Opinion ID: 1521791
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 19

Heading: the direct and cross-examination of ruffin

Text: After the government had introduced the involuntary, inadmissible, written statement into evidence and into testimony as part of its case-in-chief, Ruffin chose to testify on his own behalf, thus waiving his Fifth Amendment privilege. His counsel, [in an effort to undo the damage caused by the introduction of the written statement, and to make it appear either involuntary or exculpatory,] requested Ruffin to describe the circumstances under which it was taken and the facts it set forth. Ruffin admitted that he did give the statement, although he claimed he had given it to Detective Dyson and not Detective Muse. He also acknowledged that the officer who recorded it said a couple of things pertaining to [my rights] but not exactly my rights. When handed a copy of Government Exhibit 27, Ruffin conceded that It is supposed to be the statement that I gave and verified his signature at the bottom of the statement. Ruffin was then requested to read out his entire written statement to the jury. While Ruffin did so, his counsel regularly intervened to ask him whether the statement's portrayal of each successive event was true or false. Ruffin disputed the time 0830 and said he had stated it as eight thirty. He claimed the statement was incorrect in saying that his mother was sitting in her car because she did not have a car or a driver's license. Ruffin said that the correct version about his blocking Clifford Wilson's punch was that they hit me. Ruffin denied that Wilson fell, tried to grab his feet, and push him down the steps; he said the correct version was that he was kicking me and I was kicking him back. Ruffin agreed that he started kicking to keep Wilson from pushing him down the steps. He denied the written statement's account that he hit Wilson on both sides of the face with a left-right combination; it should have been just that he hit Wilson in the face. In reference to the statement that Wilson fell down and tried to get back up, Ruffin said that is not the phrase that I used; he proffered instead that he mentioned Wilson as having hit the wall. Ruffin denied he admitted kicking Wilson with a full house and two straight down stomps, and denied also that he was a karate expert or had ever studied karate. He claimed having said he left Wilson conscious, not unconscious. In response to Detective Muse's question as to Wilson's condition, Ruffin denied doing a job on him; Ruffin said he referred to Wilson's condition as good. When asked where his kicks had landed, Ruffin disputed having said around the forehead, mouth and nose, and claimed he had named only the forehead. Rather than a whole lot of blood, Ruffin said he calculated just a little. Ruffin did not say that he had known Wilson as long as he could remember, he said, but instead about fourteen years or more. Contradicting the written statement, Ruffin denied saying he didn't get along with Wilson (described in the statement as just another one of them `herb-smoking Street Niggers') and insisted he had actually described Wilson as a friend of the family and a friend of mines. Ruffin acknowledged his description of Wilson as an angel dust user. The statement also correctly recorded that he had blood on his shoes. Ruffin contradicted the account of his attempt to wipe the blood off in his sister's apartment before doing so in the basement: I stated I wiped it off in the basement, not upstairs. Rather than saying he had known Officer Shaw for eight to ten years, Ruffin testified, I told them about  I guess eight years or more. According to Ruffin, the statement falsely suggested that the word presume was in his vocabulary. Ruffin rejected the statement's assertion that the bass player had intervened in his struggle with Wilson: I stated that he came up the steps, called my name. That was all. Ruffin told the jury he never answered the question as to whether Officer Shaw hit Wilson. The statement wrongly recorded Ruffin's answer when Detective Muse asked him whether he was trying to kill Wilson: I only stated that I was trying to defend myself; Ruffin said he never added the part about teaching him a lesson, you can't keep going round mistreating people and expecting nothing to happen. Finally, Ruffin denied having said he had watched or taken karate. After Ruffin had read the written statement to the jury-interspersed with his testimony as to which portions were true and which were false  he was asked whether he had been harassed before giving the written statement to the police. Ruffin said that he had. Ruffin admitted that he had initialed the statement. He did not recall having been read his rights. According to Ruffin, Detective Muse told him at the time that the written statement would not be used against him. By then, his counsel's examination concerning the inadmissible written statement, originally introduced as part of the government's case-in-chief, had taken up fourteen pages of the transcript. Ruffin was also cross-examined by counsel for his codefendant, Officer Shaw, who was in an adversarial role due to Ruffin's testimony that Shaw beat the victim with a gun after Ruffin's fight with Wilson had ended. Again, the written statement was frequently brought to the attention of the jury. Ruffin's testimony concerning the death of Wilson was measured against his written statement. He was asked several further questions which required him to refer directly to the statement. This exchange occupied four pages of