Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Porchlight International for the Missing & Unidentified. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Hamilton, William "A" 8/15/07; Augusta, Ga
Topic Started: Aug 22 2007, 06:38 AM (773 Views)
Ell
Member Avatar
Heart of Gold
[ *  *  * ]

http://old.chronicle.augusta.com/stories/1...et_242452.shtml

Slaying suspect indicted
By By Meghan Gourley| Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 21, 1998

For the second time this year, Richmond County authorities have brought murder charges against a man without first finding a body.
Sign up to get local news by e-mail

An Augusta grand jury handed down a six-count indictment against Rodney Alan Richardson, 31, of Sardis, charging him with murder, armed robbery and arson in connection with the disappearance of 47-year-old William "Al" Hamilton of Augusta, said Richmond County sheriff's Chief Deputy Ronald Strength. The indictment remains sealed.

Mr. Hamilton, a manager at Discotheque Lounge, has been missing since Aug. 15, when he left the downtown bar. He was driving a 1987 Ford Tempo at the time of his disappearance.

Mr. Richardson is the ex-husband of Mr. Hamilton's girlfriend, and police said they think the alleged killing was part of a love triangle.

Chief Deputy Strength said officials believe they will find Mr. Hamilton's body but will secure a conviction against Mr. Richardson even if they don't.

"There are cases like this which are prosecuted without a body and won. With the evidence we've gathered over the last few weeks, the (district attorney) felt confident in taking it to a grand jury," he said.

District Attorney Danny Craig said he could not comment on the case until the indictment is made public.

"We have a policy that whenever we take a case to the grand jury, we are satisfied we can prove the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt," he said. "That is without exception."

Mr. Hamilton was believed to have been on his way to Sardis to pick up his girlfriend the night he disappeared. He never arrived there, and later that morning, Augusta firefighters responded to a fire at his Elizabeth Road home.

Mr. Richardson has been charged with arson in that fire, the chief deputy said.

"We have evidence he (Mr. Hamilton) was killed at the house," he said.

This incident is similar to another recent love triangle case in which police have found no body.

In February, investigators arrested Daniel Myers on murder charges in the slaying of 35-year-old Eddie Rouse, who has been missing since 1981.

Mr. Myers was charged after his ex-wife came forward and told police she witnessed her husband kill Mr. Rouse because she was having an affair with him.

By Meghan Gourley covers crime for The Augusta Chronicle. She can be reached at (706) 823-3227 or newsroom@augustachronicle.com. etruecitizen.com/news/2007/08...Record/031.html[/URL]
Ell

Only after the last tree has been
cut down;
Only after the last fish has been
caught;
Only after the last river has been
poisoned;
Only then will you realize
that money cannot be eaten.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mimi
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]

http://old.chronicle.augusta.com/stories/1...et_242452.shtml

Slaying suspect indicted
By By Meghan Gourley| Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 21, 1998

For the second time this year, Richmond County authorities have brought murder charges against a man without first finding a body.
Sign up to get local news by e-mail

An Augusta grand jury handed down a six-count indictment against Rodney Alan Richardson, 31, of Sardis, charging him with murder, armed robbery and arson in connection with the disappearance of 47-year-old William "Al" Hamilton of Augusta, said Richmond County sheriff's Chief Deputy Ronald Strength. The indictment remains sealed.

Mr. Hamilton, a manager at Discotheque Lounge, has been missing since Aug. 15, when he left the downtown bar. He was driving a 1987 Ford Tempo at the time of his disappearance.

Mr. Richardson is the ex-husband of Mr. Hamilton's girlfriend, and police said they think the alleged killing was part of a love triangle.

Chief Deputy Strength said officials believe they will find Mr. Hamilton's body but will secure a conviction against Mr. Richardson even if they don't.

"There are cases like this which are prosecuted without a body and won. With the evidence we've gathered over the last few weeks, the (district attorney) felt confident in taking it to a grand jury," he said.

District Attorney Danny Craig said he could not comment on the case until the indictment is made public.

"We have a policy that whenever we take a case to the grand jury, we are satisfied we can prove the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt," he said. "That is without exception."

Mr. Hamilton was believed to have been on his way to Sardis to pick up his girlfriend the night he disappeared. He never arrived there, and later that morning, Augusta firefighters responded to a fire at his Elizabeth Road home.

