Who Were The True Conspirators?

I have to do another post on Mary Surratt to share with you what I have found, so we have a Part III to Mary Surratt.  This information is fascinating to me.  I have never been interested in history, even the thought of it bores me.  Give me a math problem any 'ole day.  But this Mary Surratt case and the bigger picture is an enormous frame up and cover up.  I did not get the significance of many things I saw in the movie "The Conspirator", until I came home and read further.

Historians fall on both sides of this debate...."Was Mary Surratt guilty or innocent?"  The historians saying she was guilty generally argue that she had to know, they buy what the government fed them almost 150 years ago, contrary to what has been found since.  One historian even goes so far as to say she must have been guilty because she had such a calm demeanor and was "clever" during her recorded interrogations. I don't know about you but calm is what I do, in fact the worse the circumstances, the calmer I get.  Because fear, insanity, rage all cloud my ability to think and reason.  When under extreme pressure or conflicting situations I get real quiet and listen with all my might so I can take the next best step.  BUT, now can you see where that can get interpreted as "obfuscating, lying, denying and parsing her words"?  That is how some historians have interpreted her demeanor and her claim of innocence. 

YET, during the trial, five priests and several other people testified on her behalf as to her stellar character and religious devotion.  Who knew more about Mary Surratt, these people who spent time with her over the years or the historians who paint her as Booth's co-conspirator?  It seems to me if someone had a shady, questionable character it would have surfaced at some time throughout the years prior to this event.  But you know the saying, people will find (or create) the evidence to fit their beliefs.  Perhaps I am guilty of the same in this instance...let's take a look at what came up after the conspiracy trial of Mary Surratt.

In the comment section of my prior blog I present the theory that there were others, such as Edwin Stanton, Secretary of War, and President Andrew Johnson himself that seemed to go out of their way to see these 8 people convicted and immediately dealt their punishments.  Yet they could have had their own political agendas to rid Lincoln of the Presidency, in fact it would seem they had far more MOTIVE than the characters convicted of conspiracy.  I set out to understand this better by researching John Wilkes Booth's diary, John Surratt Jr.'s trial two years later in a civilian court and anything I could find out about Andrew Johnson's impeachment trial.  I must make a correction here...in a previous comment (last blog - comment section) I said that Andrew Johnson was impeached, but that is an error.  He missed being impeached by one vote, he did finish out his term, but was a very unpopular President. 

I learned several things that I want to share with you, this will give you more insight into how (at a grand level) innocent people can come to be falsely accused and wrongly convicted.  It gives you a better understanding of the deception that is possible when perpetrating fraud on the courts.  Because, rarely, if ever, is a wrongful conviction a result of error, it is much more the result of a deliberate withholding and/or altering/creating evidence, false (coerced) testimonies by state witnesses....and a prosecutor who is hell-bent on winning at any cost while exercising their persuasive powers over the jury.

In the movie, "The Conspirator" the alledged conspirators, while imprisoned awaiting their trials and after had hoods over their heads.  The hoods were lined with one inch of cotton and there was only one small hole at the mouth for them to eat their food.  Therefore, they could not be heard.  In addition, they were shackled making writing impossible and were not allowed any discussions or visits from the outside world (with one exception, at the end of the trial Mary was allowed a brief visit from her daughter).  They had been silenced, were tried quickly and punishment was dealt immediately.  Even back then, this treatment was unheard of.  Mary Surratt pleaded that she be allowed to make a last statement but was denied.  What was the government covering up, what were they so afraid she would say?

Mary Surratt was convicted on the false testimony of two men.  There was no exculpatory evidence, only circumstantial.  Both men later, changed their stories.  John Lloyd, testified in John Surratt Jr.'s trial two years later.  "Lloyd not only contradicted some of the statements he had made at the conspiracy trail but admitted that he had been subjected to both promises and threats."  According to John T. Ford (owner of Ford Theater) Lloyd had told him he "was taken to Bryantown and when he refused to say anything against Mrs. Surratt, he was hanged by his thumbs until he could no longer stand the pain.  Only then, to spare himself from further torture, did he agree to give perjured testimony against his landlady."

The other false testimony came from Louis Weichmann who told his friends John Brophy and Louis Carland, following the conspiracy trial that "his conscience was troubling him, that he had lied on the witness stand to save his own life and keep his government position.  He said that his statements had been written out for him and he had to testify based on that."  On the day of Mary's execution John Brophy swore out an affidavit disclosing Weichmann's statements and copied the Washington Constitutional Union, plus took a copy to the White House. Carland later testified in John Surratt Jr.'s trial regarding what Weichmann had told them that day.

The evidence that was introduced in the John Surratt Jr. civilian trial two years later included Booth's diary, the clemency plea for Mary Surratt (coming from the tribunal members who had voted against the death sentence and were coerced by Stanton and Holt to change their vote),  petitions given to Andrew Johnson, prior to the executions, and the statements of Lewis Powell and John T. Ford presenting "evidence of confessed perjuries and witness intimidation by the government."  "The civil trial of John Surratt Jr. exposed many injustices that a free people must never again tolerate."

John Wilkes Booth's diary indicated there were many over him in this plot, he did not act alone.  It coincided with General Baker's diary, his accounts of the Lincoln assassination.  "Both implicated, even boasted  of a secret government council which had bound the country over a century.  It revealed that the true killers were led by Lincoln's most trusted military advisor in the Civil War, Edwin M. Stanton, the Secretary of War."  General Lafayette Baker, chief of the National Detective Police Force and fellow conspirator (conspirator with Stanton), wrote "Stanton's plot was a vast, well financed attempt to seize control of the federal government, signed Lafayette C. Baker."  Numerous attempts were made on Baker's life (to silence him), he died of arsenic poisoning three years following the conspiracy trial.

