WILLIAM P. RAINEY

having been first duly sworn to speak the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, then testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MR. FOGLEMAN:

Q: Will you please state your name?

A: William P. Rainey.

Q: What is your occupation?

A: I'm an elected official, Crittenden County. I'm a municipal judge for West Memphis and Crittenden County, and I also have a private law practice.

Q: I want to show you State's Exhibits One and Two which is Affidavit for Search Warrant and Search Warrant and ask if you can identify those documents?

A: (EXAMINING) Exhibit One is the Affidavit for Search Warrant involving Damien Wayne Echols dated June 3, 1993.

Q: Is that a Search Warrant that you issued?

[000991]


A: Well, I haven't gotten to the Search Warrant yet. The Affidavit is many, many pages in the document, which were attached to this, most of those bearing my initial and date.

Exhibit Two is a Search Warrant which sprang forth from the Affidavit of Search Warrant as I previously described. It is dated --

Q: Did Bryn Ridge sign the Affidavit in your presence?

A: Yes, he did.

Q: Did you acknowledge his signature?

A: Yes, I did on the Affidavit.

Q: I want to show you what has been introduced as State's Exhibits Three and Four and ask if you can identify those documents?

A: (EXAMINING) Exhibit Three is an Affidavit for Search Warrant involving Charles Jason Baldwin dated June 3, 1993.

Exhibit Four is the Search Warrant that sprang forth from that Affidavit. The Affidavit -- Exhibit Three was attested to by Officer B. Ridge and I signed that, and Officer Ridge signed that in front of me, and I acknowledged his signature. And it is also dated on June third of '93.

Q: Referring to June third, do you remember approximately what time you were first contacted with regard to the possibility of the need for your presence to sign either search warrants or arrest warrant?

A: It was late in the afternoon, and it seems like to me it

[000992]


was four or four-thirty, sometime in that timeframe. I think Officer Ridge had initially called my home. I was still at the office. I received a call from my wife that Officer Ridge was looking for me at about the same time that Officer Ridge called my office and told me they were in the process of preparing Affidavits, that they would need my presence and wanted to know if I was going to be available.

Shortly after that, I went to the police station, went upstairs to Officer Gitchell's office where I think I met you and Mr. Hale, and there were some other law enforcement personnel in the room.

At that time I was advised of the situation, was told that y'all were in the process of putting together the Affidavit for warrant. I made some initial inquiries as to some of the detail at that time that you intended to place in the Affidavit and was told for some reason it was going to be an hour or so before everything would be typed and ready to go in and at that time I announced that it was getting close to dinner time, that I could see that it may take a while, considerable length of time to get this all coordinated and put together and for y'all to call me at home. Otherwise I thought that I would be back around 6:30.

Q: Did you go home and eat dinner?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you return?

A: About 6:30, yeah. I think I went back upstairs to the

[000993]


office where I had initially saw you and Mr. Hale and placed a call for the clerk that she needed to be available.

I went out of the room. I think I went down to the court offices at that time, and over a period of time I was in and out of the building waiting on y'all to finish up the paper work for presentation.

Q: Did you have any -- or what participation, if any, did you have in the preparation of Affidavit for Search Warrant?

A: I had no participation in the preparation of the Affidavits. I had no participation whatsoever in the preparation. I read the Affidavits as closely as possible. I initialed many of these pages and dated them. I made inquiries that all evidence that had been presented to me was properly bound and marked and attached to the Affidavit and corresponding Search Warrants. I wanted to be sure that everything coincided. There were three, at least two, being prepared and a third one being prepared also pretty much simultaneously, and I was concerned that some evidence -- that all the exhibits were in the proper order under the proper party's name.

Q: Did you at any time give any advice to the police department as to what things they needed to put into the Affidavit?

A: Only advice I gave is that, "You be sure you have got everything you have done on this Affidavit. Are you sure that is everything that is applicable to this case." At that point I

[000994]


reviewed it. I didn't want to have to review some and stop and review it again.

CROSS EXAMINATION

BY MR. FORD:

Q: I'm going to show you a document marked and received for purposes of this hearing only as Defendant's Exhibit One and ask you were you ever shown that document to review prior to the issuance of this warrant?

