It’s been two years since I’ve had a piece of chicken…

1/1/14

Lunch today surprised me so much – chicken thigh with the bone in! I haven’t had a real piece of meat in two years! Praise God! We also had apple pie, greens, white rice with gravy and cornbread. The chicken is so great! I saved the leg to eat tonight with my eggs and toast. I saved the apple pie to eat later with my milk.

 I can't believe how much I miss fried chicken, or just real meat...

I can’t believe how much I miss fried chicken, or just real meat…

I pray we go outside tomorrow. I truly need some fresh air, and more space to move around.
In this new room  I only have about 30 or 40 square feet to move around in.

This is for 23 hours a day for five days straight, but as it is too cold for the outside rec with no coats, I am usually in this tiny space for 24 hours for eight to ten days at a time; sometimes longer. I think it has been almost two weeks since it was warm enough to try to go outside.

I’m going to ask for another pair of pants tonight. I’ve had the same pair for two weeks now. They let us change out once a week on Wednesdays, but I don’t want to switch them out until I have to. I was such a proud man and hard on everyone. Yes, your love was always there. Thank God He put you in my life. God has a purpose for all this suffering, Rochelle. We just need to wait patiently for God. This process is all part of God’s plan.

1/2/14
Your visit was so great; I have missed the boys so. They are growing so fast! You looked very happy.
Did I tell you that dad sent me a Christmas card? Everyone in the pictures looked so great. You have been doing such a good job of raising our boys on your own. God has been guiding you well.

1/3/14
I got all the information from the transcripts you requested, and got it ready and sent it on to the lawyer. I also noticed that during the past week, the lights have been staying off in the mornings until 6:00 a.m. with breakfast being served after that. God is so great! Your grievances is being used by God as a way to make change. We have also been served a little more at our meals.

I’ve been reviewing your complaint to CPS, and you’ve covered most everything. You have such a goo memory, there were just a few errors in time, but it’s so hard when we can’t talk on the phone or even face to face, just through glass. I know it is hard to remember things and then run to the car and write them down, or write questions to me on your arm before you come in to visit; and then the visits are only once or twice a month. There’s so much against us, I don’t see how you get anything done.

I’m wrapped up in four sheets and three waffle blankets. If we could have a quilt or cover it would make a big difference. The cement is so cold when it’s cold outside. We still do not have warm air through the vents.

They just threw my grievance back in my cell from the charge on 12/13, saying that they would refund the cost of this med call. But, only one follow up is allowed per fourteen days of a visit. Well, my first sick call was in July, and the others were due to the lack of care post-op.

I got my shower a little while ago and traded for some more coffee. I feel a little warmer, and can try again to write my story to CPS. It is harder to do than I thought it would be, to relive all of the injustice that happened to our family.

part 6, end of complaint against Greensboro Assistant DA, injustice in North Carolina

thNRAHU73V

………end of 16 p. Formal Complaint against Assistant DA Hubbard to the NC Bar, asking for appropriate relief from wrongful imprisonment…

p. 567 9-10 “Well, I contend to you that you can believe Veronica.”  Finch v. United States, 867 A.2d 222,227 (D.C. 2005) (Improper for prosecutor to express evident opinion that government witness’ testimony had been incredibly straightforward.”) Diaz v. United States, 716 A.2d 173, 180 (D.C. 1997) (Improper for prosecutor to misstate the record by implying that defendant lied) p. 567 21-25 And I contend to you that if you apply those tests to the testimony of Veronica Palacios that you heard from the witness stand, that you won’t have any doubt that she is telling you the truth and that she is absolutely credible.” p.568 lines 1-4 In fact, the only question —— the only question that matters in this case is do you believe Veronica? If you do, then clearly the defendant is guilty of all these crimes. p. 570, lines 17-25       But, again, you know, she —— she —— at this interview she  wasn’t out to make herself look good or make herself look perfect or anything else. She was obviously out to tell the truth. And that’s what she was doing. And now, you know, because they have so little to —— to hang their hat  on —— MS. BAILEY: Objection. MR. HUBBARD: —— the defense is saying ——THE COURT: Overruled.