Seven hours before Lincoln's assassination John Wilkes Booth left a note at Vice President Andrew Johnson's home. It said "Don't wish to disturb you.  Are you at home?  J. Wilkes Booth."   This note, along with Booth's diary were presented at President Andrew Johnson's impeachment trial, in addition to several other items that had surfaced during John Surratt Jr.'s trial.

Over zealous prosecutors, power hungry men (and women), frightened witnesses can create anything.  I have said this before in my blogs related to my own case...there is NO need to make up any lies if a person is truly guilty.  Their guilt will stand on its own.  The fact that there was so much coercion going on is all the evidence I need to know in my heart that Mary Surratt was innocent.  She was a scapegoat and a distraction used to cover the true conspirators.

Mary Surratt was buried at Mt. Olivet Cemetery in Washington DC.  There is a bronze plaque by her grave that reads:

"The souls of the just are in the hands of God, and the torment of malice shall not touch them.  In the sight of the unwise they seemed to die, but they are at peace."

If you are interested in reading further or want to follow the quotes above, there are many books and Internet articles on this subject.  I encourage you to take a look and draw your own conclusions.  Injustices in our system didn't end with Mary Surratt, nor are they unique to the military, they continue today in our civilian courts.  Following are a few of the references I used:

http://albensonjr.com/marysurratt1.shtml
http://albensonjr.com/marysurratt2.shtml
http://www.ashevilletribune.com/asheville/heritage/Surratt%203.htm
http://www.ashevilletribune.com/asheville/heritage/Surratt%204.htm
http://rogerjnorton.com/Lincoln26.html
http://itwasjohnson.impiousdigest.com/zero12.htm

No Small Chatter

I want to tell you about a group I have recently connected with.  If you have an on-going interest or even a developing curiosity in my case and cases like mine you will be interested in this group.  They are called Project: Not Guilty ("PNG") and have commented several times on my blogs as "The Team".  I have the links below so you can see what they have to say about my case, as well as a link to their website.

PNG is an advocacy group who is helping the non-DNA innocents claim their exonerations and more.  PNG started out in Texas, but has become national as there is such a cry out for help in our runaway justice systems.  You may not know this, but even if the Appellate Court clears a person they are still not considered exonerated.  In Texas they still have to go through a process with the State Controllers office and quite often are not given the exoneration that is so rightfully theirs.  Besides years in prison, ripped away from family, those who are falsely accused and wrongly convicted have been stripped of their good name, many of their rights and quite often find it difficult to ever be gainfully employed again or move easily within society.  The accumulated damage to a victim of the justice system does not stop accruing once the person is released from prison.

I invite you to take a look at the Project: Not Guilty website and the comment section at the end of my four blogs where they have imparted words of advice, encouragement and wisdom:

Project: Not Guilty

The Newsweek Essay Contest

The 4 W's and the Octopus Arms

Can They Have It Both Ways?

Investigative Team...Attorney Wouldn't Join

Now as follow up to the Internet chats I started sharing with you in the post called: "Investigative Team..." I have placed another part of those chats below.  While these people ("lionheartix") also call themselves my "team", to my knowledge they are not the same team that is coming forth in Project: Not Guilty as described above.  A small portion of the Internet dialogue on September 11, 2004 went as follows:

lionheartix:  one thing that Scott (retired FBI SAC - Atlanta) told me yesterday was about the FBI and IRS.  He said that you need to do a "white paper" to take to the FBI and/or IRS and/or Texas Rangers.

ifonlythiswasover:  I'll do a white paper, I guess that is something my attorney knows?

lionheartix:  it is a detailed report of why you are there, and helps them to understand and relay the reason you are there to others, either higher up or lower echelon.  hard for them to understand someone telling a story to them, so it should be written.

ifonlythiswasover:  why I am where?  at their front door?

lionheartix:  why you are in their office, yes.

ifonlythiswasover:  surely my attorney would know about that, I will put it on my list though.

lionheartix:  yes, but he really needs to understand why you want the FBI and the IRS and Texas Rangers to be involved.  there is just so much more of this that is behind the scenes that hasn't connected yet.  it's there, but not exactly clear yet.

ifonlythiswasover:  not clear to all of us????

lionheartix:  to your case.  it will take the feds....one of the agencies, or maybe both of them, to tie this case in with the fraud, the extortion/payoffs, etc..................      would it effect the business partner that things will be really under a microscope in your case?

ifonlythiswasover:  yes...I think so.

lionheartix:  it would definitely make him think he has to back off of you or get really investigated deeply.

ifonlythiswasover:  I don't think he believed this thing could ever flip back on him...I honestly think he sees himself above the law.  I'll guarantee you the contributor is the follower here.

lionheartix:  he could literally believe that, but if he sees a LOT of subpoenas shooting through the court for this information and history and different stuff that he never wants to be made public, then he will definitely HAVE to pull in his claws and start settling things.

ifonlythiswasover:  the contributor is different...but my friend keeps reminding me he is a bad guy too and to not lose sight of that.  from the start my friend kept saying "what does the contributor have on his business partner and what does his business partner have on the contributor...you find the answer to that and you'll find the answer to the false allegations."

lionheartix:  that is very wise for her to see that.


