John Molchan, You are the Weakest Link

Dear Mr. Molchan,

I am writing this to obtain clarity after your pronouncement that Rakeem Florence’s recantation was moot due to the fact there was overwhelming evidence and his testimony being corroborated by the surveillance video. I take exception to both statements, specifically in the Patrick Gonzalez Jr. case.

 I want to first remind you that this young man was a black 16 year old. He knew people that were on the periphery of this investigation. Your former boss, Mr. Eddins, informed the public this is a capital case. Florence is of the demographic most prone to false confessions. He is the only person of color, besides his family members, when he is interviewed by law enforcement. The circumstances of the crime, ie the media circus, the Sheriff constantly on television calling for public outrage as well as public help in finding the perpetrators of these murders, all culminate in a situation that probably seems like a no win situation to young black man. Imagine coming forward with information (which he & Thornton got straight on the way to police station) and realizing you could easily become a scapegoat. He was in over his head when he got there. Even his mother thought he only knew about some aspect of the murder; she did not believe her son was there. 

This is an excerpt of the cross examination by Michelle Hendrix of Florence in Donnie Stallworth’s 2nd trial, which ended in a hung jury.

Do you know if Florence or Thornton ever talked to Hugh Wiggins, prior to them coming forward?

Here is a story that Gary Sumner’s mother told to me. Prior to the murders, Sumner and Wiggins had a business arrangement. Wiggins provided some capital to help Sumner stay afloat. As so, Wiggins called Sumner and told him he had dropped off a white van, after hours, at the shop. The next morning, Gary gets in and grabs the keys left in the dropbox. He gets into the van to move it inside. He claims there were 4 dead bodies in the back. He got out of the van, called Hugh to say the message was received.  He believed it was a threat. Now whether you believe this story or not. It does not even matter if it was true. All that matters is that the teenagers thought it was true.

Also, I find it fascinating that you never called Florence to testify in Stallworth’s third trial, but I do know why. Michelle Hendrix impeached him with all the other testimonies he gave in the other cases, ex. Coldiron, Gonzalez Jr. etc. She really proved his testimony was worthless. Despite that you seem absolutely sure he was telling the truth. I am going to take a moment to speculate why you are all on-board with Florence and his testimony. I think you are more invested in this story than you are about finding the truth. Morgan conducted a shotty investigation, which the SAO never questioned just prosecuted. No one seriously looked at the family, who should have been scrutinized because they financially gained so much from their parents death. Morgan is a keystone cop. And yet, you took this far-fetched narrative rather than looking at the real issues. Here are some really good suspects: Hugh Wiggins, Justin Billings, Cab Tice. Remember originally Blue Markham told police he sold the van used in the crime to Cab Tice.

Here is just some of the cross-examination by Hendrix:

 In fact, Florence tried to withdraw his plea on April 27, 2011. Yet now you seem to think Florence is disingenuous. This young man is the prime demographic of the textbook case of false confessions. As Ms. Hendrix proved in her cross-examination, his testimony was never consistent. He was not a good witness and you realized this as well. You opted not to put him on the stand in Stallworth’s third trial.  It seems obvious you believe Florence was single-handedly the reason the jury was hung. So in your repetitive trials against Stallworth, after running him out of money, forcing him to opt for a public defender, you did not investigate whether there was something hinky with Florence’s testimony. You could and definitely should have further inquired as to why his story was ever changing. I mean, if the interest is in justice, that would have been the only prudent course. Yet your concern was the win; it was never justice.

Interestingly, I emailed Rakeem and asked him to explain what he called “evidence” of his coercion. This is his reply:

I hope, Mr. Molchan, you realize he is asserting you coerced him and provided the narrative that was factually questionable. You mention that the video surveillance corroborates both Florence’s testimony and Thornton’s testimony.  It sounds like the reason it matches the video is because you crafted his testimony. Now ethically, it plainly looks to be improper for you to blast him on the news, knowing he does not have the same access to those media resources you have. Nevertheless, you are the one saying his recantation is moot, especially since he is accusing you of coercing this testimony. Convenient.

OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE

In reading every page of the thousands of documents dumped into the public domain prior to trial & the trial transcripts, I must presume you either do not know what evidence is, or you are so arrogant to think the pittance of information presented in Gonzalez Jr.’s trial, would put him on death row if presented today.

