
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: SATURDAY, September 24, 1994                   TAG: 9409280002
SECTION: VIRGINIA                    PAGE: C1   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: PAUL DELLINGER STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: HILLSVILLE                                 LENGTH: Medium

KILLER OF 2 WON'T GET NEW TRIAL

An appeal for a new trial by a Carroll County man convicted last year of stabbing a mother and her 2-year-old daughter to death has been denied by the Virginia Court of Appeals.

A jury found Thomas Jefferson Midkiff guilty of first-degree murder in the killings of 30-year-old Sheila Marie Ring and her daughter, Jasmine Sutphin, whose bodies were found in the ashes of their home near Woodlawn on Dec. 1, 1991. Midkiff tried to cover up the murders by setting fire to their home,

Although Midkiff confessed to the killings when questioned by authorities a few days later, his trial in May 1993 lasted a week. He was sentenced to two life terms in prison, as well as 10 years for arson.

In his appeal, Midkiff's attorneys claimed that his confession was not obtained properly.

At one point, they said in their petition, Midkiff said he was "scared to say anything without talking to a lawyer." State police Investigator B.J. Svard replied that "that is entirely up to you." But then Carroll County Sheriff R.D. Carrico took over the questioning, making such statements as "Talk to me, T.J." and "No, you've got to tell me.''

The appeals court judges ruled that, in deciding whether incriminating statements are admissible, "the court looks at the totality of the circumstances, including the defendant's background and experience with the police and court."

Midkiff in the past had pleaded guilty to five felonies and had been represented by three different attorneys. When he was questioned in the murder case, he told authorities that he knew what his rights were and the officers did not have to read them to him. However, his rights were read to him twice.

The judges said Midkiff's statement about being afraid to say anything without talking to a lawyer "is not a clear and unambiguous statement required to assert his right to counsel or his right to remain silent. ... Agent Svard did all that he was required to do by advising Midkiff that it was Midkiff's decision as to whether he wanted an attorney present."

Midkiff's petition also claimed that the trial court erred in allowing disclosure to the jury of a lie detector test. The appeals court said Midkiff's voluntary statements came after the polygraph test, so the test was not relevant and its disclosure did not matter.

The petition contended that the location of the trial should have been moved because of publicity about the case in the Carroll County area. "Extensive media coverage that discloses information about the accused, including his criminal record, does not, by itself, mandate a change of venue," the appeals judges ruled.

by CNB