|
Gary Paul Lyles, Witness for the State
|
THE COURT: Next witness, please.
MR. PANOSH: Paul Lyles, please. Gary Paul Lyles.
GARY PAUL LYLES, being first duly sworn, testified as follows during
DIRECT EXAMINATION by MR. PANOSH:
Q Would you
state your name, sir.
A Gary Paul
Lyles.
Q And Mr.
Lyles, you're the husband of Rose Lyles that just testified; is that
right?
A I am.
Q And you
live in Long Beach; is that correct?
A That's
correct.
Q Prior to
moving to Long Beach, you lived in the Julian area; is that correct?
A That's
correct.
Q And you
ran Lyles Building Supply?
715
A I did. I started it and ran it.
Q Now, in
the course of running that particular business, there came a time
when you hired Ted Kimble; is that correct?
A That's
correct.
Q And what
were his duties there at the business?
A Well, I
hired him before he was 16, and he just cleaned up a little bit,
picked up trash, and things of that nature. But he stayed with me.
In fact, I guess I was the only employer he ever had, real employer,
until I left the business. And he gradually worked his way up, until
he could do about anything there. You know, as he matured and gained
experience, his duties increased and -- along with his salary, of
course.
Q Did there come a time when you met Patricia, through him?
A Yes.
Q And did you develop a personal relationship with Patricia that
was separate from your relationship with --
A I did.
Q And what
was that?
A Loved
her. Wonderful, wonderful, wonderful girl.
Q And from
time to time, did she turn to you for advice?
A She did.
Q And in
that vein, did she call you on the day, as your
716
wife has previously discussed?
A She did.
Q And tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury about that
conversation, please.
MR. LLOYD: Object for the record, Your Honor. We're not asking for a
voir dire.
THE COURT: Overruled.
A She had
-- when I came in, she was talking to my wife, and my wife sort of
motioned, said, "I'm glad you're here." Said, "He's coming in the
door." And she handed me the phone, and she said, "Patricia's
upset." And, you know, I set down and started talking with her. And
she proceeded to tell me that Ted had taken out a large insurance
policy on her, and she didn't think they needed it. And I agreed
with her. And I proceeded to tell her that Ted needed one, and he
had one on him, because he might leave her some day and get out and
get killed and leave her with two or three babies to raise, but
didn't apply to him, and he didn't need any -- she didn't need any
more insurance. She had plenty. And she said, "Well, we discussed
it. We talked about it. And I thought we had settled it. I thought
it was done. And then I find out that he went and took it out
without my knowledge."
And she said, "He wants to buy a motorcycle." Oh, my. You know, I --
I'm very sensible and logical and
717
conservative,
and
I just -- I was just dismayed about this. And I said, "Why in the
world does he want a motorcycle?" She said, "He wants to ride up and
down High Point Road, like he did when he was single." And she said,
"I want you to talk with him." And I said, "I need to talk with
him."
And she
proceeded to tell me about buying the car. She said, "Well, we --
yeah, you could make an argument that we could use a car, but we
didn't need all that extra stuff. He spent thousands and -- $5,000
on things we didn't need, added on to that car." And I -- you know,
like I say, I was a little dismayed about that, too. And I told her,
she said, "I want you to talk with him," and I said, "I'll be glad
to talk with him. And I probably need to talk with him." I've
treated Ted like a son, and I looked upon him as a son. He'd been
with me for years. And I watched him grow up. And I knew him before
he went to work for me. I don't know, he was probably 12 or 13 when
I first met him. So I felt like sort of a father figure to him. He
and I had a -had a great relationship. I loaned him money. Anytime
he ever came to me for anything that I could do, I did it. So I
said, "Sure, I'll be glad to talk with him." And she said -- I said,
"Well, you know, we're going up to that thing in a couple of weeks,
up in Asheville," and she said -- well, it was Black Mountain. She
said, "Yeah. Yeah." I said, "I'll talk to him." And she said, "Okay.
I want you to
718
talk with him." And we sort of left it with that.
Q Did she indicate to you anything about him changing over the
weeks before her death?
