TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Exhibits ........................................................................................................................... vii
Table of Authorities .................................................................................................................... xv
1. The State and the Previous Trial Courts Engaged in Egregious
Misconduct, Driven by Bad Faith. ................................................... 1
A. The State Fabricated a Discovery Document in Defendant’s First Trial .... 1
B. The State Invaded the Defense Camp in Defendant’s First Trial ................ 2
C. The State Engaged in Brady Violations, Permitted by the Previous Trial Courts .... 2
2. Trial Court I Denied Defendant’s Motion to Suppress on the Disingenuous
Rationale That an Indictment Cures Violations of the Fourth Amendment
by Police. ...................................................................................................... 6
A. The Prosecutor Introduced Inadmissible Alleged Other Acts “Evidence” at Trial,
After Acknowledging Its Inadmissibility and After Assuring Defense Counsel and
The Court That He Would Not Do So ....................................................................... 9
B. Trial Court II Was Prejudiced by an Ex Parte Letter From Adversarial
Third Parties in Unrelated Civil Litigation, Which Ex Parte Letter the Court
Deliberately Withheld from the Defense. ............................................................... 10
C. During a Heated Ex Parte Discussion in Chambers, Pertaining to This
Case, Between Judge Collier and the Assistant Prosecutor, the Judge
Was Overheard to Shout at the Prosecutor, “I’ll Help You!” ............................... 13
3. Trial Court I and the Court Reporter Deliberately Edited, Tampered
With, and Materially Altered the “Official” Transcript of the
Proceedings in Trial I. .......................................................................................... 14
A. Judge Collier is Involved in a Longstanding Sexual Relationship With His
Court Reporter Donna Garrity ............................................................................. 15
B. Mr. Hartman Extensively Briefed the Issue of the Tampered and Altered
Transcript to Trial Court II ................................................................................... 16
C. The Post-Trial Briefs Noticed Trial Court I of the Appellate Issues ................ 17
D. Post-Trial Motions Directed Trial Court I to Concepts and Testimony
to Alter in the Transcript ....................................................................................... 18E. A Portion of The Suppression Hearing Testimony of Inspector Hartman
Was Deleted From the Transcript ........................................................................ 19
F. The Suppression Hearing Testimony of Deputy Frank Telatko
Was Deliberately Altered ...................................................................................... 20
G. Deputy Telatko’s Actual Suppression Testimony Was Deliberately
Deleted From the Record ...................................................................................... 21
H. Defense Counsel Impeached Telatko at Trial with His Actual
Suppression Testimony .......................................................................................... 23
I. The Testimony of Deputy Clinage Was Deliberately Altered in the
Suppression Transcript .......................................................................................... 23
J. The Trial Testimony of Roy “Al” Leighton Was Materially Altered ................. 26
K. The Corrupted Transcript Demonstrates an Obvious Deletion From
The Testimony of Roy “Al” Leighton ..................................................................... 27
L. The Corrupted Transcript Demonstrates an Obvious Gap and
Deletion of A Portion of the Trial Testimony of Steven Hartman .......................... 28
M. The Corrupted Transcript Demonstrates Other Irregularities
Consistent With Tampering ..................................................................................... 29
4. The Transcript of Mr. Hartman’s October 28, 2013 Bond Hearing
Has Been Deliberately Edited and Materially Altered in an Attempt to
Deprive His Spouse, For a Third Time, of Her Spousal Privilege. ................... 30
5. Judge Collier and His Court Reporter Have Been Materially Altering
Transcripts For No Less Than The Past Eleven Years. ..................................... 32
A. State v. Jeffery Mack, Medina Case No. 03CR0612 ............................................ 33
B. State v. Frank P. Wood, Medina Case No. 05CR0365 ........................................ 35