Here are some excerpts from the trial transcript of Mr. Eddins’s opening statement:

The above is from pg 246 of the transcript volume 2 of the Patrick Gonzalez Jr. Trial.


The highlighted portion is misleading. There was no “proof” only testimony by admitted co-conspirators.

This entire section is factually anemic because Leonard Gonzalez Sr. never testified in his son’s case, nor was his statement entered into evidence. In fact, this is a violation of Rule 4-3.4(E) of the RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR. That rule provides: A lawyer shall not … in trial, allude to any matter that the lawyer does not reasonably believe is relevant or that will not be supported by admissible evidence, assert personal knowledge of facts in issue except when testifying as a witness, or state a personal opinion as to the justness of a cause, the credibility of a witness, the culpability of a civil litigant, or the guilt or innocence of an accused. The state attorney was doing none of these things; he was exaggerating the totality of the evidence. This statement alludes to Sr. testimony which was never admitted. Carol Brant was Sr.’s common law wife and her testimony would only be admissible if it were corroborating Sr’s testimony, but it was not. These statements potentially taint the jury with facts which were never admitted into evidence, such as the Brady violation by not submitting the most recent criminal history of Smith and Eisa which was unknown by the defense and would have contributed to the weight their testimony carried to the jury.

Mr. Molchan, to recap, there was no legitimate, untainted testimony evidence that Gonzalez Jr. plotted anything. Not to point out the obvious but Thornton’s testimony was concocted in tandem with Florence’s.

As for the physical evidence, your office destroyed the red van you claimed was used in the crime. That evidence is no longer admissible. Carol Brant passed away. So, there are two co-conspirators, who developed their story together and now one has said it was false. You have no credible person to say Jr. plotted this crime. As for physical evidence. In the video, the shooter grabs Bud and Bud grabbed him in this struggle.  This is confirmed by the only eyewitness, the child in the room. GMA reported the child stated:

“The child told police he heard one of the men say, “You’re gonna die — one, two, three.” The boy said his father then grabbed one of the suspects and that his mother got shot in the shirt.”

There is DNA under Bud’s nails. And a profile for that DNA was developed.  But Patrick Gonzalez Jr. is excluded as a contributor.

There is no DNA evidence to put Jr. at the seen or any of his DNA on any clothing. And let’s talk about the guns. The murder weapon was never linked to Gonzalez Jr. except by Hugh Wiggins who had possession of all the guns, the bloody clothes and the safe. Now tell me why he would not be the logical suspect?  Remind me again who the owner of the weapons was. There seems to be no report showing the ATF established whose guns they were. You have Jr.’s fingerprints on the 2 of the guns not shot in this crime. You never established he did anything but touch those guns. Let’s say he did touch them, there is no evidence to suggest he touched those guns that night or during any crucial timeframe. Fingerprints do no come with a time stamp.

Morgan is a keystone cop and the SAO hitched its wagon to his “investigation”. Your office did not question it when he did not investigate the family, the people with the most to gain. What about Cab Tice? Remember Blue Markham told investigators that he sold the van used in the crime to Cab.

With real leads uninvestigated, how in the hell can you claim you are competent. There is so much reasonable doubt,. To sum it up, no physical evidence, no credible circumstantial evidence, leads not investigated. If Gonzalez Jr.’s case was tried today, how could you justify the amount of energy and taxpayer dollars you wasted aggressively pursuing a unviable set of cases. These are people’s lives, Mr. Molchan. There is so many unanswered questions, and you are a public servant. Years ago, I was told there is “no justice in Florida”. I have to say there seems to be so much tunnel vision.

Checkmate, Mr. Molchan. Your case is inviable. It’s time to put your ego aside and find the truth.

I Hate to Say “I Told You”….

Since late 2015, I postulated that Mark Smith of the Manning Sex Case would “walk” away from these crimes. On Thursday last week, that theory was proven true. I have been distressed to come up with a post in response to this crazy ass decision.  The way this case played out was more odious than I could have never perceived the events as they manifested. Not only did this degenerate “walk”, but he was found “not guilty”.  He can NEVER be held accountable for the crimes known to have been committed against Brittany Cutting or Kaitlyn and Kayla Rogers. How could that be possible? Ask Sir David.  He is the puppeteer of this tragedy.

