Miami Dade cop exposes a pattern of lying by his fellow officers.

For those of you following our blog, it's no secret that some cops are somewhat less than honest.  We've dedicated pages and pages of blog to the misdeeds of Detective Jorge Baluja of the MDPD, now it looks like one of his fellow officers from his early stomping grounds, the Northside District of the MDPD,  has come forward and detailed a pattern of dishonesty in his department.  From Gus Garcia-Roberts article in the Miami New Times, Officer Frank Adams of the Miami Dade Police Department tells us...

"They're supposed to be my brothers in blue," he says, struggling to keep his voice audible as his eyes become soggy. "But they're not my brothers — not when they're treating people like this."

It's not like Officer Adams is some lackey cop with an axe to grind, again from the article...

"Adams is an exemplary cop if his personnel record is any indication. He has been decorated with 12 commendations for good police work, and his daughter is also a Miami-Dade officer. But he says the state's largest police department has become a menace, regularly abusing and humiliating the people it's sworn to protect — and then lying about it. He's risking his career by speaking with New Times to expose its failings."

The incident that caused Officer Adams to come out against the department was a brutal police beating and how the officers involved described it in their subsequent police reports...

But what really floored Adams is the way Officer Gregorio Perez, who wrote the report, spun the incident. Five-foot-nine-inch Gaines was described as an incredibly powerful aggressor. He had allegedly lifted one officer onto his shoulder, climbed a set of stairs, and hurled the cop to the ground. He had supposedly even grabbed Adams by the shirt and repeatedly punched him, knocking him to the ground and injuring his hand. 

Gaines, a chef at a racetrack, was "lying on his stomach, gasping for air," Adams wrote in a four-page complaint. Pratts Martinez was continuously punching the man in the head. At Adams's urging, they cuffed Gaines.
Then another cop,Luis Torres, arrived on the scene, burst from his cruiser, and "ran up and kicked Mr. Gaines in the face," Adams wrote. The kick sent Adams knuckles-first into the gravel. A fourth officer, Jorge Arana, started "stomping and kicking" the chef in the legs and side. Adams says he leaped onto Gaines to protect him from the kicks.

The cops account is in stark contrast to what Officer Adams saw...

It's a lie, Adams says. He claims Gaines never resisted: The hand injury had occurred when another cop knocked Adams over while trying to kick Gaines.

It's nice to know that there are good cops out there that will stand up to the few rotten apples in their department, even when the odds seem to be against them.  Despite the officers assertions that the suspect was the aggressor a subsequent investigation by the Miami Dade County Police Department sided with Mr. Gaines and his account of how things went down.  Congratulations to Officer Adams for having the courage to exposing these cops, once again, former Plantation Police Chief Larry Massey said it best...

"If you lie, you die, If you are willing to lie to me over this, what else are you willing to lie about? His integrity was shot."

There is no room in ANY police department for dishonest cops.

So why is the lead detective in a headine mortgage fraud case helping someone identify a suspect?

Good question huh?  Why is Detective Jorge Baluja helping defendant Michael Martinez identify one of the suspects in the Bernardo Barrera mortgage fraud case?  In our last post we described the highly unusually technique that Detective Baluja used to have Mr. Martinez identify attorney Delaila Estefano, the attorney whose office conducted the closing for the Oak Avenue home that's at the center of the Barrera mortgage fraud case, the detective showed a single photo of Ms. Estefano to Mr. Martinez and asked him to identify her, what we called the "single photo lineup."


Now, let's look at why Mr. Martinez needed so much help in identifying Ms. Estefano for the police, from his deposition transcript...

So Mr. Martinez can't describe the suspect that Detective Baluja want's him to identify, sounds like a bit of a problem.  Not good but it gets worse...

If not physically, then how?  How about something simple like hair color Mr. Martinez?

Uh oh.  That's when the Detective busts out with his single photo line up...

Pretty pathetic, but as usual it gets worse.  Some of you may remember that in exchange for his testimony against his fellow codefendants in the Barrera fraud case, Mr. Martinez was given a sweetheart plea deal and sent on his way.  That should lead you to wonder, what kind of plea deal could the state give a defendant who couldn't even identify the target of the states case?  Wouldn't a "reasonably prudent" prosecutor (Judge Barzee's words, not mine) have taken a step back when this guy couldn't get his facts straight?  You would think so, but no.  Instead assistant state attorney Bill Kostrzewski decided to build his case on statements from Mr. Martinez, statements from a codefendant that couldn't even identify the target of his prosecution, statements from a man willing to say anything to keep himself from going to jail.  Once again, nice going Bill!  Trust me folks, it gets much worse.

With that said, stay tuned and have a great weekend!

