A rivalry continues to brew over at the Medina County Courthouse/Mosque & Railroad Station. Simmering below the surface, not necessarily from public view, is a love triangle involving Medina County judges and prosecutors.
It would appear that CORRUPT MEDINA COUNTY JUDGE CHRISTOPHER COLLIER, and CORRUPT MEDIA COUNTY PROSECUTORS have been competing by their displays of affection for MISS CONDUCT!
MISS CONDUCT is the goal and desire of all of these CORRUPT "PUBLIC OFFICIALS!" One has to wonder whether the charms of MISS CONDUCT might be reasonably worth the ultimate price.
Cited below is language taken from a brief filed by defense counsel in the context of a trial before TOTALLY CORRUPT MEDINA COUNTY JUDGE CHRISTOPHER COLLIER regarding the infatuation of assistant prosecutor SALISBURY a/k/a SLEAZEBURY (for obvious reasons) with MISS CONDUCT. This language properly put COLLIER on notice of the deficiencies of a trial, as if he didn't know and approve, in which COLLIER railroaded an innocent man to prison:
" That defendant was denied a fair trial because of a continuing course of prosecutorial misconduct (by Salisbury), which was pervasive throughout the entirety of the case, specifically including, but not limited to the following:
A. The assistant prosecutor falsified a police report of interview, to mislead defense counsel to believe that the defendant had been advised of his Miranda rights; the assistant prosecutor withheld exculpatory evidence, and engaged in other serious discovery violations.
B. Invasion of the defense camp, by sending an undercover operative into the Medina County Jail to spy on defendant, and by the prosecutor's listening to attorney-client privileged telephone conversations.
C. The assistant prosecutor disobeyed the court's order to provide the defendant with proper notice of the charge against him so that he could prepare for trial.
D. The assistant prosecutor abused the voire dire process by usurping the Judge's role to instruct the jury on the applicable law.
E. The assistant prosecutor repeatedly misstated the evidence at trial, over the defendant's objections.
F. The assistant prosecutor falsely made improper remarks, not supported by any evidence, implying bad character of the defendant, despite the fact that the defendant did not introduce a character defense, e. g. to lead the jury to believe that the defendant used illegal drugs.
G. The assistant prosecutor denigrated defense counsel.
H. The prosecuting attorney made improper remarks during his closing argument.
I. The assistant prosecutor invented facts no in evidence during his final rebuttal closing argument.
J. The assistant prosecutor intentionally surprised the defense at trial by impermissibly introducing forbidden Rule 404(b)-type evidence, over the defendant's objections and contrary to the law and the assistant prosecutor's assurances to the court and to defense counsel that he would not use such evidence in his case-in-chief. The lack of indicia of reliability, the lack of probative value, the lack of any balancing test by the court, and the lack of any contemporaneous limiting instruction denied the defendant a fair trial.
K. The assistant prosecutor denied the defendant a fair trial by improperly commenting on his exercise of his 5th Amendment right to remain silent and not provide a written statement to his interrogator, who had failed to advise him of his Miranda rights, failed to obtain a waiver of those rights, and who previously refused his three requests to speak with an attorney.
L. The assistant prosecutor, throughout the pre-trial proceedings, taunted the defendant.
M. The assistant prosecutor elicited testimony of the defendant's lay-off, which resulted from the bad economy and was not probative of any issues before the jury. This conduct was designed to embarrass the defendant and prejudice the jury against him by implying that he may have been fired.
N. The assistant prosecutor violated the defendant's right to compulsory process when he failed to present Deputy Douglas Clinage, his agent, for testimony at trial when Clinage had been served by the defense with a trial subpoena commanding his appearance at trial for the production of testimony."
AS CAN BE SEEN FROM THIS LEGAL BRIEF, THAT COLLIER LIKELY FAILED TO READ AT ALL, SALISBURY HAS FALLEN COMPLETELY AND HOPELESSLY IN LOVE WITH MISS CONDUCT.