the transcript. The court then recessed because it was late in the day. The following day, Ruffin was cross-examined by the prosecutor. He recounted once more his effort to locate Wilson in the building after leaving his sister's apartment and described their confrontation at the top of the stairs. The prosecutor, in an suggestive attempt to prove that Ruffin had acted with the malice required to convict of second-degree murder, and not in self-defense or upon adequate provocation, drew from the previous day's testimony, in which Ruffin had contradicted a critical admission in the involuntary, inadmissible, written statement: THE PROSECUTOR: Now this, according to you, was an old family friend. You had no animosity whatever. Is that right? RUFFIN: Yes, sir. Q. And all you wanted to do was talk to him? A. Yes, sir. Q. You didn't stop three or four steps away to say Clifford, come on down!? A. No, sir. At the time he was running. Q. He turned around. He stopped and turned around? A. Yes, sir. Q. You didn't stop a few feet away from him and say Clifford, come on downstairs!? A. At the time I started to make a statement and before I could make a statement that's when he kicked me. . . . . Q. You weren't intending to fight at all? A. Yes, sir. Q. You were saying, Hey, Cliff, come on downstairs and let's talk about this! That's what you started to say? A. Not exactly that. Q. What exactly were you starting to say? A. I was gonna ask him to come back down to talk with my sister and me to see what happened. Q. You weren't mad at him were you? A. I was upset. I wouldn't say I was exactly mad at him. Q. You thought that this man had raped your sister. A. At this time, yes, sir. Q. But you were mad? RUFFIN: [No response.] THE PROSECUTOR: I didn't hear the answer. THE COURT: He hasn't answered. [Emphasis added.] Before Ruffin left the witness stand, the prosecutor quizzed him for a further eight pages concerning the written statement. The prosecutor attacked Ruffin's credibility by focusing on the conflict in the testimony as to whether Ruffin had been subject to harassment by the police before giving the statement. The prosecutor then used the written statement again to impeach Ruffin's testimony, from the previous day, that his responses had been falsely recorded by the police: According to you, Detective Muse and Detective Dyson typed up the wrong names and the wrong times and everything else wrong with the statement? Ruffin responded, I believe some of the things were wrong, yes, sir. The prosecutor proceeded to establish that Detectives Muse and Dyson had had no prior contact with Ruffin and no motive to lie. The exchange continued: THE PROSECUTOR: And yet it is your testimony that Detective Dyson and Detective Muse are making this all up? Is that right? RUFFIN: Only thing I can say is my statement is not correct. Q. Did you read the statement before you signed it? A. No, sir. The prosecutor handed Ruffin the written statement, Government Exhibit 27, and continued: Q. That is your statement that you gave, isn't it? A. I guess so. I didn't see the statement. Q. Well, let me point down to the bottom of the page  the bottom of the first page. That is your signature down there, isn't it? A. Yes, sir. Q. Up at the top of the page where you  where it says that you have been advised of your rights, that you are not under arrest, and you are advised of several other rights, didn't you  the initials are on there? A. Not pertaining to that, no, sir. Q. Your initials are right there next to that? The advising of rights section? A. It is next to it. But it don't mean it is pertaining to that. Q. You put your initials there? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you signed your name on the bottom? A. Yes, sir. . . . . Q. You did sign the third page, didn't you? A. Yes, sir. Q. And your statement says that it was started at two thirty-nine in the afternoon, doesn't it? A. That's what it stated. Q. 1439 hours and it ended at three forty-eight? A. Yes, sir. Q. And they made that up too? A. I would guess so. Q. None of the stuff in here is accurate? A. I would say ... [Defense Counsel's objection sustained.] Q. So it is your testimony that Detective Dyson masquerading as Clarence Muse wrote down the parts in there that he wanted to write down and changed your words whenever he wanted? A. I don't recall seeing Detective Muse so I don't know. Q. You didn't say that you didn't like Clifford Wilson? A. No, sir. Q. So they are just making all that up? RUFFIN: [ No response. ] [Defense Counsel's objection sustained.] [Emphasis added.] Just a few questions later, the prosecutor rested his cross-examination. [He had extensively impeached Ruffin's credibility through the inadmissible written statement. Perhaps even more devastating, the conflict between Ruffin's testimony and the inadmissible written statement undermined his insistence that Wilson was a friend. To the contrary, the prosecutor skillfully used the written statement to prove the malice which was a required ingredient of Ruffin's second-degree murder conviction. In the hands of the prosecutor, the written statement effectively discredited Ruffin's alternative defenses of self-defense and adequate provocation, both of which the government had the burden to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt. On redirect, in order to rehabilitate Ruffin's earlier testimony, his defense counsel was obliged to continue the focus on the written statement and the circumstances under which it was taken. That effort at rehabilitation] evidently failed to convince the jury.