Help us save

Leo Alexander Jones

Leo Alexander Jones is a 47 year old innocent man who sits tonight at the Florida State Prison in a 6' x 9' deathwatch cell awaiting execution on March 24, 1998. He has been on deathwatch since March 1997. By anyone's standard, this must be considered cruel and unusual punishment.

Mr. Jones became the catalyst for testing the constitutionality of the Florida State Electric chair. Execution dates came to a halt in March, until the Florida Supreme Court decision in October 1997 ruled it was not cruel nor unusual.

As a result of this fervor, Leo became embroiled in the controversy surrounding this barbarity and slipped into the shadow of the electric chair. People have overlooked the fact that he is first a Man, a Father, a Husband, a Son, a Human Being and indeed one of our God's greatest creations. He has tried valiantly for 17 years to make the Court and legal system realize that he is not guilt of this crime, but to no avail. Lady Justice seems bound and determined to exact a revenge on Leo Jones, regardless of the fact, there is ample evidence to prove that someone else is guilty. Somebody has to fall. Justice in America is predicated on race. The race of the victim, the race of the accused and the race of the Jury. If a Black man is accused of killing a white man, even as late as the 1980's it was almost a certainty that he would be convicted and sentenced to death, especially in Florida - one of the most racist places on earth! The State of Florida has and will continue to execute innocent men unless we stop them. Those who are in the decision making capacity are only elected officials, paid to enforce the laws that we as a society want. If we want to stop the death penalty, we can do it!

The following is an exerp from Mr. Jones' appeal, filed and heard before the Florida Supreme Court on February 24, 1998

STATEMENT OF THE CASE Mr. Jones was convicted of first-degree murder in the circuit court of the Fourth Judicial Circuit, Duval County, and sentenced to death. This Court affirmed on direct appeal. Jones v. State, 440 So. 2d 570 (Fla. 1983). Mr. Jones filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in this Court on February 1, 1985, and was denied on June 13, 1985. Jones v. Wainwright, 473 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 1985). On October 8, 1985, Mr. Jones filed a Rule 3.850 motion. After an evidentiary hearing on Mr. Jones' claim that his trial attorney rendered ineffective assistance, the motion was denied. The denial was affirmed by this Court. Jones v. State, 528 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 1988). On September 12, 1988, the Governor signed a death warrant, setting Mr. Jones' execution for November 14, 1988. Mr. Jones filed his second state habeas petition. Mr. Jones' state habeas petition was denied on November 10, 1988. Jones v. Dugger, 533 So. 2d 290 (Fla. 1988). On November 14, 1988, Mr. Jones filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the District Court for the Middle District of Florida. The District Court issued a stay of execution. Mr. Jones' federal habeas petition was denied on June 28, 1989, and affirmed on appeal. Jones v. Dugger, 928 F.2d 1020 (11th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 875 (1991). The Governor signed a second death warrant on October 16, 1991, setting Mr. Jones' execution for November 13, 1991. Mr. Jones filed his second Rule 3.850 motion on November 8, 1991; the motion was denied on November 10th. This Court entered a stay of execution, reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on Mr. Jones' newly discovered evidence of innocence claim. Jones v. State, 591 So. 2d 911 (Fla. 1991). The circuit court conducted an evidentiary hearing in September 1992 and denied relief on December 11, 1992. The denial was affirmed on appeal. Jones v. State, 678 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 1996). Certiorari was denied on February 24, 1997. Jones v. Florida, 117 S. Ct. 1088 (1997). On March 11, 1997, Governor Chiles signed Mr. Jones' third death warrant designating April 10 through April 17, 1997, as the warrant week. Mr. Jones' execution was scheduled for April 15, 1997. On April 3, 1997, Mr. Jones filed a petition in this Court seeking to invoke this Court's all writs jurisdiction, claiming that execution in Florida's electric chair constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. On April 10, 1997, this Court stayed Mr. Jones' execution and ordered an evidentiary hearing in circuit court. Jones v. Butterworth, 691 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 1997). Following a hearing that was held from April 15 through April 18, 1997, the circuit court denied Mr. Jones' claim. On April 21, 1997, this Court stayed Mr. Jones' execution pending further notice and scheduled oral arguments on Mr. Jones' appeal from the circuit court ruling. On May 22, 1997, this Court relinquished jurisdiction and ordered a supplemental hearing on Mr. Jones' claim that execution in Florida's electric chair constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. Jones v. Butterworth, 695 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 1997). The circuit court held a hearing from July 9 through July 15, 1997. On July 18, 1997, the circuit court denied Mr. Jones' claim. After oral arguments before this Court on September 8, 1997, this Court affirmed. Jones v. Butterworth, 701 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 1997). Mr. Jones filed a petition for writ of certiorari on January 20, 1998. On September 8, 1997, Mr. Jones filed his third Rule 3.850 motion and a motion to disqualify the trial judge, A.C. Soud, from presiding over any further proceedings in this case. In the 3.850, Mr. Jones raised claims based on Judge Soud's failure to disclose his prior representation of Mr. Jones and based upon a newly discovered eyewitness who exonerated Mr. Jones and implicated Glenn Schofield. Both motions were denied on October 8, 1997. On October 31, 1997, Governor Chiles rescheduled Mr. Jones' execution for March 24, 1998. On November 10, 1997, this Court disqualified Judge Soud and ordered that any further proceedings be conducted by Senior Judge Clarence T. Johnson. This Court also scheduled oral argument for February 6, 1998, and directed that any proceedings in the circuit court be expedited. The circuit court held a hearing from December 15 through December 18, 1997. During the hearing, Mr. Jones was permitted to orally amend the 3.850 with a Brady claim based upon Cleveland Smith's testimony. Relief was denied on December 31, 1997. This appeal follows. Oral argument in this case has was heard February 24, 1998. