Cause No:
`
`In The Supreme Court of Texas
`
`Original Proceedings
`
`Writ of Habeas Corpus
`
`IN
`
`In Re Lonnie Kade Welsh
`
`==:—
`
`Relief from
`
`In re Commitment of Lonnie Kade Welsh
`
`Trail Court No. 15-O1-0659-cv
`
`435th Judicial District
`
`Montgomery County, Texas
`
`Party of Interest:
`
`Petitioner: Lonnie Kade Welsh
`
`2600 South Sunset
`
`Littlefield, TX 79339
`
`Respondent: Marsha McLane
`
`4616 West Howard Ln.
`
`Building 2 Suite 350
`
`Austin, TX 7872$
`
`1
`
`

`

`3
`
`3
`
`3
`
`4
`
`4,5,6
`
`6
`
`6,7
`
`7
`
`7,8,9
`
`9
`
`9
`
`10
`
`10
`
`10
`
`10
`
`Jurisdiction
`
`Procedural History
`
`Standard of Review
`
`Ground One
`
`Facts in support of Ground One
`
`Ground Two
`
`Facts in support of Ground Two
`
`Ground Three
`
`Facts in support of Ground Three
`
`Ground Four
`
`Facts in Support of Ground Four
`
`Prayer
`
`Declaration
`
`Table of Appendix
`
`Certificate of Service
`
`Table of Content
`
`2
`
`

`

`I. Jurisdiction
`
`Texas Government Code Sec. 22.00 (e)
`
`The Supreme Court or a justice of the Supreme Court either in term time or vacation, may issue a writ
`
`of habeas corpus when a person is restrained in his liberty by virtue of an order, process, or commitment
`
`issued by a court of judge on account of the violation of an order, judgement, or decree previously
`
`made, rendered, or entered by the court or judge in a civil case.
`
`Texas Constitution Art. V Sec.
`
`II. Procedural History
`
`Lonnie Kade Welsh was civilly committed on 10/14/2015 as a Sexually Violent Predator under Texas
`
`Health and Safety Code 841. Welsh’s attorney of record was Kim Cleary of the State Counsel for
`
`Offenders. Welsh was released from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice on 11/3/2015 into the
`
`custody of Texas Civil Commitment Office. Welsh appealed his civil commitment on December 04,
`
`2015 and was denied on August 25, 2016 by the Ninth Court of Appeals in Beaumont, Texas. Welsh’s
`
`appeal attorney was Johanna Ward of the State Counsel for Offenders. Welsh is in custody of Marsha
`
`Mclane for the purpose of his Civil Commitment who is the head of Texas Civil Commitment Office.
`
`III Standard of Review
`
`3
`
`

`

`Under Texas Supreme Court standards, a reviewing court mirrors the standard used by the fact finder
`
`at trial for legal and factual review. See In The Interest of A.C. J. Y. Jr., L.B. and E.B. children 560
`
`S.W. 3d 624,630 (Tex 2018). Welsh was tried under the beyond reasonable doubt standard. See
`
`841.061. Therefore, the standard of proof at the trial need to reach the level or moral certainty that
`
`would not leave a person hesitant to act on a finding that Welsh has a Behavioral Abnormality for
`
`commitment. See Victory Nebraska 511 U.S.1, $ and Id at 20.
`
`Though this court has never held and ineffective assistance of counsel for the involuntary
`
`civilly committed to other circuit courts have under the Strictiand v Washington professional standard
`
`framework. See. Donihoo v Lewis 2010 Tex. App. Lexis 2343 Texas. Court of Appeals Houston 1st
`
`District; In re Protection of H.W. 85 S.W. 3d 348,355-356 (Tex. App. Tyler 2002 no. pet.).
`
`Ground one: The state presented no evidence, In competent evidence, or no more than a scintilla of
`
`evidence to commit Lonnie Kade Welsh.
`
`Facts in Support of Ground One: The state presented on expert Doctor McGarrahan and Welsh
`
`presented and expert Doctor Marrow. Both Doctors claim they used methodologies consistent with
`
`professional standards to form the basis of their respected opinions.
`
`The State’s expert Dr. McGarrahn diagnosed Welsh with a multifaceted DSM-iv diagnosis of
`
`not otherwise specified (NOS) paraphilia name the sexual fixation to include the nondiagnostic criteria
`
`of pedophilia features, and the made-up diagnosis of Hebephilia and Ephebophilia. That she describes
`
`a capturing the complete picture of Welsh’s sexual deviancy. Dr. McGarrahan also made actual test of
`
`a Static 99R score of 4 and PCL-R score of 30. Moreover, McGarrahn relied heavily on Welsh’s sex
`
`offenses being considered in her opinion to be sexual deviant. Therefore, the expert concluded that
`
`4
`
`

