Ken Starr-Saving His Reputation
What were they thinking?
In a nutshell, the team sent 6 letters from jurors in the case, all saying that based on one small piece of testimony...
The original letters, filed Tuesday, indicated jurors would not have given Morales the death penalty had they known an informant lied on the witness stand, according to defense attorneys.
Juror Ruben, 47, who asked that his last name not be published, said he hasn't changed his mind about the verdict in the 23 years since the trial.
"I still stand by my original decision," he said. "I never thought I would give a death penalty (recommendation), but I've never looked back."
"Until I received this fax copy of the declaration, I had never seen it before. This declaration is a forgery and is untrue," said a juror identified only as Anita in a declaration for prosecutors. "This declaration goes against everything I know and believe about the Michael Morales case." To add to Anita's comments, I heard her interviewed on the radio, and to paraphrase, she said that the testimony of the lying informant would not have influenced her decision anyway, and it was the special circumstances of the crime that made them decide on the death penalty. Also, one of the letters went into great detail about a story concerning the beginning of deliberation, and Anita said none of that ever happened.
They made quite an effort to paint some picture that was completely fabricated.
There was one letter that was not forged, however...
The sixth juror also was reached and confirmed he had spoken with someone from Morales' defense team, said Chuck Schultz of the San Joaquin County District Attorney's Office. However, that juror's letter was "benign," and the juror didn't support or oppose the clemency.
I'm speechless, how could they possibly think they would get away with this?
Oh, and again, another death penalty in California, and no Snoop, no Rev. Jesse, no Danny Glover, no you fill in the blank...
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home