C. State v. David L. Reed, Medina Case No. 10CR0407 ......................................... 36
D. State v. Joel Hysell, Medina Case No. 12CR0700 .............................................. 37
E. State v. Lynn Vandeusen, Medina Case No. 12CR0388 ...................................... 39
6. Inspector Hartman Has Developed Evidence of Transcript Tampering
In Other Courtrooms in the Medina County Court. .......................................... 41
A. In the Matter of J.G, Medina County Juvenile Court
Case No. 2014-02DQ-0076, Judge Dunn .................................................................. 41
B. State v. Michael Gunner, Medina Case No. 05CR0235, Judge Kimbler ............... 42
7. Inspector Hartman, Who Operates a Blog Exposing the Corruption
Endemic in the Medina County “Justice" System, Has Received an
Estimated 400 Offensive Electronic Messages From “Publius,” who
Has a Vested Interest in Shutting Down the Blog. ................................................. 44
A. In an Exchange of Email Messages With Inspector Hartman,
“Publius” Admitted to Using Various Aliases in His Messages to the Blog ............... 45
B. After Acknowledging Being Served With Defense Subpoenas Duces Tecum, Which
Attempted to Identify “Publius” and His “Sockpuppets,” Multiple Internet Service
Providers Failed to Provide the Subpoenaed Documents to the Defense,
Suggesting that Their Responses Were Unlawfully Diverted. ...................................... 46
C. “Publius” Displays Intimate Knowledge of This Case, Not
Known to the Public ...................................................................................................... 47
D. “Publius” Made Certain Damning Admissions in His Messages
to Inspector Hartman .................................................................................................... 49
E. “Publius” Issued Threats to Inspector Hartman ...................................................... 53
F. “Publius” Laced His Messages to Inspector Hartman With
Racial Pejoratives ......................................................................................................... 54
G. “Publius” in His Electronic Messages Taunted Inspector Hartman ....................... 55
H. “Publius” Attempted to Pressure, Intimidate and CoerceInspector Hartman to Delete His Blog .............................................................................................................................. 56
I. “Publius” Laced His Messages to Inspector Hartman with
Vulgarities, Profanities, and Obscenities ..................................................................... 57
J. Inspector Hartman Has Developed Additional Evidence Pointing
To Judge Christopher Collier as “Publius” ................................................................. 57
8. Judge Collier Has Facilitated Apparent Thefts of Public Funds
By His Court Reporter and Mistress, Donna Garrity. ............................................ 60
A. State v. Kyle Miller, Medina Case No. 12CR0097, Judge Collier ........................... 60
B. State v. Lynn Vandeusen, Medina Case No. 12CR0388, Judge Collier ................... 61
C. State v. Clegg, Medina Case No. 13CR0126, Judge Collier .................................... 61
D. State v. Stevenson, Medina Case No. 09CR0386, Judge Collier ............................. 62
E. State v. Dennis Eisele, Medina Case No. 12CR0472, Judge Collier ....................... 62
F. State v. James McDonald, Medina Case No. 11CR0267, Judge Collier ................. 63
G. State v. Richard Miles, Medina Case No. 12CR0001, Judge Collier ...................... 63
H. State v. George Mose, Medina Case No. 09CR0515, Judge Collier ....................... 64
I. State v. Brian Vitt, Medina Case No. 08CR0495, Judge Collier ............................... 64
Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 65
Certificate of Service .................................................................................................. 69
List of Exhibits
Exhibit One Copy of falsified discovery document, accompanied by copy of
Original Narrative Report from which a portion of the fabricated
discovery document was extracted.
Exhibit Two Copy of December 30, 2009 Affidavit of Inspector Paul M.
Hartman (Ret.) pertaining to prosecutor’s improper monitoring of
privileged custodial telephone communications between Defendant
and his counsel and the defense investigator.
Exhibit Three Copy of Appellant’s Reply Brief, pp. 1-2 (State v. Hartman, 9th
Dist. No. 12CA0057-M, 2013-Ohio-4407) detailing the State’s
repetitive deliberate misstatement of material facts in pleadings
before the Ninth District Court of Appeals.