`

`Welsh suffered from an emotional or volitional disorder that predisposes Welsh to commit act of sexual
`
`violence.
`
`Conversely, Dr. Marrow,
`
`the defense expert concluded Welsh does not suffer from any
`
`capacity disorder that predisposes Welsh to acts of sexual violence. Dr. Marrow did not make a sexual
`
`disorder diagnosis under either the DSM-IV or DSM-V. She specifically stated that if she could have
`
`made a diagnosis she would have. Dr. Marrow also used the actual test of Static 99R arriving at the
`
`same score as McGarrhan of 4 and used the PCL-R but coming to a different score of 25. Dr. Marrow
`
`was of the opinion that other reasons were the cause of Welsh’s sexual crimes other than an emotional
`
`or volitional capacity disorder.
`
`As a preliminary matter it must be noted that the jury was not required to find if welsh had
`
`either an emotional or volitional capacity disorder. Therefore, the court should affirm to both definition
`
`or to neither. Volitional under its common meaning would be defined as free-will, Emotional should
`
`be used as a term of art in the mental health community and under the legal doctrine of in pan materia
`
`as a term that applies to the same subject matter for others who are civilly committed.
`
`Both Dr. McGurrahan and Dr. Marrow relied upon Welsh’s criminal history, the DSM, and the
`
`Static 99R, and the PCL-R. Dr. McGarrahn never explained why her methodology was superior to Dr.
`
`Marrows based on verifiable evidence within her methodology. Neither did Dr. McGarrahn eliminate
`
`any other causes for Welsh’s sexual acts, other than the Behavior Abnormality that consists of the
`
`Emotional or Volitional capacity disorder. As there can be more than one cause to commit sex crimes
`
`this is a critical gap in her methodology.
`
`Additionally, Dr. McGrrahan never established how her methodology is connected to either
`
`the Emotional or Volitional capacity disorder. She does not adequately explain how Welsh had free
`
`will and the capacity to commit the crimes intentionally but now is predisposed to commit sex crimes
`
`by either the emotional or volitional disorder. She specifically never established which capacity
`
`S
`
`

`

`disorder her methodology followed. Similarly, she never connected the out]andish DSM-IV diagnosis,
`
`the Static-99R, or the PCL-R separately, collectively, or in what way these diagnosis and test
`
`correspond to a lack of free-will or diminished capacity. In fact, she testified to the opposite results.
`
`She opinioned that neither the Static 99r, PCL-R, Paraphilic disorder, or being a repeat sex offender
`
`are enough to diagnose Welsh with a Behavioral Abnormality, the fact is she never established how
`
`any of the above test, diagnosis or crimes were in any way relevant or how they helped her to reach
`
`her ultimate opinion of the emotional or volitional capacity disorder. Even her actual test provided no
`
`basis. These tests take other sex offenders and their crimes and form a meta-analysis to form a
`
`percentage. However, Dr. McGarrahan never indicated how those who were surveyed in the test where
`
`in anyway similar to or different than Welsh.
`
`Never dose she bridge the gap between her methodology and either the emotional or volitional
`
`capacity disorder. The fact that they are completely two different types of capacity disorder themselves
`
`and she never connected her methodology to either is fatal to the probative worth of the evidence and
`
`nothing in her opinion can reach the high standards of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
`
`See Exlilbit A. Volume 4 court Transcripts Testimony of Dr. McGarrahan and Dr. Marrow was unable
`
`to obtain Dr. Marrow’s transcripts of her testimony see Exhibit C.
`
`Ground Two: Taken as a whole in the jury instruction violated Welsh’s right to a fair trial.
`
`fact in Support of Ground Two:
`
`(I) The jury instruction stated that Welsh is a sexually violent predator if he is (1) a repeat sexually
`
`violent offender; and (2) suffers from a behavioral abnormality that makes the person likely to engage
`
`in a predatory act of sexual violence; (b) A person is a repeat sexually violent offender for the purposes
`
`of chapter $41 of the Texas Health and Safety Code ifthe person is convicted ofmore than one sexually
`
`violent offense and a sentence is imposed for at least on of the offenses. See Exhibit B pg.3
`
`6
`
`