You ever wan't something so bad...

...that you'd do nearly anything to get it?  We all know the feeling, whether as child or an adult, you want something so bad that you'd do anything and overcome any obstacle in order to get it. 

So what does a defendant who's offered a deal to get out from under some serious felony charges do?  Would he lie and tell the prosecutor and the cops what they want to hear to get himself out of trouble?  What lengths would a law enforcement officer go to in order to ensure a witness gives him favorable testimony against his target?  Last but not least, the prosecutor, what lengths would he go to in order to secure a conviction against the people he's after?

Let's take up the defendants angle, the guy who got charged and is offered a plea by the state in exchange for testimony against one of his codefendants, how far would he go to save his own ass?  We learned several months ago that Michael Martinez (the man who lent the straw buyer in the Bernardo Barrera mortgage fraud case the down payment) was the first of the three original defendants charged in the Bernardo Barrera mortgage fraud case to plead out, a plea that included testifying against the others that were charged.  Standard operating procedure right?  But what if Mr. Martinez couldn't even identify the person that he committed the crime with?  The other vital member of the "organized scheme to defraud" Citi mortgage?  How far would the Detective leading the investigation go in order to help Mr. Martinez identify his co conspirator?  Take a look at this excerpt of Mr. Martinez's deposition where he's discussing how he's asked to identify the attorney whose office conducted the closing...

Very nice.  The detective shows Mr. Martinez a single photo and then asks him if that's the person he's trying to identify, so what's this now, the "one person" photo line up?  Am I missing something?  Does that sound Kosher to you all?  


I for one find this photo line up that's comprised of a single photo very problematic.  Tomorrow we'll see why the police and prosecutor were so desperate to get Mr. Martinez to identify the attorney that was the target of their investigation.

The Straw Buyer runs into an asshole in the drive thru...

So I'm sitting at in a drive through yesterday waiting for my turn to order some nasty fast food when all of a sudden out of nowhere an older Crown Victoria with dark tinted windows cuts in front of me.  I'm pissed as hell and start blowing my horn at the driver, as soon as I hit the horn the guy stops and get's out of the car, flashes his badge and says "What's your problem?!"  When I tell him that I've been waiting on line and he needs to get to the back he responds with "What are you going to do about it?"  As long as steroid munching, little penis having dimwit has the power to put the cuffs on me, I guess nothing and therein lies the rub.  Does it make sense that this man of diminished mental capacity who has a chip on his shoulder is allowed to alter the course of your life by arresting you?  Throughout the course of our blog we've seen this exact same attitude from the lead detective on the Bernardo Barrera Mortgage fraud case, Jorge Baluja.  In our case, he didn't give a rats ass for what really went on, he made up his mind regarding who was guilty and facts be dammed went forward with his case.

To fully understand the problem with cops like Detective Baluja, you first have to understand the basic flaws in their thinking, first:

"I am the law"

How can you beat that?  Second, I only arrest criminals, criminals have no rights therefore I'm free to do anything I want whether that means lie, perjure or cheat.  With that underlying thinking and unchecked authority, you have the makings of a tyrant with a badge who enforces his authority not the law.  Once a cops thinking is corrupted like this the Constitution becomes an obstacle to them doing what they perceive as "doing their job", IE Detective Baluja stating that he "knew she was guilty cause she lawyered up", never mind several instances of the Detective lying and suborning perjury.  Early on in the Barrera mortgage fraud prosecution, Prosecutor Kostrzewski made this comment regarding Detective Baluja...

"...he's young, but he means well, he tries really hard."

Fantastic excuse for the Detectives mishandling of the case isn't it?  Now consider that the best evidence of Detective Baluja's mishandling of the Bernardo Barrera mortgage fraud case comes from the depositions conducted by Attorney Delaila Estefano's defense attorneys, the other defendants charged never conducted a single depo throughout the course of this case.  The kind of lawyering that tripped up the Detective and exposed all his misdeeds must have cost a small fortune.  Let's not forget the role our blog has played in the case as well, if nothing else we've managed to bring attention to the case further highlighting the misdeeds of the cop and the prosecutor.  So what would have happened if you were charged in such a crime and didn't have the hundreds of thousands of dollars required to properly defend yourself?  What if there was no one in the media exposing the missteps by the cop and the prosecutor?  What would have happened then is that the officer would have continued committing perjury and lying the way he did throughout the arrest affidavit (we'll discuss that in detail soon) that justified his actions and his behavior would have gone unchecked regardless of what the truth may have been.  