MR. FOGLEMAN: Your Honor, we will stipulate that that wasn't shown to him because it hadn't been prepared.

BY MR. FORD:

Q: So you don't recall seeing it?

A: At that time, no.

Q: Today is the first time you have ever seen it?

A: As far as read this transcript, yeah. As far as this specific transcript, yeah.

Q: Judge Rainey, did anyone involved from the State of Arkansas -- respective police and attorneys, et cetera -- did they ever play you any tape recorded statements prior to the issuance of the warrant?

A: I know that Officer Ridge summarized the statements that were made, and I believe that -- it seems like when we were in the courtroom offices, that the tape was made available.

Q: Did you listen to it?

[000995]


A: Yes, I listened to it.

Q: When you issued the warrant at 10:00 p.m. that evening -- nine to ten o'clock -- was that the first -- immediately prior to the issuance of that warrant -- was that the first time you ever read the statement of Jessie Misskelley which is attached to all these documents, or did you by chance read it when you were there around four or four-thirty or six-thirty -- at any time did you read that statement?

A: Well, let's, you're talking about this Affidavit?

Q: No, sir, I'm talking about the statement of Mr. Misskelley that would be contained in both the Affidavit and in the Search Warrant which is in all four state's exhibits, Exhibit B of the internal exhibits.

A: You said Exhibit B?

Q: Page nine of Exhibit B. Did you ever have a chance to read that statement at any time prior to the nine o'clock hour when the warrant was issued?

A: Well, it would have been at the time -- I can't say exactly what time I started reading all of this. As far as Exhibit Three is concerned, we finished up at approximately 9:50 and, yes, I read the statement as presented to me -- I think it is page nine through thirty-five. I initialed the front page of that. My initials appear on the right-hand bottom, yeah.

Q: There are some statements -- they also put these fellows under oath and asked them some questions. One of the things you

[000996]


asked them about was you had some concern about some discrepancies of the time in Mr. Misskelley's statement versus the time that you were made aware that these homicides were to have occurred. Is that correct?

A: Yes, there were some initial discrepancies that I had questions about concerning some times. Yeah, there were.

Q: Did it happen this way -- you read the statement, have some concerns about some of the statements that were made and whether they were accurate or not, or whether you thought everything was in good order and said, "I don't know. Maybe you need to have a few more things." And then this second statement was taken because it is titled, "Second Interview Conducted to Clarify Previous Statements."

My question is: Had you read that first statement, realized there was some concerns --

A: No. That's not the case because when I inquired of this, I was told there was a second statement and it had been cleared up, and that they were in the process of typing up the second statement. But I inquired and it was pointed out to me that there was an additional statement that had cleared up that question.

Q: Judge Rainey, I think probably to cut to the chase, the reason they asked you to come here today was because Officer Ridge came and testified that he had an opportunity to visit with you in the municipal court clerk's office in the afternoon,

[000997]


and his words were in essence, "He told me what needed to be in there. I went and got it and when it got it I brought it back to him and he issued the warrant."

Did you make any suggestions, any detail, did you tell them what had to be in this Affidavit?

A: No, sir. I never told anyone what had to be in this Affidavit because -- what did you say that Officer Ridge said -- that I met with him that afternoon?

Q: In the afternoon and he said around four o'clock which would coincide with the time you first arrived, and that you told him what needed to be in there and when he went and got it and came back, you issued the warrant. That is what he says occurred, and it's our concern today that that didn't occur.

A: So what is your question?

Q: Did that occur?

A: No. I never met with Officer Ridge and told him, "You must have A, B, C, D, E." Did I speak with Officer Ridge? I probably did, and I wanted him to be sure that all documentation was presented to me in an orderly fashion and that I would be available to review it when it was ready. As far as me telling him, "You need this, this and this," no.

Q: What do you recall being presented to you as the basis for this search being conducted at night?

A: The fact that -- well, I have not reviewed this since June and the situation I have tried to put out of my mind since that

[000998]


time, but as memory will allow me the close relationship between the alleged perpetrators, the fact that the evidence possibly could be removed or destroyed if it is not attempted to be gathered immediately, that you had three parties who had been in close contact with each other and would be very available to converse with each other and the overall circumstances of the type of crime that this was, the obvious violent nature of it, I felt that there was good cause shown to issue the warrant to be executed at night.

