MOBILE, Ala. — A judge heard testimony Wednesday from a Mobile County sheriff’s investigator about a fatal shooting in June but stopped short of ruling whether the case will go to a grand jury.
Mobile County District Judge George Zoghby agreed to carry the preliminary hearing over to next month to allow prosecutors and the defense to submit written arguments over whether Mobile County Sheriff’s Office Sgt. Archie Niles can withhold the names of witnesses who led investigators to focus on defendant Travis Larenzo McCall.
What the Detective Testified
According to testimony, the shooting occurred between Alabama Village and Gulf Village in Prichard on June 13. Niles testified that Carlos Bendolph suffered a fatal gunshot wound.
He said surveillance video from a nonprofit called Light of the Village shows a man identified by witnesses as McCall running behind the building into a wooded area and then running back in the other direction toward Barber Drive.
McCall, 40, of Mobile, and Bendolph had been friends for years. They were co-defendants in a 2024 theft case, accused of stealing beer from a liquor store on Government Street in Mobile.
‘Things Went Too Far’
Niles testified that McCall ultimately admitted to shooting Bendolph but told investigators it was an accident.
The detective said that according to the defendant’s account, both men had been drinking and using cocaine and had argued throughout the day. Niles testified that Bendolph was unarmed and that the defendant told investigators “things went too far.”
Niles also testified that McCall told investigators he threw the gun in the woods.
The Witness Identity Dispute
Niles declined to reveal the identity of the two witnesses, who expressed concern for their safety.
Mobile County Assistant District Attorney Nick Frisella argued that at a preliminary hearing, the only requirement is that the detective testify that the witnesses are credible and that they would be willing to testify in court.
If the case were to go to trial, prosecutors would have to reveal the witnesses’ identities and make them available for cross-examination. Defense attorney Chase Dearman strenuously objected.
The question the judge deferred is a recurring one in Alabama preliminary hearings. The proceeding’s purpose is limited — determining whether probable cause exists — and hearsay is generally admissible in a way it would not be at trial. Prosecutors routinely establish probable cause through an investigator’s summary of what witnesses reported rather than by calling the witnesses themselves.
The defense position is that a defendant cannot meaningfully test the basis for probable cause when the identity of the people supplying it is concealed. Witness safety concerns in cases arising from this kind of neighborhood shooting are, however, not abstract.
What the Defense Signaled
Dearman said he did not want to reveal too much before cross-examining the detective when the hearing continues Oct. 28.
“I’m not about to put it on TV before I do it,” he said. “You’ll see, but there’s a lot to this case that has not been revealed. They knew each other quite well, and I don’t know if you caught that the victim in the case was allegedly unarmed. Remember that? … That was interesting. But I think after we continue the hearing, some other stuff will come out, and it will answer your question as to what our defense is.”
The emphasis Dearman placed on the victim being unarmed is notable, since that fact would ordinarily cut against a defendant rather than for one. It generally forecloses a self-defense theory, which suggests the defense is oriented toward the accident account the detective described rather than toward justification.
The Charge Question
An admission to a shooting accompanied by a claim that it was accidental raises the distinction between murder, manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide under Alabama law — categories separated by the defendant’s mental state rather than by the outcome.
Intoxication does not by itself excuse conduct under Alabama law, and voluntary intoxication is generally not a defense to a charge requiring recklessness.
What Happens Next
The preliminary hearing continues Oct. 28. McCall has not been convicted of any offense and is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in a court of law.