`

`(2) The court granted a direct verdict that Welsh is a repeat sexually violent offender. See Exhibit B
`
`pg. 3.
`
`(3) The jury charge had no statement of presumption that Welsh does not have a behavioral
`
`abnormality.
`
`(4) The State of Texas, Special Prosecution Unit elicited testimony that likely means probable from
`
`both Dr. Mcgarrahan and See Exhibit A pg.98 and Dr Marrow unable to get volume 5 of transcript See
`
`Exhibit C.
`
`(5) Nothing in the jury charge establishes proof beyond a reasonable doubt unequivocally clear and
`
`convincing evidence, or more likely than not for preponderance of the evidence.
`
`The term likely means probable
`
`Therefore, taken as a whole there is a reasonable likelihood that the jury applied the beyond reasonable
`
`doubt standard incorrectly. Given the jury instruction that Welsh is likely to engage in acts of sexual
`
`violence, with the directed verdict and the testimony of the doctors while weighing the facts that their
`
`was no instruction on the presumption of a behavioral abnormality or any clarification that the term
`
`likely does not impact the burden of proof.
`
`Ground Three: Ineffective Counsel
`
`Facts in Support of Ground Three: By professional standards Kim Bleary committed two errors that
`
`resulted in harm to Welsh’s case depriving him of the right to effective assistance of counsel.
`
`Kim Cleary and Tom Brewer were ineffective as counsel by not asking for an instruction of
`
`presumption not to have a behavioral abnormality; by not asking for instructions that the term likely
`
`does not impact the burden of proof; and by not objecting to the sate use of the term likely to mean
`
`probable that lowered the sates burden of proof. See Exhibit A pg.98 and Exhibit C.
`
`By professional standards Kim Bleary committed two errors that resulted in harm to Welsh’s case
`
`depriving him of the right to effective assistance of counsel.
`
`7
`
`

`

`1. Cleary never challenged the State’s expert Dr. McGarrahan methodology for scientific reliability in
`
`either a dulbert/Robinson hearing or objecting to the methodology at trial taking Dr. MeGarrahan Voir
`
`Dire to establish the flaws in her scientific reliability. One neither the Static 99R or the PCL-R was
`
`designed to establish free-will or diminished capacity. Moreover, Dr. McGarrahan used a DSM-IV
`
`diagnosis of NOS Paraphilia. That method is outdated and has be replaced by the DSM-V diagnosis of
`
`otherwise specified. The purpose of this was to eliminate just what Dr. McGarrahan did and that was
`
`using patch work of unreliable diagnosis. Kim Cleary did not have Dr. McGarrahan establish how the
`
`patch work diagnosis has been tested by peer groups for reliability or even how Welsh presently
`
`suffered from recurrent, intense, sexual arousing fantasies or urges. Even the threshold requirement of
`
`six months of repeat sexually behavior to the targeted sexual fixation. None of Welsh’s criminal sexual
`
`history meets the requirements for Pedophilia, Hebephilia, or Ephebophilia and under the DSM
`
`framework the must independently reach the paraphilic standards to be included for the diagnosis.
`
`Thus, how she incorporated each diagnosis based on each crim fails the 6-month requirement for the
`
`paraphilia, NOS or otherwise specified.
`
`In Short Kim Cleary by not challenging the expert’s opinion in a case such as this that relies
`
`heavily on expert opinion fails to reach the professional standards of her profession.
`
`2. Kim Cleary allowed Dr. McGarrahan to accuse me of a crime I did not commit. Dr. McGarrahan
`
`sat on the stand and accused Welsh of molesting his children and gave the reason of the inconsistent
`
`statement by the children was because they were afraid of welsh and made the outcry statement once
`
`they were removed from Welsh’s custody. These statements have no basis in reality as the facts do not
`
`support the conclusion and should have been corrected. Welsh’s children mad a child advocacy video
`
`several months after they were removed from his custody where they clearly and unequivocally denied
`
`any molestation. Kim Cleary never cleared-up the time frame accusation made by McGarrahna and
`
`only rebutted her with Dr. Marrow’s statement of denial. But Professional standards would demand
`
`8
`
`

`

`the best evidence and the best evidence was the video to be submitted as evidence and any confusion
`
`about when it was established to clear the minds of the jury.
`
`3. Kim Cleary and Tom Brewer were ineffective as counsel by not asking for an instruction of
`
`presumption not to have a behavioral abnormality; by not asking for instructions that the term likely
`
`does not impact the burden of proof; and by not objecting to the sate use of the term likely to mean
`
`probable that lowered the sates burden of proof. See Exhibit A pg. 98 and Exhibit B.
`
`Ground Four: Johanna Ward was ineffective as Counsel for Welsh’s appeal.
`
`Facts in Support of Ground Four: Johanna Ward presented two grounds for relief from judgement
`
`(1) A constitutional Challenge; and (2) Abuse of discretion for the recusal of the District Judge Suer.
`
`The Ninth Court of Appeals denied relief on the basis that (1) the constitutional Challenges
`
`was not preserved for appeal; and (2) they had previously ruled that the evidence used in the attempt
`
`to recuse the District Judge was not substantial enough to recuse him.
`
`These are clear errors of professional judgment where Joanna Ward either knew or should have
`
`known violated judgement. The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 33.1 clearly says you must have
`
`the trial court rule on the complaint. How does she not know this? Then she uses the same evidence to
`
`recuse a judge that had twice over been refused by the same court. Dis she believe they would change
`
`their mind?
`
`I have never seen a case that does not start with the sufficiency of the evidence analysis. Not
`
`only does she not start out that way she does not do it at all. As I pointed out above it would at least
`
`warrant an argument. When I asked Johanna Ward about filing for ineffective assistance of counsel
`
`based on them failing to present the video, she informed me this is not done because they are part of
`
`the same office.
`
`9
`
`

