If you have read the last several posts
on this blog, then you're already aware of the importance of pinning
the government to the date of December 4, 2003, as the date Anthony
Young claimed the Avon street meeting took place and as they have
asserted affirmatively in their last brief.
The government took 9 years to state a date
and previously it was "after Thanksgiving 2003," which is
about as vague as they could possibly get. Young did claim in
previous testimony that it was 3 or 4 days after Thanksgiving. In yet
other statements, the government stated it as after Thanksgiving and
before Christmas 2003, so we are crystal clear that it was not in
February.
This is what happens when a witness
(i.e. violent criminal informant seeking a 'get out of jail free'
pass) offers completely false testimony of events that never
occurred. They're forever trying desperately to make the date fit the
timeline. In this situation, it's the government that is desperate to
make the pieces of the puzzle fit together and they have failed
miserably.
The government suborned perjury and
knowingly presented false testimony. The assertion of the date to
make their point in the brief also depicts the fact that they are
intentionally deceiving the Court and thwarting the system of justice
by attempting to strengthen that date by emphasizing it. They are
caught in a web of lies. In their response letter dated 1 July, 2013,
there is also mention of a total of 3 calls on December 4th. All 3
calls are transcribed:
Mr. Lustberg has written a letter to
the Court that best describes the situation in its entirety:
How much more will the Court allow the
government to get away with? Time will tell. The defense awaits the
Court's ruling and only possible resolution to this serious matter.
Paul Bergrin was never on Avon Street advising a group of alleged
gang members in the dark on any date. As an attorney, Bergrin's idea
of fighting for his clients clearly involved zealous argument in a
court of law, as it should.
Anthony Young = total fail and it's
obvious that Paul Bergrin never conspired with anyone to murder FBI
informant Kemo Deshawn McCray. Of course this taints the entire
indictment for reasons that should be obvious to you.
And then there are so many questions
remaining in relation to these tens of thousands of inadmissible
wiretap recordings from the Hakeem Curry case. More on that
soon... with documents of course.
Oh and happy Fourth of July ---
mentioning freedoms and therefore the United States Constitution (and the
Fourth Amendment in this case), if I find out that these whacks have
anything to do with my missing snail mail (from business and personal
addresses), well, as they're aware, I always loudly denounce
injustice and always demand accountability. I learned long ago that there are few actual coincidences in life.
No comments:
Post a Comment