Mr. Richardson has been charged with arson in that fire, the chief deputy said.

"We have evidence he (Mr. Hamilton) was killed at the house," he said.

This incident is similar to another recent love triangle case in which police have found no body.

In February, investigators arrested Daniel Myers on murder charges in the slaying of 35-year-old Eddie Rouse, who has been missing since 1981.

Mr. Myers was charged after his ex-wife came forward and told police she witnessed her husband kill Mr. Rouse because she was having an affair with him.

By Meghan Gourley covers crime for The Augusta Chronicle. She can be reached at (706) 823-3227 or newsroom@augustachronicle.com.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mimi
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
http://ga.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocVi...00656.GA.htm/qx

Richardson v. State

Georgia Supreme Court

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.


May 05, 2003

RICHARDSON
v.
THE STATE

Lower Court Summary Information: Richmond County Superior Trial Judge: Hon. Albert Pickett

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Benham, Justice

William "Al" Hamilton has not been seen since the early morning hours of August 15, 1998. Hours later, Hamilton's house was damaged by a suspicious fire and his car and several bags of coins were missing. In the home, investigators found bloodstains on a bedroom's ceiling and walls that were evidence of the infliction of severe blunt force trauma on a human being, but Hamilton's body was never found. In 1999, appellant Rodney Richardson, the ex-husband of the victim's girlfriend, was convicted of the malice murder of Hamilton, burglary, armed robbery, arson, and theft by taking. *fn1 He appeals the judgment of conviction.

The State presented evidence that fire officials believed the fire at the victim's home to be of a suspicious origin because they discovered several separate points of origin, smelled gasoline, and saw evidence of forced entry. A witness testified she gave appellant a ride to a site down the street from the victim's home a few hours before the fire. Another witness testified appellant returned home early the morning of the fire with shoes covered in red clay dirt, smelling of gasoline, and with clothes in need of washing. Yet another witness found two bags of coins identified as the bags of coins missing from the victim's home, in her back bedroom after appellant had visited. Several witnesses testified to the strained relationship between the victim and appellant: one witness recalled appellant had attempted to run the victim over with a tow truck in the victim's front yard; another witness mentioned appellant was very upset the day before the fire upon learning the victim had secured the release from jail of appellant's ex-wife; yet another witness testified appellant had asked the witness to obtain a baseball bat and help appellant "jump on" the victim the day before the fire. When the witness declined, appellant said he would take care of it himself. The State also played several audiotapes of conversations between appellant and his ex-wife that took place in her home after the fire and before his arrest. In those conversations, appellant acknowledged having killed the victim, though he had only intended to beat him, and having taken the bags of coins from the victim's home and putting them where they were found.

1. Appellant contends the evidence was insufficient to authorize the jury to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of committing the crimes for which he has been convicted. In particular, appellant questions whether, in the absence of a dead body, the State presented sufficient evidence of the corpus delicti of homicide, "that is, first, that the person alleged in the indictment to have been killed is actually dead, and second, that the death was caused or accomplished by violence, or other direct criminal agency of some other human being...." Warren v. State, 153 Ga. 354 (Hn. 1) (112 SE 283) (1922). See Daniel, Georgia Handbook on Criminal Evidence (2002 ed.), § 1-9 ("Corpus delicti, meaning the `body of the crime,' requires that the state prove that the crime charged has been committed by someone. [Cit.]. Note that it is not necessary to show that the defendant was the person who committed the crime, only that `someone' had done so."). The corpus delicti must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt and may be shown by indirect as well as direct evidence. Wrisper v. State, 193 Ga. 157, 161 (17 SE2d 714) (1941). To establish the corpus delicti in a homicide prosecution, the State must prove that a death occurred, but there is no requirement that a dead body be produced. Chancey v. State, 256 Ga. 415 (1)(A)© (349 SE2d 717) (1986). See also McIlwain v. State, 264 Ga. 382 (445 SE2d 261) (1994); White v. State, 263 Ga. 94 (428 SE2d 789) (1993).

