Skip to content
Timothy Jones Jr.- Case Archive
2019 Murder Trialtrial-daytrial-dayRick HubbardSuzanne MayesCasey SecorBoyd YoungAdriana FloresDeborah GreyAmber KyzerdirectcrossredirectrecrossDay 30 - June 11, 2019The court denied a new-trial motion and received Adriana Flores's testimony by sealed proffer. Deborah Grey continued social-history testimony, and Amber Kyzer said she hoped for mercy while deferring to the jury's decision.
← Day 292019 Murder TrialDay 31 →

Day 30 - June 11, 2019

Flores Proffer Rulings, Grey Social History, and Kyzer Testimony

Judge Eugene C. Griffith, Jr.
12Proceedings
9Pages
3Witnesses
1,147Lines
Day 30 of 32
Appearing:
Rick Hubbard Suzanne Mayes Casey Secor Boyd Young Adriana Flores Deborah Grey Amber Kyzer

The court denied a new-trial motion and received Adriana Flores's testimony by sealed proffer. Deborah Grey continued social-history testimony, and Amber Kyzer said she hoped for mercy while deferring to the jury's decision.

Full day summary

The court denied the defense motion for a new guilt-phase trial and accepted Adriana Flores's forensic-psychology testimony by sealed proffer rather than presenting it to the jury. Flores gave an independent opinion from psychological-testing data and said the available information did not permit her to say Mr. Jones was malingering. Deborah Grey then presented social-history testimony concerning reported family trauma, instability, mental-health history, and later family circumstances, subject to the court's limits on detail and exhibits. Amber Kyzer described her relationship with Mr. Jones and said she hoped for mercy while stating that nothing justified what happened to her children; she later said she would respect the jury's sentencing decision.

Video thumbnail8:59:50
Watch →

1. Adriana Flores Proffer and Sealing Rulings

Before the jury entered, the court allowed a sealed proffer from Dr. Adriana Flores concerning Dr. Kruse's testing and conclusions, outside the jury's presence.

→
Procedural
Adriana Flores Proffer and Sealing Rulings
61 lines

The court ordered Dr. Flores's proposed expert testimony proffered outside the jury's presence and sealed the proffer.

Highlights

Adriana Flores Proffer and Sealing RulingsrulingThe court granted the State's request to seal the proffer out of caution, over the defense's objection.

2. Adriana Flores — Proffer (Part 1)

Defense expert Adriana Flores testified in a proffer that malingering-test data were insufficient to determine that Mr. Jones was malingering, after describing limitations in the screeners and her M-FAST rescoring.

→
Direct
Adriana Flores — Proffer Direct Adriana Flores Boyd Young
112 lines

Forensic psychologist Adriana Flores said the testing data did not provide enough information to conclude that Mr. Jones was malingering; the court limited direct criticism of another expert's scoring.

3. Adriana Flores — Cross (Part 2)

Adriana Flores said neuropsychological testing was outside her expertise and explained her review of incomplete PAI reporting.

→
Cross
Adriana Flores — Cross Adriana Flores Rick Hubbard
90 lines

Flores defended her review of psychological-test data while acknowledging limits on her expertise and that she had not contacted Dr. Kruse or the Licensing Board before testifying.

4. Motion for New Trial Based on After-Discovered Evidence

Before the jury entered for Day 30, the court denied the defense motion for a new guilt-phase trial and ruled on mitigation evidence and related objections.

→
Procedural
Motion for New Trial Based on After-Discovered Evidence
108 lines

The court denied a new-trial motion, kept Dr. Flores' testimony from the jury, and set limits on social-history mitigation evidence.

Highlights

Motion for New Trial Based on After-Discovered EvidencerulingThe court denied the defense motion for a new guilt-phase trial, finding that Dr. Flores was a newly presented expert rather than after-discovered evidence entitling Mr. Jones to a new trial.Motion for New Trial Based on After-Discovered Evidence“It's a newly-discovered expert witness that was presented late, but I don't think it entitles Mr. Jones to a new trial.”— Eugene C. Griffith, Jr.The court explained its basis for denying the new-trial request.

5. Deborah Grey — Direct (Part 1)

Deborah Grey, a qualified social-work expert, began explaining her biopsychosocial-history assessment of Tim Jr. and the family-history information she reviewed.

→
Direct
Deborah Grey — Direct Deborah Grey Casey Secor
261 lines

Expert social worker Deborah Grey described her social-history method and reported family and early-life history; the court admitted one genogram but excluded the family-record notebooks.

Highlights

Deborah Grey — Directprocedural actionThe court qualified Grey as an expert in licensed clinical social work.

6. Hearing on Scope of Deborah Grey’s Testimony

Defense counsel challenged limits on Deborah Grey's social-history testimony; the court allowed general questions about trauma's effect on child development while excluding unnecessary graphic detail.

→
Procedural
Hearing on Scope of Deborah Grey’s Testimony
40 lines

The court limited graphic detail in Deborah Grey's social-history testimony while allowing general questions about trauma's effect on child development.

7. Deborah Grey — Direct (Part 2)

Deborah Grey continued describing Tim, Jr.'s reported childhood trauma, family instability, isolation, and other adolescent experiences.

→
Direct
Deborah Grey — Direct (Continued) Deborah Grey Casey Secor
75 lines

Grey continued her social-history account of Tim, Jr.'s reported childhood adversity and adolescent experiences; the court allowed some expert testimony but limited reference to another expert.

Highlights

Deborah Grey — Direct (Continued)testimony highlightGrey described reported violence, substance use, threats, and chaos in a childhood home, along with Tim, Jr.'s reported fear, withdrawal, and isolation.

8. Amber Kyzer — Direct/Cross/Redirect/Recross (Recall)

Amber Kyzer testified that she did not want Tim put to death, while cross-examination addressed her marriage, alleged threats, and her views on sentencing.

→
Direct
Amber Kyzer — Direct Amber Kyzer Boyd Young
17 lines

Amber Kyzer described her family's losses and said she could not bring herself to want Tim put to death, instead expressing hope for mercy.

Cross
Amber Kyzer — Cross Amber Kyzer Suzanne Mayes
105 lines

Amber Kyzer described conflicted feelings about sentencing, alleged violence during her marriage, and what she viewed as Tim's manipulation of contact with the children.

Redirect
Amber Kyzer — Redirect Amber Kyzer Boyd Young
7 lines

Amber Kyzer said she did not want Tim put to death and would respect the jury's decision.

Recross
Amber Kyzer — Recross Amber Kyzer Suzanne Mayes
9 lines

Amber Kyzer confirmed she was not making the sentencing decision before the court excused her.

Highlights

Amber Kyzer — Directtestimony highlightKyzer said she hoped for mercy for Tim while expressly saying she was not excusing what he had done.Amber Kyzer — Direct“I hope for mercy for you.”— Amber KyzerKyzer expressed support for mercy while maintaining that nothing justified what happened to her children.Amber Kyzer — Redirect“I'll respect whatever the jury decides.”— Amber KyzerKyzer stated her deference to the jury on the sentencing decision after saying she did not want Tim put to death.

9. Deborah Grey — Direct (Part 1)

Deborah Grey continued her expert social-history testimony, while the court addressed hearsay objections, admitted Defendant's Exhibit 363, and limited further genogram testimony.

→
Direct
Deborah Grey — Direct (Continued) Deborah Grey Casey Secor
262 lines

Grey continued her social-history account of Tim's family, substance use, and later child-welfare concerns; the court admitted a completed genogram and limited repetitive testimony.

← Day 292019 Murder TrialDay 31 →