My attorney at the time said he would not go forward with the case unless we paid him an additional $50,000, thus I had to go to indigent status.  As you already know my public defender ignored all this, would not read the dialogues and said it was not our place to bring in the FBI or any other authority...no white papers were ever filed.  A lot was asked for in the subpoenas (although not nearly as much as could have been), much was never rendered, most was thrown out during the pretrial hearings...as privileged or irrelevant.  In my defense, my attorney refused to explain why we needed anything and kept telling me he would not divulge his strategy in the pretrial hearings. What strategy?

We have arrived at the Motion in Limine again.  Ten days before the trial this Motion was filed by prosecution, saying we could not bring up in trial any "prior bad act" of the contributor or his business partner.  My walking knowledge of their personal lives and businesses (including fraudulent insurance claims on the money in question) was the motive for destroying my credibility by these false allegations.  It was completely relevant and not privileged (no such thing in a criminal case).  The Detective, prosecutors and civil attorneys absolutely protected these two men (my false accusers).  And for that matter, so did my public defender by his indifference and inaction.

Below is the letter my husband, Ron, wrote Internal Affairs at Dallas Police Department.  It was not written earlier as I was incarcerated and we mistakenly thought this would be handled in the appeal, but was not how the appeal works.  You can see the response from David Brown, DPD Chief of Police and his Deputy Chief of Police.  Once again, putting the onus on my public defender in the trial.  So the focus is not truth, but procedure and how can truth be circumvented.

Brown so eloquently refers to truth as "differences in opinion".  That's a new one.  If the abuse of power is not caught on film, it doesn't count?  I have a feeling before this is over there will be a lot more finger pointing.  Immunity is a dangerous thing and takes the checks and balances out of the justice system, whereby nobody is held accountable for ruining innocent people's lives with their lies.  The above letter is like saying my officers/detectives can say anything they want under oath and if the public defender misses it or doesn't care enough to do his job then ...Oh well, you lose.  Are there any ethics in this so called "justice system"?  While it's a game to these players...that is, who can outsmart or out maneuver who...innocent people's lives are on the line.  What is the value of our lives, while these people are gaming?  Or after........

Investigative Team... Attorney Wouldn't Join

In my blog named "What's Their Motive" I talked about an Internet chat that transpired over a year's time with a friend of mine.  Over the next week or so I want to share with you some of that dialogue.  As you may remember my friend was a retired Air Force intelligence officer and had stayed connected to the intelligence community.  He would sometimes ask me specific questions and other times he would tell me to just type in the chat everything that came to my mind that happened over the 20 years I worked for these men.  He said to focus on anything that would give rise to the reasons they would set me up.  In other words, anything I knew that they would not want others to know.  Also, anything that I remembered that was odd, or out of place....anything that just stood out.  He also questioned me extensively on all the details of my case.  I printed out all of these chats and organized them chronologically in notebooks.  The Internet chat dialogues sit about a foot high. I charted things when asked and flow-charted organization structures so the details were clear and easier to understand for all those reviewing this information.  I was under the impression that my friend had included others in the questioning of me and processing the volumes of information I provided.  They told me in one of the chats that I had a "team".  I believed them because my friend was involved and because I was desperate for real help in my case.

I had another friend who talked to me after I had been doing this for awhile and sharing some of the dialogues with her.  She cautioned me that there was really two distinct cases evolving.  The one already existing for me and the one against the men who falsely accused me.  She said to not get it intermingled in my mind, because as I was helping somebody else build another case, I may not really be helping myself.  I allowed myself to believe that whoever these people were, they would step up and somehow help me in my trial, because they always indicated their belief in my innocence.  In retrospect, my friend's cautions turned out to be somewhat accurate.  In my always wanting to think positive it clouded me with a bit too much optimism (if there is such a thing).  I did have a lot of information in those dialogues that could have been very useful in my defense had I only had an attorney who was willing to read the dialogues or at the very least listen when I summarized the information.  It would have given him direction in strategy and several avenues for investigation.  Neither of which he was willing to acknowledge.  He just constantly belly-ached that he did not know how to defend me or explain my case to a jury.  He said he would not touch conspiracy theory and that the issues were too complicated for a jury to understand.

These Internet chats are important now because it serves as evidence in my habeas corpus application that my trial attorney had certain pertinent information, did not investigate further and did not use this information in the trial to set up a substantial defense in my favor.  He held this information for over two years prior to my trial and returned it to me weeks before the trial, saying he never read it and would not use it.  This constitutes clear evidence of incompetent defense.

Following is one of the first Internet chat dialogues asking me details and supplying the overall direction I was to take.  My chat name was "ifonlythiswasover" and their name was "lionheartix"...we were speaking of the false accusations, what I needed to recall and how to go about documenting it.



lionheartix:  you tell your attorney what is happening.  you can tell us, we believe you as being truthful.....they (the false accusations) are not testimonies yet.  they need to be truth to be testimony.

ifonlythiswasover:  truth so far has not prevailed.


lionheartix:  in a court of law, anyone can say or do anything.  one little factual lie, and once proven, it becomes the weak link that shoots the credibility of the whole case.


ifonlythiswasover:  and in a court of law that may be what people swear to...but if the stakes are too high it will not happen...you KNOW that.


lionheartix:  that is where you start...one little untruth.....if you can show ONE little fact that they said you did and you can prove otherwise...then that starts the credibility issue on the other side.


ifonlythiswasover:  so you believe my attorney can work that?


lionheartix:  hell yes...that is his job...and if he understands circumstances of how they could do this to you, your attorney will do what needs to be done.  these guys have done a lot of dumb things in the past 20 years and YOU know them all!


