Prosecutorial misconduct, the gift that keeps on giving...

.

Just when you think you've run out of crap to write about comes another instance of flagrant prosecutorial misconduct, the icing on the cake here is that we're already familiar with some of the key players yet somehow the Miami Herald forgot to mention their names.  From the Herald article...

Two MIA “fuel farm” defendants get new trial

By DAVID OVALLE

Two defendants in the Miami International Airport fuel-farm corruption case deserve new trials because a judge failed to give proper instructions to the jury, an appeals court ruled Wednesday.

Cliff Berry Inc., and the company’s former environmental director, Jeffrey Clint Smith, were convicted at trial in December 2008 of first-degree grand theft. The accusations: They pilfered huge amounts of fuel from the airport’s storage depot.

Smith had been free on bond while awaiting the decision. “This news in the new year is extremely welcome from him and his family,” Smith’s attorney, Michael S. Pasano, said. “He had always insisted on his innocence.”

The Third District Court of Appeal also ruled Wednesday that Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Jacqueline Hogan Scola failed to quickly hold a hearing to question prosecutors about a key witness who changed his testimony.

The indictments were part of a far-reaching probe that uncovered several racketeering schemes at MIA. In all, more than 20 defendants pleaded guilty.

As for the company and Smith, investigators alleged that company trucks were supposed to haul away wastewater but drove off with jet fuel instead, and later sold it to yacht owners.

At trial, defense attorneys insisted their clients believed they had the “good faith” right to haul away the contents of a fuel-farm tank.

Scola refused defense attorneys’ request that the jury be given instructions outlining the “good faith” defense.

The Third DCA ruled Wednesday she should have allowed the jury instruction because “the evidence at trial was sufficient to suggest the good faith theory.”

Smith was sentenced to 10 years in prison. The company was ordered to pay $1.23 million and was barred from having any government contracts. The company’s former president, Cliff Berry II, was acquitted.

Another legal issue revolved around defendant Brian Schneir, a former supervisor at ASIG Fueling, another company that prosecutors said aided in the theft of the jet fuel.

Schneir pleaded guilty to organized fraud and agreed to spend two years in prison in return for testifying against Smith and Cliff Berry Inc. However, at trial, Schneir changed testimony he gave in a deposition about the dollar amount of fuel stolen and the date the scheme began.

Appellate lawyers argued that Miami-Dade prosecutors failed to quickly inform the defense of the change in Schneir’s testimony. Third DCA Judges Richard J. Suarez and Barbara Lagoa said Scola should have automatically conducted a hearing to see if prosecutors violated rules regarding turning over evidence to the defense.

A third appeals judge, Leslie Rothenberg, disagreed, saying the two defendants were convicted “by overwhelming evidence.”

Scola later ruled that prosecutors did not violate any rules. After prosecutors moved to revoke Schneir’s plea deal, saying he lied before testifying at trial, Scola gave him 12 years in prison.

Ok, so besides the judge screwing up and not allowing the jury instructions to outline the "good faith" defense, there's one other critical problem, the states main cooperating witness changed his testimony before the trial, problem is that the prosecutor knew that the witness had changed his critical testimony yet decided not to tell the defense attorneys about it!  From the article...

Appellate lawyers argued that Miami-Dade prosecutors failed to quickly inform the defense of the change in Schneir’s testimony. Third DCA Judges Richard J. Suarez and Barbara Lagoa said Scola should have automatically conducted a hearing to see if prosecutors violated rules regarding turning over evidence to the defense.

RUT RO!  So the prosecutor knew after his key witness was deposed that his testimony had changed before trial yet he forgot to let the defendants know and in essence covered this critical fact up?  Who could this unnamed prosecutor be?  Why would the Herald write this story accusing the prosecutor of misconduct yet leave out the guys name?  Any guesses as to who this guy is?  Perhaps this photo will help jar your memory...

Richard Scruggs

That would be none other than our favorite ex public corruption prosecutor Richard Scruggs!  You all remember Mr. Scruggs from his stellar performance during the Michelle Spence-Jones mess don't you?  Throughout that debacle Mr. Scruggs hid evidence, coerced witnesses and downright lied to witnesses about evidence he had in his possession in order to get them to say what he wanted.  So the question that begs to be asked is why the hell did the Herald not name Scruggs in the article?  We were able to identify the mysterious prosecutor in this case only after reading the actual appeal, if you have the time, check it out...

Prosecutorial Misconduct Cliff Berry Inc and Jeffrey Clint Smith vs the State of Florida

Carey-Schuler

Now, who's this other player in this fuel farm corruption case that goes unnamed in the Herald article?  That would be none other than former county Commissioner Barbara Carey-Schuler, the same ex commissioner that played a key role in both getting City of Miami Commissioner Michelle Spence-Jones indicted then through changing her testimony also helped get her case dismissed.  For those of you with a good memory, you might remember Carey-Schuler as the commissioner that was buddy buddy with that crook Oscar Rivero, who was practically a fixture in her office, that was responsible for stealing millions of dollars that were meant for public housing only to build himself a mansion in South Miami.  Funny how her name keeps coming up in this high profile public corruption cases yet somehow she never gets charged?