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS Leo Jones is innocent of the crime for which he was convicted and sentenced to death. The evidence discovered since his trial establishes that Officer Szafranski was killed by another man, namely Glenn Schofield. Mr. Jones has presented testimony that Mr. Schofield has confessed to killing Officer Szafranski on twelve separate occasions. These confessions are corroborated by the testimony of five witnesses who saw Mr. Schofield on the night of the shooting. Their testimony further incriminates him as the man who killed Officer Szafranski.On September 8, 1997, Mr. Jones filed his third Rule 3.850 motion presenting more newly discovered evidence of his innocence. During the evidentiary hearing, he was permitted to orally amend the 3.850 with a newly discovered Brady claim based on the testimony of Cleveland Smith. All of the new evidence is consistent with that presented at both the 1986 and 1992 evidentiary hearings and provides additional support for the admission of Mr. Schofield's hearsay confessions as substantive evidence. This motion to vacate also included a judicial bias claim based on newly discovered evidence that Judge Soud had represented Mr. Jones in 1969, that he failed to make the appropriate disclosure in 1981, and that, as a result, Mr. Jones was denied his right to a fair trial. At the December 1997 hearing, Mr. Jones presented witnesses who testified that, in the years since Mr. Jones' conviction, Mr. Schofield has confessed to Officer Szafranski's murder.1 Mr. Jones also presented previously unavailable witnesses who saw Mr. Schofield on the night of Officer Szafranski's death whose testimony lends additional support to Mr. Jones' argument that he is innocent of this crime. One of these witnesses, Roy Williams, aka "Shorty," is the only known eyewitness to Officer Szafranski's murder. Mr. Jones also presented Cleveland Smith, a retired Jacksonville police officer, who testified that about a week prior to the Szafranski shooting the police who patrolled the area where Officer Szafranski was shot were instructed to do everything in their power to get Jones in jail. Former Deputy Smith also testified that Officer Mundy, the arresting officer, bragged for years about beating the confession out of Mr. Jones and that he entered Mr. Jones' apartment with the intent of killing whomever he found inside. Mr. Jones also presented the testimony of Chief Assistant Public Defender Bill White, who testified that Detective Hugh "Eason had witnessed L.F. Mundy beating Leo Jones and had to pull him off. He also told me if I ever told anyone that, that he would deny it if he took the stand." (H. 1143). At a 1991 hearing concerning Mr. Jones' motion to vacate and request for a stay of execution, the State admitted that the evidence then available, if presented to a jury, "might create a debatable question" about Mr. Jones' guilt (Transcript of November 10, 1991, Hearing, p. 59). The evidence supporting Mr. Jones' innocence now does more than "create a debatable question" or even a reasonable doubt. This evidence definitively proves that Mr. Jones is innocent and that he is facing imminent execution for a crime he did not commit. BACKGROUND Mr. Jones was convicted and sentenced to death for the May 23, 1981, murder of Jacksonville police officer Thomas Szafranski. The murder occurred in Jacksonville at the intersection of Sixth and Davis Streets at about 1:00 a.m.2 Officer Szafranski was driving the third of a trio of police cars leaving a hostage situation near Fifth and Lee Streets (R. 708-09). The police were travelling east on Sixth toward Davis where they planned to turn left and travel north toward University Hospital (R. 709-10). Numerous police officers converged on the scene immediately after the shooting (R. 739); however, they were unable to find any eyewitnesses to the shooting. Some people in the area directed the police to a building immediately south of the Sixth and Davis intersection (R. 743). Other witnesses testified at the trial that the shot originated from the vacant lot just north of that building (R. 1162, 1172, 1193 Police, led by Officer Mundy, began searching the building, and, in an upstairs apartment, they found Mr. Jones and his cousin Bobby Hammonds, who were taken into custody and transported to thePolice Memorial Building shortly after one a.m. Mr. Hammonds told the police that he and Mr. Jones hadnothing to do with the shooting, while Mr. Jones remained silent (R. 1104-05; 1093-94).4 Between five and six a.m., Mr. Jones and Mr. Hammonds were taken to University Hospital for treatment of injuries sustained while in police custody (R. 1095). Detective Eason testified that Mr. Jones had only "slight injuries" and that he was taken to the hospital only as a "precautionary measure" (R. 1095). Detective Eason described Mr. Jones' injuries: "Leo Jones had an ear -- some blood trickling from his ear, or it had dried up. He had a bruise on his head and I want to say that he had a busted lip, but I don't remember exactly. It was bruised or something." (R. 1103). However, according to the treating physician, Mr. Jones was at the hospital for an hour and a half and received a full physical examination as well as x-rays (R. 1299, 1305). Officer Mundy testified that Mr. Jones' injuries were inflicted at his apartment when he resisted arrest; however, the testimony on this subject fails to account for injuries serious enough to warrant x-rays four to five hours later. Officer Mundy testified that while he was in the apartment, he heard "scuffling" and noticed Mr. Jones fighting with Officers Butler and Torrible (R. 792).5 Officer Torrible testified that he did not recall Officer Mundy hitting Mr. Jones; he explained that "[i]t wasn't much of a scuffle, it was -- he [Jones] was immediately subdued." (R. 980-81).6 Officer Butler did not testify. H. Randolph Fallin had been retained by Leroy Clark, Mr. Jones' brother, to represent Mr. Jones. Mr. Fallin contacted Detective Frank Japour at approximately five a.m. to inform the police that he represented Mr. Jones and that his client should not be questioned outside his presence (Transcript of 1986 Evidentiary Hearing, pp. 203-04). While they indicated to Mr. Fallin that they understood his request, the police ignored it and continued to question Mr. Jones (Id.). Mr. Fallin arrived at the police station at about nine a.m. but was denied access to Mr. Jones until after the confession had been signed at about noon, after almost eleven hours in police custody (Id. at 205). That confession, which was written by Detective Hugh Eason, contains no details of the crime and indicates that the shots were fired from either "a gun or rifle" (R.1098-1101).7 The only evidence against Mr. Jones at trial was his presence in the Davis Street apartment, the presence of guns in the apartment, Bobby Hammonds' testimony which had previously and has subsequently been recanted,8 and Mr. Jones' confession which he later retracted. Mr. Hammonds testified that Mr. Jones left the apartment carrying a rifle shortly after one a.m., that he heard a shot ten or fifteen minutes later, and that Mr. Jones returned to the apartment still carrying a rifle (R. 914-18). In his closing statement, the StateAttorney referred to Mr. Hammonds' testimony as "the strongest testimony we've got." (R. 1459).9 The State presented evidence to support its theory about Mr. Jones' motive in shooting Officer Szafranski. For example, Officer Ritchey testified that he