Opinion ID: 1788754
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: What Mitchell Testified

Text: Juanita Sistrunk Mitchell, the first to arrive at the scene of the accident December 14, 1984, found Mrs. Jackson fully conscious because she told us too many things. In describing how the accident occurred, Mrs. Jackson told her, Well, suddenly, it seemed like I run into some real deep gravel and I had no control, or could not control the car. Vol. XXII, 1453-54. Thereafter, when Chiddester was on the witness stand, and as a predicate to asking him an opinion, defense counsel asked him if he had heard Mrs. Mitchell's testimony. Plaintiffs' counsel objected, and defense counsel responded that Mitchell's testimony related to Mrs. Jackson being off on the shoulder of the road. She obviously could not have run into some real deep gravel on the paved surface. Plaintiffs' counsel responded that all Mrs. Mitchell had testified was that she said Linda Jackson described to her that when she felt the bump, that it felt like the left rear was off the road. (Emphasis added.) The record shows that Mitchell testified to no such thing. Yet the circuit judge commented: That's what I remember her saying. (Emphasis added.) Defense counsel then informed the court accurately what Mitchell had testified, and was in the process of asking Chiddester another question when the court interrupted: BY THE COURT: Just a moment. We won't take Mr. Yerger's statement as necessary to being what the testimony was. You all know what the testimony was. You are the judges of the facts. If we are wrong and if I'm wrong, you are right on the facts. That's just the way it is. Now, my recollection as to the last part of that may not go along with Mr. Yerger's, but I am going to allow him to ask that question and let the jury remember what, in fact was said. (Emphasis added.) Vol. XXIII, 1682-83. The judge distorted the actual testimony. He had no business whatever telling the jury what he remembered, and in this case it was wrong. The jury went into deliberations with a mental conflict. The circuit judge had flatly said that what in truth was accurate was in accurate.