To prove that the missing victim in the case at bar was dead and had died as a result of the criminal act of another, the State presented evidence that the victim had not been seen since the August 15 fire; that he was a man with personal relationships that,

uncharacteristically, he seemed to have abandoned; *fn2 that he had acted out of character in leaving a car repair job unfinished; and that he had not reported for work since the fire. The State also presented the testimony of two blood-pattern experts and Georgia's chief medical examiner/forensic pathologist who determined from the pattern of bloodstains on the ceiling and walls of the victim's bedroom that a person lying on the bed had been struck at least six times by a blunt instrument that became saturated with blood, with the impact causing blood and tissue matter from the struck person to adhere to the walls and ceiling. DNA testing showed the blood spatters to be that of the victim named in the indictment. While there was a "great deal" of blood on the walls and ceiling, the bed linens on which one might also find pools of blood had been removed from the bed prior to the fire. The chief medical examiner testified that his examination of the blood-spatter evidence led him to conclude the victim was repeatedly struck on the head, causing profuse bleeding and skull fractures and resulting in "lethal injury." The State presented sufficient evidence from which a rational trier of fact could conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the victim was dead, that he had died as a result of the criminal act of another, and that the assailant was appellant. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979); White v. State, supra, 263 Ga. 94 (1). See Gilchrist v. State, 466 So2d 988 (Ala. Crim. App. 1994); Sachor v. State, 619 So2d 285 (Fla. 1993); Fisher v. State, 851 SW2d 298 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); People v. Curro, 556 NYS2d 364 (N.Y.A.D. 1990); State v. Nicely, 39 Ohio St.3d 147 (529 NE2d 1236) (1988); People v. Modelski, 164 Mich.App. 337 (416 NW2d 708) (1987); State v. Pyle, 532 P2d 1309 (Kan. 1975).

2. Appellant next contends the trial court gave an incomplete charge on the concept of corpus delicti and committed reversible error in its charge to the jury on aggravated assault, the underlying felony of the burglary and felony murder charges.

(A) Appellant asserts the jury was not informed that the State had the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the person alleged to have been killed is dead and that the defendant was the perpetrator. The trial transcript shows that the trial court told the jury that the State was not required to produce a dead body in order to prove that a death occurred, but could establish the corpus delicti by circumstantial evidence. The jury was then instructed that "[t]he State is required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant caused the death of the alleged deceased, Mr. Hamilton, named in the indictment." In addition, the jury was told that the State had to prove every material allegation of the indictment and every essential element of the crimes charged, and that appellant was charged with two types of murder, with each type having as an essential element causing the death of another human being. Looking at the charge as a whole, the jury was instructed that the State had the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the victim named in the indictment was dead and that appellant had caused that death by committing a criminal act. See Spradlin v. State, 160 Ga. App. 132 (1b) (286 SE2d 310) (1981).

(B) The indictment alleged that appellant had committed burglary by entering the victim's home without authority and with the intent to commit aggravated assault, and had committed felony murder by causing the victim's death while in the commission of aggravated assault as defined in OCGA § 16-5-21(a)(2). *fn3 In its jury instruction on burglary, the trial court's definition of aggravated assault encompassed subsections (1) and (2) of § 16-5-21(a). In the instruction on felony murder, the trial court noted that aggravated assault was a felony "and is defined as I have already told you earlier... I have defined for you that felony of aggravated assault. I don't need to go back over that."

The burglary count of the indictment did not set forth the means by which the underlying aggravated assault was alleged to have occurred. It is not usually cause for a new trial that the jury was instructed on an entire Code section when only part of it is applicable under the facts in evidence. Lee v. State, 265 Ga. 112 (3a) (454 SE2d 761) (1995). The potential for reversible error occurs when the indictment specifies the commission of a crime by only one of several methods possible under the statute, as the felony murder count did, and the entire code section is charged. See Dukes v. State, 265 Ga. 422 (457 SE2d 556) (1995). Since the trial court entered a judgment of conviction and sentence on the verdict finding appellant guilty of malice murder and not on the felony murder verdict, any issue concerning the felony murder count of the indictment is moot. Pickren v. State, 272 Ga. 421 (1) (530 SE2d 464) (2000). Accordingly, appellant's assertions concerning the jury instructions set forth no reversible error.