I can hear people saying, under their breathe, that I blame Sir David for the rain. If only that were so. It would be easier to dismiss me and this post by saying I am on a crusade against what I perceive is the Devil himself. Regrettably the Devil himself could not evoke the despondency Sheriff Morgan has in the heart of girls whose only sin was the family they were born into.

I cannot make a more compelling case for the imprisonment of Mark Smith. I have put document after document out there that support the predatory nature of this man’s heart. I’ve asked the question as to how he got a badge to begin with. He was discharged from the US Navy due to a “Personality Disorder”. He explains he was young and threatened suicide. However, being familiar with military protocol, I know you don’t get out of your obligation to serve that easily. For this reason for discharge, there must have been evidence to justify that Smith was a LIABILITY to the service.

Furthermore, a fellow cop who has 15 years experience in criminal investigations was persuaded to investigate a colleague. Not only that but he convinced a judge, who most certainly was apprehensive in issuing the search warrant, to find cause to effectively shred the credibility of deputy. For this case to be so compelling as to have an investigator come forward on his own as well as a judiciary who finds legal sufficiency to go after a law enforcement officer is HUGE.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

To question the judgment of the arresting officer, Zack Ward is question all cases in his 15 years of service at the Sheriff’s office, including the Billings Case. If the evidence Inv. Ward found was not legally sufficient in the eyes of the jury, how could it have been sufficient for the State Attorney?  The question here is who dropped the ball.In a press conference BEFORE THE MANNINGS WERE ARRESTED, Morgan says:

 We received some information downloaded from computer systems involving this case,” said Morgan. “We have over 100,000 images that have to be reviewed in addition to videotapes. As you can well imagine what a labor-intensive process that’s going to be for us to go through all of that material.”

This means there were images from Smith, Thomas and/or the victims. Yet in a Facebook conversation 10/4/15 with Eric Haines, Chief Deputy of the ECSO, he says:

 I unloaded on him including attacking his religiosity.  But the point is clear, Morgan says there were videos and images

but NOW Haines says, there aren’t any videos and pictures. No video or picture evidence was presented to the jury.

What happened to them?

I’ve asked the question as to how he got a badge to begin with. He was discharged from the US Navy due to a “Personality Disorder”. He explains he was young and threatened suicide. However, being familiar with military protocol, I know you don’t get out of your obligation to serve that easily. For this reason for discharge, there must have been evidence to justify that Smith was a LIABILITY to the service.

IN ADDITION, lest we forget my post from over a year ago:

yourprezi_Page_04

Erin Ambrose is the starting point because the entirety of the story seemingly circles back to her. She is also the person in this story with the most influence and has the greatest obligation to do the right thing. Her job title and ethical responsibility is higher than the rest and her part in this story is the most egregious. This is not an isolated incident for the State Attorney’s office. They have been more concerned with covering things up rather than pursuing justice. This is case merely epitomizes what happens on a day to day basis under Bill Eddins and his cronies.

Ms. Ambrose, Assistant State Attorney for the First Judicial Circuit, is engaged to a deputy by the name of Jason Young (Jason Von Ansbach Young).

10697416_10100595171443963_3087119126674280417_o (1) Jason is probably the least culpable of the bunch. While he is an adult and a law enforcement officer, which, in and of itself, carries responsibility for serving and protecting the public, he is not an active participant in endangering children; he is, however, complicit.

Jason’s brother and soon-to-be best man in his wedding in January is Ryan Von Ansbach Young, an ex-deputy who is married to Mindy Von Ansbach Young, a current Lieutenant at the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office.

 10763_1063480463680611_818962773520710047_n1919474_100376989990968_4173802_n

The Von Ansbach Youngs have foster children as well as their own children. Ryan Von Ansbach Young posted bail for his wife’s colleague, Mark Smith on 3/09/2015. This act which had to be known by the Sheriff’s Office due to the hand in hand relationships they have with bail bondsmen. If they did not know, it is because they did not want to know. Having a deputy, Ryan’s wife, suborning the release of a child sex offender, by extension, shows complicity of the entire organization for which she and her family represent. This is also the caveat that Ms. Ambrose falls prey to.