Exhibit Four Copy of false and prejudicial ex parte letter to Trial Court II sent
by Inspector Hartman’s adversaries in unrelated civil litigation
filed in Indiana, which the court withheld from the defense.
Exhibit Five Copy of defense counsel’s Affidavit of Disqualification pertaining
to Judge Christopher Collier, with attached Affidavit of Inspector
Hartman, detailing an ex parte discussion between the judge and
the assistant prosecutor wherein Judge Collier shouted at the
prosecutor, “You compelled the [Defendant’s] wife to testify. But
I’ll help you.”
I’ll help you.”
Exhibit Six Copy of a business record from the website of the Ohio Secretary
of State identifying Judge Collier’s court reporter Donna Garrity as
a principal in Medina Court Reporters, Inc.
of State identifying Judge Collier’s court reporter Donna Garrity as
a principal in Medina Court Reporters, Inc.
Exhibit Seven Copy of the docket in State v. Hartman, 9th Dist. No. 10CA0026-M,
highlighting and documenting seven requests filed by court
reporter Donna Garrity, delaying the filing of the corrupted
transcript of Defendant’s Trial I until December 27, 2010.
Exhibit Eight Copy of the caseload of Donna Garrity in the Ninth District Court
of Appeals documenting that Donna Garrity filed no fewer than
nine transcripts of proceedings occurring after the date on whichof Appeals documenting that Donna Garrity filed no fewer than
she was served the Praecipe by Mr. Hartman’s appellate counsel.
Exhibit Nine Copy of the October 8, 2014 Affidavit of Inspector Hartman pertaining to the longstanding and ongoing sexual relationship
between Judge Christopher Collier and his court reporter Donna
Garrity.
Exhibit Ten Copy of August 2, 2011 Affidavit of Inspector Paul M. Hartman
pertaining to the deliberate alteration to the transcript of hissuppression hearing testimony.
Exhibit Eleven Copies of pp. 175-180 of the materially altered and corrupted
transcript of the suppression hearing testimony of Deputy FrankTelatko.
Exhibit Twelve Copy of Defendant’s November 23, 2009 Motion for Acquittal, pp.
4, filed 13 months prior to the corrupted transcript on Mr.Hartman’s first trial, quoting the precise language of Deputy
Telatko’s suppression testimony that was later deliberately deleted
from the corrupted transcript.
Exhibit Thirteen Copy of the trial transcript, pp. 369, of Mr. Hartman’s first trial,
documenting that defense counsel impeached Deputy Telatko with
his suppression hearing testimony that was later deliberately
deleted from the transcript of the suppression hearing.
Exhibit Fourteen Copy of the suppression-hearing transcript, pp. 243-244,
containing the deliberately altered testimony of Deputy Douglas
Clinage.
Exhibit Fifteen Copy of Mr. Hartman’s December 17, 2009 brief Additional
Authorities and Exhibits in Support of Defendant’s Motion forAcquittal, pp. 6-7, filed more than 12 months prior to the corrupted
transcript, memorializing Deputy Clinage’s actual testimony at the
suppression hearing, later deliberately altered in the corrupted
transcript.
Exhibit Sixteen Copy of contemporaneous handwritten notes taken during the
suppression hearing testimony of Deputy Douglas Clinage,
memorializing his actual testimony, “It was a complicated night. The charge kept changing.” That actual testimony of Deputy
Clinage was materially altered in the corrupted transcript of thesuppression hearing testimony of Deputy Douglas Clinage,
suppression hearing.
Exhibit Seventeen Copy of Mr. Hartman’s December 17, 2009 brief Additional
Authorities and Exhibits in Support of Defendant’s Motion for
Acquittal, pp. 34-35, filed more than 12 months prior to the
corrupted transcript, and memorializes specific examples of Judge
Collier’s preventing defense counsel from conducting a full andfair cross-examination of the State’s witnesses, which were later
deliberately deleted from the corrupted transcript.
