No.
Q. Would you agree with--where did you get the information that you put in the search warrant that you signed and swore to that Officer Wheaton did not observe any available food or water for the horses? Where did that information come from?
A. I checked all of the information that she had given me before the search warrant was signed, that there was no water or food available for them to-—if you’ve got a dog food dish in front of your dog and you’ve got food in that dog dish, they’ve got food available. If you’ve got twenty-five bales of hay that’s put off to the side-—
THE COURT: Officer Dunlap.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: He wanted to know your source I think of the information that you put in there. Is that correct?
MR. DUNGAN: Yes.
THE COURT: What was the source of that information? Your observations, reading a report, talking to someone, all three?
THE WITNESS: Talking to Officer Wheaton and looking at the pictures.
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q. All right. Let me try another question. Would you agree with me that if on March fourteenth, 2007, that Officer Wheaton went out to the property and observed twenty-five to thirty square bales of hay, a full tank of water, and that she walked out to a large pen and observed approximately twenty-five horses eating on a round bale of hay, that it would be inaccurate to say in that search warrant that Officer Wheaton did not observe any available food or water for the horses?
A. It depends on what horses you’re talking about.
Q. Would it be misleading to a judge?
A. No, I wouldn’t say that.
Q. Okay. On the next page of that search warrant towards the top, you put information in there that Officer Wheaton was contacted by Matt Mercier on March fifteen, 2007. Is that correct?
A. On March sixteenth? Oh, I’m sorry, March fifteenth.
Q. 2007.
A. (No audible response)
Q. Second sentence from the top.
A. I’m reading it.
Q. Okay.
A. Yes.
Q. It says in there Officer Wheaton was contacted by Matt Mercier on March fifteen, 2007. Correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And it goes on to say that Matt Mercier stated he is the caretaker of the horses, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And then it goes on to say that Matt Mercier reported that Dr. Sray is a personal friend of his.
A. That’s what it says.
Q. Where did that information come from?
A. Officer Wheaton.
Q. Told you that.
A. Yes.
Q. That Matt Mercier said that he and Dr. Sray are personal friends.
A. That’s what Matt Mercier stated to Officer Wheaton.
Q. It goes on to say that Dr. Sray is also the veterinarian for Jackson County Animal Control Department. Correct?
A. He is Animal Control’s veterinarian.
Q. And that’s what it says--
THE COURT: (Indiscernible)
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q. That’s what it says in the search warrant, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. It goes on to say in the search warrant that you called Dr. Sray on the phone.
A. That I contacted—-hang on for a second.
Q. Last sentence in that paragraph says Officer Dunlap.
A. Yes.
Q. You called Dr. Sray.
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Is that true?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. You spoke with Dr. Sray yourself.
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And you wanted to ask Dr. Sray about his relationship with Mr. Mercier.
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And according to you, Dr. Sray said that he had known Matt Mercier since Matt Mercier was a child.
A. Yes.
Q. Did Dr. Sray actually tell you that on your oath?
A. That he was a friend of Mr. Mercier?
Q. That he had known him since he was a child.
A. Yes.
Q. And that’s exactly what you put in the search warrant.
A. Yes.
Q. So that information is true at the time you put it in the search warrant?
A. Yes.
Q. And true today according to your conversation with Dr. Sray?
A. That’s what Dr. Sray had stated.
Q. Okay. What information were you given about Dr. Sray’s visit to the farm on March sixteenth?
A. The only information that I was given, that Mr. Mercier had contacted Dr. Sray to go out and look at his horses.
Q. Let me ask you this. Were you told that Dr. Sray had said some of the horses were in poor shape but it had been a bad winter and some of the horses were older horses. Were you told that?
A. Yes, I do remember that.
Q. All right. Were you told that Dr. Sray’s recommendation to Animal Control was to let Mr. Mercier keep being the caretaker for the horses?
A. No, I do not know that.
Q. You were never told that.
A. No, I was not.
Q. All right.
A. Not on the sixteenth, no.
Q. But did you know that by the twentieth?
A. No, I did not know that.
Q. Did you know that at the time that you filed for the search warrant?
A. No, I did not know that.
Q. So that information didn’t make it in there obviously then, right?
A. No.
Q. All right. Were you told that Dr. Sray had said that four weeks of good weather will take care of the problems on this farm?
A. No.
Q. And that information didn’t make it in the search warrant either.
A. No.
Q. Were you told that Dr. Sray did not recommend seizure of the farm or the horses?
A. I was not told that.
Q. All right. So that information didn’t make it in there obviously either, correct?
A. It’s not in the search warrant.
Q. Okay. Now, the next search warrant, if you would turn to the one of March twenty-first, 2007.
A. Okay.
Q.