SO, TOO, HAS COLLIER, AS WILL SHORTLY BE FURTHER DEMONSTRATED IN FILINGS THAT COLLIER HAS COMPLETELY IGNORED SO AS TO RETAIN HIS GRIP ON A VIRTUAL LIFETIME APPOINTMENT TO THE MEDINA COUNTY BENCH, COMPLIMENTS OF CORRUPT MEDINA COUNTY PROSECUTOR DINO HOLMAN.
IN REALITY, THE ONLY BENCH UPON WHICH COLLIER IS QUALIFIED TO SIT IS LOCATED IN ANY ONE OF THE MEDINA COUNTY PARKS, TO BE SHARED WITH THE PIGEONS AND THE SQUIRRELS!
It will be interesting to see how the Disciplinary Counsel of the Ohio Supreme Court will deal with these and other issues of corruption in the Medina County Courts.
MUCH MORE TO COME ....
Friday, January 21, 2011
Friday, January 14, 2011
"MEDINA VICE" IS THE REAL THING!
Many may remember the television show Miami Vice from some year ago!
It seems as though corrupt Medina County prosecutor DINO HOLMAN was inspired by the TV series and decided to begin his own local program of undercover "investigation," MEDINA VICE.
Always mindful of the need to preserve his tarnished 98% rate of conviction, and in utter contempt for the United States Constitution, HOLMAN conceived of a new and resourceful strategy, although HIGHLY ILLEGAL.
HOLMAN concluded that it made plenty of sense to him that, if the Medina County sheriff's deputies did a lousy, ineffective, and incompetent job of developing the minimal facts necessary to indict and punish innocent citizens, WHY NOT PUT UNDERCOVER INVESTIGATORS INTO THE JAIL BESIDE ALL OF THOSE HARDENED SOON-TO-BE FELONS AND GET THE INFORMATION THAT WAY!
I'm sure that HOLMAN figured he had a sure-fire winner with that idea and so he forged ahead straightaway.
The only minor problem with little scheme is that IT VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS OF THE SOON-TO-BE HARDENED CRIMINALS, UPON WHOM HOLMAN HAS SET HIS UNLAWFUL SIGHTS.
The FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, BUTTRESSED BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT IN THE 1966 LANDMARK CASE MIRANDA v. ARIZONA, PROVIDES THAT A CITIZEN TRULY HAS THE RIGHT TO REFRAIN FROM MAKING INCRIMINATING STATEMENTS IN A CUSTODIAL ENVIRONMENT.
I am reasonably confident that most would agree that the Medina County Jail is a custodial environment.
The SIXTH AMENDMENT GUARANTEES A RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO LEGAL COUNSEL.
The FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT IMPOSES AND CONFERS THE SIXTH AMENDMENT UPON THE STATES.
Lo and behold, HOLMAN and his criminal assistants (an apt characterization) have come upon this ingenious tactic to assault and defeat the protections guaranteed to innocent citizens conferred by NO FEWER THAN THREE AMENDMENTS TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
I'm fairly confident that HOLMAN believed that he hit the JACKPOT with this scheme.
However, the United States Supreme Court has stepped in long ago and ruled that HOLMAN's scheme is HIGHLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
Should you decide to confirm this for yourselves, you may go to http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=385&invol=293 in a matter decided by the United States Supreme Court, in HOFFA v. UNITED STATES (1966).
Once again, and as usual, the United States Supreme Court decided more than 40 years ago that HOLMAN's tactic of invading the defense camp is unconstitutional and compels setting aside any conviction arising from such a practice, which is nothing more than business as usual in the Medina County courts.
Following is an excerpt taken directly from Hoffa v. United States, referenced above:
It seems as though corrupt Medina County prosecutor DINO HOLMAN was inspired by the TV series and decided to begin his own local program of undercover "investigation," MEDINA VICE.
Always mindful of the need to preserve his tarnished 98% rate of conviction, and in utter contempt for the United States Constitution, HOLMAN conceived of a new and resourceful strategy, although HIGHLY ILLEGAL.
