Virginia Hubbard - Mother of Defendant Coy Hubbard

For Viewing Only
Forum rules
Since some of the different parts of the trial transcript are extremely large, posting has been disabled in them. Use the Baniszewski Trial Discussions for postable topics.
 
Topics: 102  Posts: 137  Images: 550  Joined: Aug 08, 2010
Gender: Gentleman  Country: United States (us)  Location: Springfield, Illinois

Virginia Hubbard - Mother of Defendant Coy Hubbard

Postby admin » October 31st, 2010, 6:42 pm

VIRGINIA HUBBARD , a witness called on behalf of the defendant Coy Hubbard,
being duly sworn by the Court, testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION (OUT OF PRESENCE OF THE JURY),
QUESTIONS BY MR. FORREST BOWMAN, ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS,
COY HUBBARD AND JOHN STEPHAN BANISZEWSKI

Q. State your name, please.

A. Virginia Hubbard.

Q. Where do you live?

A. 435 North Linwood.

Q. Are you acquainted with Coy Hubbard?

A. Yes, I am his mother.

Q. Is he here in court?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Where is he?

A. Right there. (indicating defendant Coy Hubbard)

Q. Do you recall October 27, 1965?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Directing your attention to that date, did you receive a telephone call on that date with respect to your son?

A. Yes, I received a telephone call at work at 2:00 o'clock.

Q. From whom?

A. The principal at school.

MR. NEW: We object.

THE COURT: Objection sustained. It is hearsay.

MR. BOWMAN: We will strike that.

THE COURT: The answer will go out.

MR. BOWMAN: At this time the defendant Coy Hubbard offers to prove if the witness were permitted to answer the question, she would state she received a telephone call from the principal of Howe High School.

THE COURT: Same ruling.

Q. Did you, on October 27, 1965, receive some information as to something happening to your son?

A. Yes, sir.

MR. NEW: We object.

THE COURT: Overruled, yes or no.

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What was that information?

MR. NEW: We object.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. BOWMAN: The defendant Coy Hubbard offers to prove if the witness were allowed to answer, she would say "The principal of Howe High School told me the police were there at the school and were arresting my son, Coy Hubbard".

THE COURT: Same ruling.

Q. Did you have conversation by telephone on October 27, 1965 with a police officer?

A. Yes, sir.

MR. NEW: We object and move the answer be stricken.

THE COURT: Overruled.

Q. Did you say anything to him with regard to your son?

MR. NEW: We object.

THE COURT: Yes or no. Objection overruled.

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What did you say to him?

MR. NEW: We object.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. BOWMAN: At this time the defendant Coy Hubbard offers to prove if this witness were permitted to answer the question, the witness would state that she told the police officer she wanted her son brought to her home so she could talk to him.

THE COURT: Same ruling.

Q. Did the police officer say anything to you?

A. He only said -

Q. You just answer yes or no.

A. Yes, sir.

Q. He did?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What did he say to you?

MR. NEW: We object.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. BOWMAN: The defendant Coy Hubbard offers to prove if this witness were permitted to answer the question, her answer would be that the officer said he could not take the boy to her home, he was taking him downtown.

THE COURT: Same ruling.

MR. BOWMAN: These are offered as evidence of the fact it was said, not the truth of what was said.

THE COURT: Same ruling.

Q. Now, did you go downtown October 27. 1965?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Where did you go?

A. I went to the Juvenile Center over at the court room.

Q. Why?

A. That is where he told me he was taking my son.

Q. Now, when you - this was the city-County Building?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And was your son there when you got there?

A. No, sir, he was not.

Q. Were there police officers there?

A. There was a few in there and some ladies were there. I told them I was supposed to meet my son down here.

Q. Did you have a conversation with them?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. About what?

MR. NEW: We object.

THE COURT: Objection sustained.

Q. Did you ask permission to see your son down there?

A. Yes, sir, I asked them to let me see my son.

Q. Did they give you that permission?

A. Yes, sir.

MR. NEW: We object.

THE COURT: Objection sustained. The answer will go out.

MR. BOWMAN: Defendant Coy Hubbard offers to prove that if the witness were allowed to answer the question, she would say "they told me I could see my son but only for five minutes".

THE COURT: Same ruling.

Q. Did you see your son?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Where?

A. I saw him there in the Juvenile Center.

Q. Did you talk to him?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. By yourself?

A. No, sir, the policeman was in there with me.

Q. All the time?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. About how long did you talk to him?

A. It did not seem over two to three minutes to me.

MR. BOWMAN: Cross.

MR. NEW: No questions.

THE COURT: May I ask, Mr. Bowman either you or the State, clear what she meant by Juvenile Center?

Q. All of the events you have been talking about at Juvenile Center - do you mean the Juvenile Branch at Police Headquarters in the City-County Building?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. You did not go to the Juvenile Court at 25th and Keystone?

A. Yes, sir, I went that night.

Q. To the Juvenile Center?

A. My husband and I and his sisters and brothers went with him. They did not have him over there when I got over there. Two policemen brought him over and I asked to speak to him and they would not let me speak to him. I asked what all could I bring him over there. They told me I could bring him tee shirts and underclothes and socks and also deodorant.

Q. When is the first time after that you got to talk to your son?

A. I go to talk to him Saturday, the 25th, at the Juvenile Center.

Q. Saturday, about the 30th of October?

A. Yes, sir.

MR. BOWMAN: You may cross.

MR. NEW: No questions.

THE COURT: Next witness.

MR. BOWMAN: You may step down.

WITNESS EXCUSED.

THE COURT: Are you ready for the jury?

MR. BOWMAN: I have a motion. At this time the defendant Coy Hubbard objects to the use of and moves to suppress any statement made by him to the witness Campbell at the time in question for the reason they violate his constitutional rights guaranteed by the federal constitution, the 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th amendments as well as the constitution of the State of Indiana.

THE COURT: Anything else?

MR. BOWMAN: In behalf of Coy Hubbard, no, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Overruled. Bring that witness back, Campbell. Bring in the jury.

MR. BOWMAN: The defendant John Baniszewski objects for the reason it is hearsay.

THE COURT: Sustained as to defendant John Stephan Baniszewski.
e-mail: webmaster@sylvialikens.com

Return to Baniszewski Trial Transcript

Who is online

Members browsing this forum: No registered members and 1 guest