Regardless, just another instance of a dirty prosecutor who's resorted to obtaining convictions by any means necessary even if it means breaking the very laws he swore to uphold and another black eye for our local state attorneys office.  Oh well...

Michelle Spence- Jones in the news again and why the hell does Veldora Arthur still have her job?

.

Great question, right?  Francisco Alvarado of the Miami New Times reports on another major flaw in the states bribery case against former City of Miami Commissioner Michelle Spence-Jones in today's edition of Riptide.  Apparently Armando Codina, the states key witness against Spence-Jones is alleging that the assistant state attorney prosecuting Spence-Jones was somewhat less than honest about the facts of the case during his deposition which yielded the most injurious testimony against the former commissioner.  From the New Times article...

In a deposition taken this past February 16, Codina -- a former business partner of Jeb Bush -- implies that Miami-Dade State Attorney Richard Scruggs misled him into believing Spence-Jones stole $12,500 he had donated for an event honoring former County Commissioner Barbara Carey-Shuler.

This isn't the first time this has happened during the states quest to put Spence-Jones behind bars, just a few months ago we learned that Barbara Carey-Shuler, another key witness in a separate case against Spence-Jones suddenly remembered during a deposition that the allegations she made about Spence-Jones forging a letter authorizing the release of $50,000 to her company were untrue and in fact the letter was genuine.  Once again, from the New Times article...

"Whose handwriting is that?" Raben asked Carey-Shuler. "It's mine," she replied.

When Raben quizzed her if the final version -- the one prosecutors alleged was a forgery -- was "genuine," Carey-Shuler said: "That's correct."

So now what?  The testimony that was the cornerstone of both of the states cases against Spence-Jones just went up in smoke as both the key witnesses claimed that they were lied to   mislead by the prosecutors who built the cases against Spence-Jones using their coerced testimony.

Let's not forget though that the minute the charges were announced against Spence-Jones there was a press conference followed by Governor Charlie Crist immediately suspending her from her position as commissioner.  Keep in mind that between the two cases Spence-Jones was accused of stealing roughly sixty to seventy five thousand dollars through her alleged nefarious activities.


Now, fast forward a few months to the Veldora Arthur federal mortgage fraud indictment, she's charged with participating in a scheme to defraud banks out of nearly ELEVEN MILLION DOLLARS and she's still got her job at the city collecting a hefty $300,000 per year?!  Not to mention that there was no press conference, no press release, nothing other than news of the indictment on some local blogs!  

What gives here folks?  On one hand we have a popular commissioner who was elected to her position by a landslide victory who immediately loses her job after being accused of stealing approximately $75,000 and on the other hand we have another city employee who's federally indicted for a massive eleven million dollar fraud and she's still got her job?  Even worse, a job where she's responsible for handling financial matters for the City?  

Why does Veldora Arthur still have her job?  Why hasn't she been immediately suspended without pay as Spence-Jones was?  Why the double standard?  The best the City of Miami Fire Department could do when asked why she wasn't suspended was this lame statement from their spokesman Ignatius Carroll...

"this has nothing to do with her role as fire chief...our guys don't carry guns"

She may not carry a gun, she carries the fire departments checkbook!

Coincidence or a disturbing pattern of behavior regarding prosecutors handling of sensitive and perhaps exculpatory evidence.

Over the last few weeks we've discussed in detail how the the prosecutor and police detectives responsible for the Bernardo Barrera mortgage fraud prosecution sat on sensitive evidence which would have radically changed the way their key witness testified against the people who were ultimately charged.  This key witness was shown a clean copy of a cashiers check that was used as the down payment for the purchase of the home at the center of the alleged identity theft and mortgage fraud, a copy from the bank that issued the check...

The witness after being mirandized and scared shitless by the detective and the prosecutor tells them what they want to hear after being confronted by this check, she tells them that she had never seen the check before.  Months later after the arrests were made, this same witness was shown a second copy of the same check during a deposition...

After seeing this copy of the check with her handwriting her memory is suddenly jarred and she remembers handling the check as well as processing it.  Funny how testimony has a way of changing when your not under threat of being arrested and the fact that your handwriting is all over the check!


Our contention is that the State Attorneys Office and the Miami Dade County Police Department have had a copy of the check with the handwriting all over it since day one but chose not to show the witness the check on purpose.  Does any of this ring a bell for our readers?  Does this scenario sound vaguely familiar?  Everyone remember the Michelle Spence-Jones case right?  At the heart of the states allegations against Spence-Jones was that she forged a letter from Barbara Carey-Shuler authorizing the release of $50,000 to Spence-Jones, when Carey-Shuler was shown a copy of the letter she told prosecutors that she had not written it or signed it, here's a copy of that letter as it was shown to her by the state...

Damn!  But then months later, the states key witness against Michelle Spence-Jones, Barbara Carey-Shuler, is shown another copy of that damning letter that she said she never wrote or signed during a deposition...