HOLMAN concluded that it made plenty of sense to him that, if the Medina County sheriff's deputies did a lousy, ineffective, and incompetent job of developing the minimal facts necessary to indict and punish innocent citizens, WHY NOT PUT UNDERCOVER INVESTIGATORS INTO THE JAIL BESIDE ALL OF THOSE HARDENED SOON-TO-BE FELONS AND GET THE INFORMATION THAT WAY!
I'm sure that HOLMAN figured he had a sure-fire winner with that idea and so he forged ahead straightaway.
The only minor problem with little scheme is that IT VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS OF THE SOON-TO-BE HARDENED CRIMINALS, UPON WHOM HOLMAN HAS SET HIS UNLAWFUL SIGHTS.
The FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, BUTTRESSED BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT IN THE 1966 LANDMARK CASE MIRANDA v. ARIZONA, PROVIDES THAT A CITIZEN TRULY HAS THE RIGHT TO REFRAIN FROM MAKING INCRIMINATING STATEMENTS IN A CUSTODIAL ENVIRONMENT.
I am reasonably confident that most would agree that the Medina County Jail is a custodial environment.
The SIXTH AMENDMENT GUARANTEES A RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO LEGAL COUNSEL.
The FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT IMPOSES AND CONFERS THE SIXTH AMENDMENT UPON THE STATES.
Lo and behold, HOLMAN and his criminal assistants (an apt characterization) have come upon this ingenious tactic to assault and defeat the protections guaranteed to innocent citizens conferred by NO FEWER THAN THREE AMENDMENTS TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
I'm fairly confident that HOLMAN believed that he hit the JACKPOT with this scheme.
However, the United States Supreme Court has stepped in long ago and ruled that HOLMAN's scheme is HIGHLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
Should you decide to confirm this for yourselves, you may go to http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=385&invol=293 in a matter decided by the United States Supreme Court, in HOFFA v. UNITED STATES (1966).
Once again, and as usual, the United States Supreme Court decided more than 40 years ago that HOLMAN's tactic of invading the defense camp is unconstitutional and compels setting aside any conviction arising from such a practice, which is nothing more than business as usual in the Medina County courts.
Following is an excerpt taken directly from Hoffa v. United States, referenced above:
The proposition that a surreptitious invasion by a government agent into the legal camp of the defense may violate the protection of the Sixth Amendment has found expression in two cases decided by the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Caldwell v. United States, 92 U.S. App. D.C. 355, 205 F.2d 879, and Coplon v. United States, 89 U.S. App. D.C. 103, 191 F.2d 749. Both of those cases dealt with government intrusion of the grossest kind upon the confidential relationship between the defendant and his counsel. In Coplon, the [385 U.S. 293, 307] defendant alleged that government agents deliberately intercepted telephone consultations between the defendant and her lawyer before and during trial. In Caldwell, the agent, "[i]n his dual capacity as defense assistant and Government agent . . . gained free access to the planning of the defense. . . . Neither his dealings with the defense nor his reports to the prosecution were limited to the proposed unlawful acts of the defense: they covered many matters connected with the impending trial." 92 U.S. App. D.C., at 356, 205 F.2d, at 880.
We may assume that the Coplon and Caldwell cases were rightly decided, and further assume, without deciding, that the Government's activities during the Test Fleet trial were sufficiently similar to what went on in Coplon and Caldwell to invoke the rule of those decisions. Consequently, if the Test Fleet trial had resulted in a conviction instead of a hung jury, the conviction would presumptively have been set aside as constitutionally defective. Cf. Black v. United States, ante, p. 26.
THERE IT IS ONCE AGAIN, IN BLACK & WHITE! THE LANGUAGE OF THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DOES NOT SEEM TO ME TO BE TERRIBLY DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND!
PERHAPS HOLMAN THINKS THAT THE JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT WERE JUST KIDDING!
MUCH MOR TO COME ....
Thursday, January 13, 2011
TWO HARDENED CRIMINALS SLIP TROUGH THE CRACKS!
Medina County police made two apparently illegal seizures of non-contraband, well ahead of the legal curve. It seems as though substance identified as "K2" has been encountered in Medina County!
