Comes another typical series of
LYIN' & DENYIN' from the office of CORRUPT COUNTY PROSECUTOR DINO HOEMAN.
To catch you, the reader, up with all that's happened, the individual whose case is being profiled at this blog has had his second conviction for the same alleged offense
OVERTURNED AGAIN by the Ninth District Court of Appeals on the grounds of
PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT. That is not really a surprise since
HOEMAN encourages misconduct by his employees as a usual and customary practice.
Recently
Richard "Dick" Markus, the judge sitting by assignment in the second trial, was recused.
"Dick" Markus, like
LAPDOG COLLIER before him, engaged in a number of shady and unethical practices at trial. One of the most egregious of that
"Dick's" ethical violations occurred when he deliberately withheld evidence of an
ex parte document sent to him by a couple of
complete scumbag attorneys from Indiana, making unfounded accusations against the blogger, in defiance of a Federal Court Order.
One of those two
complete scumbags, not surprisingly, boasts that he is a "lawyer in two states"
(THE STATE OF CONFUSION AND THE STATE OF SIN) and was FIRED FOR CAUSE (MISCONDUCT) BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. The other so-called "lawyer" was suspended from the practice of law for one year.
Both of these two scumbag attorneys would have great success here in Medina County as members of the Medina County Bar & Pickpocket Association.
Markus, "Dick" that he is, was prejudiced by that communication and deprived the Defendant of his rights under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, the right of Due Process (notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard) and the Right to a Fair Trial.
Of course
Markus, a typically arrogant
"Dick," was overturned by the Ninth District Court of Appeals for letting
DINO HOEMAN'S ASS. PROSECUTORS,
SCOTT SLEAZEBURY and
MUSTAFAH FAUQUOD RAZAVI engage in their usual and customary
PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT.
Here is what the Ninth District Court had to say, in part, about the
PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT that
CORRUPT MEDINA PROSECUTOR DINO HOEMAN daily encourages among his ass. prosecutors:
The unfortunate result is that this case will be remanded once again to the trial court where it is likely that yet more resources will be expended for yet another retrial. Whether that in fact happens is beyond our purview. However, where this Court attempted in its last opinion to gently suggest that the State not repeat its indiscretions, I will say it bluntly: the prosecuting attorney(s) are much too personally invested in this case to be objective. Hopefully, reassignments for any retrial will be considered.
The complete decision of the Court of Appeals, further detailing the
PROSECUTORAL MISCONDUCT of
HOEMAN'S ass. prosecutors at the website of the Ninth District Court of Appeals can be found at
http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/9/2013/2013-ohio-4407.pdf
On May 16, 2014,
DINO HOEMAN petitioned Judge James Kimbler (who has absolutely
no jurisdiction in this case) to appoint a Special Prosecutor for a
third trial in this case. It is obvious that the motion, while signed by
HOEMAN, was drafted and prepared by Ass. prosecutor
STA-PUF KERN, who has proven himself to be as much of a
LIAR as his companions
SCOTT SLEAZEBURY and
MUSTAFAH FAUQUOD RAZAVI.
Following is quoted from
STA-PUF KERN'S motion to appoint a Special Prosecutor:
THIS REQUEST IS BEING MADE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE SO AS TO AVOID ANY APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY AS A RESULT OF BASELESS ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THIS OFFICE AND OTHERS IN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM.
WHAT A HOOT! THE COURT OF APPEALS DID NOT FIND THAT ALLEGATIONS OF PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT WERE "BASELESS."
THE MORE THAN 25 CASES, WHERE APPELLANTS HAVE RAISED ISSUES OF PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT BY DINO HOEMAN'S OFFICE, CAN HARDLY BE CONSIDERED BASELESS.
THE FACT THAT LAPDOG JUDGE CHRISTOPHER COLLIER HAS BEEN DELIBERATELY EDITING AND MATERIALLY ALTERING TRANSCRIPTS FOR MORE THAN THE PAST TEN YEARS, AIDED AND ABETTED BY HIS INTIMATE ACCOMPLICE COURT REPORTED DONNA "HAVE IT YOUR WAY" GARRITY IS CERTAINLY NOT BASELESS.
NOR IS THE FACT THAT DINO HOEMAN HAS BEEN DEFENDING LAPDOG COLLIER'S MATERIALLY ALTERED TRANSCRIPTS FOR THE PAST TEN YEARS. IN FACT, THAT CERTAINLY IMPLIES THAT HOEMAN IS COMPLICIT IN THE TAMPERING WITH THOSE TRANSCRIPTS.
HOEMAN HAS FINALLY TAKEN THE HINT! THE COURT OF APPEALS DOESN'T WANT THE SAME DIRTBALLS FROM HIS OFFICE PROSECUTING THIS CASE FOR A THIRD TIME!!!