was present on May 16, 1981, when Mr. Jones was arrested for making an illegal left turn and heard him make threats against the police: "[h]e stated he was tired of the police hassling him, that the police weren't the only ones that had guns and that he was going to shoot him a mother-fucking pig." (R. 1142, 1150). Mr. Jones was not charged with making threats against the police that night, and the police reports detailing the arrest make no mention of any threats allegedly made by Mr. Jones (Id.). The only evidence of this statement, aside from the arresting officer's testimony, is an internal police memorandum from Officer Ritchey to Detective Eason that is dated May 23, 1981, a full week after the incident allegedly occurred.10 This memo states only that "Jones made numerous threats about getting even with the police." Clearly, this memorandum was written after Officer Szafranski's shooting and Mr. Jones' arrest in order to create highly prejudicial motive evidence against Mr. Jones. In addition, during Detective Eason's testimony regarding the questioning of Mr. Jones on May 23, 1981, he attributed the following statement to Mr. Jones: "I'm tired of being fucked with. I go to the store and I'm fucked with, I go down the street, I'm fucked with, my friends are fucked with, my family is fucked with, and I'm tired of policemen fucking with me and I decided I'd kill a policeman and that's why I did it." (R. 1101). Detective Eason did not write this statement in his notes, or even include it in the confession he wrote for Mr. Jones to sign, because he "did not see any need to at that time." (R. 1119).11 The State also presented evidence implicating Mr. Jones in another shooting at a police officer at the same location one week earlier. Officer Mundy testified about the May 18, 1981, shooting at Officer Scott Carter whose car was hit at the same intersection where Officer Szafranski later died (R. 880-81). Because he was not hit, Officer Carter did not stop his car in the intersection, so the triangulation that was later done was unreliable because the police could only estimate the car's location when the shots were fired (R. 859). Officer Mundy testified that he did a triangulation and determined that the shot that hit Officer Carter's car originated in the vacant apartment across from the intersection (R. 881). Although Judge Soud conceded that "maybe [the triangulation calculations] weren't all that accurate," he admitted the testimony to explain why Officer Mundy immediately went to that apartment building when he arrived at the scene of Officer Szafranski's shooting (R. 862-63).12 Significantly, Officer Mundy's own drawings of the triangulation of the bullet that hit Officer Carter's car pinpoint the building next to the one in which Mr. Jones lived, contrary to his testimony at Mr. Jones' trial that the bullet came from the vacant apartment in Mr. Jones' building. Officer Mundy never entered Mr. Jones' building on the occasion of Officer Carter's shooting and he was not listed as a suspect in police notes.13 The State presented a two-sentence confession that Eason testified he obtained from Leo Jones. This confession was admitted over the defense objection that Leo Jones had been beaten and had signed the confession in fear for his life (R. 1097). Officer Mundy and Detective Eason testified that Jones was not beaten, that his injuries were minor and were a result of Jones attempting to flee (R. 1095). Leo Jones testified at trial and explained that he had been beaten and signed the confession out of fear for his life (R. 1237, 1245). Mr. Jones testified that the guns in his apartment belonged to Glenn Schofield (R. 1214). Mr. Hammonds testified at trial that Mr. Schofield was in Mr. Jones' apartment that night and that he left shortly after midnight; Mr. Hammonds testified that Mr. Schofield left by the front door leading directly onto the porch and that he was carrying a gun (R. 914-15).14 Ballistics tests could not link the bullet recovered from the scene with any of the guns in Mr. Jones' apartment (R. 1048). The results of the neutron activation test performed on Mr. Jones' hands to determine whether he had recently fired a gun were negative (R. 1074-75). A witness who lived on the first floor of the next apartment building testified that he heard running through the alley between the two buildings immediately after the shots were fired, implying that Officer Szafranski's killer fled the scene (R. 1193). Glenn Schofield was a suspect in Officer Szafranski's murder from the beginning. Mr. Hammonds and Mr. Jones both testified that Mr. Schofield had been in the apartment that night, and this testimony was unrefuted. On May 24, 1981, Detective Eason began looking for Mr. Schofield. His notes indicate that he made the following effort: The writer ran an N.C.I.C. Check on the subject Glen Schofield on 5-25-81 and found that he was wanted for Violation of Probation. The writer obtained photographs of the suspect and had a Police Bulletin with the description of the suspect and information in regards to this writer wanting to talk with the suspect concerning the shooting of Officer Szafranski distributed throughout the Sheriff's Office and through the State of Florida. Significantly, Detective Eason made these efforts to find Mr. Schofield after Mr. Jones had signed a confession that did not even mention Mr. Schofield, and he continued to investigate Mr. Schofield as a suspect even after the grand jury indicted Mr. Jones. Mr. Schofield gave two different alibis: he told Detective Eason in 1981 that he was with his girlfriend Patricia Ferrell and he told Lou Eliopulos, an investigator for Mr. Jones' clemency attorney, in 1984 that he was with Marion Manning and "Shorty." Ms. Ferrell, now Owens, testified in 1992 that Mr. Schofield was not with her that night but that he later asked her to provide an alibi for him and that he later confessed to Officer Szafranski's murder. Ms. Manning has confirmed that she was with Mr. Schofield and "Shorty" on the night of the murder, but her testimony incriminates rather than exonerates Mr. Schofield. And Roy "Shorty" Williams has testified that Mr. Schofield was there with the rifle at the time of the shooting. Mr. Schofield has now been incriminated by all of his alibi witnesses. THE EVIDENTIARY HEARINGS Mr. Jones has filed three Rule 3.850 motions and has had three evidentiary hearings. Proper analysis of Mr. Jones' current 3.850 requires consideration of all the evidence cumulatively. That evidence includes twelve independent confessions by Mr. Schofield that he killed Officer Szafranski, as well as five witnesses who saw him on the night of the murder. The scope of the first hearing in 1986 was limited to trial counsel's ineffectiveness; however, important witnesses testified then. Their testimony must be considered now.15 In 1992, Mr. Jones' witnesses testified about Mr. Schofield's activity on the night of Officer Szafranski's death and his numerous confessions in the years since Mr. Jones' conviction. Again in 1997, Mr. Jones presented newly discovered evidence of his