You obtained the search warrant to search Mr. Henderson’s house on
A. Correct.
Q. And also the silver Dodge Ram truck that was still located on the farm.
A. Correct.
Q. And as far as what you were asking to search for, you see the part on the front page where it says in big bold capital letters, to seize, secure, tabulate, et cetera?
A. Yes.
Q. And then you describe what it is you want to look for, right?
A. Any files, paper documents, electronic devices, yes.
Q. Keep going.
A.
Equipment for storage or transportation of information that may pertain
to the ownership of the horses located at the northeast corner of
Q. All right. So you want to get into Mr. Henderson’s house and the truck on that farm in order to look for any information that may tell you who the owner is of those sixty-nine horses. Correct?
A. Correct.
Q. That’s all you were looking for.
A. Correct.
Q. All right. And you did in fact search not only that house but that truck as well.
A. Correct.
Q. And then you prepared tabulation forms apparently in some handwritten form that indicated what you had taken from both the house and the truck. Correct?
A. Correct.
Q.
All right. One of the items that
you had listed on your tabulation form of what you took from
A. Correct.
Q. How does that help you determine the ownership of horses?
A. Determines where and who is located at a certain address.
Q. Sager Road.
A. Any address, because we asked Mr. Mercier for paper work pertaining to these horses specifically, who they owned and who owned them and he would not provide us with that information.
Q. That’s why you got the search warrant.
A. Correct.
Q.
And why you went to
A. Correct.
Q. And then you took his household bills.
A. Yes.
Q. What on that household bills was going to tell you who owned the horses?
A. It was going to give us information of who and what, well, who lives at that address and—-
Q. Sager Road.
A. Sager Road--
Q. You knew who lived there.
A. I didn’t know who lived there.
Q.
But you weren’t asking in the search warrant to find out who lived at
A. It’s not uncommon for Animal Control when we do a search warrant, it’s not any different than us going in and doing a search warrant for seizure of an animal or dog fighting or anything like that. We have to get verification on paper work who owns what, who lives where.
Q. That’s not what appears on the search warrant as far as what you’re authorized to take though. Would you agree with me?
MS. LAMP: Your Honor, I’m going to object to the ongoing, it’s an ongoing objection to the relevance of this.
THE COURT: Okay. Overruled.
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q. That’s not what was authorized in the search warrant, household bills was not authorized. True?
A. It says any file, paper work, documents, electronic devices, electronic equipment for storage or transportation, information that may pertain to ownership of the horses.
Q. All right. So you’re saying the Consumers bill and the cable bill would pertain to ownership of horses.
A. It could.
Q. Okay. What about the miscellaneous pictures of horses? What’s the relation to ownership?
A. We’re trying to verify what horses, what on that property.
Q. And the pictures that you took from the home are going to help you how?
A. To figure out who actually lives at that address and if so, who owns the horses.
Q. All right. So you’re hoping that one’s going to lead to the other.
A. Possibly.
Q. All right. The laundry basket that you took, how was that going to help?
A. We just used that to provide transportation for things.
Q. All right. So as long as you’re in there, you just help yourself to a laundry basket.
A. No.
Q. I mean, it didn’t say in the search warrant if you find a whole bunch of stuff you can go ahead and take a laundry basket, right?
A. It says we could search and seize anything that we wanted to.
Q. Okay. But my question was it didn’t say go ahead and help yourself to a laundry basket, did it?
A. Not on my search warrant it doesn’t say that.
Q. Okay. It doesn’t on mine either. All right. You took a Nextel phone.
A. Because it could have things pertaining on there for photographs.
Q. Did you look before you took it?
A. No.
Q. Just grabbed it.
A. Yes.
Q. All right.
A. It says any, if you read this—-
Q. I’ve read it and--
A. –-electronic devices, electronic equipment.
Q. We’ve all read it.
THE COURT: Officer Dunlap. Go ahead, Mr. Dungan.
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q. The alarm clock that you took. How was that going to be helpful for determining horse ownership?
A. I had no idea what was on the, if it stored anything or not. I have no idea.
Q. What, I’m-—
THE
COURT: Did you say alarm clock?
MR. DUNGAN: I did say alarm clock.
THE COURT: Why did you take, did you seize the alarm clock?
THE WITNESS: I did not.
THE COURT: She didn’t seize it.
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q. It’s on the tabulation, correct?
A. It’s on the tabulation. Officer Wheaton was there with me.
THE COURT: Did you sign the tabulation?
THE WITNESS: I took the tabulation up to the prosecutor’s office.