ifonlythiswasover:  yes, I agree


lionheartix:  what else were they told by you that they had liabilities (exposure items) they were unaware of?


ifonlythiswasover:  if they cheat on their wives, deception is a lifestyle...wouldn't they just continue?


lionheartix:  write them down!  your attorney will use them to cross


ifonlythiswasover:  including his business partner?...since he has gotten so involved and seems to be running this?  In my book draft I have focused mostly on my false accuser (the contributor).


lionheartix:  that is right (both of them).   look to what has been shown to them prior to your resignation, and what else you caught them doing...do they put their fingers in the candy jar?  do they do unscrupulous things with taxes?  do you have any evidence of them cheating?  another woman?  an escort service they use regularly? 


ifonlythiswasover:  yes, they had women.  one of them used a foundation to fund rehabilitation/therapy for a mistress once she left him. 


lionheartix:  tell about the foundation!


ifonlythiswasover:  I refused to do the tax returns on the foundation because of abuse of 501(c)3 status.


lionheartix:  who funded it?  who got paid? monthly, quarterly, once a week?


ifonlythiswasover:  the business partner mostly and a local ministry was involved with subsequent payments of living expenses once release from rehab....


lionheartix:  what checks did you write to pay off women?  do you get my drift?


ifonlythiswasover:  there were some over the years for both men...


lionheartix:  you need to go over all their dealings in your head, write them down...just start brainstorming....write them here.  Go over general ledger items...see what triggers your memory when you start classifying general ledger items.  Where again did you tell them they were vulnerable?  what made them nervous?


ifonlythiswasover:  The business partner would always ask me what I saw as a problem...


lionheartix:  use those items you told them....yes...you told him what you thought were problems...that's exactly what we need to know.  you have to find the way to trigger all those memories and to write each item down...your next twenty years (of freedom) depend on it.


ifonlythiswasover:  it comes to me in my sleep


lionheartix:  when it does, you need a paper and pen next to the bed.  you wake up and write down everything.  believe me, once you do it, you will be amazed at what you can get on paper during a 6 hour sleep.  don't worry about yourself...treat it like Nate and Brandon depend on it.


ifonlythiswasover:  yeah...that helps...just don't want to have fear get in the way...that is the biggest blocker.


lionheartix:  your job in the next couple of months is several...bring in income, build credibility and a good defense and take care of your kids.  NO FEAR...just determination to DO IT


ifonlythiswasover:  the income will be the hardest because of what I now have on record, at least that is still my belief.


lionheartix:  what do you have on record?


ifonlythiswasover:  the reports, the newspaper, the talk


lionheartix:  you are innocent!  you have NOT been proven guilty of taking one thin dime!  All bullshit.  you only say what you need to say.  you get a job, you don't talk about the problems...period.


ifonlythiswasover:  I know but people have perceptions...its finding those who will stay clear with me...will be the challenge.  do you know RG?


lionheartix:  no, who is he?


ifonlythiswasover:  he worked with them for years....(more details)...okay...I think he may have stories that would be useful in all this.


lionheartix:  good, write them down.  one will lead to another, and another, and another...until you finally get the one that they can't talk away.  work on the wife angle, what did he do against her that screwed her out of millions during their divorce attempts?  what did he ask you to do against her?  what can her friends offer?...you just need to point your attorney in the right direction. 


ifonlythiswasover:  I don't like digging up dirt (named several improprieties).


lionheartix:  Audrey, now is not the time for you to get moralistic....you need to fight fire with fire.  Those items are highly worthy of bringing up and rehashing....all the divorcing and mistresses during the years on both guys.  get those maternal instincts working and PROTECT your family.  the business partner had a charitable organization to take care of ex-lovers?  the foundation then pays a church who then helps them in college and living expenses, etc....it has all been filtered.  Beat that credibility, they can all be exposed...The Church of What's Happening Now?  That is called money laundering!  The Feds would be interested in that info, for sure.


ifonlythiswasover:  the business partner would tell me ...there is a great imbalance (of money) in the system and he knew they would come after his money to even things out....they being the powers who redistribute wealth.


lionheartix:  write that down!  what was the conversation that led to these revelations?  Darling, you have so much in your head!  Just fire it out there!  and write each item down.


ifonlythiswasover:  middle of the night he just calls me..not uncommon for him to ruminate over this fear.


lionheartix:  write them down!  remember all those conversations!


ifonlythiswasover:  I guess I was a (financial) confidante...now he fears that?


lionheartix:  yes...for sure...and he should fear that.  you are now unlocking the secret to....WHY!


ifonlythiswasover:  I would have never gotten to this place if he had just left me alone...I suppose it is his ruminating that brought us to this point?


lionheartix:  think retro-ly.  go back into your memory and write down all those conversations.  why did he call you about something...what was the circumstance that upset him to call in the first place?


ifonlythiswasover:  maybe he was serious all those years when he said "Audrey, if you ever leave us....we'll have to kill you."


lionheartix:  go for it...that needs to be told too!  you never told me that.  he threatened you all those years and you thought he was joking?


ifonlythiswasover:  I didn't take it seriously....he said it with a smile...a real sick smile, I suppose.


lionheartix:  that is what you need to go with...your own brainstorming of these issues....remember all of this...and build on each item.  when you get back here (Texas) we will spend one evening a week brainstorming over all this and get more out of your memory.  keep writing......


That was the beginnings of a volume of chats that sit almost a foot high.  I will share more as time goes....but now you know my mission....if I had only had an attorney who was willing to investigate the wealth of knowledge I departed to my "team".