Coincidentally this copy of the letter has Carey-Shuler's handwriting all over it.  After being shown this copy of the letter, Spence-Jones defense attorney Peter Raben asks...

"Whose handwriting is that?" Raben asked Carey-Shuler. "It's mine," she replied. 
When Raben quizzed her if the final version -- the one prosecutors alleged was a forgery -- was "genuine," Carey-Shuler said: "That's correct."

WHOOPS!  Now, in this case the state alleges that this copy of the letter with Carey-Shuler's handwriting all over it was buried in a box somewhere in the prosecutors office.  Some excuse huh?  The state can't take enough care before ruining someones life, career and reputation to search through every single document in their possession before pressing charges, that's rather careless isn't it?  Is this the kind of care and caution that a prosecutor uses before making such a high profile case?  I can't speculate as to what exactly happened in the Spence-Jones case or why the state do a thorough investigation into their own files before showing this letter to their star witness against Spence-Jones, for the sake of this argument, let's just say this was a tragic oversight on the part of the prosecutor.

So what about prosecutor Kostrzewski and Detective Baluja not showing their star witness in the Barrera mortgage fraud case the copy of the cashiers check with her handwriting all over it?  Unfortunate mistake or an intentional manipulation of the evidence and coercing their witness to say what they needed her to say?  Perhaps the second copy of the check with the witnesses handwriting all over it was buried in some box in the state attorneys office?  Perhaps they never had a copy of the check with the handwriting until after the arrests were made?  Or maybe they had a copy of the check with the handwriting all over it faxed over to them before the arrests were made and they conveniently decided to bury it so they could make their bullshit case and affect the arrests?  YIKES!  I can only imagine what the repercussions of something like that could be.  God forbid something like that actually happened...

So what do you think about these strange instances of key evidence being omitted from the states star witnesses when the states putting together a case?  Coincidence or just another day for a corrupt, inept morally and ethically challenged prosecutor? 

Huge news on the Michelle Spence-Jones case.

Some of you may remember the embattled City of Miami commissioner Michelle Spence-Jones who was first arrested for Grand Theft and then months later indicted by a grand jury on charges of bribery.  The grand theft charge was based on a letter from former county commsioner Barbara Carey-Shuler authorizing the release of $50,000 to Spence-Jones and her company Karym Ventures Inc, only problem is that both Carey-Shuler and the state attorneys office said that the letter was a forgery.  That forged document was the basis of the states case against Spence-Jones, according to Francisco Alvarado's article in the Miami New Times today, there seems to be a problem with that letter that the state insists was forged...

During last month's deposition (obtained by New Times and WPLG's political reporter Michael Putney), Spence-Jones' criminal defense attorney Peter Raben showed Carey-Shuler two drafts of the February 15, 2005 correspondence. One draft, dated January 9, 2005, contained several handwritten edits, including a notation that said: "should release the $50,000 to Karym."

"Whose handwriting is that?" Raben asked Carey-Shuler. "It's mine," she replied. 

When Raben quizzed her if the final version -- the one prosecutors alleged was a forgery -- was "genuine," Carey-Shuler said: "That's correct."

UH OH!  Let's take a look at that first draft with Carey-Shuler's handwriting all over it...

bcareyletter

Pretty hard to deny that huh?!  The article goes on to say...

Carey-Shuler explained that Scruggs did not show her the draft with her handwritten notes when he questioned her this past September on two separate occasions. How Scruggs, a former federal prosecutor who sent mass murderer Yahweh Ben Yahweh to prison, could have missed a key piece of evidence is a total head scratcher. The drafts were in a box of files stored by the county after Carey-Shuler left office. The box was marked "Cafe Soul," the name of the property on NW 7th avenue Karym was going to renovate with the grants. In other words, it was readily available when Scruggs subpoenaed hundreds of county records pertaining to the $50,000 that went to Karym.

And here's the best bit...

When Raben asked her if she had been tricked or misled to redirect the $50,000 to Karym, Carey-Shuler's response was "no."

You have to wonder, was the exclusion of this draft version of the letter simply an oversight by the prosecutor preparing the case or was it a calculated dirty trick designed to mislead?  Carey-Shuler goes on to say...

When Raben asked her if she had been tricked or misled to redirect the $50,000 to Karym, Carey-Shuler's response was "no."

Now consider the magnitude of this "new" evidence, would there have been a case if this letter was made public before?  Could charges have been brought against Spence-Jones if the state couldn't allege that the Carey-Shuler letter was a forgery?  Wouldn't you think that the state should have used an abundance of caution before bringing charges against ANYONE let alone a public figure like Spence-Jones?  After all this draft of the letter that the state alleges was a forgery was in the evidence that they subpoenaed!

I'm sure your asking yourselves, what does this have to do with our tales of mortgage fraud?  Sadly dear readers this exact same thing happened in the Bernardo Barrera mortgage fraud case.  We'll have to wait a little while before we can discuss.  This certainly doesn't look good for Prosecutor Scruggs!