Written Decision on Andrew Thomas

Unfortunately, the investigation into Andrew Thomas's corruption and abuse of power did not include the cover ups and misconduct by him in the investigation of Mark. However, I still watched and read with glee as this dangerous and arrogant man was stripped of harming anyone else from a position of power. Because  of his unwillingness to admit his wrongdoing, he will probably never meet the ethical standards to reinstate his license to practice law. Thank goodness.

Popularity may make a person admired, but it does not make one honorable. Power may give a person influence, but it does not make one trustworthy. Authority may give a person control, but it does not make one dependable.

. . .  is how the Andrew Thomas is depicted in this scathing written decision.  This prosecution of Andrew Thomas was unprecedented in history.

Here, from the written decision, are only some of the other descriptions of Thomas and his completely bankrupt code of ethics.

He was equaled to ousted and criminally prosecuted Carolina District Attorney Michael Nifong:

. . . North Carolina District Attorney Michael Nifong, resulting in his disbarment for his conduct regarding the Duke University lacrosse case is not ancient history.

. . . growing, profound arrogance or a supreme confidence that his (Thomas) power had no boundaries. Perhaps because of his might he believed he was right. Clearly the startling absence of any evidence in these prosecutions did not hinder the flex of that power.

Unshackled, a treacherous power to “get” people, regardless of the fact that they were innocent, was set loose.  The result is unmistakable from the hundreds of exhibits and the mountains of transcripts within this case.

There was an intentional abandonment of even a semblance of true investigative techniques.

Motivated by such declared revelation they compounded their corruption by embracing duplicity, deceitfulness and deception. . . . They ignored the law and rules to achieve their objective.

They ignored the law and rules to achieve their objective.

A gaping void was opened in the life of the people of Maricopa County where any citizen’s rights could be burned as part of the maintenance of this fake conspiracy.

This case is regrettable proof that the absence of ethical behavior fuels uncontrollable actions.

He was willing to shear away the Constitution from citizens of this country to accomplish his goals

They never looked for evidence, because they always knew there was none.

Respondents Thomas and Aubuchon joined hands to inflict an economic blizzard on that public and multiple individuals which is paled only by the intentional infliction of emotional devastation their icy calculated storm left in its wake. That harm is irrefutable, yet still finds Respondents without a shred of remorse.

Mr. Thomas discerned he had in Ms. Aubuchon someone all too willing to do whatever was necessary to hammer his opponents, real or imagined, into submission.

You can read the decision in its entirety here.

Mark's Recorded Phone and Jail Conversations - Over 1800!

Five years of recorded daily phone calls and recorded jail visit conversations that occurred 3 times a week, all recorded.  Five years worth of recorded conversations.  That would be over 1800 recorded conversations! If Mark were guilty of any of the Baseline crimes, surely he would have said something, sometime incriminating if he had any involvement.  Humans can’t help but talk. It’s how we’re wired.  But Mark, since he did not commit any of these crimes; therefore no knowledge of these crimes, what incriminating thing could he say?  The answer, of course, is nothing!  Which is why not a single conversation was used by the State at trial.  Not one.

An Open Letter to DPS DNA Analyst, Lorraine Heath

There’s a new sheriff in town and it’s not Judge Klein. This is a whole new round with a respected judge that will not be led by the nose by the prosecutors. Judge Granville is by the book and has little patience for prosecutor Ms. Cohen and her antics.

As for your 2007 DNA testimony, there are many more people who now have their eyes and ears to this case. In fact, Chromosomal Labs observed your testimony in the 2007 trial and, as a result, approached Mark’s defense team to provide their lab and services for FREE. Yes, for FREE.

You might ask, what compelled Chromosomal to do this with such an enormous, high profile case? You see, ordinary citizens do not understand the complex nature of the DNA and they accepted your testimony as the gold standard, only because they didn’t understand. But those in the DNA industry roll their eyes at you and your questionable practices. They do not hold you in high regard. In fact, quite the contrary.  And there are some in the DNA industry who will not stand by while you railroad an innocent man simply for monetary gain and status.