The 4 W's and the Octopus Arms

The Who, What, When, Why's have been talked about throughout my blog by now, but I'd like to give you some specifics along with some of the letters and formal complaints I lodged.  I think we all know the Why's on the part of my false accusers, it can all be summed up in one word ....GREED.  As to the prosecutors it's all about convictions, convictions and more convictions.  In both situations it is about WINNING at all costs.  If prosecutors were ever put on death row for the characters they assassinated with their false, spell bound words we'd have to build an enormous new prison and perhaps then, the few remaining would think twice about seeking truth as they deal out "justice" in their court room dramas.

The What is: I was falsely charged with Theft - greater than $200,000....that translates to Embezzlement of $3,775,000. 

That leaves us with two W's.  The specifics as  to When are easy to get out of the way.  I was indicted in March 2004 in Dallas County.  As a result of the indictment I was arrested in April.  I lived in New Mexico at the time.  So I was taken to the Santa Fe Corrections facility, where I stayed for seven days while a $20,000 bond was worked out in Dallas, I was not required to be transported back to Dallas.  Following those seven days,  I was allowed to continue living in New Mexico and traveled into Dallas for monthly hearings.  Even then my attendance was waived for some of those hearings.  I was not considered a flight risk, yet it was rumored in the Collin County Business Journal that I had fled Texas.  I believe the term for that is yellow journalism.  After the first year on the $20,000 bond I was given a PR (personal recognizance) bond for the remaining time prior to my trial.  None of the bonds were ever violated.

Following the indictment we had years of continuances and pre-trial hearings.  My jury trial commenced on September 10, 2007 in Dallas County.  I was convicted on September 12th, not allowed to return home but remanded to jail straight out of the courtroom.  September 13th I was sentenced to eight years and my case was immediately put into appeal by my husband.  The Judge decided I was a flight risk (after three and a half years on bond!!!) and required a half million dollar appeals bond....more than some alleged murderers.  Eventually we were able to get the appeals bond down to $100,000 but even that was too much for my family who by then was depleted from helping me.  It's noteworthy to mention that while my sentence was eight years, the jury decided NO restitution, NO legal fees and NO court costs, which is all but unheard of coming out of Dallas.

That leaves us with Whosville...some days this feels like a crazy Dr. Seuss book....almost unreal had it not been for those 3 years of incarceration.  The pain of not being with my family quite often  felt unbearable....that was very real.  The first person I spoke to was Detective Steven Zuczek of DPD and as far as I know he is the only detective on my case.  I started with a defense attorney Tom Lockry.  He was not at all qualified to handle my trial or really even my case.  The initial Judge was Faith Johnson.  The second attorney I had was Mark Perez.  After about 4 months he asked for an additional $50,000.  We did not have it so I had to go to what's called Indigent status, and was appointed an attorney by the court.  Clark Birdsall was my court appointed attorney.  First he was a self employed defense attorney taking court appointments, then he became a public defender, employed by the State.  He remained with me through the trial.

The prosecutor through all the pretrial hearings was ADA Mike Moss.  He was replaced just before the trial by ADA Stephanie Martin.  I believe she is DA Craig Watkins's golden girl.  He recently used her with the Dallas County Commissioners as he fought to keep them from cutting his budget.  Her presentation to the County Commissioners was noted in The Dallas Morning News last fall. 

When Craig Watkins was ushered into the DA's office by the voters in January 2007, I also had a change in judges.  Tracy Holmes won the 2006 election and took over Faith Johnson's position in the 363rd District Court, where my case resided.  I thought the take over by the Democrats might fare well for me, thinking the old  boy network had been broken, but I was sadly mistaken.  It seemed they had a need to prove that they were tough on crime...or alleged crime, and were just putting everybody away as fast as they could....building a near 100% conviction rate.

Through out all of this I had  a lot of frustration.  I had exculpatory evidence withheld, forensics were a battle and what was recovered was kept out of my defense. I had constant struggles with my own attorney, Birdsall, to even get him to listen to me...and for the most part he was unavailable.  I gave up trying to meet with him and sent him tons of information via emails....at least then it was documented.  I tried, but you can't make somebody do what they don't want to do and he had made it clear he did not want my case.

I also tried to get Birdsall off my case, writing both the Judge and the head of Public Defenders, Brad Lollar.  Following is the letter to the Judge (Lollar's was almost identical):

I received no response whatsoever from the Judge regarding this request.  My husband (my witness to all of this) and I had a meeting with Lollar where he informed us that my case was not a priority and that I can't just up and change attorneys whenever I feel like it.  He told us that the fraternizing with the opposition complaint was absurd....and then walked us out of his office.  

The next major letter I wrote was to DA Craig Watkins, upon his taking over the DA's Office and had it delivered by courier:







Of course, no response but I did not give up, I kept thinking he was really concerned about wrongful convictions...I didn't realize he had replaced Moss with one of his top prosecutors...although I would soon learn.  Here is the second letter to DA Craig Watkins:

I also sent formal complaints on the Judges to the State Commission on Judicial Conduct.  Below is the attachment to the complaint for Judge Faith Johnson:

Nothing came of these complaints prior to the trial.  I have since learned they are more interested in discrimination type misconduct.  I tried everything I could to bring attention to the irregularities in my case but could get no action.  All I ever wanted was a fair trial.  It just did not happen.  Those were the players.  Very real and very dangerous folks.