A Yes, she
did. She told me, she said, "He's not the man I married." And she
did tell me he slept with a, I thought she said he slept with a gun
under the bed, but it may have been under the pillow, but I
remembered under the bed, but I'm not sure of that. That's been a
good while, remember. And she did say all he thinks about's money.
Q Did she
make any statement to you about whether or not she signed the
insurance policy application?
A
Oh. She did not. She said she did not and would not. And I said,
"Don't." She said she thought that was settled, until she found out
he had taken the policy out, is the way that she put it to me,
without her knowledge.
Q Now, earlier you testified that you were aware of the fact that
Ted Kimble had insurance?
A Yes.
Q And would
you explain that, please.
A Well,
when he worked for me -- well, remember, Ted was a -- was a teenager
growing up, and I didn't think he handled his money well. I was very
tickled that he married Patricia, because she was so logical and
sensible and -- you know. In fact, the first time he introduced her
to me, he said, "I know you're going to like her. She owns her own
719
home." And I said, "Yeah. She's smart enough to have her own home."
But anyway, I took out a key man insurance policy on Ted, and I
think it started out at like $100,000. And I paid that. And if you
paid it several years, it gradually would sort of pay itself with
the dividends. And if you continued to pay it, it could evolve on up
into considerably more money. It could practically double over the
years. And I paid it up until the time I sold Ted the business,
encouraged him to keep it, as protection for his future wife and
children, and/or as a retirement, because it would -- it would --
eventually, when he got 60, 65 years old, it would be worth some
money.
Q You'd indicated you did sell him the business. When did that
occur?
A Oh, my.
Q
Approximately.
A Well,
about a year before Patricia died.
Q Do you remember when it was, in relationship to their marriage?
A In
relationship to their marriage?
Q Yes.
A I sold
them the business -- sold Ted the business after he and Patricia had
their legal ceremony.
Q The one
in Virginia?
A The one
in Virginia. And I probably encouraged that.
720
In
fact, they told me they were going to get married, and I told them
maybe they ought to consider going ahead and doing it before the
year changed, for tax purposes. Of course, I'm not a tax advisor and
I didn't know. I don't think it really helped them. But anyway, I
did tell them that. And I knew about it.
Q Would you have considered selling the business to him, if he
was not married?
MR. HATFIELD: Objection. Calls for speculation.
Q Let me
rephrase that.
THE COURT: Sustained as to the way it's phrased.
Q Was the
fact that he was married, was that one of the factors you took into
consideration, in determining whether you would sell him the
business?
A
Absolutely.
Q Now, when
you sold him the business, you sold him the physical assets; is that
correct?
A Yes.
Q Did you
sell him the land?
A No, I did
not. We -- the land was leased.
Q And who
was the land leased from?
A A Mr. --
oh, God -- Glascock. But we got it through Robins & Weill, the
people that handled it. I never actually talked to Mr. Glascock but
a couple of times. Robins & Weill was our contact. That's who we
paid our rent
721
to
and --
Q And you
possessed the land on a lease basis?
A On a
lease basis, that's correct.
Q Was it a
long-term lease?
A Started
out a long-term. When I sold the business to Ted, it had a, I'd say
two, two and a half years to run, something like that. I don't
remember exactly. But I do remember he had some time.
Q So you would have sold it to him about the first part of '94?
A Oh, it was in the -- in the spring, I guess, yeah. It's about
right.
Q If they got married December of '93, it would have been the
spring of '94; is that correct?
A Yeah.
Q And the
lease had two and a half years to run?
A I'm guesstimating that. That's a reasonably close estimate.
MR. PANOSH: Thank you. No further.
CROSS-EXAMINATION by MR.
HATFIELD:
Q Mr.
Lyles, you said you loved Ted like a son?
A I did.
Q And of
course, you told the jury you loved Patricia, too?
A I did.
722
Q And you knew
Ted from the time he was 14 or 15 years old?
A Probably
before that. I don't remember. But he went to work for me before he
was 16.
Q And you
-- Let's see.
A On a
part-time basis.
Q I'm
sorry. I --
A When he went
to work for me, it was part-time. He was still in school, and he was
working some in the evenings and Saturdays.
