EX-DETECTIVE WATSON TESTIFIES AGAINST PARTNER

He Tells Court Richardson Was With Him When He Created Bogus Search Warrants

Testifying yesterday in the trial of his former partner, former narcotics
detective Mark Watson made no apologies for his own criminal conduct.

Some of the actions, he suggested, were common among officers.

In mostly brief answers to attorneys' questions, Watson testified that his
partner, Christie Richardson, was with him on three occasions when he
created -- and served -- bogus search warrants.

But Watson stopped short of alleging that Richardson knew the warrants were
bogus.

At one point, Richardson's attorney asked Watson, "The implication is that
Christie must have known, right?" -- to which Watson replied, "I assume so."

Watson, 39, also testified that Richardson signed forms saying she had
witnessed payments to Watson's informants when she hadn't, and that he had
signed paperwork attesting that he had witnessed Richardson pay her
informants when he hadn't.

"That's not uncommon," Watson said without elaborating.

The two detectives, both Jefferson County officers assigned to Metro
Narcotics, were charged last year with creating bogus search warrants,
obtaining warrants through the use of fraudulent affidavits and obtaining
payments for informants who say they never received the money. They were
being tried together until Friday, when Watson, as part of an agreement
with prosecutors, pleaded guilty to 299 felony counts and three
misdemeanors, and agreed to testify against Richardson.

Prosecutors are recommending a 20-year sentence for Watson, although his
attorney, Mary Sharp, has said she will seek probation.

Richardson's trial continued after Watson's plea hearing Friday.

She is charged with 20 counts of first-degree burglary, 132 counts each of
criminal possession of a forged instrument and tampering with public
records, one count of bribery, six charges of theft by deception over $300,
five counts of perjury, and one count each of official misconduct and theft
by deception under $300.

Richardson, 36, has pleaded innocent but could be sentenced to 70 years in
prison if convicted.

Prosecutors have argued that Watson and Richardson worked together in
committing the alleged offenses.

In about two hours on the witness stand yesterday, Watson testified about
his work with Richardson, whom he described as his "best friend."

Richardson took notes as Watson testified.

Watson said he created fraudulent search warrants because he didn't have
time to get signatures and feared suspects would flee or hide their contraband.

In his opening statement last week, Richardson's attorney, Steve
Schroering, said Richardson didn't know that the warrants were bogus and
that she trusted Watson.

Schroering also said Richardson didn't know that informants hadn't been
paid, and that partners on the narcotics unit commonly signed each other's
forms without actually witnessing the payment.

During questioning by prosecutor Jonathan Dyar, Watson said he and
Richardson were partners from the time she started with the narcotics unit
in 1998 until their resignations last year.

Beyond that, he said, she was his best friend outside the office. He said
they and a friend met at a restaurant on Bardstown Road shortly before the
trial started to console each other.

They also knew each other's families and went to movies together, in
addition to sharing other recreational activities such as four-wheeling and
hiking, he said.

Watson testified that he would create search warrants by photocopying a
judge's signature from an earlier warrant. He said he did that when he
didn't have time to get a judge's signature.

He also said he did it at least once to re-create a warrant that had been
lost because he didn't want to go back to the judge who signed it and admit
the warrant was lost.

Under cross-examination by Schroering, Watson testified about his entire
career, including his tenure with the Atlanta police department and his
internal affairs record there. Watson said the number of complaints against
him, for missing court cases and other offenses, wasn't unusual. Watson's
failure to appear in court on Jefferson County cases led to the
investigation of him and Richardson.

Schroering questioned Watson at length about the former detective's reasons
for admitting guilt. Watson said he felt he had a chance to be acquitted on
some charges but feared he would be convicted of first-degree burglary,
which would make him ineligible for probation. Pleading guilty to
second-degree burglary made him eligible for probation.

Watson testified, however, that he believes it's unlikely that he'll be
granted probation. "It would be nice," he said, "but I don't anticipate it."

Schroering asked Watson under what circumstances prosecutors agreed to
amend the burglary charges. "If I gave truthful testimony that showed she
had some knowledge," Watson responded.