Eddie Joe Lloyd

● Defense lawyer did not claim his client’s innocence.

• Confession

● Described the victim having been sodomized with a bottle. ● Green color of the bottle. ● Described strangulation of victim using a ligature, including how he grabbed her throat, consistent with finger marks ● Described pushing up victim’s sweater and bra. ● Described “her clean Gloria Vanderbilt jeans.” ● Described victim’s gold colored earrings ● Described victim’s underwear left on a tree at the crime scene ● Described leaving victim laying on her side ● Diagram of crime scene ● Described street light on wooden telephone pole near garage where crime occurred. BUT Lloyd, committed in a mental institution had written letters to police regarding a host of crimes. Lloyd described this rape occurring in a stolen car, and the license plates matched an inoperable and different vehicle. He incorrectly identified the location of the body on the diagram of the crime scene.

The lead officer explained the “standard policy” to keep “confidential” “until time of trial” details such as “the caliber of the weapon used in any homicide” because such information can be used to evaluate leads. “You have to keep that information confidential to weed out good and bad information so that you’re not continually spinning your wheels or following down inappropriate leads…” “The information that he had put in the letter was confidential information known only to myself and to the members of the Squad 3 who made the scene that morning at the garage. The information was in regards to a bottle which had been inserted in a particular area of the victim. This was known only to us.” “He brought up the bottle and this time he brought up the color of the bottle which hadn’t been mentioned. It is a green bottle.” “He brought up another important fact regarding her Gloria Vanderbilt jeans. There were corduroys found; he stated where they were found. He stated there were a second pair of pants he took from the girl. He said recently washed, her clean Gloria Vanderbilt jeans. He described the color of the stitching, the independent patch they had in the back of the pants.” “[H]e physically showed how she waslaying on her side, which is exactly how she was in the garage in the photographs we have with the knot around her neck…” “I asked him what kind of earrings were they, and he described them to a T, curly Q, gold colored… He emphasized where the ears were pierced, he drew it in detail. He brought it up spontaneously. It surprised me.”

The taped confession “was shocking and graphic in the detail that he gave. Keep in mind that this was not a taped statement in which the police officers were spoon feeding information to Mr. Lloyd where he was just parroting back answers like yes or no.” “[I]f he had come there maybe sometime after this offense, how would he have known about the underwear on the tree, as ‘his calling card?’ The evidence technicians were out there, they processed the scene, they collected evidence. How would he know about the underwear on the tree if he visited the scene after the incident had taken place?” “All of these being details that were never disclosed through the media or general public. The only ones who knew it were the homicide investigators and the killer.” “The area was secured, no one else was allowed in and it wasn’t until sometime later when Officer Degalan and the evidence technician, Officer Babcock, went inside that garage and ended up moving the body that the bottle fell out. That was the first time they knew about it, and as Officer Degalan indicated that was not a publicized matter…Aside from the homicide investigators and Evidence Technician Babcock, the only other person who would have know that was the killer, Mr. Lloyd.”

• Brady
• Coerced Confession
• Miranda or Edwards Claim
• State Law Evidence Claim

Lloyd v. Grayson. 507 U.S. 993 (1993)
Lloyd v. Grayson, No. 88CV‐73351‐DT (E.D.M.I.)