Q: Were you aware at the time that you issued the warrant that Mr. Misskelley had already been in custody approximately twelve hours?

A: I didn't know the number of hours that he had been, but I recall seeing his father at the police station around four o'clock when I was there.

Q: Wasn't it the basis that if the other boys knew that one of their close-knit groups of friends was in custody that they would go and destroy these things?

A: Certainly that was one train of thought, yes.

Q: Did they submit anything to you in writing, did they submit --

A: Who is "they?"

Q: Police department, prosecutor's office -- did they submit anything to you in writing or in tape from anybody to indicate that their investigation had revealed that these boys were

[000999]


involved in such a close-knit cult group?

A: Yeah, that was discussed with me, that they had close association. The information that Mr. Misskelley gave concerning the event that alleged to have transpired there in the woods were very credible based upon other evidence given that I recall. The totality of the circumstances certainly warranted that. I found it implausible that one person could have carried out such an act on three individuals and, therefore, I felt that there was more than one person involved with it that added credence to this statement that Mr. Misskelley had given.

Q: Because there's more than one person involved, does that necessarily connote that a nighttime search is necessary?

A: Under these circumstances it did, taking into consideration the communication factor that was certainly available to all parties alleged to have been involved.

Q: Was your entire though process for issuance of the warrant contained in the testimony given to you by Officers Gitchell and Ridge and the documents which were submitted to you in the Affidavit -- was that the entirety of it?

A: Yeah, that's what it was based upon. It was based upon the facts presented and not based upon any speculation or conjecture. It was based upon the facts presented to me that night.

THE COURT: You had both a written Affidavit and

[001000]


prepared documents, which you indicated to be some forty-five pages in length. You took additional oral testimony -- State's Exhibit Five -- and that was preserved?

THE WITNESS: Yes.

THE COURT: So it was based upon the oral testimony together with affidavits and attached exhibits?

THE WITNESS: Yes, and as far as these -- the time factor on these Affidavits -- to say that I set down and started -- many of the documents involved in one Affidavit were quite similar to others, and they all coincided, and to say that I read through one batch and signed it and read through the others -- it did not happen that way. I started reading all of information put before me, and I would put it in this stack, and there were be some come in here, and I would put it in that stack. But the times that these warrants were signed, those are accurate times in which I actually signed those particular warrants.

CROSS EXAMINATION

BY MR. PRICE:

Q: Judge Rainey, according to your knowledge, did Detective Ridge ever tell you if Jessie Misskelley Senior, the father of Jessie Junior, had signed Jessie's Miranda waiver rights form?

[001001]


A: Did he tell me that?

Q: Right. You might want to refer to pages nine and ten.

A: (EXAMINING) You're asking me did --

Q: On refreshing your recollection on pages nine and ten, it discusses about how Jessie Junior signed a Miranda waiver rights form, correct?

A: Okay.

Q: Is there any reference in the typed up transcript of his father signing the rights form?

A: I don't think there is.

Q: Do you recall independently if any detective ever told you if his father signed a rights form?

A: I recall asking a question about Mr. Misskelley. I commented that I had seen him there, and it seems that I was told that Mr. Misskelley Senior had agreed --

MR. STIDHAM: Your Honor, if he's going to say what I think he's going to say, I'm going to object.

MR. PRICE: I specifically limited it to that question.

THE WITNESS: Well, you asked the question, and I thought I needed to answer it.

THE COURT: Specifically answer with regard to the statement itself -- nothing else -- if you know.

THE WITNESS: I was satisfied that the father was involved. That's as far as my recollection can carry

[001002]


me.

BY MR. PRICE:

Q: Besides the documents in front of you, do you keep any other records or notes or anything concerning the Search Warrant?

A: No.

Q: Do you have a municipal court docket book that you may have made an entrance in?

A: I'm sure when the warrants are issued, we have a warrant control system that they were recorded and given numbers and all that but as far as me making any --

Q: Docket entries.

A: No.

(WITNESS EXCUSED)