Dylann Roof seeks limit on victim testimony

CHARLESTON, S.C. – When her best friend said she wanted to feel like a princess at her wedding, matron of honor Sharonda Coleman-Singleton delivered with a horse-drawn carriage and a fairy-tale day.

As that marriage dissolved and with an uncertain financial future, Coleman-Singleton delivered once again, Rita Whidbee testified Thursday, giving her friend a blank check and telling her to fill in the amount she needed.

“She would do anything could do make next person’s life as easy as possible,” Rita Whidbee told federal jurors who in coming days will decide whether Charleston church shooter Dylann Roof should be sentenced to life imprisonment or the death penalty.

Coleman-Singleton, 45, was one of nine black parishioners Roof shot to death in his racially charged attack on Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in June 2015.

Dylann Roof showed no remorse in writings while in jail

But Roof, serving as his own attorney, has taken issue with testimony from friends of victims, asking the court to curb their number, particularly considering that he plans to offer no evidence of his own.

“If I don’t present any mitigation evidence, the victim-impact evidence will take over the whole sentencing trial and guarantee that I get the death penalty,” his first of three motions on the issue states. “I also think that victim-impact witness should include only relatives – not friends or co-workers – of the victims. And that victim impact testimony should be limited to a 'quick glimpse' of the victims’ lives.”

While much of the testimony has illustrated the heart-rending importance of a lost husband, father, wife or mother, some portions have chronicled more routine stretches of life, like childhood memories, favorite foods and nicknames.

The proceeding has taken on the character of a memorial service, instead of its intended purpose as a sentencing hearing, David Bruck, standby counsel for Roof, said in court.

U.S. District Court Judge Richard Gergel has struggled to find the right balance of victim impact testimony. He has upheld the importance of victim impact statements but has also urged prosecutors to streamline victim testimony.

Judge: Roof competent to represent self in penalty phase

Gergel warned the government Wednesday that he “will cut you off at some point if it goes on too long” and added the “defense raises a legitimate point that at some point it does become too much.”

The government removed some witnesses in response to that recommendation, said assistant U.S. attorney Jay Richardson as the defense again raised the issue on Thursday. But he also argued the testimony has been appropriate.

“He is the one that chose to kill nine people,” Richardson said of Roof. “He chose to go into a church to do it, and he chose to do it to particularly good people.”

In a second motion regarding the excessiveness of victim impact statements, Roof, with assistance from his attorneys, argued his death penalty case is being treated differently than other high-profile federal murder cases.

The penalty phase for Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, executed following a death sentence conviction, saw 38 victim impact statements, the same initially proposed by the prosecutors in Charleston. McVeigh was convicted of killing 168 people. Roof is guilty of nine deaths, the motion states.

Roof does not object to the witnesses being heard but said their testimony should come at his formal sentencing, when the jury has already made its decision for life or death.

In response to a third motion filed on the matter, one that came Thursday afternoon, Roof asked the court to offer more breaks during emotional proceedings that were bringing jurors, officials and courtroom watchers to tears.

Gergel, who offers a morning and an afternoon break in addition to a lunch hour, declined, and chastised much of the motion, one that also raised concerns about video and audio recordings of victims.

“There’s no antiseptic way to do this,” said Gergel, adding that he would be surprised if jurors didn’t become emotional given the loss to families. “I am continually committed to maintain the due process rights of this defendant.”

Among the last to testify Thursday was Daniel Simmons Jr., son of the Rev. Daniel Simmons Sr., who was the only victim taken by paramedics from the church. The 74-year-old did not survive.

Remembered as the backbone of the church, Simmons was the second person shot by Roof, gunned down when he moved forward to help Roof’s first victim, the Rev. Clementa Pinckney, who was shot in prayer.

The younger Simmons remembered his father for his love of the church, education and conversation with people who hold different viewpoints, and more lightly, his affinity for a dapper hat.

But the son remained troubled about that night, knowing his father, who held a concealed carry permit, typically carried a pistol: “It was hard for me not knowing why he didn’t protect everyone.”

Later, when his father’s car was released, the son found it on the front seat.

“I found it,” Simmons told juror, his voice cracking. “Apparently he took it off before he went to church. It was hard, but it did bring some closure.”