Kimberly Renee Poole

Case record: Kimberly Renee Poole

Background

Kimberly Renee Poole was a 21-year-old housewife and mother in the Winston-Salem, North Carolina area. She also worked as a topless dancer at a strip club. Poole wanted jewellery, designer clothing, and adulterous affairs with both men and women. Her spouse, Brent Poole, was described as devoted and as being able to deny her nothing. Poole wanted his money and his life.

The offence

Poole began an affair with John Boyd Frazier, a patron at the strip club where she worked. On the night of June 9, 1998, Poole lured her husband, Brent Poole, to an oceanfront hotel in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina on the pretext of celebrating their third wedding anniversary. Their young daughter slept in the hotel room.

Poole made love to Brent on the deserted beach, and then delivered him to Frazier, who shot him dead. During the event as prosecutors described it at trial, the couple was ambushed as they walked along Myrtle Beach; a masked gunman took Renee's jewelry and shot Brent twice in the head.

The murder weapon that killed Brent Poole was never found.

Prosecutors also said Poole wanted to kill Brent because she feared losing custody of their 2-year-old daughter, and that her marriage to Brent had become rocky. Prosecutors said Poole took the child and moved in with Frazier but returned to Brent two weeks later. Prosecutors suggested Poole wanted a divorce but feared her job and her affair with Frazier might mean losing the little girl in a custody battle.

Prosecutors pointed out that Brent Poole had a $100,000 life insurance policy.

Investigation and statements

Poole told police about the masked man who killed her husband but left out the detail that the shooter was her extra-marital lover, John Frazier. On June 12, 1998, Poole told investigators in the presence of her lawyer that Frazier was indeed the gunman.

On another occasion, without her lawyer present, Poole admitted that she played a part in the murderous plot. After confessing to police, Poole changed her story and claimed the statements were made under duress after long, grueling interrogation.

In her habeas corpus petition proceedings, Poole argued that her June 13, 1998 statement was involuntary due to psychological pressures placed upon her resulting from police misconduct, including lying, promises of hope and reward, and implicit threats to take her daughter. She also argued it violated her Fifth Amendment rights because it was taken in the absence of counsel after she invoked the right to counsel the previous day.

A federal habeas discussion also described misrepresentations that Poole said Detective Altman made during the interrogation:

1. that John Frazier had confessed and implicated her in the murder plot and that he was placing all of the blame on her;
2. that Detective Altman did not want to see the Petitioner go to jail for the rest of her life;
3. that Frazier was facing the death penalty when, in fact, he was not;
4. that Detective Altman wanted to help the Petitioner, but she had to help herself first;
5. that Detective Altman bragged about his relationship with the Solicitor's office implying that he could use that relationship to help the Petitioner; and
6. that Detective Altman told the Petitioner that if she was honest she would not lose her daughter.

Trial

Poole was indicted for murder and criminal conspiracy in the August 1999 term by the Horry County Grand Jury.

At trial, prosecutors sought conviction for murder and conspiracy. Prosecutors called witnesses who identified Frazier as the shooter. Prosecutors also called individuals to describe Poole's love triangle with the two men. Hours of Poole's audiotaped police interviews were played for jurors.

The defense argued that the prosecution's case cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt because the confessions were coerced by police, and that there was no physical evidence linking Frazier to the murder. The defense called psychiatrists to testify that Poole suffered from depression and stress after Brent's killing, described as hardly the behavior of a killer. A psychologist also described how Poole's alleged confession could have been coerced.

Poole was found guilty as charged after a jury trial on November 13, 1999.

Sentencing

The judge sentenced Poole to life in prison without parole.

Appeals and post-conviction proceedings

State court proceedings

In ruling on Poole’s direct appeal, the South Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment in an unpublished opinion entered on January 16, 2002. Poole had appealed arguing the trial court erred in:

1. admitting statements she made to police which were involuntary due to improper influences, and in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth amendments;
2. refusing to allow the introduction of evidence concerning third party guilt;
3. refusing to grant a new trial based on alleged prosecutorial misconduct regarding a defense exhibit;
4. refusing to grant a new trial based on alleged prosecutorial and juror misconduct regarding the prosecutor's failure to disclose that he and the jury foreperson attended the same church; and
5. refusing to grant a new trial based on the jurors' misunderstanding of the law related to confessions.

Poole filed a timely petition for rehearing en banc on January 31, 2002, which was denied by the Court of Appeals on March 21, 2002.

Poole filed a petition for Writ of Certiorari presenting questions for review by the South Carolina Supreme Court on May 22, 2002. The South Carolina Supreme Court denied certiorari by order filed November 6, 2002, and the remittitur was sent down on November 14, 2002.

Federal habeas corpus petition

The U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina, Rock Hill Division considered a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by Poole on November 3, 2003 under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

A petition to stay the case was filed and was granted on May 11, 2004 pending the re-trial of her co-conspirator, John Boyd Frazier. On May 31, 2005, the stay was lifted and the court granted Poole thirty (30) days to file a response to the Respondents' motion for summary judgment. Poole filed a written opposition on July 11, 2005. Poole filed a letter on July 19, 2006 citing Holmes v. South Carolina, 126 S.Ct. 1727, 164 L.Ed.2d 503 (2006).

On September 1, 2006, a Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the Respondents' Motion for Summary Judgment be granted and the petition be dismissed. On September 11, 2006, Poole filed objections.

The court ultimately overruled all objections and adopted the Report and Recommendation. The court granted the Respondents' motion for summary judgment and dismissed the petition.

Outcome

Poole was convicted of murder and conspiracy in the shooting death of her husband, Brent Poole, and she was sentenced to life in prison without parole.

Other details

At the time of the murder, Poole was described as 21 years old.

During the homicide event described at trial, a masked gunman robbed Renee's jewelry and shot Brent Poole twice in the head.

Officer Scott Brown noticed Poole on the beach waving her arms at approximately 11:45 p.m. on the evening of June 9, 1998. An officer for the Winston Salem, North Carolina Police Department found John Frazier at home in Winston Salem at approximately 5:25 a.m. on the morning of June 10, 1998.

Poole was represented by William I. Diggs, Esquire, and Orrie E. West, Esquire, at the jury trial.

In the habeas corpus proceedings, the petition named as respondents: the Warden of Leath Correctional Institution and Henry McMaster, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina. The opinion of the court was delivered by R. Bryan Harwell, United States District Judge.

The court reviewed the Report, objections, pleadings, memoranda, and applicable law, and adopted the Report and Recommendation incorporating it by reference.

Dr. Thomas Sachy testified in a hearing described as occurring on Monday morning, and he said: “I believe that is unjust and it is just shocking,” and: “The terrifying thing for the public is that you can be convicted of a crime or convicted of anything and it may not be based on what we think as a proper functioning of the law.”

A hearing described as discussing new evidence was held in a highly-publicized 1998 Grand Strand murder-for-hire case, where Poole’s attorneys argued for a new trial based on a juror nicotine addiction and insufficient cigarette breaks during eight hours of deliberations preventing the juror from “thinking clearly.” The presiding judge called that insufficient evidence and denied the petition.