Opinion ID: 4556238
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: December 2006 Interview

Text: After Lolley came forward, police reopened the investigation of McKillop’s death and reached out to Cooper in December 2006 for questioning. He agreed to be interviewed at the Bay City police station, where he met with Detectives Richard Wehby and Mark Haro. (5/5/11 Tr. R. 5.13, PageID 796.) At the beginning of questioning, Wehby and Haro informed Cooper that he was not under arrest, and therefore he could leave at any time. (Id., PageID 796-97; 5/6/11 R. 5.14, PageID 817). What the detectives did not reveal to Cooper, however, was the nature of the investigation. No. 18-1391 Cooper v. Chapman Page 4 Without these details on hand, Cooper was friendly and talkative. (5/5/11 Tr., R. 5.13, Page ID 797-98). He explained to the investigators that during the 1970s, he lived in Anderson’s basement and that his landlord sold stolen property and facilitated narcotics transactions. (Id.) According to Cooper, he would “never refuse a request” from Anderson (id., Page ID 801), whether it be to break into houses or do “whatever” he was asked to do. As Cooper explained, “he was trying to prove himself[.]” (Id., Page ID 798-99, 801). However, as Cooper further explained, his behavior changed following several events in his life, which served as an “eye opener” that he would need to alter his lifestyle. (Id., Page ID 799-800.) Cooper did so, he claimed, by joining the military and becoming “an assassin.” (Id., Page ID 799-800; 5/6/11 Tr. R. 5.14, Page ID 819.) At this point in the interview, Detective Wehby asked Cooper directly if he had ever killed anyone. Suddenly, Cooper became far less talkative. He seemed evasive and answered tersely that he had not killed for money. (5/5/11 Tr., R. 5.13, Page ID 803; 5/6/11 Tr., R. 5.14, Page ID 819.) He added that he had never held anyone down to be beaten up or killed. (5/5/11 Tr., R. 5.13, Page ID 803.) The detectives then referenced Jenkins and McKillop, and the interview took a sudden turn. Cooper’s demeanor seemed to change, according to police testimony. He suddenly sat up in his chair. His skin now was flushed, and he appeared nervous. (Id., Page ID 800). Detective Wehby informed Cooper that police had information that he was responsible for the homicide and had been paid to kill someone, but he had accidentally killed the wrong person. (Id., Page ID 801, 803). According to Wehby’s testimony, Cooper “never denied” these accusations, but rather simply “kept deflecting” the statements, saying “oh I don’t recall that,” and “I wouldn’t have had anything to do with that.” Based on these noticeable dodges, it appeared to the detectives as if Cooper was trying to change the subject. (Id., Page ID 801). Then, for the first time in the interview, Cooper indicated he had had a “falling out” with Anderson and Anderson’s affiliates. He also began to speak negatively about the group, seeming to imply that its members were trying to pin the murder on him. (Id., Page ID 803). Following this exchange Cooper refused to provide a DNA sample, even though he had initially agreed to do so. (Id., Page ID 801.). According to Detective Wehby, Cooper also No. 18-1391 Cooper v. Chapman Page 5 appeared to be taking deliberate measures to avoid leaving DNA evidence. He put his used cigarette stub in his shirt pocket after each smoke break. (Id., Page ID 801-02.) He broke up his Styrofoam cup and placed the pieces in his pockets. (Id.) He also put into his pockets the paper towels he had used during bathroom breaks. (Id.) As the interview ended Cooper informed Detective Wehby that if it was the wrong guy who got killed, Cooper felt truly and deeply sorry for the victim’s family; however, Cooper added that if it was the right guy, then that guy got what he deserved. (Id., 5/6/11 Tr., R. 5.14, Page ID 820.)