We've exposed several instances of Detective Baluja perjuring himself, suborning perjury and coercing witnesses, from something as small as directing a witness to lie about the time and location a statement was given (possibly to get overtime?) to outright lying about how a witness was handled.  So what now?  How can this type of misconduct be stopped?  Once again, I defer to former Plantation police chief Larry Massey:

"If you lie, you die, If you are willing to lie to me over this, what else are you willing to lie about? His integrity was shot.  In the interest of the community I separated him from service." 

Get rid of them and then throw the book at em!  If every lying or "Brady Cop" is prosecuted for lying and for violating an individuals civil rights then are forced to serve real jail time with the same people that they may have perjured themselves to put behind bars, then maybe other cops thinking of bending the truth a little may think twice before doing so.  Personally, I have a lot of faith in the new Director of the MDPD, James Loftus, I'm sure our little story is going to get both his and Internal Affairs attention.

Is the lead Detective in a headline case lying or is his star witness lying?

Which is worse?  The lead Detective in a headline case lying or the witness whose testimony he built his case on lying?  Last month we discussed how Detective Jorge Baluja interviewed a key witness in the Bernardo Barrera Mortgage fraud case, based on what we found in the deposition transcripts there seems to be some reason for concern.  The way the detective conducted this interview was troubling, in fact the witness was so rattled that she went on to state during her deposition that she wanted to make sure she wasn't going to be criminally charged, you have to ask yourself though, just how far would the witness go to make sure she wasn't going to get charged? 


With the testimony from the key witness in hand, let's see how Detective Jorge Baluja addressed the very same questions that the key witness was asked during her deposition.  Let's start off with whether or not the Detective read the witness her Miranda rights, from the witnesses deposition...

That's pretty clear now, isn't it?  Now let's see what Detective Baluja says when asked the same question during his deposition...

Did we just read that right?  It seems to me that Detective Baluja clearly states that he didn't read the witness her Miranda rights, clearly confused the attorney conducting the deposition asks the detective the question again...

Bizarre.  The witness then goes on to say...

Easy enough.  During his deposition Detective Baluja tells the attorneys that, the witness wasn't being investigated and was not a suspect in the Bernardo Barrera mortgage fraud...

Fair enough right?  According to the Detective, the witness has nothing to worry about...

So why is she worried about getting charged if she's just a witness?  Somethings not right, look again...

Looking at her bank records Detective?  That must have given the poor girl a warm and fuzzy feeling.  Let's see what the Detective has to say...

This causes the Detective to pause for a second (I've redacted the witnesses name for privacy reasons)...

Now we clearly have a problem here as Detective Baluja has contradicted the testimony from the witness regarding her bank records, she says the detective told her he had her bank statements and he says he didn't.  It get's worse, the witness says...

When asked if he was surveilling the witness, the Detective says...

Another inconsistency, the detective again...

Really?  The witness again...

Nice.  Once again Detective Baluja leaves the witness with that warm and fuzzy feeling...

With that said, can you really blame the poor witness...

We're now presented with a serious problem folks, we have the lead detective and the key witness whose testimony the detective built his case on contradicting each other.  Someone's lying.  If the witness is lying then she loses credibility, if the detective is lying then his case is worthless.  Which is it?  We don't know much about the witness but we know the Detective has a poor track record when it comes to telling the truth and dealing with witnesses.  How does that old kids rhyme go Jorge?  Something about pants being on fire? 

I'll leave it to members of the MDPD and it's command staff who we know read our blog to consider the following quote from former Plantation police chief  Larry Massey regarding Joseph Guaracino a lying cop that he fired who was later charged with mortgage fraud...

"If you lie, you die, If you are willing to lie to me over this, what else are you willing to lie about? His integrity was shot.  In the interest of the community I separated him from service."

With the states so called "victim" added into the mix we now have the lead detective, the states victim and key witness with serious if not fatal credibility issues.  It's at this point that any reasonably prudent and competent prosecutor working the case should have had the common sense to put the brakes on this investigation, instead Prosecutor Bill Kostrzewski went full steam ahead.  As we've learned and will see in the near future though, the terms prudent, competent and common sense don't apply to Prosecutor Kostrzewski.  

Clickity Clack Bill, the train has definitely left the station!

So what about those signatures from yesterday?

Did everyone have a chance to check out the signatures we posted yesterday and determine which ones were signed by Bernardo Barrera and which ones were forgeries?  Once again, here are the signatures as they appeared in yesterdays post:

Let's take a look at some of your guesses and see what we got:

• S, T & U are fake.
• S,t,u would be the obvious choice but they all look like they came from the same hand.
• S,T, & U stand apart...and yes they do look like they came from the same hand.

We would have to agree with these three commentors, the signatures S, T and U look completely different than the rest of the signatures.