An online article, found in the Medina Gasette at the following link http://medinagazette.northcoastnow.com/2011/01/12/synthesized-marijuana-k2-isnt-illegall-in-ohio-just-yet/
shows a picture of what purports to be the apparent seizure of K2 by Medina County cops, who report that they've encountered two individuals in possession of this non-contraband.
Now, that is all well and good, except for the fact, as the Gasette points out, IT IS NOT AN ILLEGAL SUBSTANCE!
I am far from endorsing drug use and abuse in any fashion. The article does point out, however, that this "new" form of a substance has not yet been criminalized.
The next question that arises: BY WHAT LEGAL AUTHORITY DID POLICE SEIZE THE PICTURED K2?
The pictured K2 could not have been illegally seized without a search warrant for any number of reasons:
1) The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires that the police have probable cause to secure a search warrant. (BUT NO FOURTH AMENDMENT & NO WARRANTS REQUIRED IN MEDINA COUNTY!)
2) The Fourth Amendment requires the police to develop probable cause for a search warrant. (BUT NOT IN MEDINA COUNTY, WHERE THE TERM "PROBABLE CAUSE" REMAINS UNDEFINED AN NOT FULLY UNDERSTOOD!)
3) The Fourth Amendment requires a warrant be reviewed for probable cause by a neutral and detached judicial officer. (BUT NOT IN MEDINA COUNTY, WHERE THE "JUDGES" DO NO SEEM TO EXPRESS MUCH OF AN INTEREST AND WHERE OFFICERS CAN ISSUE THEIR OWN WARRANTS, WITH FULL JUDICIAL APPROVAL, WITHOUT PRIOR JUDICIAL REVIEW!)
ON SECOND THOUGHT, PERHAPS THE POLICE SEIZED THE NON-CONTRABAND K2, WITH THE BLESSING OF MEDINA COUNTY PROSECUTOR DINO HOLMAN, JUST BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO.
THAT'S PRETTY MUCH HOW IT'S DONE IN ANY POLICE STATE!
It's amazing that the two hardened non-criminals escaped punishment from HOLMAN. Perhaps he was attending one of those not-so-secret meetings in Columbus with some township trustee or other, plotting to sandbag some other Medina County business, since that does seem to happen in Medina County.
MUCH MORE TO COME .....
An online article, found in the Medina Gasette at the following link http://medinagazette.northcoastnow.com/2011/01/12/synthesized-marijuana-k2-isnt-illegall-in-ohio-just-yet/
shows a picture of what purports to be the apparent seizure of K2 by Medina County cops, who report that they've encountered two individuals in possession of this non-contraband.
Now, that is all well and good, except for the fact, as the Gasette points out, IT IS NOT AN ILLEGAL SUBSTANCE!
I am far from endorsing drug use and abuse in any fashion. The article does point out, however, that this "new" form of a substance has not yet been criminalized.
The next question that arises: BY WHAT LEGAL AUTHORITY DID POLICE SEIZE THE PICTURED K2?
The pictured K2 could not have been illegally seized without a search warrant for any number of reasons:
1) The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires that the police have probable cause to secure a search warrant. (BUT NO FOURTH AMENDMENT & NO WARRANTS REQUIRED IN MEDINA COUNTY!)
2) The Fourth Amendment requires the police to develop probable cause for a search warrant. (BUT NOT IN MEDINA COUNTY, WHERE THE TERM "PROBABLE CAUSE" REMAINS UNDEFINED AN NOT FULLY UNDERSTOOD!)
3) The Fourth Amendment requires a warrant be reviewed for probable cause by a neutral and detached judicial officer. (BUT NOT IN MEDINA COUNTY, WHERE THE "JUDGES" DO NO SEEM TO EXPRESS MUCH OF AN INTEREST AND WHERE OFFICERS CAN ISSUE THEIR OWN WARRANTS, WITH FULL JUDICIAL APPROVAL, WITHOUT PRIOR JUDICIAL REVIEW!)
ON SECOND THOUGHT, PERHAPS THE POLICE SEIZED THE NON-CONTRABAND K2, WITH THE BLESSING OF MEDINA COUNTY PROSECUTOR DINO HOLMAN, JUST BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO.
