News Coverage Affects Death Case Perception

Featured Stories, News

Are there any winners when politics and tragedy intermingle? FYN scrutinized a recent story presented by WSBTV regarding an accident in Gilmer County. While a distraught family member seeking justice is newsworthy, the piece appeared to mostly be an accusation at a state politician with no supporting evidence other than statements from a grieving family member. We have decided to revisit this case to do the background work to illuminate more aspects of the intricate web.

Let’s go back to January 24, 2005. That day Amanda Truelove, a young mother, was shopping at Wal-Mart in Ellijay after a trip to Atlanta. She had her family with her: her husband, Joey Truelove, her three-year-old son Joshua and her daughter Hailey, four. After they had finished shopping, she phoned her father, a mechanic, as her Ford Escort was having mechanical problems. He urged her to get it to a store closer to Blue Ridge so he could have a look at it. Truelove then got back into her car with her family. She entered the highway, turned her flashers on and proceeded towards Blue Ridge at a low rate of speed as the car was failing and the problem worsened as she approached 25-30 m.p.h.

Not far behind was Walter Layson, a contractor with his own business. He was trying to reach his family’s cabin in Blue Ridge to meet his children and wife to work on completing its construction. After a couple of errands in Pickens County, he continued north on Highway 515.

At approximately a quarter til 3 p.m., Layson’s Ford Expedition approached Truelove’s Escort which was in the right lane of travel. What happened next defies logic. The roadway was dry and the weather was clear. There was a tremendous impact. In an instant two families destinies were altered forever.

Truelove’s daughter, Hailey, was pronounced dead two and a half hours later, violently ejected from the car still strapped into her car seat. Her husband, Joey, died 45 minutes later at Erlanger Hospital in Chattanooga after being partially ejected also. Truelove (also thrown from the car) and her son had injuries but what hurt most was the scars on their souls.

Layson was hospitalized in I.C.U. with head and various other blunt trauma injuries. He was also deeply affected emotionally as he still to this day doesn’t have memory of a large portion of that day. Like Truelove, he also carries a large scar on his psyche.

“I remember seeing the air bags, crawling on glass and seeing my toolbox (thrown from the vehicle onto the ground), then being in the hospital.”

As is mandatory in all such cases, a toxicology draw was performed on Layson upon his arrival at the hospital. No drugs. No alcohol. No medical reason why he would have blindly struck the Truelove vehicle on that day. Layson was also hospitalized at Erlanger and since he was in Tennessee, Truelove was told, the district attorney didn’t go after the medical records as “there wasn’t enough evidence.”

Lives are shattered then eighteen months later, Layson’s “sentence” is exacerbated. The district attorney, Joe Hendricks, filed four charges of vehicular homicide, second degree, against Layson for Hailey and Joey’s deaths. Why eighteen months later? And why did the district attorney rather than the Georgia State Patrol issue the charges? Why did it take eight years for the case to be brought to trial?

One factor was the state patrol’s case. They had delays and difficulties in completing the investigation, part of which was waiting for the crime lab reports. They closed their case January 12, 2006 and the D.A.’s office received it within a week. They didn’t file charges until July 26.

FYN has obtained a memo from an accident reconstructionist regarding two circumstances which must be present for the charge of vehicular homicide to be levied: following too closely and speed restrictions. The memo explains how these do not apply in this situation.

Heath Stewart, former SCRT (Specialized Collision Reconstruction Team) member recalls they decided against filing charges.

“It’s hard to appreciate the closing speed when you’re unaware of the speed of the vehicle in front of you.”

He went on to explain it wasn’t financially prudent for the court system to take on and since they couldn’t prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, they chose not to pursue it.

According to a source familiar with Georgia State Police procedure, it is highly unusual for a district attorney to file vehicular homicide cases as specialized training is imperative to the prosecution of such cases. That is why SCRT exists.

Shocked, Layson hired Rex Abernathy as his defense lawyer after the charges were levied. Abernathy was relieved in 2008 when now-Speaker of the House David Ralston’s services were obtained. At the time though, Ralston hadn’t yet been elected to that position.

Was there animosity between former district attorney Joe Hendricks and current Speaker of the House David Ralston as has been suggested to FYN? Sources have reported that Hendricks has been in the background of this case the entire length of it, even after leaving office, working closely with WSBTV and Mosher.

It is true as WSBTV reported that Ralston continued the case citing legislative leave numerous times. Legislative leave is a statute under state law (O.C.G.A. Section 17-8-26) whereas any member of the general assembly may request the case be continued until such time as they may be free to attend court to represent their clients. FYN counted ten times in the court file this was the delay. According to Layson, he’s also aware of several verbal requests along the same lines, but once it became apparent Hendricks would continue setting the case against Ralston’s calendar and the news media became involved, Ralston chose to begin submitting his requests in writing.

