SALISBURY EAVESDROPS, COLLIER IGNORES THE SUPREME COURT!

        On November 6, 2009, Defense Counsel attended a pre-trial conference called by COLLIER, who had hoped to railroad the Defendant without the benefit of one of those infamous Medina County show "trials."

         SALISBURY offered the Defendant a plea to one count of burglary (F-4) with one year in prison. 

         The Defendant refused SALISBURY'S plea offer because he is factually innocent of the charged offense of Burglary, or any other crime.

         During the plea negotiations on November 6, 2009, the Defense Investigator was sitting on a bench in the hallway, outside of COLLIER’S conference room. Thusly seated in the hallway, the Defense Investigator heard SALISBURY state to Defense Counsel, “I’ve listened to his (Defendant's) telephone conversations with the Defense Investigator.”

        

         The Defense Investigator recognized immediately that SALISBURY had listened to privileged communications between the Defendant and the Investigator. Telephone calls made by inmates from the Medina County jail are recorded by and through an agreement between Medina County and Correctional Billing Services, Dallas, TX.

         SALISBURY learned the identity of the Defense Investigator during the Investigator's testimony at the suppression hearing on August 21, 2009.

         The Defense Investigator maintained liaison with the Defendant and briefed him, via telephone, as to the status and strategies of the defense case, as did Defense Counsel.

         Given SALISBURY'S complete lack of honesty and integrity, it is more than likely that SALISBURY eavesdropped on privileged conversations between the Defendant and Defense Counsel, as well.

         In 1966 the United States decided Hoffa v. United States, 385 U.S. 293, 307 (1966), citing Black v. United States, 385 U.S. 26 (1966), and citing Coplon v. United States, 89 U.S.App.D.C. 103, held that Government invasion of the defense camp invalidates the trial at which it occurred.

           COLLIER, WHO WAS FULLY BRIEFED BY DEFENSE COUNSEL ON THE PROVISIONS OF HOFFA V. UNITED STATES, SIMPLY IGNORED THIS RULING BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.

         As it turns out, the Defense Investigator's assessment was accurate. Following one segment of the suppression hearing, the Investigator informed the Defendant, via telephone, that defense counsel intended to subpoena Deputy Clinage at trial as a defense witness and that defense counsel considered Clinage’s testimony important to the defense.

  

         SALISBURY never called Clinage, the assigned case officer, to testify at trial. Further, Clinage ignored a defense subpoena and did not appear to testify at trial in response to the defense subpoena. Clearly, Clinage was instructed to ignore the subpoena by SALISBURY, with COLLIER’S approval. 

         Defense Counsel twice informed COLLIER, on the record, that Clinage had failed to appear at trial in response to the defense subpoena.  

        COLLIER JUST BLEW IT OFF AND MADE NO ATTEMPT TO COMPEL SALISBURY TO PRODUCE CLINAGE, THE STATE'S AGENT, UNLIKE AN HONEST AND ETHICAL JUDGE!

AFTER ALL, COLLIER HAS NO REGARD FOR THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE RULINGS OF THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, SINCE COLLIER CONSIDERS HIMSELF TO BE THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE KANGAROO COURT OF MEDINA COUNTY, OHIO!

MUCH MORE TO COME ....