Charles's False Confession Statements

The false confession I gave to detective Sgt. Waymon Allen is full of things that are just flat out impossible. I was just making anything up, anything I thought he wanted to hear. My false statements are in bold and evicence of why they are false follows.

The part where I said I went to a old friend's (Larry) house off of Irvington is not true. I did not see or talk to Larry the day of the murder.

Here is why it would have been impossible for me to have gone Larry’s as I falsely said I did. Blaine Earl Wright (my daughter’s uncle) and his mother Barbara Wright saw me walking toward them on a side street called Caperton right next to the flower shop they were leaving after buying flowers for Cynthia (my daughter's aunt) who was in the hospital. They were actually just getting back into their car as I was walking towards them on Caperton, heading towards Irvington Blvd. If I had gone to Larry’s house as I said in my statement, then they would have seen me walking toward them coming down Irvington and heading toward Crosstimbers. Since Larry lived one street over from Caperton, on Irvington Blvd and McDaniel St, there is no way I would had bumped into them [Blaine and Barbara] a second time. Remember I talked to Barbara earlier at her house as they were getting into the car to go visit Cynthia. By the time they drove to the flower shop on Irvington and Caperton, I had walked by them as they were leaving the flower store.

This may seem like a small detail but it isn’t because there is just no way I went to Larry’s house that day. I do not know Larry’s last name. But Lee Rose knows where he lived and Linda McClain might know as well. I do know it was on McDaniel St.

However I did go to Larry’s house 3 weeks prior with Lee Rose and it was the first time Lee had seen me in over 3 years. Unknown to me, Lee wasn’t allowed to go to Larry’s house for some reason. I don’t know why but when I asked him to go inside with me, he said he couldn’t and waited on the street while I talked to Larry.

So if I would had gone to Larry’s house the day of the murder, that would mean I would have visited him twice since the day I got out of prison. And that is impossible because I went to Larry’s house once and that was with Lee Rose. From Larry's house, Lee and I went to Barbara’s house and again, Lee told me he couldn’t go in. Something must had happened in those 3 years when I was away to cause him to be barred from those two houses. I have no clue what it is or could had been. He never told me the reason why.

In my false confession, I next said I walked over to Melody’s house on Post Street and talked with her mother. Again this is not true. Although I did go to Melody’s Mom’s house, it was 3 weeks prior to the murder. I was with Lee and John Phillips. I recall asking Lee if Melody still lived there, he said yes, so I went on up and talked to her Mom and Dad. I remember her two kids were there. Her Mom told me that Melody was living on the other side of Hardy Toll Rd with a black guy and she asked me to talk to her. I said I would go see her, but I told her I didn’t know where she lived. She was trying to explain it to me when Lee, who was standing on the street, came up. I asked him if he knew where she lived. He said yes so I told Melody's Mom and Dad I would go see her. Lee, John and I walk over to Melody's on the other side of Hardy Toll Rd. Lee goes up to the house but Melody didn’t want to come out and talk. So we left. So once again, I only spoke to Melody’s Mom once and that was 3 weeks prior to the murder of Mrs. Franklin. My hope is she recalls this. I don’t know Melody’s last name or her Mom’s and Dad’s name but I had no intention of telling Melody who she could and couldn’t be with. She is a grown woman. I always liked Melody.

Next false statement was that I told Detective Allen that I walked over to Pookie's house but that he had moved. On the day of the murder, I did not go see Pookie and he had not moved. Pookie is actually Shawn Wright, my daughter’s uncle. Again 3 weeks prior to the murder, I was with Lee and he took me to some street behind Crosstimbers to where Pookie lived with his girlfriend. I didn’t even know where Pookie lived. That was the first time I saw Pookie in over 4 years. This visit occurred in the same day I spoke to Larry and Melody's Mom and Dad. I’m sure Lee could vouch for this, if he is honest about it.

In my false confession, I said that I just walked up to Mrs. Franklin’s house and walked right in the door. This is impossible if everyone is in agreement Mrs. Franklin kept her door locked: 1. See Eric’s statement to police at transcript at XXVII at 69-70. 2. Also see Linda McClain's statement 1.003 and transcript at XXXVIII at 280-1. 3. See photo of door, which had, not one, but two bolt locks on it.