• Same signature 21 different times.
• same signature, different times, different circumstances.
• ditto 

This conclusion is understandable as well as there are similarities in all 21 signatures, same style of writing, some style of letters, etc.  One could conclude that perhaps the person signing these signatures was in a different psychological state when they were executing the signatures and therefore having different styles of signing the same signature.

• abc, de, fghijkl, mnop, qr, stu all seem to be different people to me...whadda i win?

Ok, this conclusion is understandable as well.  According to this opinion, there are six different styles of signatures executed by six different people.


Let's take a look at where the signatures came from (click on the links to view the sources of the signatures in full size)...

1. A and B were obtained from Bernardo Barrera's divorce file from back in 2005.
2. C was obtained from a letter Mr. Barrera wrote to the court in regards to the civil foreclosure of the oak avenue home.
3. D and E were signatures obtained from the documents on file with the state of Florida for the fraudulent corporation that Mr. Barrera opened back in late 2008.
4. F through L were signatures that we obtained from the loan application that was submitted for the fraudulent mortgage for the Oak Avenue home.
5. M through R were signatures obtained from the mortgage for Mr. Barrera's primary residence.
6. And last but not least, S, T and U were signatures that Mr. Barrera submitted to the MDPD as samples of his real signature!

So there you have it folks, six different instances of Mr. Barrera's signature with only one instance where the signatures were supposedly forged.  Now, we know our readers are of higher than average intellect (that is with the exception of that one member of the MDPD and our favorite curmudgeon from the state attorneys office), why didn't anyone pick this up?  The most common sentiment was that all the signatures were executed by the same person except the last three which were the ones that Mr. Barrera submitted to the police as a sample of his real signature.  The other common opinion was that the signatures were all executed by the same person, yet no one was able to buy into the theory that all the signatures with the exception of samples F through L were executed by the same person, why wasn't anyone able to come to that conclusion?  

BECAUSE IT'S COMPLETE AND UTTER BULLSHIT!

There in lies the rub folks, buying into the hypothesis that only signatures F through L are forgeries is an insult to our readers intelligence.  If we don't buy this nonsense, how could anyone in law enforcement have?  Even worse, how could ASA Kostrzewski have believed this nonsense?  We'll look into this mess in further detail tomorrow, there's a pretty embarrassing explanation for all of this.

Until then, let's enjoy this short video from a recent wedding reception that illustrates the dangers of mixing Russians, vodka and guns...

How a MDPD Detective manages to screw up a simple photo line up...

Everyones familiar with the method police use to identify suspects known as the "Photo Lineup".  It can't get any easier or more basic than a cop asking a witness to take a look at some photos and see if they can pick out the subject, easy enough.  Yet if a photo lineup is conducted improperly it can actually end up doing more harm than good, fact of the matter is that there are specific procedures that need to be followed when introducing a photo lineup to a witness.  There was a great piece on 60 Minutes a while back that addressed photo lineups and the consequences of conducting them improperly, if you have a few minutes, take a look...

At the very least what we come away with after watching that story is that not only is there a science to putting a photo lineup together, but there are a specific set of instructions that are to be read to the witness before showing them the photo line up.  What's this got to do with us?  The lead detective, Jorge Baluja, in the Bernardo Barrera mortgage fraud case used photo lineups several times during the course of his investigation (if that's what you wanna call it), at this point considering his track record, you have to ask yourself, did he conduct the photo lineups correctly?  Let's take a look, starting with the instructions that he's supposed to read before showing the lineups to the witness, from his deposition, here's one of the defense attorneys asking Detective Baluja about these very instructions...

Ok, that's easy enough, the detective acknowledges that on the back of each group of photos there are instructions that the Detective has to read before conducting the photo lineup, fine.  So does Detective Baluja go ahead and read these instructions to the witness before conducting the photo lineup?  Let's hear it in his own words...

Oh really Jorgito?  You can't recall whether you read the witness the instructions or not?  That's no good now is it?  Let me refresh your recollection Jorge, you didn't.  How do we know that Detective Baluja conducted the photo lineup without reading the witness the instructions?  Because he says so!

DUH!  Those pesky instructions, what a pain in the ass, huh Jorge?  It's not like they're given to you with the GOD DAMN INSTRUCTIONS WRITTEN ON THE BACK OF THE PHOTOS NOW IS IT?!  Never one to disappoint now are you Detective Baluja?


Now that we've seen how Detective Baluja conducts his photo lineups, let's see what its like from the perspective of the witness that's suffering through a Baluja photo lineup.  Here's a excerpt from the deposition of co defendant Michael Martinez, with ASA Bill Kostrzewski asking a few questions regarding a Baluja photo lineup...

So what was the purpose of the lineup?