3. Appellant maintains he was not afforded effective assistance of counsel at trial. "To show ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must show that counsel's performance was deficient and that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense. [Cit.]." Suggs v. State, 272 Ga. 85 (4) (526 SE2d 347) (2000). Appellant asserts that trial counsel was ineffective when he did not challenge the chief medical examiner's opinion testimony concerning the victim's cause of death, culled from the blood-spatter evidence, or the admissibility of the audiotapes of conversations between appellant and his ex-wife that took place in her home. Appellant also maintains that trial counsel did not listen to the audiotapes prior to trial.

At the hearing held on appellant's motion for new trial, trial counsel testified he was a sole practitioner and an experienced criminal defense attorney at the time he took appellant's case and, pursuant to petitions for voluntary discipline, was indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in 2000. See In the Matter of Richard Ward, 272 Ga. 369 (529 SE2d 371) (2000); In the Matter of Richard Ward, 274 Ga. 323 (553 SE2d 796) (2001). *fn4 He believed the weakest part of the State's case to be the short amount of time in which appellant was thought to have killed the victim, set the house afire and disposed of the victim's body and car in such a manner that neither was ever found. As a result, his defense strategy was to establish the improbability of appellant being the killer due to the short period of time in which appellant could have committed the crime. When asked by the assistant district attorney if there were any important decision in representing appellant that counsel would have made differently had he to do it over again, counsel responded that he had not realized how damaging the blood-spatter evidence would be and would have done more on that front. He acknowledged that, after reviewing the reports of the State's blood-spatter experts before trial, he had contacted two other blood-spatter experts, one of whom agreed with the conclusions reached by the State's experts and the other of whom was not interested in the case.

There is a strong presumption that trial counsel provided effective representation and, as a general rule, matters of reasonable trial tactics and strategy, whether wise or unwise, do not amount to ineffective assistance of counsel. Berry v. State, 267 Ga. 476 (4) (480 SE2d 32) (1997). A reviewing court evaluates trial counsel's performance from counsel's perspective at the time of trial. Grier v. State, 273 Ga. 363 (4) (541 SE2d 369) (2001). We conclude that counsel's choice of trial strategy was not unreasonable, especially in light of his pre-trial consultation with blood-pattern experts who agreed with the conclusions reached by the State's experts.

Trial counsel also acknowledged that the comments made by appellant's ex-wife to him that she had been coerced by police into taping conversations with appellant were grounds for a motion to suppress the taped conversations, but described the ex-wife as "a loose cannon" who he "never knew what she was going to do" and who testified on behalf of the State at appellant's trial. The ex-wife testified at the motion for new trial that the lead detective threatened to put her in jail if she did not agree to tape appellant's conversations with her. The lead detective testified that the ex-wife repeatedly paged him to give verbal reports of her conversations with appellant; he recorded her consent to placement of a recording device in her home on the first tape; the recording device was one which she had to activate each time she wished to record appellant's conversation; and he had not threatened her in any way.

When trial counsel's failure to file a motion to suppress is the basis for a claim of ineffective assistance, the defendant must make a strong showing that the damaging evidence would have been suppressed had counsel made the motion. Roberts v. State, 263 Ga. 807 (2e) (439 SE2d 911) (1994). In light of the lead detective's testimony at the hearing on the motion for new trial and the trial court's denial of the motion for new trial, it is unlikely a motion to suppress would have been successful; accordingly, appellant has failed to make the strong showing necessary to establish ineffective assistance. Id.

Trial counsel stated he had listened to the 8-9 hours of recorded conversations between appellant and his ex-wife, an edited version of which was played to the jury by the State. Because he was not aware before trial that the State would be permitted to introduce a redacted version of the tapes at trial and because he knew that portions of the taped conversations suggested appellant only told his ex-wife he had killed the victim because she was "nagging" him about it, trial counsel had the option of playing the tapes in their entirety to the jury or making a redacted version for presentation to the jury. He exercised neither option, having determined that the first "was not a wise thing" and that he did not have time during the trial to do the second. The decision not to play more of the tapes was tactical in nature, and appellant has not established how the failure to play more of the tapes to the jury would have affected the outcome of the case. Id., at 808. Accordingly, appellant did not establish ineffective assistance of trial counsel.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mimi
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
http://www.wrdw.com/crimeteam12/headlines/9174637.html
August 15, 2007

It's a story that was made into a program on national TV.