innocence, including an eyewitness who saw Mr. Schofield shoot Officer Szafranski, additional witnesses who saw Mr. Schofield on the night of the crime, and inmates to whom Mr. Schofield has confessed. In addition, Mr. Jones presented the testimony of Cleveland Smith, a retired Jacksonville police officer, who testified that Officer Mundy, the arresting officer, bragged about beating the confession out of Mr. Jones. In addition, Mr. Smith testified that shortly before Mr. Jones' arrest, the police who patrolled the Davis Street area had been instructed to do everything in their power to get Mr. Jones in prison. Mr. Smith also explained that Mundy was known to have falsified police reports and beaten confessions out of other suspects. Mr. Smith was also proffered with reference to his knowledge of Detective Eason. Bill White, the Chief Assistant Public Defender in Jacksonville, testified to his conversation with Detective Eason after Eason was forced out of the Sheriff's Department over an alleged conspiracy to commit murder. Bill White testified that Eason told him that he, Eason, had to pull Mundy off Leo Jones, but that if he, Eason, were ever asked under oath, he would deny making such an admission to Mr. White. Finally, Mr. Jones presented Alberta Brown who testified about Judge Soud's representation of Mr. Jones in 1968 and her involvement in the bribery of the judge who reduced Mr. Jones' sentence. When considered cumulatively, as required by this Court's opinion in State v. Gunsby, this evidence presents a compelling argument for Mr. Jones' innocence and establishes that if this evidence had been available at his trial the outcome would have been different. Counsel for Mr. Jones called Mr. Schofield as his first witness at the 1997 hearing. Mr. Schofield invoked his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent and requested that he be assigned an attorney (H.141-42). After consulting with Charles Willmott, Mr. Schofield testified on December 16, 1997. Glenn Schofield admitted in 1997, as he had in 1981 and 1984, that he was in the Davis Street area on the night of Officer Szafranski's death. On June 2, 1981, he was interviewed by Detective Hugh Eason whose homicidecontinuation report reveals that Mr. Schofield provided the following information: Sc[h]ofield stated that he was at the house of Leo Alexander Jones on the night of the shooting and he had gone over to transact some business. He stated that he was a drug dealer for Jones and that they had exchanged some drugs and money on the night of May 22, 1981, but he had left before the shooting occurred. He stated that he had overheard Leo Jones talking about "being fucked with by the Police" and that he was going to "waste a Policeman." He stated this statement was heard approximately a week before the Policeman was shot and he was talking to a black male by the name of Stanley. (Def. Exh. 7). At the 1997 hearing, Mr. Schofield had no memory of talking with anyone from the Duval County Sheriff's Department while he was in the hospital following his arrest in St. Johns County (H. 545, 548). During the course of his testimony, he would periodically deny ever talking to the police about the Szafranski shooting, but then clarify that the police possibly talked to him during their investigation (H. 606-07). Mr. Schofield initially claimed that he could not remember ever telling the police that he was at Mr. Jones' apartment on the night of the shooting (H. 547). However, his later testimony directly contradicts this professed lack of memory: "I talked with a police officer. They wanted to know why I was at Leo Jones' apartment and I told them I was there. I was there to pick up some heroin and that's why I was there." (H. 608). Mr. Schofield's testimony was also inconsistent regarding whether he had given the police a sworn statement or ever confessed to being a drug dealer. Mr. Schofield initially claimed that he had no memory of Detective Eason asking him to give a sworn statement (H. 549). Mr. Schofield also denied that he would ever tell the police he was a drug dealer (H. 547, 592). However, when confronted with Detective Eason's report indicating that he had in fact made this admission, Mr. Schofield testified that he had told Eason that he was picking up heroin at Mr. Jones' apartment but only because he "was under oath. Had to tell them the truth." (H. 608). Mr. Schofield's explanation of the circumstances of this sworn statement contradicts his earlier testimony that he had no memory of Detective Eason's request for a sworn statement: Q Earlier this morning you indicated that you would never have told the police that you were dealing drugs? A- I said I would never tell them under oath. Q -You just now said you would tell them under oath? A -That's right. I told them under oath. But I wouldn't tell them without being under oath, just volunteer I'm dealing drugs. But under oath, yeah, I'll tell them the truth if I'm under oath. Q -So, you're saying that the police officer put you under oath and you told him you were dealing drugs? A -What you mean? You said -- the stenographer was there. The lady was there with the same thing. Q -You remember that? A -Yeah, she was there. That was under oath. That's the only way you can be under oath. Q -And you remember giving a statement with the stenographer present under oath? A -Yes. (H. 609-10). Mr. Schofield testified that he gave someone from the Duval County Sheriff's Office a sworn statement before a stenographer when he was transported back to Jacksonville after attempting to escape from the St. Johns County Hospital (H. 609-10). Counsel for Mr. Jones has never received a sworn statement from Mr. Schofield, and Assistant State Attorney Angela Corey Lee told the court and counsel that no such statement exists (H. 638). Obviously, Glenn Schofield's testimony was false in this regard. Mr. Schofield's testimony is also rebutted by Detective Eason's report which indicates that Mr. Schofield did in fact "volunteer" that he was a drug dealer and that he was not under oath when he provided this incriminating information (Def. Exh. 7).16 Despite the entry in Detective Eason's report indicating that when he was questioned about the murder Mr. Schofield attempted to incriminate Mr. Jones, Mr. Schofield denied ever telling the police that he had heard Mr. Jones say he was going to kill a police officer (H. 592). In fact, Mr. Schofield testified that this conversation never took place: "Once again, me and Leo have never talked or had a conversation about killing no police officer, about no police officer at all." (H. 611). Mr. Schofield also testified that he knew nothing about Officer Szafranski's murder and that he never talked to the police without first talking to his lawyer (H. 549). He insisted that if the police ever questioned him about the case, he would simply say that he knew nothing (H. 607). All of this testimony is contradicted by Detective Eason's report. Detective Eason's report indicates that he and Detective Ralph Moneyhun returned to the St. Johns County Hospital on June 3, 1981, to interview Mr. Schofield