Q Were you
involved in Monnett Road Baptist Church?
A Yes, sir.
Q So you
knew his dad and his mom?
A That's
where I met Ted.
Q When did
you first meet Patricia?
A You know,
I've been trying to remember that, and I'm not sure. I'm not sure if
I met her at our church and he brought her to church one night, or
that she came by the business. I just can't remember for sure.
Q Did you
meet her very significantly before you found out they were
interested in getting married?
A Oh, yes. Oh,
yes. When I met her, they were friends, they said.
Q And you
couldn't see any romantic potential there, they just were friends?
723
A Couldn't see
any romantic potential on Ted's part, but on her part, I could.
Q It was pretty
clear she admired and liked him?
A Absolutely.
Q Now, you
made a distinction, you didn't condition selling your business upon
Ted getting married, you simply wouldn't have considered selling it
to him unless he was married?
A That's
correct.
Q Have I
stated that correctly?
A That's
correct.
Q Is that
because you had misgivings about Ted's honesty and reliability, or
because you thought he was just a little -- still a little too
immature?
A I would
say I had misgivings about his maturity and business handling,
before he married.
Q You knew
that he had no money of his own to buy the business from you,
because you --
A I did.
Q And you
knew approximately what your selling price would be?
A I did.
Q And that
was in the neighborhood of $50,000?
A Correct.
Q And as
you were already asked, the sale would basically
724
entail
allowing
him to make his own deal with the Glascock family or Robins & Weill
about the land, and you'd sell him the inventory and the goodwill,
whatever else there was there; is that right?
A That's
basically correct. He had awhile for the lease to go, but yes.
Q Now, when
did you first take the key man policy out on Ted?
A I don't
remember. Probably at least two or three years before.
Q Was this
because you -- by that time, you'd become so dependent on his help,
that if he -- something happened to him, you really did need -- you
were the beneficiary of it, weren't you?
A The
company would have -- was the beneficiary. Well, yes, yes, to some
extent, but primarily, it was for Ted's benefit.
Q What was
the payoff amount on that policy?
A You mean
if --
Q If he
died.
A
Immediately like $100,000, I believe is what it started out at.
Q Did he
know about that policy?
A Oh, sure.
Q Did he
know what the purpose of it was?
725
A I didn't tell
him when I took it out, but after a year or two, I did.
Q Well, the
-- even on a young and healthy man, $100,000 life insurance policy's
not cheap, is it?
A Six,
seven hundred dollars a year. It wasn't much.
Q This is a
whole life policy that built --
A Uh-huh.
Q -- rather
than just term insurance?
A Yeah. It
was a key man policy, and it did build up, and it would pay
dividends.
Q And he --
the purpose of it then that he was a key man to the company?
A That was
part of the purpose. But really, a good portion of the purpose was
that I was trying to look after Ted.
Q So, even
though your company which you owned wholly and completely yourself
was the beneficiary, you wanted to teach him habits of practical
business planning and thrift and all of that?
A
Absolutely.
Q Did you
feel he was learning those?
A I did. I
did.
Q Was your
arrangement with him that he was paid by check for his earnings?
A Oh, yeah.
726
Q And he had a
W-2 and --
A Oh, sure.
Q -- and at the
end of the year –
A Our company
was incorporated.
Q And your
company had an accountant?
A I got a
check from the company, too, you know, yes.
Q Around
the time -- around 1992, do you recall Ted being in an auto
accident, where a car he owned was demolished?
A I remember
him being in an automobile accident that was demolished. I'm not
sure exactly it was '92, but could have been.
Q Did he miss
work as a result of any injuries he sustained in that?
A I believe
he missed some, yes.
Q Was there
a period of time there where he was paid off the books, so to speak?
A I paid
Ted out of my pocket, yes.
Q Did you
have any idea that he would represent to the company that was going
to have to pay the claim that he had been out of work?
A I don't
recall that. I don't recall that. He was not out of work -- well, he
was out of work maybe a week or so. I can't remember. You -- we're
talking six years, and --
Q Even during
the week that he was out of work, did he get paid out-of-pocket?