Powell v. United States, 455 A.2d 13, 16 (D.C. 1982) (“It is for the jury, not the counsel, to decide whether a witness is telling the truth. An attorney may not divert jurors from this task by injecting his personal evaluation as to a witness’ veracity…The prosecutor may not publically cast his vote.”) Dyson v. United States, 418 A.2d 127, 130 (D.C. 1980) (en banc) (Reversible error where porsecutor characterized dense testimony as “falsehood”, argued that there was “not a grain of truth in this defense” and asserted that the defense witnesses had “lied”) W

p.571, lines 1-3  Hubbard: – the defense is saying, Oh, well…cut it off, don’t watch the rest of it, don’t want to put it in context.”  Making untoward comments about assuming what the defense is saying. p. 571 Lines 8-25,  Imagine the most personal or embarrassing or hurtful moment of your life, whatever that might be, and then imagine – and it’s probably – hopefully for none of you that moment is that for four and a half years you were abused by – sexually abused by your father. But, in any event, imagine whatever that moment might be, and the imagine you were a fifteen-year-old girl, as she is now. And some of y’all have children and know…And imagine you had to go in and sit up here in this witness stand…But imagine you had to sit up here and look out at your family… p.572 lines1-6 But she did an admirable, commendable job of remaining quiet and respectful and cogently and intelligently telling you all these hurtful and embarrassing and terrible things that she suffered at the hands of one of the people who should have loved her most. He should have protected her from people like him.

Morris v. United States, 564 A.2d 746 (D.C. 1989) (Improper for prosecutor to invite jurors to imagine conversations between co-defendants)

ABA Standards for Criminal Justice, Standard 3-5.8 (a). (“the prosecutor should not intentionally misstate evidence or mislead jury as to the inferences it may draw.”) -taken from www.tdcaa.com/node/5266 A prosecuting attorney, though free to strike hard blows, is not at liberty to strike foul ones, either directly or indirectly … 21 This was improper because it was simply “a plea for abandonment of objectivity” rather than any legal basis for punishment. “Place yourselves in the shoes of the victim … How would you feel? What would you want?”22 Again, this is improper because it invites the jury to assess punishment based on a sense of vengeance rather than the facts and the law. p. 572 Lines 14-18 She did commendably well in telling you the truth about what happened to her. She has no reason to lie despite what Ms. Bailey said.

p.573 1-3 She didn’t do this because she wanted to get out of the house. She did it because she wanted the abuse to stop. She wanted her father not to be able to come in and have sex with her whenever he felt like it.

p. 574 –lines7-11 The only thing that this child had to gain from coming forward – well, a couple of things, for the pain and the abuse to stop and maybe hopefully to see a little bit of justice, to see that somebody does care enough to tell him that it’s not okay. In order to establish plain error, West must show that any error in giving the transferred intent instruction was “obvious or readily apparent, and that it was so clearly prejudicial  [*7]  to [his] substantial rights as to jeopardize the very fairness and integrity of the trial.” Id. (quoting Harris v. United States, 602 A.2d 154, 159 & n.6 (D.C. 1992) (en banc) (citations omitted)). Aralles with  8th Amendment NC & US Constitution   8th Amendment NC & US Constitution   Article 26 – Bail.  Northern California Innocence Project brought a state habeas petition, which was granted on the basis of the cumulative harm done by egregious prosecutorial misconduct.

……..

Where is the justice here?

Unanswered Grievance to the NC Bar after 2 years, prosecutorial misconduct, wrongful imprisonment

……

Dyson v. United States, 418 A.2d 127, 130 n. 5 (D.C. 1980) (Prosecutor has ethical obligation not to express personal opinion on guilt.) Sherrod v. United States, 478 A.2d 644, 657 n.15 (D.C. 1984) (Error for prosecutor to express “personal belief in appellant’s guilt.”)

Lines 14-17 “And, of course, that’s the crime that occurred when they first moved back to Greensboro to 2021 Rankin Mill Road…and obviously Veronica testified to you that there were-began about a month or so after they –they moved back. Lines 25-26, “He’s the one who’s (sic) creating the situation where there’s so many times that he’s done that that she-she can’t tell you exactly how many times…But that’s no fault of hers. That is something that the defendant’s created.

-vouching for the credibility of witnesses or offering a personal opinion about the evidence U.S. Constitution amend. VI (“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right…to be confronted with the witnesses against him…”) Finch v. United States, 867 A. 2.d 222, 227 (D.C. 2005) (Improper for prosecutor to express evident opinion that government witness’ testimony had been “incredibly straightforward.”) p. 556, lines 13-15 So, intercourse occurred during that time is first-degree rape of a child under the age of thirteen years. p.557, Lines2-4  All indications. In any event, clearly that is sexual intercourse within the definition. Over and over, he assumes guilt to a jury that has not deliberated. Lines 7-10 And obviously prior to –since this is between February 1st of 2008 and August the 1st of 2008 she was twelve years old during that time period. So she was under the age of thirteen. Lines20-21 I contend that the evidence you heard more than proves that. p. 558 contorting the truth and what defendant said to make it look like something else was said lines 6-13, Second, that the person with whom the defendant had vaginal intercourse was the defendant’s child. It was uncontroverted, the defendant said it himself, that she’s his daughter. So, you can take that as proven. (Nothing was proven other than common public knowledge – defendant knows that Veronica is his daughter.)