again.17 The report states that Mr. Schofield "gave Ralph Moneyhun the same information that he had given me concerning the shooting at 4th and Davis." However, Mr. Schofield also provided additional information concerning his own activity on the night of the shooting: The writer also received information from Glen Sc[h]ofield that his girlfriend's name was Patricia Ferrell and the following numbers are numbers that we could possibly get in touch with her in case we needed her in the investigation at a later date: xxx-xxxx - this is the telephone number of Glen Sc[h]ofield's sister who lives at xxxx xxxxx Street, apartment xxx, xxx-xxxx - this is the number of Glen Sc[h]ofield's step-mother and father, xxx-xxxx - this is the number of Pat Ferrell's father's house at xxx xxx Street. (Def. Exh. 7). Mr. Schofield testified that he told the police he was with Ms. Ferrell on the night of Officer Szafranski's death; he also testified that it was possible that he gave the police Ms. Ferrell's phone number so that his alibi could be verified (H. 545-46). However, Patricia Ferrell (then Owens) testified in 1992 that Mr. Schofield was not with her on the night of Officer Szafranski's death. In fact, her testimony reveals that Mr. Schofield tried to establish a false alibi for that night in anticipation of questioning by the police. Ms. Owens saw Mr. Schofield on the morning of May 24, 1981. She testified: A -When he walked in, he said, Pat, if anybody want to know where I was, tell them I was with you. This is what he said. Q -And did you say anything to him? A -Yes. . . . Q -And then what did you say to him? A- I had asked him about the police officer. This is what I asked him. Q -And what did he say? A -And he said that do I think that he was going to say anything to go to prison for the rest of his life. This is what he said to me. Q -In response to your inquiry about the police officer? A -Yes. (Transcript of 1992 Evidentiary Hearing, pp. 215-16). Ms. Owens explained that "[f]rom when he left and while I did not see him, he wanted me to say that he was with me. This is what he meant." (Id. at 217). Mr. Schofield denied telling Ms. Owens to say that he was with her on the night of the murder and also denied that he ever talked to her about the Szafranski murder (H. 591, 603). Detective Eason's report indicates that on June 4, 1981, he spoke with Assistant State Attorney Ralph Greene about the interviews with Mr. Schofield and that Mr. Greene instructed him to get a sworn statement from Mr. Schofield (Def. Exh. 7). Detective Eason's entry for June 9, 1981, indicates that he attempted to do so: The writer, along with Stenographer, Harriet Cohen, returned to St. Johns County Hospital in an attempt to get a sworn statement from Glen Sc[h]ofield, but his attorney Greg Williams, talked with this writer over the telephone and advised that his client Sc[h]ofield was not going to give this writer a sworn statement on this date, but would get back with me on a later date. (Id.). Later that day, Detective Eason made the final entry in the homicide continuation report: Due to the circumstances surrounding this case and the fact that the suspect, Leo Alexander Jones, has been apprehended and arrested and charged with the murder of Officer Szafranski, this writer suggests that this case be cleared by arrest. (Id.). Also later on the same day that the police requested a sworn statement, Mr. Schofield attempted to escape from the St. Johns County Hospital.18 In 1997, Mr. Schofield claimed that he could not recall whether he tried to escape on the same day that he refused to give a sworn statement to Detective Eason (H. 531). However, the records establish that only hours after he was asked for a sworn statement, Glenn Schofield, while under arrest, fled the hospital. While in 1981 Mr. Schofield relied on Patricia Ferrell as his alibi when he was interviewed by thepolice, he provided a different alibi when he was interviewed in 1984 by an investigator working for Mr. Jones' clemency attorney. Lou Eliopulos testified that he interviewed Mr. Schofield in 1984 because through his investigation he realized that Mr. Schofield was "a prominent player as a possible suspect in theshooting." (H. 922). Mr. Eliopulos described Mr. Schofield as both reluctant and curious about the interview and very concerned that his name not become involved in Mr. Jones' case (H. 930-31). Mr.Schofield gave Mr. Eliopulos the names of two alibi witnesses: "Marion -- Marion, which he referred to her as Marilyn -- Manning, is her last name. He also gave me the name of `Shorty.'" (H. 925). Mr. Schofieldprovided no other identifying information for Shorty (Id.). Mr. Schofield told Mr. Eliopulos that hefrequently used Ms. Manning to rent cars for him and that on the night of Officer Szafranski's death, he waswith her and Shorty in a rental car (H. 926). During the interview, Mr. Schofield stated that on the night ofthe murder he was in Callahan's Bar with Ms. Manning and Shorty at about 11:00 p.m. or midnight and that they all left together in Ms. Manning's rental car to go to another bar (H. 937-38). Mr. Schofield indicated that he heard sirens while he was in the Davis Street area and that he thought it was in response to the hostage situation on Lee Street (H. 938). Mr. Schofield denied being in the Davis Street area at the time ofOfficer Szafranski's shooting (H. 936). During the interview with Mr. Eliopulos, Mr. Schofield initially denied ever speaking with Detective Eason about the Szafranski murder, but near the conclusion of their meeting, he admitted that he had been interviewed at St. Johns County Hospital (H. 927, 935). Mr. Schofield also told Mr. Eliopulos that he had testified before the grand jury although he was hospitalized in St. Johns County having been shot during an escape attempt the day before (H. 935). Mr. Schofield also initially denied ever being in Mr. Jones' apartment, but then admitted that on one occasion he had gone to Mr. Jones' apartment to buy heroin (H. 931, 933). However, in contrast to what he told the police in 1981, Mr. Schofield told Mr. Eliopulos that he was not in Mr. Jones' apartment on the night of the Szafranski shooting (H. 934). Finally, although he was relying on her as his alibi witness, Mr. Schofield told Mr. Eliopulos that Ms. Manning is a liar (H.953). Mr. Eliopulos testified that Mr. Schofield probably told him this in relation to the information Ms. Manning had already provided that incriminated Mr. Schofield in Officer Szafranski's death (H. 955). At the 1997 hearing, Mr. Schofield denied that he ever spoke to Mr. Eliopulos and could not recall ever being interviewed by an attorney or investigator representing Mr. Jones (H. 546). However, his testimony combined elements from his 1981 alibi to the police and his 1984 alibi given to Mr. Eliopulos. He was at Mr. Jones' apartment between 6:00 and 7:00 p.m. on May 22, 1981; he went to pick up some heroin after making a deal with Mr. Jones' brother; and he took Ms. Manning with him because she knew where Mr. Jones lived (H. 535-36). Mr. Schofield testified that he was with