Re: IMPRISONED FOR "DRIVING A NICE CAR IN A BAD NEIGHBORHOOD

More | Report Post

That must have been one fine car you were driving if they sent you
to prison for it. It's a d*amn good thing they didn't find drugs or
a gun on you or you would have REALLY been in trouble.

On 7/25/08, JAP wrote:
> On 7/25/08, Curmudgeon wrote:
>> You're not going to be able to find much help on this board or
>> any sympathy from any court if you're not truthful. In your
>> original post you said, "The trial attorney was "told not to
>>>> defend" as per direct testimony." Now you're saying there
>> was no testimony--direct or otherwise. So, which is it? Why
>> don't you share that relevant part of the trial transcript? Or,
>> are you saying that the attorney did not challenge any exhibits,
>> cross-examine any witnesses, or make any arguments on your
>> behalf?
>>
>> On 7/25/08, JAP wrote:
>>> On 7/25/08, Curmudgeon wrote:
>>>> And just who was it that gave direct testimony that he/she
>>>> personally told your attorney not to defend you? And why
>>>> was your attorney taking directions from anyone except you?
>>>>
>>>> On 7/25/08, JAP wrote:
>>>>> Accoeding to police testimony I was initially pulled over
>>>>> because of "driving a nice car in a bad neighborhood".
>>>>> The evidence used was not turned in until three (3) days
>>>>> after incarceration. The trial attorney was "told not to
>>>>> defend" as per direct testimony. Soooo...what is the
>>>>> problem here?
>>>
>>> The attorney did not say exactly who told him not to defend.
>>> However there is recorded testimony of the admission. There
>>> are also two witnesses. Is this someone who can help?
>>> I have filed an application for writ of habeas corpus.
>
> I am saying that he was "told not to defend" according to his (the
> attorney) testimony. I am not aware of who told him not to defend.
> When the testimony of the police officers came into the trial of
> stopping me because of "driving a nice car in a bad
> neighborhood". He did nothing to challenge with no probable
> cause. Thus making this whole episode a gross miscarrage of
> american justice, which can be proven through the trial
> transcripts. The appointed attorney testified, after the trial was
> over, with two agents present. of him being told not to
> defend...recorded on cassette tapes. Could this be conspiracy or
> even railroading???