Exhibit Eighteen Copy of the corrupted trial transcript, pp. 265, demonstrating an
obvious gap and deletion of the actual cross-examination of the
trial testimony of State’s witness Al Leighton.
Exhibit Nineteen Copy of the Affidavit of defense witness Steven Hartman averring
that portions of his trial testimony had been deliberately deleted from the corrupted trial transcript.
Exhibit Twenty Copies of the cover page of the corrupted transcript wrongly dated
“November 9, 2010,” when the trial actually commenced on November 9, 2009.
Exhibit Twenty-One Copy of the Affidavit of Mr. Jeffery Mack averring that the 2003
transcripts of the deposition testimony of a State’s witness and thetranscript of his suppression hearing, held before Judge Collier,
had been materially altered. State v. Mack, Medina Case No.
03CR0612, 9th Dist. No. 05CA0024-M, 2005-Ohio-6325 (whereinMr. Mack raised the issue of corrupted transcripts on appeal;
Id., at ¶13 ).
Exhibit Twenty-Two Copy of the Affidavit of Mr. Frank P. Wood averring that the transcript of his trial, before Judge Collier, was materially altered
and that exculpatory testimony had been deleted from the
transcript. State v. Frank Wood, Medina Case No. 05CR0365.
Exhibit Twenty-Three Copy of the Affidavit of Mr. David Reed who avers that Judge Collier imposed an illegal sentence upon him, which he appealed
to Collier. The judge dismissed Mr. Reed’s motions as “untrue,”
indicating the judge tampered with the transcript of Reed’s
sentencing hearing, or the docket in his case, or both.
Exhibit Twenty-Four Copy of the Affidavit of Ms. Ashley Marrs, who entered Collier’s courtroom as an observer in support of her fiancé Joel Hysell and
who was denigrated and publicly humiliated by Judge Collier in
open court while she was seated in the gallery. Mrs. Eva Marrs,
Ashley’s mother, ordered a transcript of the hearing, which Donna
Garrity furnished fully seven months after Mrs. Marrs placed the
order for the transcript, which had been materially altered to deleteall of Collier’s inappropriate and unprofessional remarks.
State v. Joel Hysell, Medina Case No. 12CR0700.
Exhibit Twenty-Five Copy of the memorandum of interview of Ms. Lynn Vandeusen,
who was charged, prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced to a jail
term by Judge Collier for allegedly altering a transcript of court
proceedings, produced by Donna Garrity’s Medina Court
Reporters, Inc., and which transcript Ms. Vandeusen never
possessed. State v. Vandeusen, Medina Case No. 12CR0338.Exhibit Twenty-Six Copy of the Affidavit of Mrs. Holly Powell, mother of juvenile J.G, who, on two separate occasions requested and paid for
complete transcripts of J.G.’s adjudicator hearing in Medina
County Juvenile Court, only to find that the court turned overwoefully incomplete and inconsistent “transcripts” in an apparent
deliberate attempt to frustrate her appeal of the magistrate’s
finding that J.G. is a delinquent child.
Exhibit Twenty-Seven Copies of a letter and the Affidavit of Mr. Michael Gunner
averring that the transcript of his sentencing hearing before MedinaCounty Common Pleas Judge James Kimbler had been materially
altered, thus impacting his appeal. State v. Gunner, Medina Case
No. 05CR0235.
Exhibit Twenty-Eight Copy of the Affidavit of Mr. Alan Gunner, bother of Mr. Michael
Gunner, present at the sentencing hearing and memorializing the
actual language of Judge Kimbler at the sentencing hearing of his
brother, which language had been later deliberately deleted fromthe transcript.
Exhibit Twenty-Nine Copy of the Affidavit of Mrs. Sandra Gunner, who was present
and witnessed the sentencing hearing of her son Michael Gunner,averring that the transcript of the sentencing hearing held beforeJudge Kimbler had been materially altered.
Exhibit Thirty Copy of the Affidavit of Ms. Jacqueline Davey, a family friend who was present at and witnessed Michael Gunner’s sentencing
hearing before Judge Kimbler and avers that the language of Judge
Kimbler at sentencing has been deleted from the transcript.