THAT'S PRETTY MUCH HOW IT'S DONE IN ANY POLICE STATE!
It's amazing that the two hardened non-criminals escaped punishment from HOLMAN. Perhaps he was attending one of those not-so-secret meetings in Columbus with some township trustee or other, plotting to sandbag some other Medina County business, since that does seem to happen in Medina County.
MUCH MORE TO COME .....
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
"JUDICIAL ETHICS" IS NOT A SKIN DISEASE AFFLICTING JUDGES!
It would certainly appear that CORRUPT MEDINA COUNTY JUDGE CHRISTOPHER COLLIER is under the false impression that "judicial ethics" is a skin disease that afflicts only judges, since he seems to avoid them like the bubonic plague!
Although, I must admit, COLLIER's avoidance of judicial ethics has a profound effect on all of the citizens of Medina County, since WE are afflicted by the symptoms.
Now, judges come from the ranks of lawyers, and most lawyers claim to loosely belong to the legal profession.
Any sociologist will tell you that one of the hallmarks of any "profession" is that the organization of like and allied individuals polices itself. Therefore, any self-policing professional organization must have, as a matter of necessity, an established Code of Conduct and the means to enforce that code.
With regard to that niche of "legal professionals" who hold the elected positions of "judges" (except in Medina County where judges like COLLIER are not really elected in the true democratic sense of that word), the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio has adopted the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct.
You may consult and read the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct, should you choose, at this link: http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/LegalResources/Rules/conduct/judcond0309.pdf
As you can plainly see, the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct is publicly displayed for all the world to see. COLLIER, who does not seem to be aware of the contents of the CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT, is either unaware of its existence or has had difficulty reading the Code, if at all, with comprehension.
Should you go to the above link and review the Code, you will note that, right off the bat, COLLIER HAS A BIG PROBLEM!
CANON #1 OF THE OHIO CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT PLAINLY STATES:
"A JUDGE SHALL UPHOLD AND PROMOTE THE INDEPENDENCE, INTEGRITY, AND IMPARTIALITY OF THE JUDICIARY AND SHALL AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY."
Right from the outset, COLLIER has three strikes against him!
COLLIER, a Republican who has been gifted with a virtual lifetime appointment to the bench by Medina County Democrats in exchange for his subservience to Democrat Medina County Prosecutor DINO HOLMAN, certainly cannot lay claim to promoting INDEPENDENCE of the Medina County judiciary.
Should COLLIER refuse to toe the mark, the Dems would rise to the occasion and run a candidate against him in a General Election.
Then, there comes the issue of INTEGRITY, which COLLIER just can't seem to locate. Perhaps no one has given him the proper map!
In the matter of judges, lack of independence amounts to lack of integrity.
Should COLLIER refuse to toe the mark, the Dems would rise to the occasion and run a candidate against him in a General Election.
Finally, IMPARTIALITY has flown out the very courtroom window through which COLLIER gazes, while defense attorneys have taken center stage, as he HOLMANIZES innocent citizens.
Should COLLIER refuse to toe the mark, the Dems would rise to the occasion and run a candidate against him in a General Election.
Then again, according to the Code of Judicial Conduct, COLLIER should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.
COLLIER has obviously given this requirement no consideration at all, as evidenced by his improper private ex parte communications with SALISBURY and his intentionally errant rulings in favor of Salisbury, no matter that facts and the law.
MUCH MORE TO COME ....
Although, I must admit, COLLIER's avoidance of judicial ethics has a profound effect on all of the citizens of Medina County, since WE are afflicted by the symptoms.
Now, judges come from the ranks of lawyers, and most lawyers claim to loosely belong to the legal profession.
Any sociologist will tell you that one of the hallmarks of any "profession" is that the organization of like and allied individuals polices itself. Therefore, any self-policing professional organization must have, as a matter of necessity, an established Code of Conduct and the means to enforce that code.
With regard to that niche of "legal professionals" who hold the elected positions of "judges" (except in Medina County where judges like COLLIER are not really elected in the true democratic sense of that word), the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio has adopted the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct.
