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

Heading: First March 2, 2010 Interview

Text: On March 2, 2020, Cooper was arrested in Bay City. (5/5/11 TR., R. 5.13, Page ID 806; 5/6/11 Tr., R. 5.14, Page ID 820). Detectives Wehby and Scott Rzeppa began Cooper’s first custodial interview at approximately 5:10 pm that day (3/2/10 Tr., R. 1.5, Page ID 119.).2 They advised him of his constitutional rights, which he waived both verbally and in writing. (5/5/11 Tr., R. 5.13, Page ID 807; Appellee’s Br. appendices A and B, R. 5.19, Page ID 1226, 1228). Thereafter, through the course of the interview, Cooper admitted to having gone with several other individuals on three occasions to the house where McKillop’s murder had occurred. The murder, according to Cooper, took place on the third occasion. (3/2/10 Tr., R. 1.5, Page ID 12324, 135, 143). Cooper explained that the objective of the visits was to encourage Jenkins to repay the money he owed to Anderson. This was intended to be accomplished by tying Jenkins up and “maybe beat[ing] the shit out of him[.]” (Id., Page ID 123-25). On the first two visits, Jenkins was not there. Jenkins was not home during the third visit either, but unfortunately McKillop was. During the murder Cooper claimed that he had remained outside on the front porch, serving as a lookout as his peers entered the house. (Id., Page ID 128). According to Cooper he never entered the house. He further claimed that, while on the porch, he had heard argument followed by gunfire from inside the home. (Id., Page ID 128-29). A few days later, he learned that the victim had been the wrong person. (Id., Page ID 133) The detectives were skeptical that Cooper had told them everything. To “get him to admit his further involvement if he thought that we had some more information on him,” the 2Cooper’s first custodial interview was recorded and played for the jury in full. (5/5/11 TR. R. 5.14, Page ID 806-07, 09; 5/6/1111 Tr. R. 5.14, Page ID 812, 820). No. 18-1391 Cooper v. Chapman Page 7 detectives raised the specter that Cooper’s DNA may have been found on the victim. (5/6/11 Tr., R. 5.14, Page ID 821; 3/2/10 Tr., R. 1.5, Page ID 186-202). Cooper resisted this tactic, however, and insisted that he had stayed outside the house throughout the evening. (Id.) Approximately three hours into the interview, Cooper then expressed exasperation that the detectives did not believe his story: “See, that’s why I don’t want to talk to you guys about this because who do I have to collaborate [sic] anything I have to say?” (Id., Page ID 193). Shortly afterwards, the interview ended.