Ok, so the purpose of Detective Baluja showing Mr. Martinez the lineup was to identify Attorney Delaila Estefano, did he know anyone else that was in the lineup?  Lets see...

So Mr. Martinez knew some of the people in the line up, but not all of them?  We wonder though, who else was included in the photos that Mr. Martinez was shown other than Attorney Delaila Estefano?  Let's see...

Oh, OK!  Detective Baluja is trying to get the witness to identify a female out of a group of six photos where at least 2 maybe three of the photos are of MEN!  WTF?!  Out of the remaining photos, one is of the witnesses coworker, another is of some unknown woman and the other is OF THE WITNESSES FIANCE?!  Did we read that right?!  Let's continue...

Hey, you know, sometimes it's tough having a fiance, it doesn't hurt for someone to show you a picture of your significant other now and again just to see if you recognize her.  WTF IS THIS $HIT?!?!?!??!?!  Come on!  How was anyone able to sit through this deposition without laughing their a$$es off?  

Let's recap, knowing how important it is for the witness to be read the instructions for the photo lineup, the pride and joy of the MDPD's Mortgage Fraud Task Force forgets to read the instructions to the witness.  Ok, moving on, Detective Baluja conducts another photo lineup where he's trying to get co defendant Michael Martinez to identify attorney Delaila Estefano's photo out of a lineup of six photos, they consist of the following photos:

1. photo of an unknown woman
2. photo of a coworker named Danny
3. photo of female coworker
4. photo of witnesses fiance
5. photo of at least one other male
6. photo of attorney Delaila Estefano

Now, how hard would it be to pick out the female attorney from this line up?  Let's see, you're asked to identify a female from six photos, at least two of the photos are of males, so now that leaves you with four photos to choose from.  From those four, one of them is a female coworker and the other is your FCUKING FIANCE!  Now you're left with two, an unknown dark skinned woman and lastly the female attorney that the Detective wants you to identify.  Could this be the most flawed photo lineup in the history of the MDPD?!  WTF IS THIS $HIT!?  ANYONE?  There could only be one photo line up that could be worse than this, let's take a stab at it and see if we can find which one is Mr. Bernardo Barrera from this group of six photos...

Hmmm...  That's a tough one isn't it?  Funny isn't it?  Not really when you consider that the photo lineups that Detective Baluja ran were almost as bad as this one or maybe worse?  At least our lineup consists of all males!  The level of incompetence exhibited by Detective Jorge Baluja throughout his career would be hilarious if not for the fact that his piss poor police work destroys the lives of the poor innocent people that he victimizes.  Unfortunately for the people that we've been writing about, Detective Baluja has met his match in the state attorneys office, a person far more incompetent than himself, a person whose actions are far more egregious than his.  We'll discuss him a little later on, trust me on that.

Revisiting the mortgage fraud case from yesterday and more rumors about the MDPD command staff...

We discussed a mortgage fraud story yesterday that didn't make any sense to either us or the poor guy that got arrested.  The story came to us in the form of an email and got our curiosity going so we went down to the Miami Dade County Criminal courthouse to see what was in the case file in order to get a better understanding of what the case was about.  Unfortunately after reading the arrest affidavit, we got more confused.  See for yourselves, as always, click on the image for a larger view...

Let's break it down...

On the above date, the victims advised that they attended a closing for the sale of their home located at 610 NW 184 Terr at HRH title service.  The victims stated that they contacted the Co-Def in regards to helping them sell their home.  At some point during the sales process, the Co-Def approached the Def and asked if the company he works at was interested in this mortgage transaction.  The def (stated during previous interview) that he could not get the loan approved by his lender so he referred the Co-Def to another Co-Def (mortgage broker) at Syracuse Capital Management.

Ok, the report identifies a Defendant (the man who's email we discussed yesterday) and then identifies two co defendants, one that could possibly be a realtor (who else would help the victims sell their home?) while the other co defendant is identified as being a "mortgage broker". 

The def stated at the previous interview that he was paid $1500.00 by the Co-Def (Syracuse Capital Management) for sending him this fraudulent mortgage transaction.  The interview was stopped and the Def was advised of his Miranda Rights at which time he decided he wanted an attorney. 

There's nothing wrong with a broker getting a commission for referring a loan, it happens all the time.  Why the hell would this trigger the Detective to Mirandize the poor guy?  Why the hell shouldn't he ask for an attorney at this point?!  Oh, I forgot how our favorite mortgage fraud detective responds to people "lawyering up"!

When the victims arrived at the closing on November 15, 2007, also present at the closing was the Def and the Co-Def's, they were presented with paperwork stating that the house was selling for $280,000.  Once the victim questioned the Co-Def in regards to the fraudulently inflated sales price of the home the Co-def stated not to worry because you are getting what you wanted for your house ($160,000). 