You may consult and read the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct, should you choose, at this link: http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/LegalResources/Rules/conduct/judcond0309.pdf
As you can plainly see, the Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct is publicly displayed for all the world to see. COLLIER, who does not seem to be aware of the contents of the CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT, is either unaware of its existence or has had difficulty reading the Code, if at all, with comprehension.
Should you go to the above link and review the Code, you will note that, right off the bat, COLLIER HAS A BIG PROBLEM!
CANON #1 OF THE OHIO CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT PLAINLY STATES:
"A JUDGE SHALL UPHOLD AND PROMOTE THE INDEPENDENCE, INTEGRITY, AND IMPARTIALITY OF THE JUDICIARY AND SHALL AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY."
Right from the outset, COLLIER has three strikes against him!
COLLIER, a Republican who has been gifted with a virtual lifetime appointment to the bench by Medina County Democrats in exchange for his subservience to Democrat Medina County Prosecutor DINO HOLMAN, certainly cannot lay claim to promoting INDEPENDENCE of the Medina County judiciary.
Should COLLIER refuse to toe the mark, the Dems would rise to the occasion and run a candidate against him in a General Election.
Then, there comes the issue of INTEGRITY, which COLLIER just can't seem to locate. Perhaps no one has given him the proper map!
In the matter of judges, lack of independence amounts to lack of integrity.
Should COLLIER refuse to toe the mark, the Dems would rise to the occasion and run a candidate against him in a General Election.
Finally, IMPARTIALITY has flown out the very courtroom window through which COLLIER gazes, while defense attorneys have taken center stage, as he HOLMANIZES innocent citizens.
Should COLLIER refuse to toe the mark, the Dems would rise to the occasion and run a candidate against him in a General Election.
Then again, according to the Code of Judicial Conduct, COLLIER should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.
COLLIER has obviously given this requirement no consideration at all, as evidenced by his improper private ex parte communications with SALISBURY and his intentionally errant rulings in favor of Salisbury, no matter that facts and the law.
MUCH MORE TO COME ....
Friday, January 7, 2011
WHAT'S A LITTLE PERJURY AMONG FRIENDS?
I've recently had a rather revealing conversation with the mother of a young man railroaded by the Medina County prosecutors office and CORRUPT JUDGE CHRISTOPHER COLLIER.
It seems as though, according to the mother, the young man was peripherally involved in a fracas of some sort and had a minor role, if any, in the event.
Most involved plead guilty, since they really had no other choice, given the extortionate tactics of the Medina County prosecutor, who is not really interested in the truth of any matter, or, ultimately in justice.
According to the mother, the PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE PRESSURED HER SON TO GIVE FALSE TESTIMONY against one of the others involved in the fracas.
When the lad refused to offer perjured testimony in court, no doubt quite coincidentally, the young man's case just happened to end up on COLLIER's docket.
I wonder just how that happened! Must be just the luck of the draw!
LO AND BEHOLD, THE LAD WHO REFUSED TO LIE IN COURT WAS SENTENCED TO MORE TIME IN PRISON THAN THE PRINCIPAL OFFENDER(S)!
You can be sure that the prosecutor's office dictated the sentence to COLLIER, who imposed the sentence required by HOLMAN's office. After all, this young man had the unmitigated gall to refuse to play ball in HOLMAN's schoolyard.
So much for an independent judiciary in Medina County!
JUST WHO ARE THE REAL CRIMINALS IN THE MEDINA COUNTY COURTHOUSE/MOSQUE & RAILROAD STATION?
Such is the manner of criminal "justice" in Medina County, that this hardened young "felon" had MORE INTEGRITY THAN THE PROSECUTOR AND THE JUDGE.
THIS IS BUT ONE MORE ACCOUNT OF THE CORRUPT ADMINISTRATION OF INJUSTICE, MEDINA STYLE!
MUCH MORE TO COME ....
It seems as though, according to the mother, the young man was peripherally involved in a fracas of some sort and had a minor role, if any, in the event.
