JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — A judge will allow a jury to hear that Kimberly Kessler bought an electric carving knife, trash bags, cleaning gloves and ammonia during the 24-hour time frame in which she's accused of murdering Yulee hairstylist Joleen Cummings.
An order issued late Monday afternoon by Circuit Judge James Daniel says the evidentiary value of the purchase outweighs the possibility it may unfairly prejudice jurors.
Kessler is accused of killing Cummings over Mother's Day weekend 2018. At the time, they both worked at the same hair salon. Kessler has pleaded not guilty but has also refused to communicate with her attorneys or cooperate with the court.
She has been removed from recent hearings due to her disruptive behavior.
Defense attorneys had argued the surveillance video showing Kessler's purchase at Walmart on May 12, 2018 should be prohibited as evidence. Summarizing their argument, the judge’s order says the purchase “should be excluded because Joleen Cummings’ body has never been found and it is pure speculation as to what weapon, if any, may have been used to kill Joleen Cummings or, if she was killed, whether she may have been subsequently dismembered in an effort to dispose of the body. As a result of these unknowns, Defendant argues there is little probative value in the evidence that she purchased the electric knife and the danger of unfair prejudice in admitting this evidence greatly outweighs any probative value as it will a) invite the jury to speculate about the weapon used to kill Ms. Cummings or what happened to her after she was killed and b) inflame the passions of the jury.”
The order continues, “However, the timeline of Defendant’s activities before, during and after the evening of May 12, 2018 is highly probative of the State’s theory that Defendant is responsible for the death of Joleen Cummings. Defendant’s purchase of the items in question at Walmart is part of that critical timeline which includes the following events:
• 4/30/18 – 5/8/18: Defendant’s cell phone contains internet searches that include “Coworker guilty of murder missing person body not found;” “Man with ‘hunting humans’ DVD charged with murder after co-worker’s remains found in yard;” and “Injecting advice – how to use a tourniquet.”
• 5/5/18 – Defendant purchased extra-long zip ties/cable-ties from West Marine
• 5/12/18 – Defendant and Joleen Cummings worked at Tangles Salon until approximately 5 p.m. Defendant is the last person that most likely would have seen Ms. Cummings alive. Ms. Cummings was scheduled to pick up her children on Sunday, 5/13/18 for Mother’s Day, but never showed.
• 5/12/18 (7:58 p.m. and 8:13 p.m.) – Surveillance video from store captures Defendant taking white trash bags to the dumpster behind the salon.
• 5/12/18 (8:57 p.m.) – Defendant appears on Walmart surveillance video purchasing the items at issue including the electric knife. An empty box of trash bags was found later at the salon, but the electric knife and gloves were never found.
• 5/12/18 (10:53 p.m.) – Defendant appears on store surveillance video emptying a trash bin into the dumpster behind the salon. The trash bin was later located in the salon and Joleen Cummings’ blood/DNA was identified on the back of this trash bin)
• 5/13/18 (12:26 a.m.) – Defendant appears on store surveillance video emptying contents of a blue tote/storage bin into the wooded area behind the salon. The blue tote was later recovered where it was dropped behind the store. The tote contained an acrylic fingernail that was later linked to Joleen Cummings through DNA.
• 5/13/18 (1:17 a.m.) – Video surveillance from Vystar Credit Union captures Defendant arriving at Home Depot parking lot in Joleen Cummings’ vehicle, parking the vehicle, walking to a nearby Gate gas station, and calling a taxi to pick her up. Defendant has visible injuries to her face.
• 5/14/18 – Video surveillance from Loews shows Defendant purchasing a potted plant and potting soil. A newly potted plant was later discovered in the salon next to the reception desk.
The order continues, “From the State’s point of view, the timeline provides evidence that whatever happened to Joleen Cummings occurred between the hours of 5 p.m. on May 12, 2018, when she finished working with Defendant at Tangles Salon, and 1:15 a.m. on May 13, 2018 when Defendant was captured on video parking Ms. Cummings’ vehicle in the Home Depot parking lot.
Combined with the evidence of Ms. Cummings’ blood found inside the salon and on a pair of Defendant’s boots she wore that evening, and an attempt by someone to use chemicals to clean up blood inside the salon, the timeline also supports the State’s contention that Ms. Cummings’ disappearance on May 18, 2018 was the result of a violent and unnatural death. The timeline would be incomplete and inaccurate with an unexplained gap in time if Defendant’s trip to Walmart to purchase the various items and her return to the salon thereafter was excluded from the jury’s consideration.
Moreover, the timing of the purchases and the nature of the purchases themselves are highly probative evidence of Defendant’s consciousness of guilt because they support the State’s contention that Defendant spent considerable time and effort that night in an attempt to remove evidence linking her to the disappearance and death of Joleen Cummings.
During the period of time when Ms. Cummings went missing and, as the State contends, was presumably killed, video surveillance caught Defendant twice taking filled trash bags to a dumpster behind the salon. Defendant then stopped what she was doing and went to Walmart to make her purchases, returned to the salon, and resumed her efforts at removing items from the salon and disposing of them in the dumpster or the adjacent woods.
The items she purchased, including the electric knife, could all be used by Defendant to continue her efforts at removing and concealing evidence related to why Joleen Cummings disappeared that same evening. This is particularly true in light of the fact that there is no dispute that Defendant was homeless at this point, essentially living out of her vehicle, and had no need for these items for home use.
Defendant rightly points out that there is a danger that the jury might speculate that the electric knife was the weapon used to kill Joleen Cummings, as well as the manner in which the knife was used afterwards in an effort to conceal the homicide. However, this danger of unfair prejudice to the Defense if this evidence is presented to the jury is greatly outweighed by its probative value, especially in light of the option the court has, if needed, to instruct the jury not to speculate on such matters and otherwise limit the arguments made by the State with respect to this evidence. On balance, the evidence should not be excluded.