`

`V. Prayer
`
`Wherefore premise considered Welsh humbly prays you grant this motion by either overturning the
`
`commitment, remanding for new trial, allow the appeal process to begin anew with different counsel,
`
`or any other relief entitled too.
`
`IV. Declaration
`
`I Lonnie Kade Welsh do here by declare under the penalty of perjury that the above factual statements
`
`are true and correct.
`
`Signed November 13, 2020 by Lonnie Kade Welsh
`
`ke/ier
`
`Exhibit A — volume 4 Court Trial Transcripts Testimony of Doctor McGarrahan Doctor Marrow.
`
`VII. Table of Appendix
`
`Exhibit B — Jury Charge
`
`Exhibit C — volume 5 not included Motion to compel court to order indigent copy of Trial Transcripts
`
`and denial.
`
`VIII. Certificate of Service
`
`I Lonnie Kade Welsh do herby certify that a true and correct copy has been of the Writ of Habeas
`
`Corpus has been served by placing the same with the United States Post Office postage prepaid to:
`
`Marsha Mclane
`
`4646 West Howard Ln
`
`Respectfully SubmiUed /‘(
`
`Building 2 Suite 350
`
`Austin, TX 7872$
`
`10
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT
`EXHIBIT
`
`A
`A
`
`

`

`APPEARANCES
`
`HE. HAUREES WHITTHORE
`SBOT MD. 24070399
`MS. RACHEL JORDAN
`SNOT NO, 24087818
`SPECIAL PROSECUTION UNIT
`1300 11th Street. SuIte 310
`77240
`Huntsville. Texas
`Phone:
`936-291-0431
`ATTORNEYS FOR TUE STATE
`
`US. KIMBERLY CLEARY
`SNOT NO. 24076963
`MS. THOMAS BREWER
`SNOT NO. 24059634
`STATE COUNSEL FOR OFFENDERS
`200 RIver Pointe Drive
`Coeroc, Tunas
`77034
`Phone:
`.936-521-6700
`ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT
`
`2 3 4 5 6 7
`
`10
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`lU
`
`IN
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`REPORTERS RECORD
`VOLUME 4 OF 6 VOLUMES
`CASE NO. 09-15-00498-CV
`TRIAL COURT CAUSE ND.
`l5-O1-00659-CV
`
`IN RE:
`
`IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
`
`THE COMMITMENT OP
`
`HONTOOHERY COUNTY. TEXAS
`
`LONNIE KADE WELSH
`
`435TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
`
`TRIAL
`
`On October 13, 2015,
`
`the following proceedings
`
`came on to be heard in the above-entitled and numbered
`
`cause before the Honorable Michael T. Seller.
`
`Judge
`
`Presiding, held in Conrne, Montgomery County, Toyas.
`
`Proceedings reported by machine shorthand and
`
`computer-aided transcription.
`
`Grey coesoy, Official Reporser, 330th District Coort
`
`- 03n-53e-3e3n
`
`Grey Ceesey. Official Geperter, 430th Ulstrioo Coart
`
`- 936.530-3e3E
`
`TRIAL
`
`(Open court, Respondent present,
`
`no jury)
`
`MS. WHITTRORE:
`
`8efore the jury comes
`
`In,
`
`Your Honor -- before we bring the jury in,
`
`I would just
`
`ask that we invoke the Rule.
`
`THE COURT: Okay. Who are all
`
`the
`
`3
`
`5 6 7 B 9
`
`3
`
`INDEX
`CHRONOLOGTCAI
`VOLUME 4 OF 6 VOLUMES
`JURY TRIAL
`
`October 13. 2015
`
`Jury Sworn
`Opening Statement by State
`Openle9 Statanont by Ronpuedont
`Judicial Notice Requested
`
`5
`B
`14
`205
`
`STATE’S WITNESSES
`
`DIRECT
`
`CROSS
`
`72
`1661203
`
`4
`4
`4
`4
`
`VOL.
`
`4
`4
`
`2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`23
`
`2 3
`
`7
`
`6
`
`Connie Kade Welsh
`16187
`Antoinette McGarrahan, 951196
`Ph.D.
`
`RESPONDENT’S WITNESSES DIRECT
`
`CROSS
`
`Conch Nanks
`
`2061227
`
`213
`
`VOL.
`
`4
`
`ALPHABETICAL INDEX
`
`DIRECT
`
`CROSS
`
`VOL.
`
`Manks, Conch
`2061227
`HcGarrahan, Antoinette 961198
`Ph.D.
`Welsh, Lonnie Kade
`
`18187
`
`213
`16g1203
`
`72
`
`4
`4
`
`4
`
`Stote Rests
`
`COURT REPORTER’S CERTIFICATE
`
`FADE
`
`VOL.
`
`4
`
`205
`
`233
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`lB
`
`witneosos? Why don’t you approach the bench here for
`
`me, witnesses. State, do you have any witnesses here?
`
`MS. WHITTI1ORE: Not yet, Your Honor.
`
`My
`
`witness 15 going to be Sr. HcOarrahan,
`
`THE COURT: Ha’an, raise your right hand.
`
`(Witness sworn)
`
`THE COURT:
`
`For
`
`the record,
`
`face the
`
`reporter and tell her what your name is.
`
`THE WITNESS:
`
`My name Is Patsy Lonnell
`
`IN Honks.
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`THE COURT:
`
`Just a second. Okay.
`
`You may
`
`be seated. moan.
`
`The Rule has been invoked,
`
`So what that
`
`23 means is that -- moan --
`
`24
`
`25
`
`THE WInlESS:
`
`Oh. okay.
`
`I’m sorry.
`
`THE COURT:
`
`You have 9ot
`
`to wait outside
`
`srey Ceunny, Official Reporter. 430th Oistr-int taart — 035—53$.363e
`
`Grey Cheeey, uttiolel neporter, 435th DIstrict Court - 935—536-3&3N
`
`