Most involved plead guilty, since they really had no other choice, given the extortionate tactics of the Medina County prosecutor, who is not really interested in the truth of any matter, or, ultimately in justice.
According to the mother, the PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE PRESSURED HER SON TO GIVE FALSE TESTIMONY against one of the others involved in the fracas.
When the lad refused to offer perjured testimony in court, no doubt quite coincidentally, the young man's case just happened to end up on COLLIER's docket.
I wonder just how that happened! Must be just the luck of the draw!
LO AND BEHOLD, THE LAD WHO REFUSED TO LIE IN COURT WAS SENTENCED TO MORE TIME IN PRISON THAN THE PRINCIPAL OFFENDER(S)!
You can be sure that the prosecutor's office dictated the sentence to COLLIER, who imposed the sentence required by HOLMAN's office. After all, this young man had the unmitigated gall to refuse to play ball in HOLMAN's schoolyard.
So much for an independent judiciary in Medina County!
JUST WHO ARE THE REAL CRIMINALS IN THE MEDINA COUNTY COURTHOUSE/MOSQUE & RAILROAD STATION?
Such is the manner of criminal "justice" in Medina County, that this hardened young "felon" had MORE INTEGRITY THAN THE PROSECUTOR AND THE JUDGE.
THIS IS BUT ONE MORE ACCOUNT OF THE CORRUPT ADMINISTRATION OF INJUSTICE, MEDINA STYLE!
MUCH MORE TO COME ....
Thursday, January 6, 2011
THE CONSEQUENCE OF DENYING CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS!
Here is another documented account of judicial corruption, in the nearby State of Pennsylvania. It seems like a couple of not-so-honorable judges were taking kickbacks for sending juveniles to a private juvenile detention facility.
It's clear there is money to be made in all manner of ways.
You can read the entire story by following this link:
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-02-23/justice/pennsylvania.corrupt.judges_1_detention-judges-number-of-juvenile-offenders?_s=PM:CRIME
THIS IS BUT ONE EXAMPLE OF THE CONSEQUENCE OF THE DEPRIVATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND AN UNSUPERVISED AND UNACCOUNTABLE JUDICIARY.
THIS COMES AS NO SURPRISE, FULLY RECOGNIZING THAT THE CORRUPT PROSECUTORS AND JUDGES IN MEDINA COUNTY HAVE LONG AGO DENIED CITIZENS OF THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, UP TO AND INCLUDING THE PRESENT DAY, AND THERE ARE DOUBTLESS NUMBERS OF INNOCENT CITIZENS IMPRISONED AS A RESULT.
MUCH MORE TO COME ....
It's clear there is money to be made in all manner of ways.
You can read the entire story by following this link:
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-02-23/justice/pennsylvania.corrupt.judges_1_detention-judges-number-of-juvenile-offenders?_s=PM:CRIME
THIS IS BUT ONE EXAMPLE OF THE CONSEQUENCE OF THE DEPRIVATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND AN UNSUPERVISED AND UNACCOUNTABLE JUDICIARY.
THIS COMES AS NO SURPRISE, FULLY RECOGNIZING THAT THE CORRUPT PROSECUTORS AND JUDGES IN MEDINA COUNTY HAVE LONG AGO DENIED CITIZENS OF THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, UP TO AND INCLUDING THE PRESENT DAY, AND THERE ARE DOUBTLESS NUMBERS OF INNOCENT CITIZENS IMPRISONED AS A RESULT.
MUCH MORE TO COME ....
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
INTIMIDATION & ABUSE OF AUTHORITY: STOCK-IN-TRADE OF MEDINA COUNTY PROSECUTOR
Here is but one more display of the abuse of authority and attempted intimidation rampant in the Medina County system of injustice.
Assistant Medina County prosecutor SCOTT SALISBURY a/k/a SKIPPY SLEAZEBURY (for obvious reasons) has been trying desperately to suppress this blog. My best guess is SLEAZEBURY feels disgraced over the content of his communications posted here over time, and rightly so.
After cajoling, harassing, threatening, and attempting to extort the moderator of this blog, all unsuccessfully, SLEAZEBURY has now turned to that time-worn tactic: INTIMIDATION!