Exhibit Thirty-One Copy of a letter from Ms. Joan Lewis, family friend who attended the sentencing hearing of Michael Gunner, disputing the transcript
of the sentencing hearing before Judge Kimbler. Ms. Lewis poses
the question, “What good is a transcript if it is altered in any
way?”
Exhibit Thirty-Two Copy of the index of offensive email messages that “Publius” sent
to Inspector Hartman at his blog.Exhibit Thirty-Three Copies of an email exchange between Inspector Hartman, who used the pen name “Miguel Sword” in his published blog, and
“Publius” who admitted to using various aliases in his electronic
messages to Inspector Hartman, including, but not limited to,
Publius, Leperchaun (sic) Sam, Steve Martinez-johnson, among
others.Exhibit Thirty-Four Copies of subpoenas served upon Internet Service Providers seeking to positively identify “Publius.” Each and every one of
these subpoenaed provider failed to comply with the subpoena and
never produced the requested documentation and information tothe Defense, leading to the inescapable conclusion that person(s) in
a position of authority interfered with the production.
Exhibit Thirty-Five Copies of representative samples of electronic messages “Publius”
sent to Inspector Hartman at his blog, displaying intimate
knowledge of Matthew Hartman’s case not publicly known.Exhibit Thirty-Six Copies of representative samples of electronic messages “Publius”
sent to Inspector Hartman at his blog, containing certain
admissions, some damning.
admissions, some damning.
Exhibit Thirty-Seven Copies of representative samples of electronic messages “Publius”
sent to Inspector Hartman at his blog, in which “Publius” threatens
Inspector Hartman, including shooting Inspector Hartman,
planting drugs in his car, and unlawfully arresting Inspector
Hartman on a charge of OVI and assuring conviction by means
of a “canned sample.”
Exhibit Thirty-Eight Copies of representative samples of electronic messages “Publius”
sent to Inspector Hartman at his blog, referring to InspectorHartman using vile racist pejoratives including, but not limited, to
Spic, Wetback, Wetback Mexican, Nigger, Nigger Lover, and
Exhibit Thirty-Nine Copies of representative samples of electronic messages “Publius”
sent to Inspector Hartman at his blog, which were attempts to
pressure, coerce, and intimidate Inspector Hartman to shut down
his blog.
Exhibit Forty Copies of representative samples of electronic messages “Publius”
sent to Inspector Hartman at his blog, which were laced with
vulgarities, profanities, and obscenities.
Exhibit Forty-One Personal profile posted at the TripAdvisor website by Publius2003,
placing his residence in Medina, Ohio.
Exhibit Forty-Two October 13, 2008 hotel review of the Comfort Inn, Seville, Ohio
(contiguous to the City of Medina) that Publius2003 posted to the
TripAdvisor website with the disingenuous comment, “I was in
town for a wedding.”
Exhibit Forty-Three November 10, 2010 hotel review of the Cleveland Airport
Sheraton Inn that Publius2003 posted to the TripAdvisor website
with the comment “while visiting Cleveland” (Cleveland is a short
thirty-minute drive from Medina).
Exhibit Forty-Four November 29, 2008 hotel review of the Cincinnati/Springdale
Crossland Economy Studios Publius2003 posted at the
TripAdvisor website with the comment, “We booked this hotel for
a warm, clean place to stay over my birthday weekend.”
Exhibit Forty-Five Copies of a traffic citation that Cleveland Police issued to Judge
Collier, establishing his date of birth at November 14, 1954, along
with a copy of the November 2008 calendar revealing that Judge
Collier’s birthday fell on a Friday in 2008.
Exhibit Forty-Six Copy of the docket, State v. Kyle Miller, Medina Case No.
12CR0097, along with a copy of Certificate for Court
Stenographer’s Fees for July 18, 2014, not supported by the
docket.