Nothing Hidden

Today I will share with you some of the newspaper articles published while The NOAH Project was being planned and built.  There was never an attempt to hide the school.  As one of my early attorney's said...(1) you don't have the profile of a thief and (2) all the money is accounted for down to the penny and (3) nothing was ever hidden.  Significant facts (never mentioned in the trial)  all screaming: "AUTHORIZED"!  "APPROVED"!  "LEGITIMATE"!

These first two articles were printed in the Plano Star Courier and were pertaining to the School and our Speaking Series:

This next article was in the Metro Section of the Dallas Morning News once construction commenced:





This article was brought to my attention by my ex-client, I didn't know when it would be published and he happened to see it before I did.   Yet, this is the man who said in his deposition he had no prior knowledge of the school.  These articles do not reflect the actions of someone who is trying to hide something.  All of this was not allowed in the trial because of the Motion in Limine.

ALWAYS....Follow the Money!

By now you are probably asking "What's all this hub-bub about a Separate Property Partition?  Why is it such a hot issue in this case?"  Now listen up you men who are always thinking of ways to protect assets and especially listen up you women who may need to understand this someday or add this protection to your own portfolio.

Many of you know about Separate Property coming into a marriage, and how it can be maintained as separate in a community property state as Texas.  This is about creating Separate Property once you are already married.  In the case I am familiar with it is done frequently with real estate developers where the banks and other lenders are requiring personal guarantees during the construction phase.  By doing a Separate Property Partition it allows the guarantor to carve a piece of community property out and split it with their spouse equally thus creating two equal Separate Properties, one for themselves and one for their spouse.  That way if real estate development deals go belly-up and the guarantee is called by the lender(s), they can take the community property and the separate property of the guarantor but the separate property of the guarantor's spouse is still in tact and can be used to support the family.  Pretty good risk management, you say?  Yes, it is.  There was another purpose though, in the instance in which I am familiar.

The above reason for this partition is the one the spouse hears.  The real reason I saw this instigated was once these partners get wealthy, quite often they go looking for the trophy...thus facilitating a divorce.  Guess what divorces do?  Tie up the partnership when the partner is living in a community property state.  A divorce can prevent a real estate deal from being sold, by tieing it up for years, thus keeping all the partners of a deal from realizing millions in profits.  All it takes is one partner going through a nasty divorce (these divorces literally take years)....and where there is a trophy involved I guarantee you there is some nastiness.  So, to prevent this, once there is a property separation, all new real estate development deals are done in the guarantor's separate property.  Over time the old deals are either sold or go back to lender.  As a consequence, it is usually a surprise when the spouse files for a divorce and finds out most the deals have been in the other's separate property and all along they believed the corpus of their community property was growing by millions from the investment profits in these development deals.  The deals were not happening in community property after all so it happens there is really nothing to get other than their own separate property and perhaps the old homestead.  You see, it seems everything comes down to money, right?  If there are no child custody issues, divorce at this level of wealth is just about money.

That's why it surprises me in the statement to the police, it was said that the false accuser was not watching his accounts as he was "distracted by his divorce".  What was his divorce about, where custody was not an issue, if not about money?  Correct, it was entirely about money so if he was distracted with his divorce, wouldn't he be distracted TOWARD his money?  Of course he was, he was already a micro manager of his money, the divorce process only amplified his focus.

What makes this particular situation even more precarious, you ask?  My client's wife called me in January 2003 (see timeline) to tell me she was going to bust his separate property because in the second partition, which she said she never agreed to, he pulled all real estate investments into his separate property, giving them a nominal value and taking his equal share of cash out of the community property, leaving practically nothing in the community property.  Some of these deals went on to see significant profits very soon after (or before) the transfer....if we only knew the actual date of the agreement.  Yet in her testimony at my trial she agrees we had that conversation and she said those things to me but then five minutes later goes on to say she would sign anything to save her marriage.  Hmmm, well, which is it?  She did not agree to it or she did?  She was not questioned further.  The jury was left to wonder what all that was about since no one explained to them the significance of the 2nd Separate Property Partition and how I was placed smack in the middle of it.

As you may recall in the previous timeline blog I talk about how I was questioned on exposure items to client's divorce during a transition meeting on October 15, 2003.  Now that you understand everything about Separate Property Partitions, in particular the intent behind them, I think you'll agree with my stated concern of these three items:

1. Client's wife had no legal representation in the 2nd property separation and was now questioning all the real estate deals taken out of the community property causing an enormous disparity (years later) in the values of their once equal separate properties.
2. All the partnership and corporate interests were listed as a nominal value on his transfer of these assets to his separate property when in fact there were on-going sales supporting a much greater value.
3. My client's unwillingness to provide me with the executed document so I could complete the schedules required by the divorce attorneys - proper allocation of sale proceeds based on effective date was in question.

To further clarify the issues related to this partition, just a couple weeks before the trial (now 2007) I searched for the document as my understanding is it had to be filed with the county and I figured out my trial attorney was doing no investigative work.  Going through the records in downtown Dallas I found both partitions, the first partition filed in the late 80's and the 2nd partition filed in the late 90's.  When comparing the two I found many differences.  The first partition was prepared by an estate/family attorney.  Whereas the second one had been hacked up, I presume by my client, having his secretary cut, paste and type and I came to wonder if it was even a legal document...because it was reciting family law codes which I doubted were even applicable, given the deletions and additions.  It became clear to me why he would never give me the document to support this 2nd partition.  My attorney touched on the authenticity of her signature and the nominal values but the significance of all this was not driven home to the Jury.  Further, when she volunteered she was paid plenty in the divorce, that was not the issue...the issue was the motive of my client when the divorce started and as it became heated up.