`

`OPENING STATEIIENT BY THE STATE
`
`65.
`
`JORDAN; Ladies and gentlemen of
`
`the
`
`jury, Hr. Welsh is thu very definition of impulsive.
`
`You will
`
`learn throughout
`
`this trial
`
`that hr. Welsh has
`
`a complete disregard for the laws and the rules of our
`
`6
`
`society, and he also has a sexually deviant interest in
`
`7 children.
`
`And that those, coupled together,
`
`is what
`
`makes him a Sexually violent predator.
`
`Good morning,
`
`ladies and gentlemen.
`
`I want
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`to thank you so much for showing up yesterday on a
`
`holiday, coming back today and being willing to sit
`
`through this trial
`
`that’s going to last through today
`
`and tomorrow, and keep an open mind while 600 listen to
`
`the evidence that’s going to be presented to you.
`
`Hf name is Rachel Jordan, and along with
`
`the courtroom.
`
`THE WITNESS; Okay.
`
`THE COURT;
`
`So you can’t be in here durlog
`the trial and don’t discuss the facts of this case with
`anybody other than the lawyers. Okay? Okay.
`
`Go cot
`
`there and have a seat.
`
`Thank you.
`
`mu’ so.
`
`for me.
`
`Anything else before we bring the jury in?
`
`ES. WHGTTHORE; No, Your Honor.
`
`(Open court. Respondent end jury present)
`
`THE COURT;
`
`Please raise your right hand
`
`(Jury panel
`
`sworn)
`
`THE COURT;
`
`Thank you.
`
`Be seated.
`
`Good morning.
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`8 9
`
`10
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`IS
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`THE JURY (COLLECTUVE):
`
`Good morning.
`
`THE COURT; At this time, bnth sides have a
`chance to give you an Opening statement.
`
`Its not an
`
`opening argument. This is what
`
`they think the evidence
`
`is going to show. What
`
`they say is not evidence, but.
`
`again,
`
`this is what
`
`they think the evidence Is going to
`
`show.
`
`State, you may proceed.
`
`65.
`
`JORDAN;
`
`Thank you, Your Honor.
`
`Hay It please the Court, opposing counsel.
`
`Id
`is
`16
`
`17
`
`16
`
`19
`
`25
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Haureen Whitteore, we represent
`
`the State of Texas
`
`against Hr. Welsh in this trial.
`
`And you are here to
`
`answer
`
`the very important question;
`
`Do you find beyond
`
`a reasonable doubt
`
`that Connie Welsh is a sexually
`
`violent predutor?
`
`And I knew yesterday, during Voir dire, you
`
`were given the definition of what a sexually violent
`
`predator is, but
`
`I know you’ve slept since then,
`
`so I’m
`
`going to gn over it again with you.
`
`A sexually Violent
`
`predator asks two questions,
`
`it’s two elements,
`
`And the
`
`srey Chneey, Oftielni Reporter, 43505 Dictniet court
`
`- n3H.O38.3n3a
`
`Grey Cheney, Of tinSel neporter, 430th ulotrIun Court
`
`. 935.035.3538
`
`6
`
`child.
`
`three different counts of sexual assault of a
`
`child against Crystal Avams, who was
`
`a 15_yearold
`
`Tenale.
`
`You will
`
`learn that hr. Welsh pled guilty to
`
`these uffanses and that he was sentenced to six years’
`
`oonflnenant
`
`in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice
`
`for those offenses.
`
`And you’ll wise learn that, additionally in
`
`2009. he committed sexual assault of a child.
`
`two core
`
`500nts, against Latessa Bell, who was 15 years old at
`
`the time, and he was also sentenced for these offenses.
`
`And sn for these 515 sexually violent
`
`offenses,
`
`the way we’re going to prove to you that
`
`Hr. Welsh is a repeat sexually violent offender is
`
`testimony free Hr. Welsh himself.
`
`I expect
`
`that when he
`
`takes the stand, he will admit
`
`to you that ho pled
`
`2 3
`
`5 6 7 a 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`first asks,
`
`is Hr. Welsh a repeat sexually violent
`offender, and the second asks, does Hr. Welsh suffer
`Iron a behavioral abnorsality that makes bin likely to
`engage in a predaisry act of sesual violence,
`
`And no
`we. as the State, we’re going to prove to you these two
`elements throughout this trial.
`
`So let’s talk about that flrst element,
`
`is
`
`hr. Welsh a repeat sexually violent offender?
`A repeat
`senually violent offender is someone who has at least
`two convictyons for a sexually violent offense and who
`has been sentenced for at
`
`And that’s
`
`ieast one of
`
`thee.
`
`the legal definition of
`
`a repeat sexually violent
`
`offender.
`
`And so throughout this trial. we will prove
`to you that, yes, Hr. Welsh It a sexually violent
`
`offender.
`
`You will
`
`learn that in 2006 he committed
`
`2 3
`
`5 6 7 8 9
`
`IS
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`indecency with a child by contact against Ashley.
`
`a
`
`six-year-old female.
`
`And he was altlmutely sentenced to
`
`four years’ cemfinenemt
`
`in the Texas Department of
`
`Criminal Justice for that offesse, eves though initially
`
`he was put on probation for that offense.
`
`He violated
`
`that probation, he was adjudicated for this offense.
`
`adjudicated guilty.
`
`He pled guilty.
`
`You will else learn throughout
`
`thin trial
`
`that
`
`in 2006, Hr. Welsh committed sexual assault of
`
`a
`
`guilty,
`
`that he was convicted of
`
`these offenses,
`
`that he
`
`was sentenced for those offensos, sent
`
`to prison, and he
`
`is still currently Incarcerated.
`
`And also, what’s going to be admitted into
`
`evidence Is a penitentiary pucket or what you may hear
`
`referred to as a pen packet,
`
`And a pan packet serves as
`
`the underlyimg reason for why someone is In the
`
`17
`is
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23 penItentiary. why they’re inCarcerated.
`
`And so,
`
`the
`
`24
`
`25
`
`actual
`
`indictmemt
`
`language,
`
`the convictions,
`
`the
`
`judgments thenseluns,
`
`those are entered into evidence,
`
`Gray Chxeuy, Ott leSs! heperter, 435th Distrist Court
`
`-
`
`iss-sxn.xssn
`
`Grey Ceeeoy, Official Rnporser. 43sth Distriat Court
`
`. nins3s..3ciu
`
`

