COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
PLYMOUTH, SS NO: 81865

 

COMMONWEALTH

v.

DARRELL JONES



 

AFFIDAVIT OF JOHN J. BARTER

John J. Barter, being first duly sworn, states as follows:

1. My name is John J. Barter. I am a member of the bar of
the Supreme Judicial Court for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
and I represent Darrell Jones, the defendant in the above
entitled case.

2. In connection with investigating the facts of this case
I was working with a licensed private investigator named Richard
Hamilton. On July 25, 20l2, Mr. Hamilton and I went to visit
with a witness named Terie Starks at her residence in
Brockton, Massachusetts. Mr. Hamilton has since passed away.

3. Mr. Hamilton and I met with Ms. Starks at her home, and
asked her questions about her recollection of the trial in the
above referenced case and underlying events. We also showed Ms.
Starks copies of documents and a copy of a certain videotape that
showed her being questions by two Brockton Police Detectives.

4. Ms. Starks told us that she was arrested on or about
November 25, l985, at a motel in Methuen, Massachusetts by

Brockton Police Officers. Ms. Starks did not know how the Police



AFF. 208

knew that she was in Methuen. The Police told her that she was

being arrested on a ?default? for Brockton District Court cases,
but it was her belief that the Police actually wanted to talk to
her about a shooting incident that happened in Brockton a couple
of weeks earlier.

5. Ms. Starks told us that after she was arrested she was
driven by the Brockton Police to the Brockton Police Station lock
up. She was not given the chance to get bailed out of the Police
Station lock up and she was told that she would be held overnight
so the detectives could talk to her more in the morning.

6. Ms. Starks told us that during the drive from Methuen
to Brockton, while she was being held, the Police kept telling
her that she had some serious problems because she had cases on
default. They told her that no single case would send her away
to prison for too long, but that she could get convicted of all
the charges, and that she could get sentenced to do the maximum
on each case, back to back, so she could be in prison for a long
time. The police told her that things would go better for her if
she cooperated with them in providing information about the
shooting incident.

7. According to Ms. Starks, on the same night that she was
arrested, the Police told her that they were investigating the
shooting of Guillermo Rodrigues, known by the nick name 

and that they had information that she knew something about that

AFF. 209

shooting. Ms. Starks stated that Mr. Rodrigues was a drug
dealer, and he was often at a Brockton bar known as Pete and
Mary?s. Ms. Starks did not know Mr. Rodrigues well, but she said
she would see him at Pete and Mary?s and he would buy her drinks
sometimes.

8. The police asked Ms. Starks if she knew who shot Mr.
Rodrigues, and she told them that she didn?t know the person.

9. The Police told her that they already arrested the
shooter in that case and that his name was Darrell Jones, and
that he was known by the nick name ?Diamond.? Ms. Starks did not
personally know this person, but other people that she knew had
mentioned that nick name ?Diamond.? The Police told her that
because Darrell Jones was already arrested, and because they
would keep him in custody, she should not be worried about
testifying that she saw him shooting Mr. Rodrigues. Ms. Starks
said that she did not have any personal knowledge that ?Diamond?
had shot Mr. Rodrigues, but the police told her that he did, and
that he was under arrest for the shooting.

10. When the Police arrested Ms. Starks she wanted to be
released. She stated that she was an alcohol and drug user at
the time and she wanted to get out of Police custody as quickly
as she could.

ll. During this meeting with Ms. Starks on July 22, 20l2,

Ms. Starks was shown the video?taped interview that the Police

AFF. 210

recorded at the Brockton Police station on or about November 26,
1985. Ms. Starks told us that she had never seen the videotape
before, and that the Police did not show it to her when it was
made, and they did not show it to her before the trial.

12. As Ms. Starks looked at the video tape she commented
that it reminded her about her past, and about her past drug and
alcohol use. She said that viewing the tape now she can tell
that she was still under the influence of drugs or alcohol, or
coming down from a period of drug and alcohol use when the tape
was made. At that time in her life she did not have good will
power, had an addictive personality, and she was driven to use
cigarettes, alcohol, and crack cocaine. As she looked at the
videotaped statement she commented that it showed that she was
jittery and was making nervous gestures, and scratching, which is
how she would behave when she was craving cigarettes, alcohol,
and cocaine.

13. Ms. Starks noticed that almost as soon as the tape
started, Detective Smith, without asking her whether she would

I

?like a cigarette,? reached over and gave her a pack of

cigarettes and she immediately lighted up a cigarette. At that
time in her life, when she was craving alcohol and crack cocaine
and could not get them, the next best thing to ease her craving

was to get a cigarette. Cigarettes would temporarily give her

some satisfaction and calm her nerves. Ms. Starks said that she

AFF. 211

believed that the detective gave her the cigarette pack because
she had a deal in advance that she would be get a pack of
cigarettes and she would be allowed to smoke if she would talk to
the Police on the tape.

