Carla Johnson Allegation

The jury convicted Daniel of two counts of Sexual Battery (Counts 13 and 14) based on the testimony of Carla Johnson, resulting in two concurrent 8-year sentences. However, a review of Johnson's testimony reveals a witness whose description of the alleged assault changed repeatedly, whose claims about corroborating evidence were retracted under oath, and who was interviewed without a recording device by detectives who suggested the crime to her.

​

1. The Shifting Anatomy of the Allegation 

​

Johnson could not consistently describe the basic mechanics of the alleged assault. Her testimony fluctuated regarding whether she was wearing a bra and whether the contact was skin-to-skin or over clothing.

​

• Police Interview: She told detectives the officer fondled her breasts on top of her clothing and that she was not wearing a bra [Tr. 3522].

• Preliminary Hearing (Version 1): She testified she was wearing a bra and that he touched her breasts under her shirt and bra [11/17/14 Prelim. Hearing, p. 109].

• Preliminary Hearing (Version 2): Later in the same hearing, she testified he fondled her under her clothing but she was not wearing a bra. When pressed by the defense if she was positive it was skin-to-skin, she answered, “Yes, sir, I am” [11/17/14 Prelim. Hearing, pp. 133-34].

• Trial: Her story reverted again. She testified he touched her on top of her shirt and she was not wearing a bra [Tr. 3524, 3528].

​

2. The Disappearing Voicemail 

​

Johnson claimed she left a voicemail regarding the assault immediately after it happened, but her testimony regarding this potential evidence was contradictory.

​

• Preliminary Hearing: She testified that she and her roommate, Victor Wilson, listened to the voicemail together. She stated, “we listened to his phone... Then he deleted it” [11/17/14 Prelim. Hearing, p. 125; Tr. 3526-27].

• Trial: She completely reversed this claim, testifying she was "positive" that she never listened to or attempted to listen to any voicemail. When asked if she had ever listened to it, she answered, "No" [Tr. 3519, 3526].

​

3. Suggestive Police Tactics and Missing Records 

​

Johnson did not independently report a crime; she was approached by detectives who framed the narrative before she spoke.

​

• Leading the Witness: Det. Davis initiated the contact by telling Johnson that police had a "tip" that she had been sexually assaulted by an Oklahoma City Police Officer [Tr.  3517-8].

• No Recording: Just as with numerous other accusers in this case, Det. Davis failed to record the interview, claiming she "did not have a tape recorder with her" [Tr. 3523, 3541]. Consequently, the jury had no objective record of how the story was elicited or evolved during the initial interrogation.

​

4. A Pattern of Criminality and Drug Use 

​

Johnson’s credibility was further eroded by her extensive criminal history and admitted substance abuse.

• Seven Felony Convictions: Johnson admitted to seven prior felonies, including two separate convictions for Escape from a Penitentiary, Possession of a Firearm in the Commission of a Felony, and Possession of Cocaine with Intent to Distribute [Tr. 3188, 3525].

• Regular Drug Use: Johnson admitted at trial that she smoked crack cocaine on a regular basis [Tr. 3521] and used marijuana [Tr. 3589].

​

BOTTOM LINE 

​

Carla Johnson was an inconsistent and compromised witness.

• She changed her story four times regarding whether the contact was over clothes, under clothes, with a bra, or without a bra.

• She fabricated a story about listening to a voicemail that she later admitted she never heard.

• She was a regular crack cocaine user with a history of escaping custody and possessing firearms.

• She was interviewed by a detective who suggested the crime to her and failed to record the conversation.

• Her testimony fails to meet the threshold of reliable evidence required for a criminal conviction.