Ms. Manning in a rental car (H. 618). After leaving Mr. Jones' apartment, Mr. Schofield and Ms. Manning picked up his friend Roy "Shorty" Williams and then went to Ms. Manning's apartment (H. 534, 541).19 Mr. Schofield, Ms. Manning, and Mr. Williams later went to a nightclub, but Mr. Williams stayed outside because he was too young to get in (H. 542). Sometime before daybreak, Mr. Schofield went to the apartment that he shared with Patricia, whose last name he referred to as both Reese and Ferrell (H. 540, 545). Mr. Schofield summarized his activity on the night of Officer Szafranski's death: After I went by there [Mr. Jones' apartment] and picked the heroin up, me and Marilyn went back to her apartment and we bagged it up and we went out there to the crab people's house. We stayed out there almost until the crab people's house closed. I think they closed about 2:00 o'clock or 3:00 o'clock. From there we left and went to her apartment. Me and her laid up during that time and before daybreak I went home so I can be with my woman. (H. 539-40). Other witnesses presented by Mr. Jones confirm that Mr. Schofield was in the Davis Street area on the night of Officer Szafranski's death. However, while Mr. Schofield testified that he left the Davis Street area in the early evening, Ms. Manning and Mr. Williams have both testified that they were still in the area with Mr. Schofield when Officer Szafranski was killed. Ms. Manning testified in 198620 that she had left Mr. Schofield in the Davis Street area while she went to a shopping center; they planned to meet back in that area to go out to a nightclub (Transcript of 1986 Evidentiary Hearing, pp. 113-14). However, when she returned to the intersection of Fourth and Davis Streets, Mr. Schofield was not yet ready to leave (Id. at 114). She drove around for awhile looking for his brother and then returned to look for Mr. Schofield: After we couldn't find him, we came back up Davis Street and we was looking for Glenn. That's when all the polices was down there on Sixth and Davis. They weren't there before we left, but when we came back to pick up Glenn to go to the club, said by the time we got back he would be ready. When we got back, his friend was there, but we couldn't find him and so he rushed and jumped in the car and said Glenn was around the corner, so I kept circling the block and circling the block, but I never did see Glenn until about -- I guess about five or six minutes later he came from in back of Lee Street and I was down there on Third and Davis. I had come -- kept going around and round. By the time I got to Third and Davis, he jumped in the back seat of the car. (Id. at 115). Ms. Manning testified that Mr. Schofield had been running and that when he jumped into her car, "[h]e told me to hit the expressway." (Id.) Ms. Manning, Mr. Schofield, and his friend who was already in the car then went to a nightclub (Id.). According to Ms. Manning, Mr. Schofield "wasn't the same" and was acting "nervous" (Id. at 116-17). Alberta Brown also testified in 1986 that Ms. Manning had told her in 1981 that she picked up Schofield on the night of the murder and that he had a rifle with him (Id. at 344). Ms. Manning's testimony clearly indicates that Mr. Schofield was still in the Davis Street area when Officer Szafranski was shot and that immediately after the shooting, as the police converged on the Sixth and Davis intersection, he was attempting to flee the area. Roy Williams, whom Mr. Schofield identified as "Shorty," the friend he was with on the night of Officer Szafranski's death, provided testimony consistent with Ms. Manning's that further incriminates Mr.Schofield. Mr. Williams testified that he was "partners" with Glenn Schofield in 1981 and that he often stayed with Mr. Schofield at the Emerson Arms apartments (H. 285, 327).21 On the night of Officer Szafranski's death, Mr. Williams was with Mr. Schofield and Ms. Manning: 22 Q -Did you see a rental car with your own eyes that night? A- Oh, yes, ma'am. Q -Okay. Where did you see that car? A- It came up there on Fourth and Davis, Sixth and Davis. Q -Where did it stop? A -It had stopped to the juke joint up there. Q -To a juke joint? A -Yes, ma'am. Q -And that's when you first saw Glenn Schofield get out of this car? A -Yes, ma'am. . . . Q -All right. How long would you say he was at the juke joint? A -I don't know. Q -Well, Mr. Williams, you remember that you were there with another woman, right? A -Yes, ma'am. Me and the woman standing outside. I wasn't in any juke joint, now. I didn't say I was in no juke joint. I was standing outside. We were standing outside for a good little while. (H. 317-18). Mr. Williams also testified that Ms. Manning had told him the car she and Mr. Schofield were driving was a rental car (H. 317).23 After being at the "juke joint" with Mr. Schofield, Mr. Williams walked along Davis Street while Mr. Schofield took the back street, probably Lee Street (H. 314). The next time Mr. Williams saw Mr. Schofield, he was kneeling by Mr. Jones' building with a rifle as Mr. Williams watched from across the street where he stood with a female friend (H. 286, 313, 318).24 Mr. Williams testified: Q -Okay. Now, you indicated you saw Mr. Schofield with a gun? A -Yes, sir. Q -Where exactly was he at? A -Standing on the side of the apartment, bending down. . . . Q -Okay. What happened after you saw Glenn kneeling down with -- was it a rifle? A -Yes, sir. Q With the rifle? A Yes, sir. Q What happened next? A I just heard some gunfire, and that's it. Q Did you see a police car go by? A Yes, sir. Q And is that when you heard the shot? A Yes, sir. (H. 287-89; see also 449-50). Mr. Williams also testified that Officer Szafranski's car was stopped, that his dome light was on, and that he was writing a report when he was shot (H. 299, 435-37). Randy Fallin, Mr. Jones' trial attorney, testified that in 1981 he had information that corroborates Mr. Williams' hearing testimony. Mr. Fallin testified: Q Now, did you develop information regarding Officer Szafranski having stopped the car to write a report? A Yes. I don't know about write a report. What I had at the time was that he had stopped in the -- and he was looking at or writing something down, and the light was on in his car, and he was stopped at that intersection just for -- I never had information he got out of the car, but he had stopped there for a little longer than it would take him to turn right or left, as the officers preceding him had done. Q And your information was the dome light was on? A Yes. (H. 737). Mr. Fallin testified that the medical evidence confirmed that Officer Szafranski was instantly debilitated by the shot and that his foot must have been on the break when the bullet hit him (H. 779, 782-83). When Mr. Williams was taken to the crime scene in 1997 with Officer Senters of the State Attorney's Office, he stated that he saw Officer Szafranski's car, not in the intersection as it is seen on the crime scene pictures, but parked on Davis Street south of the intersection near Mr. Jones' building (H. 435). At the hearing, Mr. Williams confirmed on