All this leads into the significance of the Motion in Limine filed 10 days before my trial and how it is the prosecution was able to keep motive for the false accusations out of my trial.  Following is that Motion:

This document did not come to my attention until about 2 months ago when a friend of my husband's was researching my case.  He also found that all of the testimony from my trial and pre-trial hearings has been taken out of the public records and is being help in the DA's office so he was unable to review that.  My own trial attorney never told me of this Motion.  So, during my testimony I was constantly interrupted by prosecution and not allowed to tell what happened.  It sure did not lend to my credibility in the eyes of the Jury.

At least all of this is coming to light now....for that I am grateful.  What is interesting is that I, the defendant, wanted everything out in the open, nothing to hide and begged for the involvement of the Feds.  Typically it is the defendant who is trying to get Motions in Limine and it is typically the defendant who is fighting like crazy during the pretrial hearings to keep prior actions out of the trial.  In my case it was the false accusers who were spending large sums of money and energy doing that, as if they were the defendants.  I am told my case has been very atypical....I don't know.  What I do know is there were three of us who knew the details of these transactions...my client, his business partner and me.  And, it took awhile for me to figure it out, I was just trying to correct the allocations, thinking that is what everybody wanted.  Apparently, that is where I made my mistake!

A DEAD BATTERY?

August 2005 my trial attorney asked me to provide a list of what needed to be subpoenaed.  Within two days I faxed him a list...which was over two pages long.  The list included (but was not limited to) the contributor's 2001, 2002 and 2003 Separate Property bank statements, financial statements, support for all transactions, individual income tax returns and the computer.   He subpoenaed part of the things on the list that Fall, the computer was included in his subpoenas.  We were told everything would come to us before Thanksgiving 2005.  It did not.  Then I was told to show up a couple times to review the documents prior to Christmas, again they did not show up. 

Finally I was called in the second week of February 2006 to review what they did bring in, which was less than what was subpoenaed and did not include the computer.  My attorney called their civil attorneys asking about the computer.  He was given the run around and for a few weeks nobody knew where the computer was.  It had disappeared!  Then they miraculously found it, kept promising to bring it in, but did not.  This behavior continued until the Discovery hearing on May 26, 2006, when they started their arguments of relevance and privilege.  Privilege is unheard of in criminal cases but guess what?  They continued to argue through out the summer.  I started requesting forensics when I received a list of files and realized much of what I needed was gone plus there were several other peculiarities in the list of files.  In the May hearing I started asking for FBI involvement.  The Judge kept saying her budget wouldn't allow for forensics.  Okay, so I am innocent, want to prove it, but its not within the Judge's budget?  It appears that the DA's office did not take the computer into evidence because then my defense would have a right to all its contents.  Don't ever let anybody tell you prosecution is about truth, it is about winning...plain and simple. 

With regard to forensics I decided the only chance I would have is to get the media involved so I sent an email entitled "Forensics PLEASE", dated August 25, 2006 to my attorney (Birdsall), the prosecutor (Moss, ADA), Judge Faith Johnson, and two investigative reporters, Becky Oliver and Byron Harris, with a followup on August 28, 2006.  The name of the followup email was "Deleted Files".  I have both emails imaged below (you may have to increase your "zoom" level to 125% to read the documents):

As a result of these two emails my attorney told me the Judge was angry and was talking about pulling my PR (personal recognizance) Bond so I would have to sit in jail until my trial.  She said she had never seen anything like it in her 16 years as Judge.  I did these emails because there seemed no other way to get what I needed to prove my innocence and I was not in violation of the terms of my PR Bond.  Although, she could have remanded me for Contempt of Court, but that would have brought attention to my case and that is what nobody seemed to want.

On September 25, 2006 the Judge begrudgingly approved the computer forensics, complaining about what it would do to her budget.  Upon her decision at the Hearing the contributor (my false accuser) stormed out of the Courtroom.

October 8, 2006 I provided a detailed letter of everything I needed the forensics expert to look at based on a revised and complete listing of all files on the hard drive which he had provided.  The computer files were fragmented (files in pieces intermingled with code), they said as a result of a dead battery.  But prior to them allowing the battery to die there was evidence that someone had laid thousands of files on top of mine, crowding my files and causing a complete deletion for many files from the system.  I wanted to see all files then I could determine what they had used to tamper with the evidence.  I was told by the Judge that I would meet with her and  review ("in camera" - meaning outside the Courtroom) all the files so I could explain how the various files related to my defense.  When she lost the election, she postponed my trial due to on-going forensics, and she said, in Court, there was some advantages to losing the election because she sure didn't want to review thousands of files from my computer.

The forensics expert was able to "defragment" many of the files but the date stamps were destroyed.  There were approximately twenty banker's boxes full of recovered files.  I was allowed about one inch of those files, most of which were totally useless.  Even the files that did have information that may have been helpful and raised questions were not used by my trial attorney.  When the new Judge took the bench I was not allowed to view anything "in camera".  The times I mentioned this to my attorney he would just shake his head....he would not bring it up in our Hearings.

To this day I believe there are things in that computer that could have helped my defense even with so much deleted, plus I feel certain I could have figured out how they tampered with those files.  I believe there is a pattern both to what was overlaid and to the date stamps...I am not believing there was a random malfunction causing ALL the problems.  The Court allowed itself to be led by the contributor's civil attorneys.  As a consequence, it was the men who falsely accused me who determined what computer files I was allowed to see and use in my defense.  They expended so much energy and legal fees keeping the computer's contents away from me that I am certain there are things they know I would recognize and be able to use in my defense and definitely information toward the impeachment of their characters. 