It is telling that this impropriety and the ability to connect this sort of deviant, sex offender with the people who are supposed to police and cage these monsters. Cozying up with them off the clock shows how little regard they have for the humanity they are supposed to be protecting. Of course, this gives a bad message to all that have knowledge of it. Of course, it de-legitimizes the entire criminal justice system in Pensacola, because cronyism trumps proper handling of criminal cases. This is the downfall of the entire community.

10173692_686024901453670_2236079528720823431_nyourprezi_Page_03

The malfeasance is that with all these children in their home, the Von Ansbach Youngs, all current or prior law enforcement professionals, allow a sex offender into their home. They allow said offender to come and go freely with children in the home.

Sr. Deputy Mark SmithEscambia Sheriff's K-9 tops at national trials - Studer Community Institute.clipular

The sex offender, who should not have contact with children is Mark Smith, an ex-Senior Deputy of the Escambia Sheriff’s Office. He is awaiting adjudication currently for multiple counts of sexual battery/rape of children over 16 and under 21, which has been minimized through the State Attorney’s office. Most counts being reduced to misdemeanors, even though there is video evidence of his impropriety as well accounts of sexual misconduct against others that the Sheriff’s dept. refused to acknowledge (See my post “Where’s Gavin?“)

Coming full circle back to Erin Ambrose, who is SUPPOSED to be an advocate of the children molested, battered and raped by  Walter Thomas and of course Mark Smith, who were both Escambia County Deputies at the time of the offenses.

10473866_10204243856329120_2942019695593477156_n 1015429_10200868804664193_937361007_o

The most malicious of the acts in the fact that not only is Ms. Ambrose violating her position as Assistant State Attorney by being involved personally with a case she is prosecuting but she is closely entangled in this family that neglects their moral and ethical duties as servants of the county and officers of the court to protect children against exposure to child sex predators. She knows what happens in this close knit family that she is about to become apart of and is aware of Smith’s consistent presence in the home as well as his “access” to the children. That is a conflict of nature that corrupts the entire justice process.

The girls victimized by these sexual predators are not being protected by the system. The system is more interested in covering its as. In addition to this situation, regarding this same case, Sheriff David Morgan effectively endowed Gulf Coast Kids House with $50K for a new wing AFTER he personally became aware of the abuse of his deputies on children. This was a stop-gap measure to preemptively control the reaction of the Gulf Coast Kids House when the story inevitably became public. These two organizations colluded to sweep this incident under the rug with Gulf Coast Kids House turning a blind eye to the additional victims that may have been affected by the deputies that Sheriff Morgan failed to investigate.

86204-check

This is the price of silence in Escambia County. 

With my head bowed, I say “I was right”. 

The boundaries of victimization is overwhelming & this check shows you how justice is bought & paid for in Escambia County. 

The Reckoning Approaches

First off, let me tell Cab Tice, Justin Billings, & Mr. Hugh Wiggins: YOUR TIME IS APPROACHING. I know your pride and arrogance prevent you from that on a daily basis. However, there is a collaborating effort of some very intelligent, previously distant people with information who have your head in their sights. The worst news about this is that I AM ONE OF THEM.

To say the least, the last week or so, in perusal of the evidence in the public domain, some fascinating devils hidden in the details that have been long overlooked have been found as well the keys to the conspiracy. It seems the diligence is paying off. Things are happening in quick succession and will culminate in the overturning of the death sentence of Patrick Jr.

I have had the opportunity to understand this crime a bit from another perspective. An advocate of Lenny Gonzales aka Sr, his brother Richard, is on a mission to get his brother out of his current death sentence from cancer in prison. We found that we had similar goals with which we may be able to create an alliance. That along with the collaboration of others who lost the political roll of the dice that sent innocent men to prison for murders they did not commit, will be the downfall of the collusion and corruption. I have always believed that the more I knew about each of the people involved and their reasoning for ending up in a part of the best and most overwhelming conspiracy in Pensacola, I would have the advantage. Knowledge is power. It is cliche but it is also absolutely true.