cross-examination that he believed Officer Szafranski's car was parked near Mr. Jones' building: Q And you say his car was in the middle of the intersection while he was writing up this report? A No, ma'am. Q Oh, where was his car? A I think it was parked in front of the house, down the street, in front of the house. Q In front of the house down the street? A Yes, ma'am. (H. 300-01). However, Mr. Williams answered affirmatively when asked whether Officer Szafranski "was right there at the intersection of Sixth and Davis, writing that report" (H. 300); he also testified that he saw a police car driving by at the time the shots were fired (H. 365). The inconsistencies in Mr. Williams' testimony regarding the location of Officer Szafranski's car were explained by Officer W.D. Wilmoth who was called to testify for the State. Officer Wilmoth testified that just prior to the shooting, he drove south on Davis Street and stopped his car about one hundred and forty feet passed the intersection of Sixth and Davis Streets (H. 1227). Officer Wilmoth stopped his car across the street from Mr. Jones' building and waited for the three police cars that were travelling down Sixth Street to Davis Street (H. 1249).25 Officer Wilmoth's testimony supports Mr. Williams' belief that he saw a police car parked in front of Mr. Jones' building at the time of the shooting. Mr. Williams' confusion about who was in the car and whether the car was on the same or opposite side of the road can be explained by the passage of time and Mr. Williams' mental deficiencies.26 Mr. Williams testified that immediately after the shooting, he left the area (H. 289, 365, 450). However, he met up with Mr. Schofield about two minutes later: Q Okay. After you heard the shot, what happened? A I started walking back down the other end. I seen Glenn come running down on Lee Street, walking back down Lee Street, got in the car and left. Q Okay. Did at any point in time you have contact with Marion Manning? A Yes, sir. Q Can you tell me about that? How did that happen? A I seen her coming up. I told her she better go get Glenn off Lee Street. Q Why did you tell her that? A I just told her that. I said, Glenn is in trouble, I guess. (H. 289, see also 330, 365). Mr. Williams testified that he was already in the car with Ms. Manning when they picked up Mr. Schofield and that they all left the area together (H. 368-69, 452). Mr. Williams clarified that he did not actually see Mr. Schofield shoot Officer Szafranski: Q Did you see Glenn Schofield fire the shot? A Sir? Q Did you see Glenn Schofield fire the rifle? A No, sir. We was standing across the street and, as I looked, like, Glenn bend down. The only thing I seen him bend down. I didn't see him shoot the rifle. Q Did you hear the rifle go off? A Yes, sir. Q Did you see him aim the rifle? A Yes, sir. THE COURT: Did you say you saw it go off or you heard it go off? THE WITNESS: I heard it go off. THE COURT: You didn't see the flash of the fire? THE WITNESS: No, sir. (H. 296-97). Mr. Williams testified that, although he did not see Mr. Schofield fire the shots, he heard the shots, and they came from the same place where Mr. Schofield was kneeling (H. 359). Mr. Jones has presented the testimony of four other witnesses who saw Mr. Schofield on the night of Officer Szafranski's murder. First, Dwayne Hagans testified that he is from Jacksonville and has known Mr. Schofield since 1977 or 1978 (H. 850). Mr. Hagans was in the Davis Street area on the night of Officer Szafranski's murder, and he saw Mr. Schofield in a car "with a little dude" (H. 851, 862). Mr. Hagans thinks that it was a rental car because "during the time back then, dudes rented Monte Carlos out of lots. It probably was a rental car." (H. 878-79).27 Mr. Hagans testified that "Schofield flagged us down. He wanted to get a little money to get out of town with" (H. 851). Mr. Schofield also wanted Mr. Hagans "to hold his rifle down," but Mr. Hagans, who had noticed a lot of police in the area and was trying to avoid them, refused to take the rifle (Id.). The next morning, Mr. Hagans read in the newspaper that Officer Szafranski had been killed (H. 852). James Corbett also saw Glenn Schofield on the night of Officer Szafranski's murder. He testified that he was driving in the area and as he made a left turn from Sixth Street onto Davis, he saw Mr. Schofield on the second-story porch of Mr. Jones' apartment building (H. 1068-69). This occurred at about 11:30 p.m. or midnight (H. 1071).28 Mr. Corbett testified that when he saw Mr. Schofield, he "looked like he had a rifle looking towards Davis Street where the police were at." (H. 1069).29 After seeing Mr. Schofield on the porch, Mr. Corbett went to a friend's house at the Blodgett Homes at Fourth and Madison Streets (H. 1071). Mr. Corbett also testified that he heard the gunshots that killed Officer Szafranski: Q When you were in the house, did you hear anything? A Yeah, we was in there messing around for a while. I say it was about an hour or so after that. I don't know. About an hour or two. That's been a long time. I heard a gunshot, you know, and -- Q And -- A And after a while, within minutes, I don't know, after the gunshot, man, the place was crowded with police all over. The whole area was shut down. Q Okay. Were you -- A So we jumped and peered out the window, you know, and I thought I seen Glenn coming down from Madison Street running like he had -- I don't know whether it was a bat or a rifle or something in his hand. He was running down Madison Street into the project. Right behind him was Marilyn, not too far behind him. Q Who is Marilyn? A I guess that's his girlfriend. Q And the next day, did you hear anything about what had happened that night? A Yeah, that next morning, you know, we was out there in the project camping out and we heard that they say Leo had killed a police and I say "Man, no, I don't even believe that, you know." (H. 1071-72). Mr. Corbett's testimony is consistent with that of Denise Reed and Daniel Cole who testified in 1992 that they also saw Mr. Schofield running on Madison Street with a rifle30 Mr. Cole testified: [A]s we approached Fourth and Madison, we notice we seen somebody running toward us . . . [a]bout a good half block from me . . . [a]t that time I notice that he had shotgun in his hand . . . A rifle or either a shotgun. . . [It was] Glenn Schofield . . . I know him . . . [and] [h]e was running from the left-hand side, getting ready to run through Blodgett Homes . . . [A]t that time me and Denise [Reed], we walked toward Davis Street and at the time when we got on Fifth Street a policeman approached us . . . stopped me and Sharon and . . . he told us to put our hands up against the wall . . . And then after that when they searched us and everything, because they had went upstairs, went across the street to where Leo was living . . . we noticed that they had went over to Leo's house and was bringing him and just got Bobby downstairs and put them in the car. (Transcript of 1992 Evidentiary Hearing, pp. 73-81). Mr. Cole stated that after watching the police and rescue units cover the