Lines 15-25 do nothing but further confuse the ‘evidence’. Line 24 states “There’s no doubt of that being proven.” But what was proven through all of that? Just when her birthdays were and that I am her father. He continues on in that vein of discussion for two more pages. Nothing is proven. p.560, lines, 16-17 “and again, I would contend that the evidence more than adequately proves that occurred. Washington v. United States, 397 A.2d 946, 951 (D.C. 1979) (Misconduct for prosecutor to argue, “I believe [witness’] testimony”) p.562, 11-13 “And this evidence proves, I contend, that he has committed that particular act, he’s guilty of that particular act.” Hyman v. United States, 342 A.2d 43,45 (D.C. 1975) (“[A] prosecutor may not express his opinion of the veracity of a witness…since such remarks amount to unsworn testimony and as such are impermissible”) – alludes to the 6th amend. Right to enjoy the right to be confronted with the witnesses against him…”) p.563 lines 1-3 “And so therefore we can take that element as well as having been proven”. What, that I wasn’t married to her? That isn’t even a question. p. 563 Lines 19-22, “So, I could have charged many more counts based on the number of times that she described, but we didn’t know the exact number of times.” Daye v. United States, 733 A.2d 321, 328 n.6 (DC 1999) (Improper for prosecutor to argue that “[i]f we had other evidence that [government witness] committed this murder, we would have prosecuted him for that.”) p.565 Lines 14-16,”… which I contend, both of those I contend are proven to you by the evidence you heard.” p.567 lines 4-6 I contend to you that this evidence more than amply proves each and every element of each – of each of these charges beyond a reasonable doubt.”

…continued…

January 2012 Complaint to the NC Bar, p.2 unresolved in 2014

2008 – Veronica was having a great deal of trouble with authority figures at Eastern Guilford Middle. We encouraged her to go to the school counselor and even got special permission for her to be able to leave class to speak to them because she was having issues with bullying, as well as abusive actions by her math teacher. We went to several meetings to advocate for her and to help with her defiance and refusing to cooperate. We also had two incidents of a math teacher abusing her by not only making fun of her in class, but making her stand at the front of the class holding a penny in each hand for over twenty minutes for not doing her classwork, so we got her removed from that classroom to a different teacher. I have always gotten off of work to participate in IEP and other meetings for her. These records of meetings and my attendance could have been subpoenaed, again to help establish my authenticity as a caring parent, and to establish past patterns of the main witness.

2007-2009 Various doctor’s records to show where she had female pediatricians and had been examined by one in PA after staring menarche and in yearly follow-up check ups

Also because of now two erroneous news articles involving my case, it will be close to impossible to find old friends or other family members who would even have the money to put up the necessary collateral, and I will have to sit even longer unlawfully imprisoned.

II. Candor Toward the Tribunal
a. 1. As my wife mentioned in her grievance, James, Judy, Haley and Haley’s mom Shelley gave her permission to come inside the Crawford house and speak to Haley and her grandparents about what they knew Veronica had said. In the investigative notes, Shelley mentions she knew that my wife had spoken to Haley, although some of the wording was not true, as James and Judy were in the kitchen with Haley. James then proceeded to get on the stand and to deny that my wife had come in his house. Although Mr. Hubbard obvious wanted this testimony for his own gain, it would have been an important part of the presentation of material fact, especially if he had pursued his line of questioning to get James to admit that my wife had been welcomed in the home to speak with them. My wife had no idea the family knew for over a year that Veronica was making allegations, and was stunned to find out in a conversation with James that they had never been concerned over Veronica’s allegations. She was known to tell exaggerated stories.

2. In the investigative notes, Marcel Edwards, the CPS worker, noted that the parents kept talking about actions the children would do to get to go live with their mother, and how they had tried to get us trouble in the past by making false accusations, (see document 1). We also disclosed to Ms. Edwards that we had concerns about Daniel Jr. sexually abusing Veronica, as well as the possibility that Veronica had been molested by Carolyn’s former boyfriend, David Laughlin (her mother). We also relayed a story where my wife Rochelle had taken Veronica, Daniel and Nicholas to private swimming lessons one year. Veronica got a bruise on her leg while learning to dive, yet her mother drug her down to the Randleman Sheriff’s Department and coerced Veronica to falsely state that my wife had beat her with a belt. The intake person dismissed it, noting that it was not consistent with a belt mark. Veronica held that in for over six months, and then called in tears because she wanted to tell my wife she was sorry for doing that. Mr. Hubbard would have been aware of these notes, yet did nothing in the pursuit of justice to see what past issues there could have been, and the potential of an alternative suspect.