TOP QUESTIONS - NEVER ASKED

All that ever had to happen in my trial was for there to be reasonable doubt.  Reasonable doubt was abounding had the appropriate questions been asked.  Following are a few of the top questions - never asked:

1. If I had something to hide - why would I pursue and even go to Washington DC to meet with NIH (National Institute of Health) regarding a multi-million dollar research grant?  With my accounting and audit background I knew full well that NIH, as part of their due diligence, would require audited financial statements with full disclosure from inception since we were a start-up entity.  Part of an audit of a non-profit includes an independent confirmation of material charitable contributions directly from the contributor. Of course, NOAH was auditable.
2. Why didn't my ex-client call the police immediately?  In the depositions he said he discovered the theft in July or August 2003.  In the trial testimony he said he discovered it on October 7, 2003.  With whatever lie you go with, the police did not get a call until mid-November.  Why is that?
3. Why didn't they have NOAH's bank accounts frozen immediately?  There was approximately $100,000 in checking and money market, with another $100,000 in restricted Certificates of Deposit.  The accounts of NOAH were never frozen.
4. Why did they give me a prioritized list of things to do for them in the 3 to 4 week transition period when it was decided I would stay with NOAH (October1).  Why would they allow a "thief" to continue to handle their financial information?  The amount he contributed to The NOAH Project was $3,775,000 over three years....I don't believe I mentioned that thus far.  If you decided to call that stolen...would you continue to work with me and NOT call the police?  Here are the specific priorities I was given for the month of October (the transition period): (1)  2002 Individual Tax Returns (done by CPA firm...I only had review function), (2)   their personal financial statements, and (3) divorce workpapers and schedules.
5. Why did I have several transition meetings with the contributor's business partner throughout the entire month of October during which I discussed and transferred completed work assignments and boxes of files.  Would you give a thief transition time?
6. At one of those transition meetings with his business partner on October 15, at the Whataburger on Coit Rd. in Plano, TX, I was asked what I saw as my ex-client's/contributor's exposure items in his divorce.  I named three major areas and was questioned further as to the details.  Why wasn't that brought up in the trial?  Isn't that a key to the motive?
7. The business partner of the contributor came to my house to get the remaining file boxes and the computer on October 28th.  If I was a thief, why didn't he bring the police or have the police handle it entirely?
8. On October 30th, after we determined we could not get emergency funding fast enough to keep the school open, the business partner came to the school with four large commercial moving vans to take the assets of NOAH saying they "would store them for us".  As it was explained, while we tried to reorganize NOAH, they would store these assets for three reasons (1) to prevent vandalism of said assets, (2) protect against claims from Landlord and (3) protect from claims of other creditors.  He asked me to sign what he called a "receipt" so if the police showed up and I was not present, then they would not be arrested for stealing NOAH's assets.  Why, if I had stolen the money, didn't they have the police confiscate these assets?
9. Why did they get away with saying the value of these assets was only $20,000 when the accounting books and support indicated it was worth well over $250,000?  What did they fill four large commercial moving vans with that only totaled up to $20,000?  If the assets only had a value of $20,000 why bother to go to so much effort?  Because $20,000 is all he recognized on his tax return as recovering.  Hmmm....a slight understatement.
10. The Directors and Officers insurance policy for NOAH expired the first week in October. Remember from the prior blog the contributor and his business partner had ownership in the insurance agency.  Why did someone from their insurance agency call me on the night of October 30th and try to convince me I had to extend NOAH's Director and Officer's policy to cover the end-days and protect the Board from any claims the parents or creditors might make?  When I told her we did not have the wherewithal to pay, she said they would pay it and I told her "NO, do not extend, do not pay that additional premium."  Their insurance agency went on to pay for that extension anyway.  They did not have my permission or NOAH's money.  Where are the papers for this?  It happened but nobody can come up with any signed papers for the extension.  Why not?  Because they do not exist, but the extension was put into place to cover the claim made by my ex-client.
11. Why did the DPD detective testify that it took three months to find me?  Mid-November to December 9th (1st conversation with detective) is only about 3 weeks - why wasn't he questioned about the timing?
12. Why did the detective get away with testifying that my mailbox at home in Plano was stuffed full like I had fled.  I moved out on the Saturday evening of December 6th and he first contacted me on December 9th.  I am certain my mailbox did not get stuffed to overflowing on Monday, December 8th....only one day of mail.  Why wasn't he further questioned?
13. Where are the audio tapes of the telephone conversations I had with the detective throughout December?  He testified I confessed several times.  That was an outright lie that was allowed to stay in. (1) I hadn't been mirandized and (2) it never happened.  How was that allowed to stay in the court records?  If the audio tapes had been entered into evidence, they would tell a very different story.
14. Why was the jury asked to decide if it was my signature on the contrived confession and NOT told that two forensics experts (Dallas County and Denton County) said the authenticity could not be determined?  Further, why wasn't the jury told that I repeatedly requested (in pretrial hearings) that the FBI do forensics on the contrived confession and the computer and was denied.
15. Why were most all my computer files withheld from my defense - claiming irrelevance and /or privilege?  I was not given an opportunity to review (in camera) with the judge those files and an opportunity to explain how they were needed in my defense.  Judge Faith Johnson said that is what would happen but never did.  Why was the computer never taken into evidence by the DA's office?  It had 15 years of files on it....a wealth of evidence for my defense.