THE COURT: I guess I asked you, did you sign the tabulation?
THE WITNESS: Yes, I did.
THE COURT: Why did you sign it with the alarm clock?
THE WITNESS: Officer Wheaton took it and put it in.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. DUNGAN:
Q. The rapid detect multi drug screen test that was used, how was that going to determine horse ownership?
A. I didn’t seize that either. Officer Wheaton did.
Q. As you’re sitting there, how does that help us determine horse ownership?
A. It could be used for any kind of the breeding purposes, I don’t know. It had pertaining to horses. It--
Q. But not horse ownership, you’d agree with that, wouldn’t you?
A. It could pertain to horse knowledge.
Q. Ownership? What about ownership though? Because that’s what we were out there for, right?
A. Possibly.
Q. Possibly. It’s--
THE COURT: What’s the object?
MR. DUNGAN: It’s a rapid detect multi drug screen test that was used.
THE WITNESS: They could use it for testing a horse that might be in a menstrual cycle to breed another horse.
THE COURT: Mr. Dungan?
MR. DUNGAN: Judge, I guess I’ll leave it up to you, that’s all that matters, if you think it pertains to horse ownership or not.
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q. Another item that was seized was a portable PBT.
A. I didn’t seize that either.
Q. Okay. Do you know how that would pertain to who owns the horses?
A. No.
Q. All right. There was a Sony Cybershot three point two camera that was taken.
A. It has a memory on it.
Q. Did you look at the memory before you took it?
A. I can’t look at the memory. There’s a memory stick that’s in it. You have to take it out and look at the photographs.
Q. So at the time you take it you have no idea if it’s going to be relevant or not.
A. No, we don’t.
Q. You just take it and then we’ll figure this out later.
A. And you would get it back.
Q. You also took a daily planner.
A. Yes.
Q. Did that have any information on horse ownership in it?
A. I didn’t go through the relevancy of everything that was taken. Officer Wheaton did.
Q. Grab first, look later.
A. You take anything that could be pertaining to horses or ownership of horses that they possibly could have in their daily planner.
Q. Let me ask you this. Could you have looked at the daily planner first?
A. No.
Q. While you’re at the house.
A. No.
Q. To see if there’s any information in there pertaining to horses before you decide to take it?
A. No.
Q. That would be impossible for you to do that?
A. At that point in time, yes. It was very late at night and they had no light source in that building.
Q. Did you have a flashlight?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Did the search warrant limit you to any particular time?
A. No.
Q. All right. You took a view cam?
A. Yes.
Q. What is that, like a hand held video camera?
A. Yes.
THE COURT: Did you say view?
MR. DUNGAN: It’s described on here as view cam, a Sharp.
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q. Did that have any tapes in it?
A. I don’t know.
Q. Did you look at any tapes?
A. No.
Q. Did you look to see if it had any tapes in it?
A. No.
Q. You took a cooled equine semen container.
A. Yes.
Q. Was there semen in it?
A. I don’t know.
Q. Do you know how that relates to who owns the horses?
A. Could have ownership verification on anything inside or outside of it pertaining to them.
Q. Okay. What would have been outside of it that would have helped us figure out--
A. Labels, names.
Q. What would have been inside of it?
A. Could have been a label inside the semen container.
Q. Okay. You also, now we’re apparently getting into items that were taken from the truck. You took a rolling suitcase. How was that going to help with horse ownership identification?
A. The paper work that was provided inside.
Q. And that’s, the paper work provided inside is not listed on the tabulation form.
A. Anything that is in that rolling case, there could have been paper work inside. I wasn’t the only one doing the search warrant. Officer Wheaton was there with me.
Q. All right. And you didn’t look inside the suitcase?
A. No, I did not.
Q. And you don’t know that anybody else looked inside the suitcase.
A. No, I do not.
Q. Just that the suitcase was taken.
A. Yes.
Q. All right. A Cobra radar detector was taken. Do you know what a Cobra radar detector is?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Fuzzbuster, right?
A. Yes.
Q. And how was that going to help us identify who owns the horses?
A. I did not take the Cobra radar detector.
Q. I understand that. But how would that help identify—-
A. I have no idea.
Q. –-who owns the horses?
THE COURT: She said she had no idea.
MR. DUNGAN: Oh, I’m sorry, I couldn’t hear. She had no idea?
THE COURT: Yes, she said she had no idea.
MR. DUNGAN: Okay.
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q. The Samsung cell phone that was taken from the truck. How was that going to help with horse ownership?