In August 1998, William "Al" Hamilton, the manager of downtown dance club the Discotheque, disappeared after leaving work. Later that morning, firefighters put out a fire at his home. Evidence later showed Hamilton had been killed there, but his body couldn't be found.

Two months later, a grand jury indicted Rodney Richardson for murder and arson. He was the ex-husband of Hamilton's girlfriend.

A jury convicted Richardson the next year, and he's now serving two life sentences plus 50 years in state prison.

All these years the question remained: where was Al Hamilton's body?

That brings us to today. A tip led investigators to a bridge along Highway 88 in Burke County, near Keysville, not far from the country store.

The GBI and the Richmond and Burke County Sheriff's Offices have been organizing their resources and searching the area today. A bulldozer was digging through the dirt under the bridge this morning.

While investigators on the scene would only say they were searching for evidence in relation to a 1998 case, two sources close to the investigation confirm it is the Hamilton case.

So far they haven't found anything. They have stopped the search for now and plan to interview people in Richmond and Burke County to hopefully find more information before returning to resume their search.

Murder Case Timeline
Aug. 1998-Al Hamilton Disappears
Home set on Fire
Oct. 1998-Rodney Richardson Indicted
Oct. 1999-Richardson Convicted
No Body Found
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mimi
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
Posted: Aug 22, 2007 - 06:38 AM

No evidence found in search for murder victim

By Elizabeth Billips Associate Editor
Officers searched all day for the skeletal remains of a murder victim, but found nothing. Acting on a tip, Richmond County investigators scoured an area along Brier Creek in Keysville last Wednesday, looking for signs that the body of William "Al" Hamilton was buried there nearly a decade ago.

http://www.thetruecitizen.com/news/2007/08...Record/031.html
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
mimi
Member Avatar
Advanced Member
[ *  *  * ]
http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/1999/...et_263679.shtml

Originally created 06/15/99

Genetic evidence accepted
By Staff Writer

Expert DNA testimony about blood scrapings taken from an Augusta man's home after he disappeared may be used as evidence against the man accused of killing him, a judge ruled Monday.

William "Al" Hamilton, 47, was last seen alive in the early morning hours of Aug. 15. His body has never been found, but authorities believe Mr. Hamilton was beaten to death, and Rodney Alan Richardson, 31, of Sardis, Ga., was indicted on charges of murder, armed robbery and arson.

On Monday, William T. Fowler Jr. of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation crime laboratory testified about how he compared blood scrapings taken from Mr. Hamilton's home to a known sample of Mr. Hamilton's DNA.

"Basically, the bottom line is ... both were from the same individual," Dr. Fowler testified in Richmond County Superior Court.

Although Mr. Hamilton's home on Elizabeth Road was set on fire in the early-morning hours of Aug. 15, the DNA contained in the blood scrapings was in very good condition, Dr. Fowler testified.

Richmond County Sheriff Investigator Dewayne Piper said Monday that the amount of blood inside the home and the placement indicated Mr. Hamilton was killed inside the home.

The DNA sample Dr. Fowler used for comparison purposes came from a DNA diagnostic center in Ohio. Mr. Hamilton had provided a sample for personal reasons before his disappearance, Investigator Piper said.

At a hearing last year when Mr. Richardson requested bond, a prosecutor told the judge that detectives discovered blood spatters on the walls and ceiling of the home, indicating Mr. Hamilton was attacked and beaten to death inside his home.

Mr. Hamilton was last seen about 3 a.m. Aug. 15 when he left his management job at the downtown Discotheque. Neither he nor his 1987 Ford Tempo has been seen since then.

Mr. Hamilton told co-workers on Aug. 15 that he intended to go to his girlfriend's Sardis home but he never arrived there. Mr. Richardson is the ex-husband of the Sardis woman Mr. Hamilton was dating.

Judge Carl C. Brown ruled Monday that prosecutors may use the DNA evidence and testimony at Mr. Richardson's trial, scheduled to begin Monday.

Sandy Hodson covers courts for The Augusta Chronicle. She may be reached at (706) 823-3226 or shodson@augustachronicle.com.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
« Previous Topic · Missing Persons Cases 1998 · Next Topic »
Add Reply