`

`nonsexuai criminal history, and that this proves to you
`
`his impulsive, antisocial behavior
`
`in society. You’rC
`
`going to hear something -- talking about how -- the wide
`
`variety of his criminal offenses,
`
`something that you may
`
`hear referred to as criminal versatility. You’re going
`
`to hear that this is a risk factor,
`
`that means that he
`
`is more likely in the future to reoffend,
`
`And you’re
`
`going to learn that ever since he was an adult, he’s
`
`been continuously arrested for offenses, convicted of
`
`offenses, charged with certain offenses.
`
`And in 2006 ix
`
`when the sexual offense -- his first sexual offense that
`
`he was actually charged with,
`
`Indecency with a child by
`
`contact against Ashley Pate, occurred.
`
`And like I said, he was initially given
`
`probation for this offense,
`
`And you will
`
`learn,
`
`ladies
`
`2 3
`
`6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`is
`
`And so. you’ll be able to look at
`
`the physical evidence
`
`of those pen packets.
`
`And Sc that’s how were going to
`
`prove to you that hr. Welsh is a repeat sebually violent
`
`offender -
`
`So that brings us back to the two elements.
`
`The second element
`
`then asks Whether or not Mr. Welsh
`
`Suffers from a behavior abnormality that makes him
`
`likely to engage in a predatory act of sexual violence.
`
`And, again, yesterday,
`
`I know the definition was put up
`
`for you on the screen, but that definition,
`
`let me
`
`remind you,
`
`is a congenital or acquired condition that.
`
`by affecting a person’s emotional or volitional
`
`capacity. predisposes the person to commit
`
`a sexually
`
`violent offense to the extent that the person becomes a
`
`2 3 4 5 6
`
`B 9
`
`10
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13:
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`29
`
`menace to tho health qnd safety of another person,
`
`And,
`
`ladies and gentlemen, you will
`
`learn
`
`throughout this trial
`
`that Hr. Welsh’s impulsive
`
`behavior and his sexually deviant interests in children
`
`is what has created the sexually violent offenses in the
`
`past and It’s also what predisposes him to commit
`
`them
`
`in the future.
`
`And that’s What
`
`fOO’tO going to learn
`
`throughout this trial.
`
`You’re going to learn about hr. Welsh’s
`
`extensive criminal history, his criminal history that
`
`includes not only the sex Offenses, but also his
`
`16
`
`17
`
`16
`
`19
`
`25
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`and gentlemen,
`
`that while he was on probation, while he
`
`was supervised, while he was
`
`in sex offender treatment,
`
`trying to deal with him sexually deviant interests, he
`
`violated his probation and he committed more sexual
`
`offenses.
`
`You will
`
`leers that
`
`in Hay 2009 Is when he
`
`committed the sexual assault Of
`
`a child against Crystal
`
`Avans, and you’ll also learn about an additienal victim
`
`that I haven’t
`
`talked about yet. Shelby Jones.
`
`and that
`
`occurred in October of 2006.
`
`And yes will
`
`leers that
`
`Grey Chw,oy. Official eeporter, 234tn Oietrlet Court — 536.530.3538
`
`Grey Cheney, Official Roperter, 435th Sietraet Court
`
`‘ 536.030.3638
`