A. Same, same way. It could have stuff stored in it.
Q. Like what?
A. Anything that pertained to horses.
Q. Did you look before it was taken for any information in there?
A. No.
Q. Did anybody else?
A. No.
Q. This is another thing, take first, look later.
A. Yes.
Q. All right. You took a signed copy of a search warrant tabulation from that house.
A. From the truck?
Q. From the truck.
A. Yes.
Q. How was that going to help with determining horse ownership?
A. It had notes on the back that Matt had on there.
Q. And did those notes pertain to horse ownership?
A. It pertained to him getting verification that we were there that day.
Q. And that helps us determine ownership of the horses how?
A. No.
Q. Okay, good. Another item that you took from the truck was Matt Mercier’s Capital One credit card. How was that going to help determine horse ownership?
A. It had a name and address on it I believe.
Q. What was the name?
A. If it says Matt Mercier on it, it was Matt Mercier.
Q. And you’re saying that there was an address on a credit card?
A. I’m not really sure. I don’t really particularly remember that credit card. If you’re asking me, I don’t.
Q. Took a receipt book from the truck.
A. Correct.
Q. Receipts for what?
A. A receipt book could pertain to anything.
Q. I’m not saying what it could. What did it?
A. I don’t know. I wasn’t the only one there taking things.
THE COURT: Did you seize that object?
THE WITNESS: We seized that object, me and Officer Wheaton did. I did not particularly take the receipt book. The tabulation was signed by me, but I’m not the only one that did the search warrant.
THE COURT: Did you take the receipt book?
THE WITNESS: No, I did not.
THE COURT: She didn’t take the receipt book.
BY MR. DUNGAN:
Q. Did you see Wheaton take it?
A. Officer Wheaton did take it.
Q. Did you see her take it?
A. No, I did not.
Q. All right. You don’t know if she went through it before she took it?
A. No, I do not.
Q. And you know you didn’t.
A. I did not.
Q. All right. You found eighteen VHS tapes in the truck?
A. Correct.
Q. And obviously you didn’t look at those either before you took them?
A. I did not. I don’t have a TV system there with me to look at them.
Q. Officer Wheaton didn’t look at them either, correct?
A. I’m assuming not.
Q. All right. When you were out at the farm on March twentieth, 2007, you did meet with Matt Mercier out there, correct?
A. Are we done with the search warrants?
Q. Yes.
A. I’m sorry. Could you re-—could you ask that question again please?
Q. When you were out at the farm on March twenty, 2007, executing these various search warrants, you did talk to Matt Mercier?
A. At the very end, yes. Well, we gave him a copy of the search warrant, yes, and I talked to him at the end.
Q. Thank you.
A. You’re welcome.
Q. You understood his responsibility to run that farm. He identified himself to you as the caretaker?
A. He said he was the caretaker.
Q. All right. And you wanted him to make sure there was going to be hay there that night.
A. That evening, yes.
Q. He was not allowed to bring it?
A. No, he could-—I told him to provide somebody who had, was a responsible party to provide it.
Q. My question to you is, Matt was not allowed to bring the hay out there, correct?
A. Matt could bring it to the road, he could not come on the property.
Q. Per you, per Animal Control’s order.
A. Per the court order.
Q. That Animal Control obtained.
A. Yes.
Q. All right. Did you give him a copy of that court order?
A. Of the search warrant?
Q. No. Of the order that kept him off of the property.
A. It should be attached to the search warrant.
Q. I agree. But did you give Matt Mercier a copy of it?
A. Matt Mercier did receive a copy of it.
Q. All right. Matt told you at that time that he had had an appointment for, at Dr. Irving’s office for the horse with the severe leg injury?
A. Yes.
Q. You did call and confirm that that was true?
A. Yes.
Q. And you did make him cancel that appointment.
A. I did not make him cancel it. I called the vet to verify that he did have an appointment.
Q. And Matt told you he wanted to keep it?
A. Matt said he had an appointment with his vet and I verified that through the phone conversation with Dr. Irving’s secretary.
Q. And Matt told you he wanted to keep that appointment.
A. Matt did ask if he could keep that appointment.
Q. And you said no.
A. I said I needed to contact Dr. Irving to verify he indeed did have a vet appointment.
Q. Which he did.
A. Which he did.
Q. And then you told him he couldn’t keep it.
A. I told him he could not transport the horse himself to Dr. Irving’s.
MR. DUNGAN: All right. I don’t have any other questions, Your Honor, thank you.
THE COURT: Mr. Hurst?
MR. HURST: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Miss Lamp, any follow-up?
MS. LAMP: No, Your Honor, thank you.
THE COURT: Okay, officer, you may step down. Watch your step there.
THE WITNESS: Thank you.
THE COURT: Have a seat there.
(At 2:54 p.m. witness excused)