Exhibit Forty-Seven Copy of the docket, State v. Vandeusen, Medina Case No.
12CR0388, along with a copy of Certificate for Court
Stenographer’s Fees for April 15, 2013 sentencing, not supported
by the docket, along with the Judgment Entry revealing that the
Defendant was actually sentenced on April 22, 2013.
Exhibit Forty-Eight Copy of the docket, State v. Matthew Clegg, Medina Case No.
13CR0126, along with a copy of Certificate for Court
Stenographer’s Fees for June 3, 2013, not supported by the docket.
Exhibit Forty-Nine Copy of the docket, State v. Thomas Stevenson, Medina Case No.
09CR0386, along with a copy of Certificate for Court
Stenographer’s Fees for December 14, 2000, not supported by the
docket.
Exhibit Fifty Copy of the docket, State v. Dennis Eisele, Medina Case No.
12CR0472, along with a copy of Certificate for Court
Stenographer’s Fees for November 26, 2012, not supported by the
docket.
Exhibit Fifty-One Copy of the docket, State v. James McDonald, Medina Case No.
12CR0001, along with a copy of Certificate for Court
Stenographer’s Fees for July 25, 2011, not supported by the
docket.
Exhibit Fifty-Two Copy of the docket, State v. Richard Miles, Medina Case No.
09CR0386, along with a copy of Certificate for Court
Stenographer’s Fees for June 11, 2012, not supported by the
docket.
Exhibit Fifty-Three Copy of the docket, State v. George Mose, Medina Case No.
09CR0515, along with copies of Certificates for Court
Stenographer’s Fees for May 28 and July 9, 2010, not supported
by the docket.
Exhibit Fifty-Four Copy of the docket, State v. Brian Vitt, Medina Case No.
08CR0495, along with a copies of Certificates for Court
Stenographer’s Fees for February 6, 2009 and May 9, 2011, not
supported by the docket.
Exhibit Fifty-Five Copy of the defective unsworn criminal complaint, lacking an
essential statement of facts, and the arrest warrant flowing
therefrom, charging Mr. Hartman with burglary.
Exhibit Fifty-Six Transcript of suppression hearing testimony of Deputy Douglas
Clinage, Page 242, documenting his testimony that he had not
sworn to the criminal complaint in support of the arrest warrant
charging Mr. Hartman with burglary.
Exhibit Fifty-Seven Transcript of suppression hearing, Page 5, documenting that the
State was unprepared to go forward and failed to carry and meet its
burden at the suppression hearing.
Exhibit Fifty-Eight Affidavit of Matthew Hartman averring that the transcript of his
October 28, 2013 bond hearing has been deliberately edited and
materially altered, deleting Medina County Prosecutor Dean
Holman’s express identification of the Leighton’s as the sole
victims of the alleged offense of aggravated burglary, to the
exclusion of all others.
Exhibit Fifty-Nine Affidavit of Carolyn Hartman, who had been present at Matthew
Hartman’s bond hearing and witnessed Medina County Prosecutor
Dean Holman’s express identification of the Leighton’s as the
victims of Matthew’s alleged crime, averring that the transcript of
his October 28, 2013 bond hearing has been deliberately edited and
materially altered, deleting Dean Holman’s express identification
of the Leighton’s as the sole victims of the alleged offense of
aggravated burglary, to the exclusion of all others.
Exhibit Sixty Affidavit of Inspector Paul M. Hartman (Ret.), who had been
present at Matthew Hartman’s bond hearing and witnessed Medina
County Prosecutor Dean Holman’s express identification of the
Leighton’s as the victims of Matthew’s alleged crime, averring that
the transcript of his October 28, 2013 bond hearing has been
deliberately edited and materially altered, deleting Dean Holman’s
express identification of the Leighton’s as the sole victims of the
alleged offense of aggravated burglary, to the exclusion of all
others.
Should be Carl Morris added to that list
ReplyDeleteIs there any action on this? It's not clear if and when it was filed...
ReplyDelete