This is starting to sound a little hokey right around here.

After the paperwork was signed, the Co-Def instructed the Def and Co-Def to accompany the victim to his bank and to obtain two checks from the fraudulently obtained proceeds.  The Co-Def stated to the Def and Co-Def to make sure that one of the two checks that would be obtained from the victim could not be traced back to "PETER"  The Co-Def then asked who would be taking the second victim to the bank at which time another Co-Def stated that he would be.

Have you all started to cry yet?  Can you understand what the hell is going on here?  If we're reading right, we now have the Defendant, Co-Def who was helping the victims sell their home (perhaps a realtor?), a second co-def (who may have been previously referenced as the "mortgage broker"?), a third Co-Def who is simply referred to as "another Co-Def" and a fourth person simply referred to as "Peter".  Moving along... 

The victims advised that the Def & Co-Def's followed them to their respective banks in order to have them withdraw $50,265.84 that was obtained, via a wire transfer of $109,307.41, from HRH Title Service.  When the Def & Co-Def's arrived at the banks with the victims the funds were available and the victims withdrew the money.  One victim had it split into two different checks.  Both checks were made payable to the Co-Def on in the amount of $28,000 and other for $22,265.84.  Upon receiving the checks from the victim the Def & Co-Def left the bank. 

Ok,  so defendant so far has followed one of the two "victims" to a bank while a Co-Def picked up two checks totaling $50,265.84.

The second victim stated that she provided another Co-Def with one check from her bank for $50,265.84.  That Co-Def then left the bank.  The Co-Def deposited both checks he received into an account at another bank bearing his name.

The victim provides a check for $50,265.84 to ANOTHER Co-Def?!  HUH?!  Now I'm really confused, let's take a quick inventory of the people involved in this report.  Here we go:

1- Victim #1 who was selling their half of their marital home.
2- Victim #2 who was selling their half of their marital home.
3- Defendant, this is the man that was the subject of this arrest affidavit and who emailed us his story.
4- Co-Defendant #1 who was "helping the victims sell their home", perhaps a realtor.
5- Co-Defendant #2 who was identified as being a "mortgage broker"
6- Co-Defendant #3 he's not identified, we have no idea what his role was.
7- A man simply identified as "Peter".
8- Co-Defendant #4 the man who was given a check by the victims for $50,265.84.

One of these Co Defendants (not #8) received two checks totaling $50,265.84.  Ok, is that clear?  Does that make sense?

What in the fcuk is that ?!  Can anyone make any sense of that affidavit?!  We've identified at least six "defendants" in this report, we know one was the man who was the subject of the report, so accoring to that narrative there should be at least five other people labled as Co Defendants on the report right?  Let's take a look...

WHAT?!  Just one other Co Defendant?!  WTF is this $hit?!  Can any of our esteemed readers figure out what the hell is going on in this case?  Does it sound plausable that the "victims" just handed over $100,531.68 just for $hits and grins?  Even worse, from what we've been able to find, the only person arrested in this case was the poor guy who denied the loan and referred it to another mortgage company!

Hey pride and joy of the Mortgage Fraud Task Force, Detective Jorge Baluja, WHAT ABOUT ARRESTING THE BUYER WHO HAD TO BE IN ON THIS "FRAUD"!?  What about the mortgage broker?  How about arresting the guy who deposited the $100,531.68 from the "victims" in his bank account?!  What about investigating a possible link between the buyer and the seller?!  Or even better, if there was a realtor involved (or as you describe him in your report the man who was "helping the victims sell their home") wouldn't they have some explaining to do about why the sales price went from $160,000 to $280,000?  After all, the REALTORS SIGNATURE HAD TO HAVE BEEN ON THE CONTRACT!  WTF?!  

Can you believe this $hit?!  While the leaders of the Mortgage Fraud Task Force are giving their press conferences, holding their meetings and hyping their achievements, who the hell is watching what their underlings are doing?  In this case their detectives arrested a poor guy and permanently altered the course of his life with this arrest affidavit that doesn't even make sense!  How many times do you have to read this incoherent document before you realize that it's author must have been either drunk or stoned when they were writing it?!  Does it seem like the Detective investigating this transaction had any idea what he was doing?  Before we get all carried away and blow a gasket, let's not forget that the author was none other than Detective Jorge Baluja...

