Saturday, March 21, 2009

What Came After ACGA, Part I

    The events that have previously been chronicled pretty much covers what happened leading up the writing of Another Case of Gov Abuse (ACGA) on December 8, 2003. I had always intended to update that site, but things just got away from me between work and all of the issues created by what happened next.
    We were informed within days of my posting ACGA that [*] had once again reasserted her allegation (on December 9, 2003, if I recall correctly) against me. I did not find out until months later what the actual contents of that re-assertion entailed, but it represented yet another change in the specifics of the allegation.
    Just as a reminder, [*] changed the details of her story several times. Though she has continued to maintain that this allegedly only happened one time for a period of some ten or twenty seconds, she has never been consistent on exactly what happened and in what sequence. Her first story, told to Carrie Beth Mountjoy and [*] (now [*]) over the phone the night of July 9, 2003, was that I had supposedly put one hand (unspecified which) up her shirt, that she pulled it out, then I supposedly put the same hand down her pants. By the time she got to the police station that evening, it had only been one hand (my right, which had allegedly been on top of her) down her pants only, until the officer prompted her about the up the shirt part, at which point [*] added that that had also happened a few seconds before the pants incident, but by my left hand (which she was lying on) and that I specifically touched both of her breasts (keep in mind - it is physically impossible for the human arm to move in a ninety degree up and down fashion when held immobile beneath a body; in order for me to have physically touched both breasts, it would have required an action that defied the laws of physics). When Edith Paxman made the multiple observations of inconsistencies in [*]'s story, she added details that ultimately led to [*] claiming I may have been asleep, which is what ultimately led to the initial police investigation being halted in July, 2003, and closed by September 4, 2003 (the CFS investigation was thereafter closed on September 15, 2003, after the police department confirmed their investigation was closed). Later in October, 2003, [*] recanted the entire allegation when her mom ([*]) confronted her with the fact that her details matched exactly an assault [*] had witnessed happen to [*] when [*] was three years old.
All of these changes should have been sufficient to impeach [*] later on, but of course, the attorney assigned to me by the local authorities (my so-called public defender, Ed Falla) refused to try to impeach [*]'s credibility at trial.
    When [*] reasserted her allegation in December, 2003, she changed critical details. In an effort to remove the physically impossibility of her claim made to police on July 9, 2003, [*] now insisted that it had been the hand beneath her that had been put down her pants and that the hand on top of her went up her shirt, touching only one breast. To counter her signed affidavit recanting her original allegation, [*] insisted that I had written the statement solely on my own and forced her to sign it.
    Incidentally, months later Carrie Beth was interviewed and confirmed that she was, in fact, present during the preparation of the affidavit and that I had in no way visibly threatened nor intimidated [*] to say or do anything. Later, when [*] was asked what she would say if Carrie Beth had made such a statement, [*] flatly said that Carrie Beth would be lying. I have already provided extensive details of [*]'s history of deception and lying, so I do not feel I really need to comment too much on which of the two should be believed. However, I should note that during her interview, Carrie Beth made it pretty clear that she no longer supported my innocence and that she was now inclined to believe whatever the authorities said I had done. This was also sprinkled with statements like, "I can't believe he fooled me since I'm usually a much better judge of character..." and such. But the point here is that even though Carrie Beth had decided to go along with any story that would not put herself in harm's way, and that she was clearly not a supporter of mine, she still verified the details I had provided to the letter. Carrie Beth collaborated my version of events and [*]'s should have been impeached quite readily - again, save for Ed Falla's refusal to impeach the credibility of [*].
    Well, I will continue this thread more tomorrow. I have other things to type up this morning.
    Ciao for now.

Ron Glick
Political Prisoner since 2004

No comments:

Post a Comment