area: [M]e and Sharon [Reed], we decided we could walk on home and as we walked home, we was talking about what we had seen . . . At the time they [the police] didn't ask no questions . . . We talked about we wasn't going to discuss [seeing Schofield] with nobody . . . Because due to the fact at the time I was -- I was scared of her safety and also mine . . . Because Mr. Schofield's background, his violent background . . . He was just violent. (Id. at 81-83). Ms. Reed's testimony basically mirrored that of Mr. Cole. On the night in May of 1981 when the police officer was killed, she and Mr. Cole were going home from the Center Movie Theater after midnight (Id. at 126-27). As they walked on Fourth Street, they heard a shot and then saw someone running on Madison Street toward Fourth Street (Id. at 129-30). At the intersection of Madison and Fourth, Ms. Reed recognized the running person to be Glenn Schofield (Id. at 130-31). Schofield was carrying a rifle and running very fast (Id. at 131, 139). Ms. Reed and Mr. Cole continued walking and approached Sixth and Davis where they saw a police car sitting in the middle of the intersection, frantic police officers filling the area, and Mr. Jones being led into a police car (Id. at 132-34). Ms. Reed was not questioned by police about what she had seen and did not volunteer any information because she was afraid of Schofield, his penchant for violence, and the police (Id. at 135).31 On the way home, Ms. Reed thought about whether she should say anything about what she had seen but decided not to "[b]ecause I was afraid . . . [of] the polices, plus I was afraid of Schofield" (Id. at 139). When she got home, she called her mother, Martha Bell, and told her about what she had seen (Id. at 140-42). Ms. Bell testified that on the night that Officer Szafranski was killed, her daughter, Ms. Reed, phoned her and said that she had seen Mr. Schofield running from the scene with a rifle in his hand (Id. at 179-84). In addition to the witnesses who saw Mr. Schofield on the night of Officer Szafranski's death, Mr. Jones has presented witnesses to whom Mr. Schofield has confessed. Mr. Schofield began confessing to Officer Szafranski's murder as early as 1982 and continued to confess even after the 1992 evidentiary hearing. Mr. Jones presented Jasper Kirtsey, who knew Mr. Schofield in Jacksonville and later encountered him at Lake Butler in 1982 (H. 689-90). He testified in 1997: Q When you saw Mr. Schofield at Lake Butler, did he ever talk about the shooting of a police officer in Jacksonville? A Yes, he got -- conversation got around to that, yeah. Q And what did he have to say about this shooting? A Well, he had a lot of things to say. Number one, he said that he didn't want to kill the police officer, but he said a lot of them was bad. Q What else did he say? A He said he fingered Leo for the murder of the police officer in Jacksonville. I knew the police officer, he knew the police officer. He knew what he was talking about. (H. 690). Mr. Kirtsey's testimony also provides additional details that explain Mr. Schofield's motive in shooting Officer Szafranski: Q You said earlier that you had seen from a distance Mr. Schofield talking to Officer Szafranski. Did Mr. Schofield ever tell you that -- about having any kind of argument with Officer Szafranski or any disagreement? A Well, in particular, that last time that I was present, and Glenn and Officer Shashinski were present, they was doing a pay-off. Q What -- what do you mean? A It was money being given from Glenn to Officer Shashinski. And some argument occurred from that. Q You saw -- you saw the money being passed from Glenn to Officer Szafranski? A Yes. Like -- yes. Q And they were arguing? A Well, they was arguing, you know, they having a disagreement about the amount, you know, like the amount. . . . Q Did Mr. Schofield say why he killed Officer Szafranski? A Yes. Q And what did he say? A Concerning the money. It involved money. (H. 693-95). Mr. Schofield denied that he knew Officer Szafranski or that he had any business dealings with him (H. 618). However, Mr. Williams testified that Mr. Schofield told him that he was tired of Officer Szafranski harassing him (H. 332). In 1983, Mr. Schofield confessed to Dwayne Hagans, whom he knew from Jacksonville, when they met at Union Correctional Institution. Mr. Hagans testified that Mr. Schofield talked about the night when he had flagged down Mr. Hagans in the Davis Street area. Mr. Schofield confessed that he was trying to borrow money to get out of town because he had just killed a police officer (H. 853).32 Mr. Schofield continued to admit that he had committed the murder throughout the mid-1980s. In 1985, he worked in the kitchen at Union Correctional Institution where he met Frank Pittro and told him about his involvement in Officer Szafranski's murder. Mr. Pittro testified in 1992:33 Q Do you know Mr. Leo Jones? A No, I don't know him personally, no. Q Have you ever heard his name being mentioned? A Yes, I did. Q And who did you hear mention Mr. Jones' name? A Glenn Schofield. Q And in what context did Mr. Schofield mention Mr. Jones' name? . . . A That he -- he said he shot a police officer. Q Who shot a police officer? A Schofield said he did. Q And how did that relate to Mr. Jones? A Well, he said he shot him and they arrested Mr. Jones for it. I asked him, you know, was he bullshitting. He said, no, he wasn't. He says it was better him than himself. (Transcript of 1992 Evidentiary Hearing, pp. 271-72). Franklin Prince also met Mr. Schofield working in the kitchen at Union Correctional Institution.34 Mr. Prince and others were talking about Mr. Jones' case when Mr. Schofield joined the conversation and confessed to his involvement in Officer Szafranski's death. Mr. Prince testified in 1992: Q Why were you talking about Mr. Jones's case? A Because at that particular time I think it was in the paper. I think it had something to do with the Florida Times-Union, the article that we had read about this case. Q Okay. A And that just was the subject for the day. Q Okay. And what happened? A We was talking about the case and Schofield told the fellow that he didn't know what he was talking about, that he had did the crime. I said, well, why you telling us that? Why you won't tell the officials that? And he said the officials wouldn't believe him. Q So, he told you he did the crime? A Told me personally that he did the crime with everybody else standing around, too. (Id. at 408). Paul Marr also worked in the kitchen at Union Correctional Institution with Mr. Schofield in 1985. Mr. Marr testified in 1986 that he often carried legal books with him and that Mr. Schofield approached him to ask legal questions (Transcript of 1986 Evidentiary Hearing, p. 356).35 Mr. Marr explained: Q Did there come a time during these conversations with Mr. Schofield that he spoke to you regarding the death of a police officer in Jacksonville? A Yes, he did. On several occasions. . . . Q During that time period, what conversation did he have with you regarding the shootings of a police officer in Jacksonville? <