727
A I paid him
out of my pocket.
Q What was
your purpose in doing that?
MR. PANOSH: We
object. He's answered all this.
THE COURT:
Overruled.
Q What was
your purpose in paying him?
A Because I
thought so much of him, and I felt like he needed the money. And I
didn't want him to be without money.
Q So the way
your company was set up, you got paid if you worked, so --
A Yes, but --
yes, yes, at that time, that's probably true.
Q Did he
ask you to give him some sort of letter or any other indicator that
he hadn't worked during that period --
A I don't
--
Q -- for
him to turn in to insurance?
A I don't
remember that. I just don't remember it.
Q Did anyone
ever suggest to you or bring to your attention that he tried to
exaggerate his claim that time for lost wages or whatever?
A I don't
remember if anybody did. I don't recall.
Q Did you
--
A No law
enforcement or anybody of that nature would have done it.
Q Did you
know his girlfriend, Janet Blakley, at that
728
time?
A I knew
Janet, yes.
Q Did she ever
indicate to you that she thought he -
MR. PANOSH: We
object, please.
Q Did Janet
point out to you that Ted was trying to collect insurance money -
THE COURT:
Overruled.
Q -- when
he was actually working?
A I don't
remember that. Certainly do not.
Q During that
period, did you have any indication that Ted was dishonest?
A Are you
talking about with my business? Absolutely not. I trusted Ted. He
had a key to my truck, to my business, to my house.
Q Well, I
think it almost goes without saying that you would not have sold him
the business if you had any doubts?
A That is
correct.
Q After you
sold the business, did -- was it your understanding that Patricia
was an equal partner in the acquisition of the business, in terms of
liability for the unpaid balance and that sort of thing? Was she
involved?
A That was
not my understanding, no.
Q So, half
of the purchase price was paid up front, with the assistance of
Ted's parents?
A Correct.
729
Q And the other
half was secured by you?
A (The
witness nodded his head up and down.)
Q Did you
require Patricia's signature on that obligation?
A I didn't
require it, but then I didn't handle the actual paperwork, so I'm
not sure if she signed it or not, to be perfectly honest with you.
Q Did she
take an active part in running the business?
A She did
to start with, because she was doing the books, yes. In fact, I
encouraged Ted to have her to do the books, because I felt she was
more capable and competent in that area than Ted.
Q Now, when
you got -- when your wife picked up the call from Patricia in
September of 1995 and you heard the complaints about the Jeep
Cherokee, had you known that they had purchased a Jeep Cherokee?
A I'm not
sure. To be perfectly honest with you, I don't pay any attention to
vehicles, and I know that's hard for a lot of people to believe, but
I don't.
Q Had
Patricia indicated she had misgivings about that purchase before at
any time?
A I don't
recall her, but then, remember, I don't know -- I don't remember
when I had spoken to her prior to that, because we were living at
the beach, and had been for, I don't know, a year maybe. So my
interaction with both of
730
them was very
limited.
Q When you
received your monthly check from Ted, or from the business, did it
always come on a regular basis?
A Yes.
Q Do you
remember who signed the check?
A I do not.
Q Did you
ever at any time, between your sale of the business to Ted and
Patricia, and Patricia's death, did you ever have to call up and ask
for your payment to be sent to you?
A No.
Q Were you
aware that Ted and Patricia had bought a boat, to use on the lakes
around this part of the country?
A I was
after the fact.
Q Did your
conservative nature cause you to question that?
A My
conservative nature caused me to question it, and my conservative
nature probably caused Ted not to tell me for several weeks after he
bought it.
Q So you
would have been --
A My
reaction was, "Why did you buy a boat?" or something to that effect.
Q Did you
know anything about buying a vacation apartment up in Williamsburg,
Virginia?
A No, sir.
731
Q I suppose
your conservative nature would have a problem with that, too?
A
Absolutely.
Q Being an
old-time resident of the beach, you don't think much of timeshares?
A No, sir.
Q Is this
pattern of vacation houses and boats and Jeeps and motorcycles, is
that just what young people do this day and age?
MR. PANOSH: We
object, please.