Following is an excerpt from a recent communication from SLEAZEBURY:
"since m wina isnt behind bars already then im guessing since he is still
Assistant Medina County prosecutor SCOTT SALISBURY a/k/a SKIPPY SLEAZEBURY (for obvious reasons) has been trying desperately to suppress this blog. My best guess is SLEAZEBURY feels disgraced over the content of his communications posted here over time, and rightly so.
After cajoling, harassing, threatening, and attempting to extort the moderator of this blog, all unsuccessfully, SLEAZEBURY has now turned to that time-worn tactic: INTIMIDATION!
Following is an excerpt from a recent communication from SLEAZEBURY:
"since m wina isnt behind bars already then im guessing since he is still
posting he is obviously not under a court order to cease and dissist his eronious actions that medina dosent
care or maybe their is some truth to the wina's gibberish.it would probably only take a day to find out who
the wina is and about 20 mins for a judge to issue either a warrant for arrest and or seize his/her computer
as evidence and restrain them from posting any further rantings and within an hour or 2 they would have
served him,locked him up and siezed his computer!oh yeah.if they can prove he could be a physical threat to
these to fine upstanding officials.they could just go pick him up and get the warrant later.then he/she really
is screwd! hiel hitler!no free speech here!
THIS IS PERFECT EXAMPLE OF "JUSTICE" IN MEDINA COUNTY AND PRECISELY WHY WE NEED A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION BY THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE!
You will note that SLEAZEBURY speaks of a WARRANT, which, of course normally requires an officer to establish probable cause before a warrant issues, at least according to the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. NOT SO IN MEDINA COUNTY!
Now, since I have never committed a criminal act in my entire life, up to and including the present moment, THEY'LL HAVE TO DREAM SOMETHING UP!
As SALISBURY well knows, THEY ARE GOOD AT THAT IN MEDINA COUNTY!
I suppose SALISBURY can manufacture some "evidence." HE'S REALLY GOOD AT THAT!
Then, SALISBURY speaks of making a WARRANTLESS ARREST, without probable cause. THEY ARE VERY, VERY GOOD AT THAT IN MEDINA COUNTY!
Lastly, you will note that SALISBURY pays homage to his role model, ADOLPH HITLER! That, of course, is not surprising in the least, simply because FASCISM is the order of the day in the Medina Courts.
SADLY, BECAUSE OF THE DEPRIVATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS, MEDINA COUNTY HAS EFFECTIVELY BECOME A POLICE STATE!
Of course, this is the manner in which the Medina County Prosecutor's Office regards the value of the protections that should be guaranteed in Medina County, BUT ARE NOT BECAUSE OF THE RAMPANT PUBLIC CORRUPTION.THIS IS PERFECT EXAMPLE OF "JUSTICE" IN MEDINA COUNTY AND PRECISELY WHY WE NEED A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION BY THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE!
You will note that SLEAZEBURY speaks of a WARRANT, which, of course normally requires an officer to establish probable cause before a warrant issues, at least according to the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. NOT SO IN MEDINA COUNTY!
Now, since I have never committed a criminal act in my entire life, up to and including the present moment, THEY'LL HAVE TO DREAM SOMETHING UP!
As SALISBURY well knows, THEY ARE GOOD AT THAT IN MEDINA COUNTY!
I suppose SALISBURY can manufacture some "evidence." HE'S REALLY GOOD AT THAT!
Then, SALISBURY speaks of making a WARRANTLESS ARREST, without probable cause. THEY ARE VERY, VERY GOOD AT THAT IN MEDINA COUNTY!
Lastly, you will note that SALISBURY pays homage to his role model, ADOLPH HITLER! That, of course, is not surprising in the least, simply because FASCISM is the order of the day in the Medina Courts.
SADLY, BECAUSE OF THE DEPRIVATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS, MEDINA COUNTY HAS EFFECTIVELY BECOME A POLICE STATE!
MUCH MORE TO COME, UNLESS THEY TRUMP UP SOME FALSE CRIMINAL CHARGES ....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)