We told Ms. Edwards that there were signs that Veronica was being sexually abused from as early on as two years old. I had a past girlfriend, Shann Long, who could testify to what she noticed about Veronica when she was still in diapers. My wife, Rochelle also disclosed that she had caught Daniel Jr. acting out sexually on Veronica in the closet when she was seven and he was nine, and that’s why we started therapy in 2002. Our information was more or less discarded.

III. Rule 3.8 Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor
Comment

[1] A prosecutor has the responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply that of an advocate; the prosecutor’s duty is to seek justice, not merely to convict. This responsibility carries with it specific obligations to see that the defendant is accorded procedural justice and that guilt is decided upon the basis of sufficient evidence… A systematic abuse of prosecutorial discretion could constitute a violation of Rule 8.4.
[2…; the prosecutor should make timely disclosure to the defense of available evidence known to him or her that tends to negate the guilt of the accused, mitigate the degree of the offense, or reduce the punishment. Further, a prosecutor should not intentionally avoid pursuit of evidence merely because he or she believes it will damage the prosecutor’s case or aid the accused.

a. Responsibility of a minister of justice – I was told during one of my consultations with the defense attorney, Sabrina Bailey, that Mr. Hubbard had intentions to attempt to prosecute my wife if she testified on my behalf. As you can see from the large list above, my wife could corroborate my alibi, as well as create a pretty strong case for my innocence. She could also create a pattern of past issues that Veronica had which would establish strong issues as to the credibility to Veronica’s testimony.

b. Intentionally avoiding pursuit of evidence was seen, when I was on the stand, Sabrina was giving me a chance to speak about my wife’s disability and our sons – all of whom have Asperger’s. (this documentation was provided in my wife’s grievance) Not only would this be crucial to creating a place for my wife to be able to testify by clarifying the one statement she made that Mr. Hubbard was holding over our heads, but it help the tribunal to have better understanding of the dynamic of our home, and the complications that we faced. He objected to my giving any information, and then waved away the defense’s attempt to bring pertinent information to the jury, especially as one juror worked with autistic people.

A prosecutor should not intentionally avoid pursuit of evidence… yet Mr. Hubbard does just that by threatening my wife to keep her from testifying. He is also obstructing justice by interfering with my right to an unbiased jury because my wife would have released pertinent information to not only establish alibi, but present to the Court and Tribunal. This also furthers the issue of respect to third parties, as she received no such respect.
IV. Rule 4.1 Truthfulness in Statements to Others
In the course of representing a client a lawyer shall not knowingly make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person.
Comment

Misrepresentation

[1] A lawyer is required to be truthful when dealing with others on a client’s behalf, but generally has no affirmative duty to inform an opposing party of relevant facts. A misrepresentation can occur if the lawyer incorporates or affirms a statement of another person that the lawyer knows is false. Misrepresentations can also occur by partially true but misleading statements or omissions that are the equivalent of affirmative false statements. For dishonest conduct that does not amount to a false statement or for misrepresentations by a lawyer other than in the course of representing a client, see Rule 8.4.