THE COURT:
Sustained.
Q Is that
the behavior of spendthrifts?
MR. PANOSH:
Object, please.
THE COURT:
Sustained.
Q Do you
think that the probable earnings that Ted was able to have from that
business would support those kinds of purchases?
A You mean,
in conjunction with his wife's salary?
Q Yes, sir.
A I suppose. I
-- they would have come a lot nearer doing it, if he'd have let her
handle the money.
Q Well, if
you -- if your purpose in acquiring the key man policy some years
ago in the amount of $100,000 was to show Ted the value of investing
and planning, wasn't it that he simply learned the lesson, if he was
inquiring into the
732
purchase of
insurance later on? Wasn't he just following your advice?
A Well,
when I took out that policy, to my knowledge, he didn't have any
more insurance. Okay? So had he had 20 or 30 or 40 or 50 thousand
dollars, I probably would not have taken that out. I did it for
several reasons: one, to teach him the lesson; two, to protect him.
But you could say indirectly, maybe to some extent, but I would not
have taken a policy out under the circumstances that he was doing.
Q Do you
feel that there's more value in a policy on a male wage earner in a
family's life than there is on a female wage earner in a family's
life?
A Between
those two, absolutely.
Q So it was
in Patricia's interest to have some insurance on Ted's life, but not
in Ted's interest to have insurance on Patricia's life?
A No, I
wouldn't say that. Patricia had a policy where she worked. She told
me she had a policy. Had adequate, plenty of insurance, she said.
Q So she
was covered sufficiently?
A She said
so.
Q And the
legitimate -- Ted's legitimate goal would have been for him to be
covered sufficiently, and then that ends it?
MR. PANOSH:
Object, please.
733
Q Is that your
opinion, sir?
THE COURT:
Sustained to the form.
Q But you
did comment earlier that you didn't want to see her caught with two
or three babies and Ted go out there and something happen to him and
he's out of the picture and she's left with two or three babies and
possibly not being able to operate the business?
A Correct.
Q And that
would have been the purpose of insurance on his life?
A Part of
the purpose, but --
Q But --
A -- I have
stated my reasons for the policy, you know, was they covered several
things, partly money management, building a retirement, and
protection for the future family. He wasn't even married then when I
took it out, I don't believe.
Q So he had
no dependents then, yet it was appropriate to put a policy on him?
A I didn't
understand.
Q He had no
dependents at the time?
A I don't
think so, no.
Q Well,
dependents in the sense of taxes, that is, people that you're --
A He didn't
have a wife and children then. But I --
734
knowing the nature
of young people, I assumed he would.
Q But you
did say that this key man policy was such that it would eventually
earn enough to virtually pay the premiums and it would build itself?
A According
to the agent, yes.
Q Now, do
you know whether the policy that Ted was planning on taking out on
Patricia's life was also a whole life policy?
A I know
nothing of the policy but what she told me.
Q You never
talked to Mr. Jarrell or any of the experts involved in that?
A I don't
know who Mr. Jarrell is.
Q Do you know
whether, after she died, there was a policy on her life?
A Are you
talking about where she worked?
Q No, I'm
talking about the policy she called up and discussed with your wife
and you.
A Oh, no, I
don't know.
Q You don't
know?
A I would have
no way of knowing that there was or was not. I only know what she
told me.
Q And you were
not there that last Saturday, when Patricia called your house to ask
about --
A Correct.
Q -- the
selling price of an item?
735
A That's
correct. I probably could have told her, if I'd been there.
Q And you
were going to sort of take Ted to the woodshed when you got up to
Black Mountain?
A Well,
yes, I was certainly going to scold him, was my intentions. He
wouldn't probably have listened to me, but I would have scolded him,
absolutely.
MR. HATFIELD:
Thank you very much.
THE COURT: You may step down, Mr. Lyles.
(The witness
left the witness stand.)
THE COURT: Members of the jury, the Court would caution you and
admonish you that you should not consider the evidence of Rose and
Gary Lyles against Ronnie Kimble, unless you find there was a
conspiracy and that Ted and Ronnie Kimble were co-conspirators.
|