Who had the primary motive to kill Bud? Everyone has unanimously pointed the finger at the one and only Cab Tice. Although Justin did so initially, he later pointed a finger at a cartel and a friend of his Walter Davis from Colorado. A connection possibly links Mr. Davis of Colorado to a random text received 4 days after the murders to the current Escambia County School Superintendent Malcolm Thomas. The text merely said “Pat Poff!”. He deleted it but when another came in, he was compelled to make a police report. The number the text came from goes back to a lady in a community south of Austin, Texas, ie just on this side of the Mexican border. One of her previous addresses is in Colorado. Maybe this a tenuous connection to Mr. Davis spoken about by Justin.  But why would anyone have felt it necessary to send such an ambiguous text to someone with apparently nothing to do with this case? The timing is post-arrest of Pat. The clandestine “Good Old’ Boy” system never leads to anyone to Superintendent Thomas, yet someone the conspiracy does. This point of this is lost on me but it is something I am sure is important.

So the latest facts uncovered this last week via a cooperative effort of people who have come forth who knew Patrick or the conspiracy are these:

1. Someone had GSR on their hands the night of the murder. It is deemed transfer and inconsequential. However, this person was not known to have touched either victim or the gun.

2. Cab Tice was interviewed FIRST by Homeland Security prior to deputies.

3. Blue Markham was a co-worker/ friend of Patrick’s at Allen Turner. They had a relationship.

4. Dr. Berkland, a pathologist had human organs stored in a storage unit about a month outside the murders. The hypothesis I have is that these organs are the pieces of the 4 bodies found in the white van left to scare Gary Sumner just prior to the murders. Dr. Berkland was also the doctor that did the second autopsy of Willie Junior at the family’s behalf. Not knowing if the family came to them or him to the family, I have little doubt he could be scared into doing something for a power higher than a conventional boss but lower than the hand of God.

5. The DNA reports were worded a bit off. Most of the different items of evidence are worded oddly. Most of the evidence has a statement that reads: “DNA profile could/count not be identified”. If it could, the name of the people included or excluded as possibilities are listed. There are several things where it says simply: “DNA profile could be identified” without any further statement. It doesn’t say who could be implicated or who absolutely cannot be, like other results, page after page, in these reports. Absent info….makes me question what or who the profile linked to.

6. The text to Superintendent Thomas, just the curiosity of the connection.

7. Assuming Patrick did lead these men/boys into this fatal act, why would Patrick bring in so many people HE DIDN’T know? Only way 2 people can keep a secret is if one is dead. Now we have 5 people who don’t know each other from Adam trusting their lives, safety and mission is secure. The logic of the conspiracy prevents me from seeing any benefits to bringing unpredictable elements into this situation. With every additional person, the likelihood of getting caught goes up exponentially.

8. This wonderfully modern van used as the getaway car. An unreliable vehicle is the most ridiculous thing to ever take to any type of crime with any forethought. This well thought out plan to “invade” the home Billings’ is being left to novice strangers and vehicles that are older than many of the participants. The common sense threshold is completely absent.

9. During the testing of the blue fibers of carpet in Lenny’s van, FDLE is notified to by John Molchan to stop processing the evidence. The fibers are literally in the midst of processing. The only conclusion raised prior to the call was the fibers were consistent with what should be in that van, meaning the original carpeting. Then it is set off to the side along with a list of other evidence with is NEVER tested at all. Now that van is disposed of with no way to prove it was or wasn’t the correct van.

All of this is  just an example of the things that independently don’t seem relevant but when put into the puzzle with other facts have to make even the most skeptical question the convictions and witch hunts that were carried out in the name of the Billings family.

Time to Get Serious

Last week, I got news that Pat had a Bell’s Palsy stroke, a stroke that affects one side of the face. It resolves  shortly after but it is brought on by stress. Being on Death Row definitely qualifies for stress. Seeing people die that you encounter on day to day basis…I don’t know how to deal with that sort of psychological trauma. The mental breakdown and understanding that one day, that is supposed to be you…how do you cope with that?

 

Everything is now into a different perspective. I have depended on my instincts, intuition and divine signs to guide me with all things regarding this case up til now. Following said signs, this development in Pat’s health, is a reminder to me that the time is now to do whatever needs to be done. Pat has a new attorney and investigator. He feels more hopeful about this legal staff.  Maybe, just maybe, there is someone willing to actually look at the case….I pray that is the case. 