`II
`
`12
`
`victims. dmesn’t care about that. You’re going to learn
`
`that
`
`.. and I amticipate that
`
`the defense expert, who
`
`the Respoddent is goinc to call, Dr. hauro. will also
`
`agree that Hr. Welsh does have antisocial traits. and he
`
`has a personality disorder.
`
`So that’s in agreement
`
`there,
`
`that’s what you’re going to learn througfloui
`
`this
`
`trial.
`
`What Or.
`
`licOarrahan will also explain to
`
`you is that Hr. Welsh does have a sexually deviant
`
`interest In children,
`
`And she’s going to provide yes
`
`with an explanation for this,
`
`a diagnosis to help put
`
`a
`
`label un what his sexually deviant
`
`interest is. You’re
`
`going to hear about paraphila, and labels, other
`
`specified paraphiiia.
`
`And Dr. Hcoarrahan will explain
`
`2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`Hr. Welsh did plead guilty to sexually assaulting Shelby
`
`Jones, but this offense was ultimately unedjudicated as
`
`part of the plea bargain.
`
`But hr. Welsh admits and pled
`
`guilty to the sexual assault of Shelby Jones, who was
`
`14 years old at
`
`the time, of that sexual assasit,
`
`Row,
`
`like I said,
`
`the probation for the
`
`indecency with a child against Ashley. you will
`
`learn,
`
`was ultinstely revoked because of his violations.
`
`And
`
`you will
`
`learn that Hr. Welsh knew he was goingto court
`
`on October 29, 2009, and on that sane day that he knew
`
`he was going to court
`
`to be adjudicated guilty for the
`
`indecency with a child is when he committed a sexual
`
`assault of another child against Latessa Bell.
`
`2 3
`
`S 8 7
`
`9
`
`10
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`Ia
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`And so,
`
`ladies and gentlemen,
`
`this is what
`
`you’re going to hear about, his criminal history.
`
`You’re going to learn also that since he’s been
`
`Incarcerated, his antisocial features have still bean
`
`emerging through discipiinaries.
`
`And we’re going to call
`
`to the stand
`
`Or, Hcgarrahan to explain to you what all of this means.
`
`She’s going to etplalm to you that Hr. Welsh does have a
`
`personality disorder and that’s why he acts out
`
`impulsively, he breaks the law.
`
`She’s going te explain
`
`to you thst he’s a psychopath, has ccoplate disregard
`
`for oCher people’s feelings, emotions or creating
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`Ia
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`all of that to you and explain how these certain
`
`diagnoses,
`
`these labels. help psychologists help you
`
`understand what
`
`is ultimately wrong with Mr. Welsh.
`
`as
`
`far as his sexually deviant Interest goon.
`
`And you will hear that Or. hcOarr4han cane
`
`to her independent conclusion that Hr. Welsh does suffer
`
`fran a behavioral abnormality that makes him likely to
`
`engage in a predatory act of sexual violence,
`
`Dr.
`
`licOarrahas will also testify that she
`
`rvibed ass relied upxn other doctors’ opinions.
`
`t
`
`Or. Charles Woodrick, who was 81mG by the Texas
`
`Grey Cheooy. affleiai Reporter, 435th Oietriet toort — 036.530.3O3a
`
`urey 0000ey, Official emperter, 455th DIStrict court
`
`. 536.535.3530
`
`