14. Ms. Starks said that the next thing that would have
been important to her after getting some cigarettes would be to
get out of the Police Station so she could get alcohol and
cocaine. When she was arrested the night before she asked the
Police when the bail officer would come to the Police Station so
she could get bailed out. In her past experience bail officers
would usually come to the Police Station within a couple of hours
so a person could get released. In this case she was told that
there would be no bail officers and that she would be held until
the detectives were done talking to her, and that she would later
have the chance to go to Court, where the police and the district
attorney would make a recommendation to the Court about what her
bail should be, and whether she should be released. According to
Ms. Starks, it was her belief that the recommendation that would
be made to the Court would depend on whether she cooperated with
the Police, and whether she told them what they wanted to hear.
Ms. Starks said that she knew that the Police wanted her to
support their conclusion that Darrell Diamond Jones had been the
shooter, because they told her that they already arrested him for

the crime.

AFF. 212

15. Before the Police started to record the interview they
told Ms. Starks about the shooting of Mr. Rodrigues, and what
they had learned from their investigation from other people.
They told her that they had arrested the guy who did the shooting
and that his name was Darrell Jones, known as ?Diamond.? At one
place, near the end of the tape, one of the Officers told her
that she should know that the guy who did the shooting was
already arrested, and in response she told the Officer that the
other Officer, Detective Smith, already told her about that when
she met with him earlier.

16. According to Ms. Starks, when she was looking at the
videotape she was surprised to see that part of the tape is
?recorded over? with an old black and white television show, and
that the things that she said during that part where the tape is
recorded over were not shown or heard on the tape. According to
Ms. Starks, because she talked to the Police both before and
after the tape was running, it is hard to remember what things
she said at the exact place where the tape is recorded over, but
she said that she knows for sure that she told the Police things
that are not on this tape.

l7. Ms. Starks said that one thing she told the Police was
that she did not see Mr. Rodrigues walk out of Pete and Mary?s at
all that night. She did not see him walk out by himself or with

anyone else. What Ms. Starks told the Police was that she saw

AFF. 213

two people coming from behind Pete Mary?s, around the body shop
on Montello Street, crossing the street and walking to the
parking lot near D?Angelo?s. One of these people was Mr.
Rodrigues and the other was a much shorter young black man, and
he seemed to be holding a gun on Rodrigues as they walked. Ms.
Starks never heard a shot fired, but did see Mr. Rodrigues fall
to the ground. At the time Ms. Starks was in a car with four
other people. While she was in the car she never said ?that?s
Diamond? or ?that?s Diamond and he has a gun? or anything like
that. She did not get a good enough look at the person to say
who he was, she didn?t know Darrell Diamond Jones, and she would
not have stated that he was the shooter.

18. Ms. Starks said that she could see on the video tape
that she was shown some pictures and that she picked one of the
pictures. Ms. Starks said that she does not know what picture
she picked at the time, but she remembers that before the tape
was started she was told that Mr. Jones was the shooter, that he
had been identified and he was already under arrest. Ms. Starks
said that when she testified at trial she could not identify the
person who was the shooter as any person in the courtroom, and
she was never shown pictures at the trial or asked if she had
selected a particular picture.

19. According to Ms. Starks, before the trial she was never

contacted or interviewed by the attorney for Mr. Jones, and the

AFF. 214

attorney for Mr. Jones only asked her a couple of questions at
the trial. Ms. Starks said that she thought she was going to be
called back to testify again in the case but she was not brought
back into the courtroom to testify again.

20. Ms. Starks said that if the attorney for Mr. Jones had
asked her questions about the way the videotape was made she
would have done her best to provide accurate answers and she
would have said that she cannot identify the person who did the
shooting. Ms. Starks would have said that at the time she was
held at the Brockton Police Department and videotaped she had
open charges against her and hoped to get a better deal on the
open charges by cooperating with the police. Ms. Starks said
that it was her belief at the time that the best way to get
released from the Police Station was to cooperate with the
Police, and not to say anything that was against their belief
that they had already arrested the person who did the shooting.

21. Ms. Starks said that a few years after she testified in
the Darrell Jones case, she was called as a witness for the
prosecution in a criminal case against George A. Lopes. I showed
Ms. Starks a copy of the transcript of the testimony that she
gave at the Lopes trial, she looked at it, and she remembered
being called to testify in that case. Ms. Starks confirmed that
she had a number of open cases at that time, and some of them

were under alias names. Ms. Starks confirmed that some of the

AFF. 215

charges described in the Lopes transcript were the same charges
that were pending against her when the videotape was made, and
when she testified at the Jones trial. Ms. Starks confirmed that
when she testified in the Lopes cases that she was held in jail

II

for a period of time with ?no bail? for a ?murder case, she was
referring to being held in jail because the police wanted her to
testify in the case against Darrell Jones. Ms. Starks confirmed
that because the charges were pending against her, and because
the charges gave the Police a reason to arrest her and hold her
in custody, she was motivated to cooperate with the Police when
she was at the Police Station, but when she was in Court she did
not identify Darrell Jones as the shooter, because she could not
honestly say that he was the person who she saw shooting Mr.
Rodrigues in the parking lot that night.

22. Ms. Starks was cooperative and friendly during the
interview with Mr. Hamilton and me.

23. The above statements are made based upon my best
recollections and information and belief, and are not intended to

be a verbatim account of the conversation with Ms. Starks.

Signed under the penalties of perjury this,2??6ay of

September, 2015 . A: 

John J. Barter

   

AFF. 216