SANDERSVILLE, Ga.-- Former Washington County Deputy, Michael Howell testified in front of the jury deciding his fate--walking through his encounter with Eurie Martin on July 7, 2017, with his attorney Shawn Merzlak and later being cross-examined by the prosecutor, Kelly Weathers.
Merzlak brought up Martin's appearance and actions on July 7th, 2017 that led to deputies tasing him as well as Howell's taser training, while Weathers pressed Howell about the alleged crime Martin committed that gave the deputies the legal right to stop and detain him.
THE DEFENSE QUESTIONS HOWELL
Howell states he was called to Deep Step to respond to a 10-37 call, meaning a suspicious individual.
When he arrived, Howell remembers Martin was not acting normal.
"It looked like he hadn't bathed in probably a couple of weeks. He looked really rough," said Howell. "When I observed all that, and I asked him about what his name was. He looked at me and was like 'who are you?' and he just walked on."
The defense questioned if Martin asked for water or a ride, as he'd been asking for water from other people on his long walk from Milledgeville to Sandersville.
Maritn did not ask for water or a ride from Howell.
He says if he was aware Martin walked from Milledgeville, he "would've given him a ride to anywhere in the county he wanted to go because it was entirely too hot for someone to be walking out in the heat like that."
The former deputy believed based on Martin's actions that something was wrong with him--which led him to decide not to get out of his patrol car.
He had a stare like he could see through me. Like an evil look.
He observed Martin walking onto the roadway, which is a violation of the law, however, Howell admits he didn't intend to arrest him for that violation.
He then called for backup. As he waited for another deputy to arrive, he says Martin started fidgeting with his hands.
"I didn't know what he was doing."
Repeatedly, Howell tells the jury he just didn't know what was wrong with Martin.
The defense played several clips from the dash camera video to supplement his testimony.
He explained when Lee Copeland arrived, they were going to try to talk to Martin because he was concerned, he was going to get hit by oncoming traffic--but Martin turned around and took a "posture, a stance like he wanted to fight," according to Howell.
Howell says he asked for the taser at that moment because he didn't want to fight Martin, get hurt or hurt him.
At that point, he says Martin was breaking several laws, from the traffic violation to littering by throwing down a coke can, as well as not responding to their commands which is obstruction.
Howell and Copeland then used the stun gun on Martin, but Martin took the probes out of his arm.
Martin was not fighting but continued to resist. The two deputies continued to follow him, eventually a third deputy, Rhett Scott, getting to the scene.
Howell tells the jury Martin tried to swing at Scott.
Once they got him on the ground, he described Martin's resistance.
"He was a strong individual. I've never dealt with someone who had the strength he had that day," said Howell.
He tells the jury there was no way he was going to let Martin up until they had him handcuffed.
They continued to give Martin commands, which he ignored.
Howell testified they didn't use any other types of force on him, other than holding him down to handcuff him.
The former deputy says it wasn't normal for Martin to continue to physically resist them after being tased.
The defense reiterates Howell was trained by the Washington County Sheriff's Office to use the taser before hard hand techniques, adding at no point was Howell told a taser was a deadly weapon.
He continues to tell the jury the events that followed when CPR was started, EMS arrived, and eventually Martin was pronounced dead.
PROSECUTION CROSS EXAMINES HOWELL
Kelly Weathers with the prosecution presses Howell on the timeline of events, pointing out he'd waited only about a minute in between radioing that he'd spotted Martin and calling for backup.
Howell told Weathers he knew he'd need back up by the responses he got from Martin.
Nearly 20 minutes passed by before Lee Copeland showed up. She notes the first thing Howell asked Copeland was if he had his taser.
Howell says that's because "[Martin] threw down his can, turned around, took a defensive stance and bowed up like he was ready to fight."
According to Howell, he had his gun pulled out, pointed at the ground, until Copeland pulled up with his taser.
Weathers goes back to what Howell told the GBI agent.
Howell states he has trouble remembering everything about the incident.
Regarding his time with the GBI the night Martin died, he says the trauma of the incident might have caused him not to remember some things, but after reviewing all the videos his memory has been triggered in some ways.
"But, that night you were doing your best to tell the agent everything?" she asked.
"That's correct," said Howell.
Weathers points out since that time, Howell has watched the videos, gotten a lawyer, and looked through the evidence and facts of the case.
"So, that statement you gave that night at 11:30 was you trying to give as much information as possible?" Weathers continued to ask.
"That's correct," said Howell.
The prosecution went on to ask about stun guns.