 

In the meantime I am putting my research on high speed. I want to have all my ducks in a row to give this case the kick in the ass it has needed.

What about Ethics?

 

I was looking over a case Masters vs Gilmore, et.al.  It’s a case of a prosecutor’s misconduct. The beginning of the lawsuit cites the ethical canons of the office of prosecutor. I thought they would be interesting food for thought. 

Canon 5 of the American Bar Association (“ABA”) Canons of Professional Ethics adopted in 1908 provides:
The primary duty of a lawyer engaged in public prosecution is not to convict, butto see that justice is done. The suppression of facts or the secreting of witnesses capable of establishing the innocence of the accused is highly reprehensible.


In turn, Ethical Consideration (“EC”) 7-13 of the ABA Code of Professional Responsibility
adopted in 1969 provides:

The responsibility of a public prosecutor differs from that of the usual advocate;his duty is to seek justice not merely to convict. … With respect to evidence and witnesses, the prosecutor has responsibilities different from those of a lawyer in private practice: the prosecutor should make timely disclosure to the defense of available evidence, known to him, 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 believes it will damage the prosecutor’s case or aid the accused.

These principles have been acknowledged by the Colorado Supreme Court in

People v.District Court, 632 P.2d 1022 (Colo. 1981). The Court stated

Our analysis begins with recognition that the duty of the prosecutor is to seek

justice, not merely convict. As stated in Singer v. United States, “… the (prosecutor) in a criminal prosecution is not an ordinary party to a controversy, but is a ‘servant of the law’ with a‘twofold aim … that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer.’”

… But there is more. These principles are enshrined in the jurisprudence of the United

States Supreme Court. See Young v. United States ex rel. Vuitton et Fils S.A.,

481 U.S. 787(1987); Singer v. United States, 380 U.S. 24 (1965). In Young, the Supreme Court said


This distinctive role of the prosecutor is expressed in [EC] 7-13 of Canon 7 of the[ABA] Model Code of Professional Responsibility (1982): “The responsibility ofa public prosecutor differs from that of the usual advocate; his duty is to seek justice, not merely to convict.”


...These principles even find expression chiseled into the stone of the Robert F. Kennedy Center (Department of Justice Headquarters, Washington, D.C., constructed in 1935)

where it is admonished that [t]he United States wins its case whenever justice is done one of its citizens in the Courts.”  


Implicit in these principles is the notion that justice be done to victims, to their families,and to the United States Constitution. This happens when fundamental fairness applies to convict the truly guilty. Bedrock principles, yes. Fundamental and objectively reasonable
within the meaning of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution,of course. And, these principles long pre-date the events of the case now before this Court.  


Now, average citizen, I defy you to look at the Billings’ Murder case and the role of the prosecutor and find any actions within this ethical requirements.  If these things are supposed to be the status quo, how can a man be tried, convicted and sentenced to death in 3 days?

Surveillance Tape: Fact or Fiction?

I have recently been tipped off to look for information in the surveillance tape. Ashley & Blue had the release of the full surveillance tape suppressed because of the “graphic nature” they do not want to relive. As understandable as that is, I am thinking there are other reasons the tape was never released.

CBS got a computer animated version of the surveillance tape that is allegedly true to the real surveillance tape. Here is a still shot from that version:

Notice two left-handed people with rifles come in the front to Byrd, while one right-handed person with a handgun comes in the back.  In watching the rest of the video, the first shot to Byrd Billings leg was done by the person who entered from the back, the right-handed gunman; then they all proceed with Melanie into the closet. Three assailants and two victims move to the closet. Each of the assailants alternatively shoot both Melanie and Byrd.

There are so many inconsistencies in this computerized version, at least according to the prosecution team. They cannot account for the 2 lefties and 1 righty. The number of people in the house is not consistent with their case. The fact there are 3 shooters when there allegedly was only one shooter according to the Bill Eddins. None of the facts of this tape jive with the prosecutor’s version.

Now tell me why the facts don’t line up with the prosecutor’s version of the crime.