Enough of that for now.  Based on our blog comments from the last two days and some anonymous emails we've received, it seems like there is a major shake up going on in the command staff of the MDPD.  We learned last week that Major Bernie Gonzalez from the MDPD Training Bureau abruptly and unexpectedly retired.  The Herald broke the news about the Chief of the Centralized Services Division, Frank Vecin being demoted and our sources (unconfirmed as of yet) have told us that MDPD Chief Legal Counsel Glenn Theobald has also abruptly retired.  Now we're hearing rumors of Assistant Director Oscar Vigoa being shown the door as well and some no nonsense Feds from DC overseeing an investigation into how money in the MDPD has been spent over the last few years.  What's going on at the MDPD?  At the very least it looks like Director James Loftus is cleaning house and is wasting no time doing so.  We're waiting with bated breath for updates on the shake up at the PD and will update the blog accordingly.

MDPD top cop, Glenn Theobald in trouble? Was the leader of the "Fraud Squad" forced to retire??

Say it ain't so!!!  That's right, Glenn Theobald, chief legal counsel for the MDPD and the creator and head of the MDPD Mortgage Fraud Task force is in hot water over the misspending of monies set aside by the federal government in a trust fund for the MDPD to go after people committing environmental crimes.  We learned a few weeks ago that Mr. Theobald had authorized the purchase of some rather strange items that I suppose the MDPD intended to use for the purpose of fighting environmental crime, when he was called to task for authorizing the trust fund money to be spent on these items, he made a quick about face in the form of a memo rescinding a previous memo where he OK'd the purchases:

"This memorandum rescinds the previous opinion regarding your memo to this writer...trust fund monies in the account can only be used to further environmental investigations...A direct nexus with the expenditure and the furtherance of environmental investigations is required...Any other interpretation was mistaken due to the information provided at the time the memorandum was presented."

I suppose that wasn't good enough, since both Mr. Theobald and the man that was the head of the MDPD environmental crimes investigation unit, Frank Vecin were both reassigned from their posts by MDPD Director James Loftus last week (according to Jim DeFede of WFOR).  What difference does it make to us?  In the case of Mr. Vecin, it makes none, but what about Mr. Theobald, the head of the Mortgage Fraud Task Force and the MDPD chief legal counsel?  Where does he go?  Let's see what an online source tells us regarding this matter...

"Theobald will be gone in 30 days. He was allowed to retire in lieu of a demotion as the Major of Crime Scene."

OH SNAP!  While that statement should be considered nothing more than rumor at this point, it certainly does sound plausible.  If indeed it is true, we're sure the MDPD will quickly find another attorney to fill his spot as chief legal counsel, but who's going to take over his position as the head of the Mayors Mortgage Fraud Task Force?!  After all, the task force was Mr. Theobald's pet project, the vehicle with which he gained national press coverage.  So what now?  Who's going to be the new leader of the "Fraud Squad"?  

Considering how the top brass at the MDPD misspent the millions of dollars set aside for the prosecution of environmental crimes, what's going to happen with the $50,000,000 of federal money that the Mortgage Fraud Task Force was supposed to get over the next five years?  From what we've read, Mr. Theobald has been lobbying Uncle Sam incessantly over the last three years for tens of millions of dollars of funding for his Mortgage Fraud Task Force, you have to wonder considering what's gone on with the green fund money if anyone has looked into how the mortgage fraud money has been spent?  

Our hats are off to the new director of the MDPD, Mr. James Loftus for getting to the bottom of this mess and taking swift action.  It's about time the citizens of Dade county had someone in the PD that was serious about cleaning up corruption within the department.  Consider for a moment though, since we started our story, the lead detective in one of our mortgage fraud stories get's taken off a headline case and demoted to auto theft, a veteran economic crimes prosecutor get's taken off the same headline case and now, the head of the Mayor's heralded Mortgage Fraud task force may have lost his job.  Strange times.

UPDATE HERE!

Lying cop comes clean and WTF are "Brady Cops"?

Somehow our story that started with a simple mortgage fraud case has morphed into a convoluted tale that ranges from the sloppy investigative skills of the lead detective on a headline mortgage fraud case to the less than stellar performance from a "veteran" prosecutor.  Its saddening to see cops and prosecutors misbehaving as its these very people that have sworn an oath to uphold the laws that govern the citizenry, its that much more disheartening when they are the ones on the wrong side of the law.  I came across this article regarding a veteran police officer from New Orleans that was accused of shooting six people and killing two that were searching for food during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.  From the article...

Michael Lohman, a 21-year veteran of the force, pleaded guilty to a charge of conspiracy to obstruct justice. Prosecutors said Lohman and other unidentified officers conspired to fabricate witness statements, falsify reports of the incident and plant a gun in an attempt to make it appear the killings were justified.

