TELLICO VILLAGE, Tenn. — 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.
‘IF YOU WILL REMEMBER …’
If you will 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 (leading up to) 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’s 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 an 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.
‘SAFETY VALVE’ QUESTIONED
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 the 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 isn’t 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 isn’t at capacity, in essence levellng out the burden.
TRYING NOT TO ‘WEAR OUT OUR WELCOME,’ HOWEVER …
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.
We also were recently informed that Hopkins while in prison is, according to her mother, studying online from prison through a college in Santa Anna, Calif., to complete a degree in forensics science. Though this is admirable, it’s (also) 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 — the father of Hopkins — is now deceased).
Hopkins is an only child.
MOTHER’S LETTER SUPPORTS HOPKINS’ RELEASE
Most of the time, the victim or the victim’s family is there with us.
The victim (Hopkins’ mother) in this case wasn’t 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 the Loudon County Sheriff’s Office.
FINAL NOTE: This is indeed a complicated case and situation, in our opinion, but interesting nonetheless.
