Parole Denied, Again
|
From District Attorney Russell Johnson:
Kimberly Hopkins was denied parole again by the
Tennessee Board of Probation and Parole. This is the third time
that our office has appeared to oppose her parole. The first time
ADA Jed Bassett and I appeared to argue against parole. ADA Bassett
has appeared twice more since then, most recently several weeks
ago. The notice of the decision denying her parole is attached.
If will you remember, this is the case of an adopted
adult daughter of the older couple that lived in Tellico Village.
Hopkins had traveled from Oregon to arrive at her parents' home
unannounced on a Friday of Father's Day weekend of 2018. Hopkins
had been estranged from her parents for years, so this was highly
unusual. She began acting strangely, traveled to Maryville to
Target to get some items, returned to the parents' house, cooked a
meal for her father, and then took her mother to a back bedroom
under the pretense of giving her a manicure. She then proceeded to
zip tie her hands down and tried to place a plastic bag over her
mother's head. The mother's protestations and shouting alerted the
father who came to his wife's rescue and the daughter ran out of the
house. She was later taken into custody. After being indicted and
moving towards and eventual trial date, with the parents' agreement,
she was then convicted on October 3, 2019, through a plea agreement
of an attempted first-degree murder and given a 15-year sentence to
serve.
Not long after her conviction, she was recommended
for early release by Governor Lee under the state "safety valve"
program that allows the Governor and Tennessee Department of
Corrections to move inmates earlier towards parole in the event of
'overcrowding'.
I especially take exception to this 'maneuver'
because the serious nature of the conviction is rarely a
consideration, and the 'safety valve' measure is used system-wide
even though an individual may be housed in a facility that is not
itself overcrowded (but system-wide there may be overcrowding) or
the system is over-crowded, but an inmate could be moved to another
facility that is not as capacity, in essence leveling out the
burden.
We try not to 'wear out our welcome' before these
parole boards at these hearings and pick and choose only the most
egregious or victim-impactful cases to argue against parole. We
want our presence to mean something and to continue to carry weight
with the Board when we show up on select cases.
Also, we were recently informed that Hopkins while in
prison is, according to her mother, studying online from prison
through a college in Santa Anna, California to complete a degree in
forensics science, which is admirable, but extremely disturbing as
it makes one wonder what she may do (if released) relative to her
still surviving 88-year-old mother who lives alone (her husband -
father of Hopkins - is now deceased). Hopkins is an only child.
Most of the time, the victim or the victim's family
is there with us. The victim (Hopkins' mother) in this case was not
and has never attended one of these hearings. Therefore, I should
note, in fairness and by way of explanation, that the mother wrote a
letter to us and to the parole board this time in support of
Hopkins' release. However, for the mother's protection, given the
previous history of this case, and what we know about the mindset of
Hopkins, as well as the naïve - or at least, trusting nature of the
mother - arguing against parole was the right thing to do.
The apprehension of Hopkins and the resulting
investigation of this case was handled by Loudon County Sheriff's
Office.
NOTE - This is indeed a complicated case and
situation, in our opinion, but interesting none the less.
|
BACK
7/2/25