In addition to the door being kept locked, the police had conclusively determined that someone went in through the southeast bedroom by using the screwdriver that was found on the window ledge, to pry open that window screen (Trial transcript XXXVII at 89-92, XXVIII at 189, XXVII at 90). And that is why I want that screwdriver tested before it also comes up ‘missing’ like other important pieces of evidence that could also clear me. If I used that screwdriver as they say I did, then my DNA should be all over it. Test the screwdriver and the bag it is in. (see photo of screwdriver)

My coerced statement also says I remember struggling with her and was on top of her. If this is the case then my DNA should have been the one found underneath her finger nails. It was not my DNA under her fingernails; an unknown male's DNA was found. It is neither mine nor the grandson's. It is DNA from blood, I cannot stress that enough, it is from actual blood. She scratched someone. And it was not me. Scratched them good enough to cause them to bleed. (See police report at 1.011, 2.013)

My false statement also said I went out the back door. I only said this after Sgt. Allen mentioned to me that the back door was open: “Are you sure you didn’t go out the back door?” I told him: “I guess I went out the back door then”. But let’s think about this for a moment. If it is a fact that someone entered the southeast bed room window, based on signs of forced entry using a screwdriver to pry open that window, footprints on the ground, and a fresh wood chip. (XXVII 89-92, XXXVIII 189, XXVII 90)(see photo of window), how is it I said I went out the back door when it was the front door and front screen door that were both found wide up upon Eric’s arrival home that night? (See Eric’s statement to police a police report 1.004. ‘Eric noted that the Front door(s) were wide open and the porch light was off. That the porch light being off as not normal’ (Also see 1.001)). (Also see Eric’s testimony at Trial, page 70).

I bring this to your attention because it is not normal for porch light to be off and front doors to be open. How can I say I went out the back door, when according to Eric the back door wasn’t standing open, but rather just ‘unlocked’, when it is most likely that someone went out the front door? I am no detective, but shouldn’t they had tested the door knob for prints? I know they said the house was messy, but a door knob that is used everyday would be dust free. Seems to me someone entered via the back window, and left through the front door, turning off the front porch light so as not to be seen before exiting by front door.

My coerced statement says I was approached by a man who said he better not catch me in the yard, someone who supposedly had actually spoken to me. But I only told the detective this after he told me about this guy saying he talked to me. So why didn’t they call him to testify? And why didn't he identify me in a line up or photo line ups? I think they realized this man was either lying or something. This man's brother-in-law gave a totally different description than that of me and testified that it wasn’t me.

Also in my statement I said I had blood on my hands. There are a number of things about the crime scene and subsequent testing for blood that prove this is false statement:

1. If I had blood on my hands, why wasn’t there any blood on any of the doors I falsely said I went through?
   
   
2. If I had blood on my hands, why wasn’t any found on my clothing that they tested before the trial? After my appeals, DA Lynn Hardaway re-tested my clothes with newer tests and still no trace evidence of Mrs. Franklin's blood were found on them. If you look at pictures of the scene, this was a bloody crime scene, there was blood everywhere, blood flew 3-4 foot and splattered on the wall and couch. Mrs. Franklin was covered in it, so there is no way I would not had gotten some of that on my clothes. Just no way possible. That right there should be an indicator that what I said about having blood on my hands was false. Blood would have been on my clothing. There is no way I could not had walked away from her or that house without getting her blood on my clothing or leaving some of me behind. No way.
   
   
3. You would think if my hands were covered in Mrs. Franklin’s blood when I went through her purse, like they said I did, there would be some blood there.
   
   
4. Even the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (TCCA) brought up the ‘lack’ of blood on any of the items the DA said I touched: the purse, the door knobs, and the door they say I exited.
   
   
5. It's important to know that when DA Lynn Hardaway wanted to retest some evidence using new testing methods, I did not oppose her at all. I wanted her to test it to prove that I was not the one who killed Mrs. Franklin. And results still showed no evidence of Mrs. Franklin's blood on my clothes. While the TCCA made note of this, they still deny me a new trial despite the fact there is NO EVIDENCE that connects me to this murder.