In a letter Ralston submitted to the D.A.’s office (April 2012) referring to the entrance of the news media onto the scene, he stated his intention to no longer verbally give dates of his availability but relay them in written form.

“I think it is in the best interest of all concerned that future communication regarding matters such as this be in writing…As I did last year verbally, I am proposing some weeks for the trial of criminal cases in this circuit this year. Last year, the District Attorney’s Office of the Appalachian Circuit determined that two Fannin County cases had priority and selected those cases for disposition.”

He went on to suggest two weeks he would be able to attend court without interference and stated that should those not be scheduled, he can offer alternative dates. Additionally, he stated that any time between the date of the letter and July 31, 2012 would be inopportune. In two court-related documents, after receiving this letter the D.A.’s office asked the court for dates in June and in July in direct opposition to his stated inability to attend.

Ralston defended his position by remarking,

“Defendants don’t get to choose when they go to court. The district attorneys get to call the cases they want to try in the order they want to try them. They could’ve used one of those weeks in 2011 (that he’d suggested verbally) and chose not to for whatever reason.”

He went on to say,

“I think that because of some of the news coverage we’ve lost sight of what the case is about. This case is about Hailey Truelove and Joey Truelove and it’s not about anybody else.”

Repeated attempts were made to contact former district attorney Joe Hendricks to allow him opportunity to refute the matters and questions regarding his motivation and involvement past his duties as district attorney. He has not responded.

The following questions were posed to the current district attorney but have yet to be answered: Why would the D.A.’s office opt to file charges when the SCRT did not? Would you have taken the same action as the former district attorney? Was there pressure to get a resolution to the case and if so, from whom? Once you became D.A., the case in relation to the number of years it had been pending, was heard fairly quickly. Is there a reason for that? Do you have any documentation showing that Ralston misused his legislative leave? Do you have any documentation showing Ralston gave dates he was available for trial? If so, may I at this time make an open records request for not only those documents but also any you feel are pertinent to the D.A.’s office’s position on the case? Do you have any statements regarding the case?

In May of this year, at the suggestion of Layson, he and Mosher met face-to-face. Layson explained,

“I thought if she saw how I truly was sorry she lost people…that maybe it would help her.”

The details of the meeting will not be reported here as they are personal in nature. However, at that time a plea deal was mentioned as a possibility.

Fast-forward to August 19. A court date is set, the case is heard by Judge Roger Bradley and settled in less than an hour. Layson received two 1-year probation sentences to be served concurrently, a fine and ordered to either 100 hours of community service or to pay the equivalent of that time to the receiving service. Mosher asked that he not be given first offender status but the judge denied her request.

“Alison (Sosebee, D.A.) never stood up for me in court. I feel like they wasted the taxpayers’ money. I don’t blame the outcome on Layson. The outcome lies only on the hands of the lawyers,”

Mosher stated.

Layson states he took the plea, in part, for Mosher. He didn’t want her to be subjected to a trial and with the length of time that passed he’d already served part of his “sentence”.

In regards to the news coverage, Layson had this to say,

“Shouldn’t they check stories? After seeing what they’ve said about me and what they’ve said about David (Ralston) and the way they framed things, it’s like they’re purposely telling a lie but telling it in such a way they can get by with it.”

Conflicting feelings, destroyed lives and years of pain. Where is there to go from here?

Mosher isn’t taking a backseat. She advocates for changing the laws so this doesn’t happen to anyone else.

“Right now, unless there’s alcohol present in the car or on the person, there’s no mandatory drug test.”

She also believes that Ralston shouldn’t have been allowed to use legislative leave to “avoid court”. She intends to fight to have the law changed where a legislator cannot serve as a private attorney and “abuse” their position to delay cases.

“It was eight years, six months and 25 days before it went to court. I was denied justice because of the length of time that passed.”

“Where do you start?”

she asked.

“Where do you start (to change the laws) when the man who represents the man who killed your family is your local representative?”

She states that she’s emailed the governor and contacted the Democratic Party and is waiting for responses.

So what of Joshua, Hailey’s brother and Joey’s son? Mosher said she’s kept him out of it as much as possible. She says he has questions but

“he doesn’t deserve to be put through the hell I’ve been put through.”

Ralston remained sympathetic, saying,

“I can’t begin to comprehend the pain and grief of losing a four-year-old and a spouse. At the end of the day, we have to look at the fact that tragedies like this do happen.”

As for the victims, Layson says he likewise can’t imagine what she’s been through.

“I’ve lost a large chunk of my life too, but nothing compared to her loss.”

Mosher was more lengthy.

“I didn’t get any justice. Their lives were nothing but a case for the district attorneys. I stood over my daughter and watched her die. I have relived that more than anything each time a subpoena hit my hand until the court date. Sleepless nights, nightmares. I don’t blame Layson, I blame Ralston for keeping it out of court.”

“I don’t want this to happen to anybody else. I won’t stop until the law is changed,”

she finished.

Back to Top