Jamie Rose Bolin murder trial needs jury

By Johnny Johnson

Published: February 16, 2008

NORMAN — Jury selection for the capital murder trial of Kevin Ray Underwood begins Tuesday, but before the trial opens, final housekeeping items, such as media guidelines, surprise witnesses, jury note-taking and the use of graphic crime scene photos were addressed Friday.

The 28-year-old Purcell man is accused of killing his 10-year-old neighbor, Jamie Rose Bolin, as part of what police say was a cannibalistic plot.

Underwood's slaying trial was moved from McClain County to Cleveland County due to pretrial publicity.

After overruling an oral motion Wednesday by the defense to take the death penalty off the table, District Judge Candace Blalock met with prosecutors and defense attorneys again Friday morning to hash out some final details of the Purcell man's trial.

Early in discussion, Underwood's defense attorneys told Blalock that they had issues with the sheer number of graphic crime scene photos that had been issued into evidence and that they plan to file a motion to limit the photos.

District Attorney Greg Mashburn said his office had worked to eliminate hundreds of photos and the ones that remained were crucial to the testimony that they would be offering in court.

Blalock asked that Mashburn's office go through the photos again and eliminate the use of duplicate photos of the same subject matter from different angles.

On the individual use of photos showing various wounds the 10-year-old girl received, Assistant District Attorney Susan Caswell said that a "gruesome crime scene” usually results in "gruesome photographs” but that the photos should still be admissible as evidence in court.

Blalock said she would not ask potential jurors any questions except those on the standard form allowed by the Court of Criminal Appeals.

But she also acknowledged that in a capital murder case where the death sentence is an option, both defense and prosecution might have additional questions for jurors.

"I will allow some leeway,” she said.

Both prosecutors and defense attorneys agreed neither wanted the jury to be able to take notes during the trial, and Blalock reluctantly agreed.

"We expect a lot out of our jurors,” Blalock said. "They'll just have to remember the testimony.”

Friday's legal wrangling indicated Blalock apparently ruled in closed court Wednesday that prosecutors must provide a report to the defense team about a rebuttal witness' likely testimony.

Mashburn asked Blalock on Friday to reconsider.

Defense attorneys countered that "surprise” witnesses should not be allowed and a rebuttal expert witness was, in fact, a surprise witness.

Blalock agreed with the defense, saying she remembered a time when expert rebuttal witnesses were necessary because the state did not know what defense experts were going to say.

But it's not like that anymore, she said. Today's criminal court cases are more like civil cases where both sides know what experts are going to say.

"I'm not going to give you any slack on this,” Blalock told Mashburn, explaining that he had to provide a generalized report on the testimony from the rebuttal witness.