|
Due Process-- THE TRIAL
How did this case play out? Summary:
1. It was obvious to all involved via the biker's testimony, that bikers were lying, their stories were completely coached, and the prosecutor was suborning perjury to allow them to testify, after having been pressured by the wealthy parents to win at any cost. Prosecution would not allow this website to be used in the courtroom, and told defense attorney he would not accept expert testimony as "they were not there." He also would not ask the family to take a poly, or take pedestrian's poly into account in deciding to bring this to trial. The prosecutor, although an honest person, was under extreme pressure from this wealthy family according to defense attorney, who respects him.
2. During the breaks between testimony, IN THE COURT, the parents were chiding the only biker (biker 2) who was trying to be honest, admitting that pedestrian said very little, and clearly showing that biker three was lying. They were coaching him on "adding" testimony about biker's dog, and the prosecutor had to go to the back of the courtroom and tell them to cease and desist! The judge did not see this, and the prosecutor did not mention it to the judge, withholding exculpatory information. Biker two, the only honest biker, sadly tried to add the dog story, which pedestrian's poly proved completely fictitious, after this coaching and the break, perjuring himself under the parent's pressure to win at any cost.
3. In addition to suborning perjury, the prosecutor, who also is the town attorney, violated the town policy of not calling police on neighbors (see police transcript HERE), although as we'll see below, the judge was much smarter and wiser than this. By bringing this to trial, the prosecutor is in effect telegraphing to the world that this town is a joke, and hillbilly heaven, a violation of his role in promoting the town's interests.
4. During testimony, the most egregious liar of the three boys, the third biker, who according to both other bikers arrived LONG AFTER the incident was finished, continued to embellish his story under oath. Remember, this is the ONLY biker that acutally lives in this town, the other two were driven two hours to terrorize pedestrian's neighborhood! Biker three added, out of the blue, during testimony under oath, and after coaching at the back of the room by his parents, that pedestrian said "what you are doing is dangerous" and "glared at us." Pedestrian's medical conditions and vision cause extreme pain if he is in the sun without sunglasses, and the defense made the clear point that biker three couldn't possibly have seen "glaring." Biker three added to his lies by saying pedestrian had no sunglasses on!
5. The third biker also said that pedestrian was only "feet" from them, although both biker one and two indicated pedestrian was as far back as the rear of the courtroom-- over 30 feet away. It was obvious to all that, as biker two and pedestrian said, biker three arrived AFTER the incident and was completely perjuring himself at his parent's insistence with the "must win" coaching, and with the prosecutor's and police's tacit consent.
6. The prosecutor admitted that "he didn't understand motorcycles" and defense and biker testimony showed that these WERE FOUR CYCLE motorcycles, not toys, and that the police didn't even take the time to look at the bikes! These bikes can easily kill, and it is obvious that pedestrian, frail and immobile, was at significant risk, and responded with reservation to that disparity.
7. LACK OF DUE PROCESS was clear throughout the trial. Due to juvenile rules, defense was unable to question the accusers. The second deputy wasn't even at the trial, and is the deputy who told pedestrian to record the boys on his cell phone speeding. BOTH deputies denied ("forgot" or "didn't remember") many pedestrian details, such as: a. Asking for and being denied an attorney thoughout their questioning. b. Being told numerous times that biker 3's sister was part of the incident, but was carefully excluded by police, family and the prosecutor from the testimony. c. Obviously knowing that the three bikers, after talking to the sister, intentionally went up the hill to harass, spook and intimidate the elderly pedestrian. d. "Forgetting" several pages of pedestrian's statements of not wanting to get the boys in trouble by calling police on them e. Telling pedestrian he should have called police on them, in violation of town policy, and HE would then be considered the victim. f. Continuing questioning, with the "ruse" of going back to the neighbors to make peace, AFTER pedestrian asked for counsel, without any Miranda warnings, and against the town policy of not calling police on neighbors, just to get two citations. g. Lying (by ommission) to pedestrian's lawyer about the above.
8. A NOTE TO THESE TWO DEPUTIES: The next time you have to take a polygraph for a promotion or new job REMEMBER THAT YOU LIED, BY OMISSION, ABOUT THIS CASE. This will permanently scar these deputy's ability to take a poly, not to mention the perjury of the three bikers!
9. The judge said "only you four were on that hill," (in truth, the third biker WASN"T), yet her hands were tied in not being able to accept pedestrian's polygraph, which clearly showed bikers were coached, lying and committing perjury. The truth has no place in modern courtrooms, until the Supreme Court rules on polys, which it never has, and defendant has NO due process due to this practice. The prosecutor is really at fault here, in bringing this to trial due to pressure from the wealthy parents, who have sued other neighbors, and in the face of the exculpatory poly. No other prosecutor would have done this.
10. After the trial, pedestrian's cleaning lady nearly hit two of the bikers, who continue to drive, unlicensed, at high speed on blind hills, One of them will be seriously injured or killed due to this prosecutor, and their blood will be on his hands in not having the courage to stop the lies and chide the parents, due to their wealth and influence in the town. The parents were unabashedly offering the deputy beer, and inviting him over to their house, IN the courtroom!
The judge dismissed the first charge, and found for the prosecution on the second, being unable to accept pedestrian's poly. She sentenced pedestrian to inviting the neighbors over to dinner. If they refused, probation would end. Pedestrian spent $5,000 getting his porch ready for the dinner and pleasant for the neighbors, wrote three letters, and left two phone messages, and biker's parents refused with one letter due to "medical" appointments and being busy, and did not respond to the other two letters or two phone calls. The 6 months (alternative) probation also passed, with no response from biker's parents. The offer for dinner still stands, even though the probation is over. Pedestrian's polygraph was accepted by the local PD as evidence of his wrongful conviction to continue his volunteer work, and he has passed numerous poly's for work reasons since. Neither the bikers or the deputy's will be able to pass a poly in the future in this fashion. Even though justice was violated, truth has a way of coming out, and at least one of the bikers involved has a conscience and will eventually admit the coaching and lies, even though pedestrian will likely be dead by that time due to his deteriorating health, caused in large part by these incidents.
The bottom line: Pedestrian and his family did NOT call the police on these bikers, observing town policy, and were punished for their ethics and for following town policy. The burden was on the biker's parents, who knew who pedestrian was even though pedestrian did not know who the bikers were. The judge was fair, given that her hands were tied in looking the other way on due process violations and the poly, and the facts hidden from her by prosecutor, police and the family. She has seen this website, which the prosecutor would not allow before or during trial, and can draw her own conclusions. Pedestrian's health is too compromised to appeal, so this site will have to be his court of last resort, until the boys are called to account for their actions in future incidences involving other victims, and the next world.
|
|