Statements of Fact

[2] This Rule refers to statements of fact. Whether a particular statement should be regarded as one of fact can depend on the circumstances. Under generally accepted conventions in negotiation, certain types of statements ordinarily are not taken as statements of material fact. Estimates of price or value placed on the subject of a transaction and a party’s intentions as to an acceptable settlement of a claim are ordinarily in this category, and so is the existence of an undisclosed principal except where nondisclosure of the principal would constitute fraud. Lawyers should be mindful of their obligations under applicable law to avoid criminal and tortuous misrepresentation.
However, Mr. Hubbard states over and over in terms of the allegations as being true, and to the honesty, credibility and straight-forwardness of the main witness. Not only is he misrepresenting me as already being a criminal (See p.549 of Mr. Hubbard’s closing argument, document 14), he covers up the differences found in the variety of testimony Veronica gives in different situations by stating on p. 567(see document 2),
Lines 20-25 And I contend to you that if you apply those tests to the testimony of Veronica Palacios that you heard from that witness stand, that you won’t have any doubt that she is telling you the truth and that she is absolutely credible.
p. 575 Lines 2-3 Her trial testimony, I contend to you, is remarkably consistent with her statements.
(caselaw is mentioned later)
But, if one looks at Veronica’s testimony, it becomes obviously just how much changes between investigative reports, and also changes within minutes of the earlier testimony before it when she is on the stand.
Note the discrepancies in her testimony. See document 3:
She said she was putting away her clothes when her father approached her from behind and…
Document 4:
Para. 4 Veronica said the sexual intercourse occurred either in her bedroom or Mr. Palacios’ bedroom, and also a (sic) on a couple of occasions in her brother’s bedroom. All three bedrooms are on the upper level of the home. (She later testifies that some of the bedrooms are downstairs and there is a fourth bedroom because my mother lives with us during most of the time she has made the allegations in North Carolina.)
Para. 8 Veronica said she could not give an exact number of times her father sexually abused her while in
North Carolina, but said it was sometimes as often as two or three times a week, then sometimes would not occur for a few weeks.
Document 5:
Lines 1-2 And where would it happen? In either in my room or in his room.
Lines 14-16 It was maybe every other day, maybe it was every day one right after another, or it would have been a week in between.
Document 6:
Lines 19-25 Would any of them be around when this was going on? No sir. Do you know where your step-mother was when this would happen – this would happen? No, sir.
Document 7:
Lines 23-25 It – he would come in my room sometimes at night or during the day. It depended on who was in the house or if he had the chance to, I guess…
Document 8:
Lines 7-9 He would come in my room during the day, at night, or whenever and he would take off my clothes…
Document 9:
Lines 2-3 He would – he would come in my room at night and during the day if – sometimes if my stepmom wasn’t there or if she was outside with the boys or in the backyard
Document 10:
Lines 4-6 And sometimes he would catch me off guard and I would be by myself and he would just – he would come-he would come towards me.
Lines 15-17 And he would come over to the bed and he would start – if I was asleep – it – it mostly occurred when I was asleep.
Now, under duress and the stress of keeping up with her variances she says something completely new.

Document 11:
Lines 9-11 How often did-did these events happen? They would happen maybe once a week, twice, I mean, every other day, every day. It varied.
Lines 12-14 And did that continue – you said it started how long after you moved back to Greensboro? Maybe a month, a month and a half.
Yet, she told Ms. Edwards the first time was maybe seven or eight months after the move to Greensboro.

Mr. Hubbard, in his desperation to cover up Veronica’s mistakes, creates statements of fact in his closing over the entirety of Document 12, the crux of which is stated on lines 14-19:
I mean, she can say, well, he had…but it happened sometime. It happened, you know, once-once in a week, sometimes it happened two days in a row, sometimes it, you know, went for a while and then it happened several times. It varied, she said. Again, he had the control, he had the access.
Again, he gives the pretense of stating fact.

Looking at Document 13,we see Kristal’s view:
Kristal said she spent the night with Veronica for the first time in November 2008 when she told her of the sexual abuse. Veronica told Kristal that her father would come in her bedroom when her mother was gone or asleep and make her do it…Kristal said Veronica told her the assaults happened almost every week, and usually occurred in her bedroom.

This will further be evidenced below in the discussion involving how Mr. Hubbard is leading the various witnesses’ testimony. He interrupts, manipulates and controls the testimony to the point that he takes over most of what is said on the stand, and puts himself in the role of witness, speaking at some points in the first person, which will be discussed specifically further down.
V. Rule 4.4 Respect for Rights of Third Persons
(a) In representing a client, a lawyer shall not use means that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay, or burden a third person, or use methods of obtaining evidence that violate the legal rights of such a person.

Comment

[1] Responsibility to a client requires a lawyer to subordinate the interests of others to those of the client, but that responsibility does not imply that a lawyer may disregard the rights of third persons. It is impractical to catalogue all such rights, but they include legal restrictions on methods of obtaining evidence from third persons and unwarranted intrusions into privileged relationships, such as the client-lawyer relationship.

VI. Rule 8.4 Misconduct
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:

Comment

[1] Lawyers are subject to discipline when they violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so or do so through the acts of another, as when they request or instruct an agent to do so on the lawyer’s behalf.

[2] … Offenses involving violence, dishonesty, breach of trust, or serious interference with the administration of justice are in that category.

A pattern of repeated offenses, even ones of minor significance when considered separately, can indicate indifference to legal obligation.
[3] For this reason, to establish a violation of paragraph (b), the burden of proof is the same as for any other violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct: it must be shown by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence that the lawyer committed a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty
…………to be continued………