`

`13
`
`14
`
`me.
`
`He preyed on these girls. These were predatory
`
`acts.
`
`And I want you to think about
`
`that while you hear
`
`the tmstlmony today.
`
`And additionally, while you hear
`
`the testimony from the defnnse eupert, ask yourself what
`
`actually sakes sense when she explains her opinion,
`
`that, yes, he does have a personality disorder, but he’s
`
`not likely to do it again.
`
`And,
`
`ladles and gentlemen, nt
`
`the end of
`
`this trial, we will put on that - there will he enough
`
`evidence and you will
`
`find that, beyond a reasonable
`
`doubt,
`
`that: yes. Hr. Welsh is a sexually violent
`
`predator.
`
`Respondent.
`
`Thank you.
`
`THE COURT: Okay.
`
`On behalf nf the
`
`2 3 4 a a 7 B N
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`Department of Criminal Justice,
`
`to make a determination
`
`of ehether or not hr. Welsh suffers from a behavior
`
`abnormality, and Or. Woodrick. Who is a psychologist,
`
`did find that, yes, Hr. Welsh suffers from a behavior
`
`abnormal I ty.
`
`You’re also going to hear, that
`
`Dr. HcGarrahan reviewod and relied upon a deposition of
`
`a Dr. Aranbula, who is a psychiatrist. You’ll
`
`learn
`
`that he’s the president of thn Texas Hedical Board.
`
`And
`
`he evaluated the Respondent as well, had an interview,
`
`reviewed records,
`
`and he also made am independent
`
`determination that Hr. Welsh suffers from a behavioral
`
`abnormality that makes him likely to engage In a
`
`prodatery act of sexual violence.
`
`So,
`
`ladies and gentleman,
`
`that’s how we’re
`
`going to prove to you that -. beyond a reasonable doubt
`
`2 3
`
`7 8 S
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`18
`
`17
`
`that, yes. Hr. Walsh does suffer from this behavior
`
`IS
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`abnormality.
`
`And while you hear the testimony of
`
`everyone today,
`
`I want you tu keep in mind what makes
`
`sense.
`
`And I want
`
`-- while Mr. Welsh is testifying.
`
`I
`
`also want you to pay attention to his perspective on the
`victims and whether or not he thinks what happened was
`
`the victims’ fault or whether or not what he ongaged in
`
`were predatory acts that he orchestrated,
`
`that he preyed
`
`Os
`
`theue --
`
`these young wanes or
`
`these children, excuse
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`26
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`OS. CLEARY:
`
`aay it please the Court,
`
`Counsel.
`
`OPENING STATEHENT BY THE RESPONDENT
`
`HE. CLEARY:
`
`Good morning.
`
`JURY (COLLECTIVE): Good morning.
`
`OS. CLEARY:
`
`I’m glad to see you all made
`
`it back here.
`
`It is a beautiful day out, and I know
`
`that there are places I’m sure you’d rather be than
`
`doing your civic duty.
`
`But it is very ioportant that
`
`you’re here.
`
`And on behalf of myself and Hr. Welsh and
`
`Seep Chenuy, Ottielci
`
`liopsetur, 455th District Court
`
`. 530.530.5055
`
`Grey Coeney, Official neparter, 435th Blstriut Cncrt
`
`- 530-530-3030
`
`Hr. Brewer, we’re very glad that you cane today.
`
`nuthl on.
`
`Thats a
`
`tough act
`
`to follow.
`
`You hear
`
`And I anticipate that
`
`the first part of
`
`whether hr. Welsh is a sexually violent predator is
`
`going to be pretty cut and dry.
`
`Pen packets,
`
`those
`
`exist or they don’t.
`
`And I anticipate most of
`
`the
`
`evidence you will hear will be about whether or not
`
`Hr. Welsh has a behavioral abnormality.
`
`You all
`
`just
`
`heard the definition, us I don’t need to repeat It.
`
`So I expect
`
`the evidence will nhuw
`
`Hr. Welsh will admit
`
`that he had sex with undetaged