Howell was a certified taser instructor and took a 16-hour class. He says he never taught anyone how to use the taser, only assisted in the class.
Although he was a certified instructor, Howell didn't carry a taser for most of his caree--adding the only experience he had with a taser was during the training programs as he watched when law enforcement got tased for their own certification.
Despite not carrying a taser himself, Howell agrees that he is familiar with taser use and the desired impacts.
"When you testified about Eurie Martin being able to knock those barbs out, I didn't write the exact word down, but to you, it was an extraordinary feat."
Howell says it was unusual to see someone continue to move like Martin was after being tased, although the taser probes weren't on his body the correct way as Weathers pointed out.
She wrapped up, by once again going back to what was told to the GBI the night of the incident.
She noted he did not tell the GBI agent about the traffic violation Martin allegedly committed.
She points to the dashcam footage where the three deputies can be heard trying to figure out what to charge Martin with
Howell agrees they were discussing what Martin needed to be charged with.
"You say, 'hell yeah, charge him with trespassing," asked Weathers.
Howell says he doesn't remember what exactly was said.
He admits he didn't think about giving him a traffic violation until later.
Weathers continued to press Howell on the traffic violation in question--which is walking on the roadway when a shoulder is available.
She hands him the Georgia code about the violation.
"That would be traffic violation in controversy in this case, correct?" asked Weathers.
"Yes ma'am," he said.
The one you didn't think about the night you talked to the GBI, but to this jury telling them that's the violation you say gave you the lawful right to stop him?
"Yes ma'am," he said.
The defense gets back up to clarify the discussions they've had over the last three and a half years.
"Isn't it true that the only thing I've ever told about testifying, in this case, is, to tell the truth," asked Merzlak.
"Yes, that's right," responded Howell.
Howell was excused from the witness stand and was the final witness for the day.
The defense is expected to wrap up its case tomorrow.
EXPERT WITNESS FOR THE DEFENSE
An expert witness, Dr. Mark Kroll, testified for the defense on electrical weapons, like stun guns. Spending much of his testimony dispelling rumors around the weapon, including the stress a stun gun puts on the body—saying it isn’t enough to kill someone on its own.
"The fact is, no one has ever been electrocuted by a taser, an electrical weapon. It's a dying urban myth," said Kroll.
Kroll is a biomedical scientist focusing on electricity. He told jurors about myths surrounding electronic weapons in his three-hour testimony—like electricity being similar to poison, killing someone as they get more of it.
"Electricity is fundamentally different in there are two wires involved. It comes from one wire and out the other. If electricity is going to tell you it is going to be one or two seconds."
Kroll says stun guns sending 50,000 volts of electricity into a person is also untrue, as claimed by the prosecution in their opening argument.
He pressed the trigger of a stun gun in the courtroom, making a loud noise.
"It is very loud, the arch across there which is scary because it sounds like electricity. That's the 50,000 volts. If you actually push this against somebody that couldn't happen," said Kroll.
He added the stress on the body of a five-second stun is less than the stress experienced when running 20 yards.
"The use of a taser in conjunction with those things does not add any appreciable amount of additional stress to make a difference?" asked the defense.
"That's correct. By bodily blood markers, it actually reduces stress because you are reducing the fighting. Your muscles are locked up, then you can't fight and you can't exert yourself," Kroll responded.
The defense then switched from dispelling myth to Eurie Martin's death specifically and the role a stun gun played in it.
Kroll concluded Martin didn’t experience two minutes of exposure to electricity like the state alleged. It was more like 12 to 19 seconds.
That conclusion is based on Kroll's knowledge of stun guns, and the data pulled from one of the stun guns former deputies Copeland, Scott, and Howell, as well as indicators in the video from the incident.
The state then cross-examining the expert.
"Your conclusion to the jury is based on studies, probabilities, and math and not based on the actual evidence in this case?" asked Weathers.
"Well, we don't. Well, that's all we have," responded Kroll.
The state also pointed out the use of electrocution in this defense's case when that wasn't Martin's cause of death.
"We're not arguing Mr. Martin was electrocuted. You are familiar with the autopsy report in this case, right?" asked Weathers.
"Yes, and I've heard the medical examiner say he wasn't electrocuted but if he was killed with an electrical weapon, the only way I could imagine he was killed as if the probe went into his brain like a bullet. So please help me understand if it wasn't electrocution, how was he killed?" responded Dr. Kroll.
"We are really getting off-topic from what my question was," said Weathers.
The prosecution then focused on his financial stake in the company that makes stun guns, which is in the millions of dollars, and how many times he's testified before in cases where the device was used, which has been dozens.