Simply unforgivable, yet the terms "fabricating witness statements" and "falsify reports of the incident" aren't foreign to us or Detective Baluja now are they?  What are we left with if we can't trust the very cops whose job it is to protect and serve the citizenry?  If a cops got a history of lying or "bending the truth", can he possibly be of any use as a police officer?  Cops that have a history of lying are known as "Brady Cops", that name comes from a landmark Supreme Court case from 1963 called Brady v. Maryland.  From what we've been able to glean from this case, apparently a prosecutor is required to disclose to the defendent and their attorneys if a law enforcement officer involved in their case has a record of knowingly lying in their official capacity.  That's interesting isn't it?  I think we've illustrated more than enough evidence of Detective Baluja being somewhat less than honest haven't we?  I wonder if any such disclosures were made regarding Detective Baluja during any of the cases he's been involved in?

 This "Brady Rule" has another critical component as well, from the definition:

1. Duty to Disclose: The landmark decision of Brady v Maryland (1963) places an affirmative constitutional duty on a prosecutor to disclose exculpatory evidence to a defendant. This duty has been extended to police agencies through case law, requiring law enforcement agencies to notify the prosecutor of any potential exculpatory information.
2. Exculpatory Evidence/Brady Material: Evidence in the government’s possession that is favorable to the accused and that is material to either guilt or punishment, including evidence that may impact the credibility of a witness.

No kidding?  What if you're stuck in a situation with a prosecutor like Mr. Kostrzewski who likes to play hide and go seek with the evidence?  We find this document that we found in the Bernardo Barrera Mortgage Fraud case file most interesting...

 

The fourth motion to compel the state to produce discovery?  Nice!  From the same motion...

 

"Despite repeated requests and multiple court orders, the state has failed to provide Mr. Martinez's statements...."  

Why?  There's more of the same throughout this motion, we find this quote most notable...

"The states lackluster effort in complying with its discovery obligations is delaying the discovery process and delaying the defense investigation."

So what kind of nonsense is this?  From what we've seen in the case file, it looks like ASA Bill Kostrzewski has been playing hide and go seek with evidence for well over a year, what gives here?  Aren't the defendants in this case entitled to this evidence?  What happened to due process?  What kind of games are being played here?  Is this the cowardly strategy employed by inept prosecutors who try to drag cases on for years on end in hope that the defendants will throw their hands up and cut a plea?  If so, that's a really $hitty strategy Bill, unfair, unethical and immoral.  We'll leave off with a guest commentators opinion of Mr. Kostrzewski's behavior in this case...

Have a great weekend!

From gibberish to eloquence...

Yesterday we took a look at some random samples of how Detective Jorge Baluja spoke during his depositions in the Bernardo Barrera mortgage fraud case.  I'm sure you all were as surprised as I was listening to Mr. Baluja fumbling through those depositions spewing at times pure gibberish from his mouth.  Maybe the Detective has trouble speaking, perhaps he's a better writer?  Let's take a look at some of Detective Baluja's writing as it appears in one the arrest affidavits that he prepared for the Barrera mortgage fraud case...

From the affidavit...

What?!  "Your affiant"?  "In this capacity ...concerning identity theft"?  This hardly sounds like the guy who said:

"I didn't read them straight from the -- verbatim of the page, no, I didn't."

Let's look further...

 Really?  "purchased the same home for $185,000.00 from a Maxine Andrews and other grantors..."  No kidding?!  Does this sound like it came from the same man who said...

"It's a recorder that has the listening, so you can put it in your ear while you talk."

 

That doesn't seem right now does it?  Some how something seems off kilter here.  Let's look at one last excerpt from the arrest affidavit...

No kidding?  "earnest money"?  "induce the lender"?  That's rather nice considering the man who "supposedly" wrote that arrest affidavit gave us this gem...

"that's what she wrote in the writing"

You know what I think folks?  I've discussed our theory regarding the state prepared documentation that's in the case file before.  Unless Detective Baluja is some sort of idiot savant who can't speak yet can write as eloquently as we've seen in the arrest affidavit then there is something else going on.  Boy's and girls, I'm going to propose something ground breaking here, something that if true will land one of the major players in the Barrera mortgage fraud in a HEAP OF TROUBLE.  I'm going to suggest that the state prepared paperwork in the case file was not prepared by Detective Baluja, I believe that someone else wrote everything that's in there.  Now don't get me wrong, I'm sure the Detective had some input into what was written and was perhaps present when some of the documents were written, but I'm almost sure that he wasn't the author of said documents.  That's huge folks.  We'll look closer tomorrow...


As our loyal readers have noticed, we didn't make a post on Monday, too much happening in the real world and I just couldn't make the time to sit down and write.  Don't worry though, plenty to write about over the next few months (trust me) and in case you were worried, just because we miss a post here and there doesn't mean that we aren't keeping an eye on what's going on...