Maybe it was your limited DNA experience that made you cocky. Your newness. Or maybe it was just for pure gain, but whatever your motives, there are qualified scientists and experts who know how far out of line you are.

This is a different courtroom, with different attorneys and experts, and the game has changed.

Blog of Shame

July Wrap Up

Court is out for two weeks and resumes August 1.

Based on some of the highlights from the previous weeks I’ve created the Blog of Shame. Anyone who lies on the stand will be added to the Blog of Shame.

Blog of Shame
Alejandra and Lorena Lara Do It Again
It was bad enough when Lorena Lara, at a hearing in 2007, picked out “the third guy” at the table as her attacker and that “third guy” being one of Mark’s attorney, Cary Lackey. But now at the current trial both Lorena and Alejandra Lara pick out the guy in the “green jacket.” Mark was wearing a tan suit. I guess prosecutor Suzanne Cohen is color blind since she coached these two on the wrong color.

Blog of Shame
Dic Mike and Heather Polombo
The last place dics dorks Mike and Heather Polombo wanted to be was on the stand. They reluctantly answered questions under cross examination about the 2nd search (1st search with a warrant) and the warrant directive to seize all and every men’s shoes. Both Polombo’s had integral parts of this search.

The reason this is important is that two searches and one month later is when they supposedly “found” a victim’s ring in one of Mark’s shoes, out in the open on a small 2 level shoe against a wall. If Polombos where to seize all and every shoe, how would they have missed it? Because it wasn’t there. The ring wasn’t there until Alex Femenia and Mike Mieshlish put it there on the last and 4th search.

You can read more about the two knucklehead Polombos at http://badphoenixcops.blogspot.com/. BadPhoenixCops.com is not affiliated with this blog but is a site where good cops can blog anonymously about bad cops. Just do a keyword search for Polombo.

Blog of Shame
Iselda Hernandez is Not Honest on the Stand
Iselda, a victim from the Ponchos robbery, on the stand, under oath, changes her original statement to the police about not being able to ID the suspect from the robbery. The following is from the police report dated 9/6/06.

ON 9-6-06 AT 2335 HOURS, DETECTIVE ROE AND I ASKED ISELDA IF SHE COULD IDENTIFY THE SUSPECT IN THIS CASE. ISELDA SAID SHE COULD NOT COMPLETELY IDENTIFY HIM BECAUSE SHE HAS NOT SEEN HIM FOR SOME TIME.

Iselda did point to Mark’s picture in a photo lineup after saying most of the others in the lineup were too old (Mark was 42 so how old were the other guys in the photos?) But she said she was not positive and that she really couldn’t remember.

Yet she testified at the trial a couple of weeks ago that she positively ID’d Mark as the suspect. When she’s questioned under cross, Iselda finally confesses she can’t remember. Funny how people’s memories lapse once they’re reminded what they told police originally.

From the police report:
I ASKED ISELDA WHAT MAKES NUMBER FOUR STAND OUT TO HER. SHE SAID THE MUSTACHE AND THE LITTLE GOATEE. . . . . ISELDA SAID SHE WAS NOT SURE IT WAS THE SUSPECT OR NOT. . . . ISELDA COULD NOT PROVIDE ANY FURTHER INFORMATION. THE INTERVIEW ENDED AT 233 9 HOURS.

Not a single victim has identified Mark as their attacker. Victim’s descriptions are typically of a much smaller (5’5”-5’8”; 140-180 lbs) younger, man (17-30). Mark is 6 ft and well over 200 lbs and is in his forties.

Media Hype vs The Facts

Trial is to begin early June. We’ll be relieved to get the true facts into open court. The media has done they’re usual job of sensationalizing and hyping, misrepresenting the facts, and portraying Mark as a monster. For those of you who unfortunately rely on local media to educate yourselves here are some facts you’ll never read there:

By far, the majority of the suspect descriptions by victims is a smallish man, 25 -35 years old. Mark is a large man who wears XXL, big and barrel chested. He was 43 when he was arrested in 2006.   He’s too old, he’s too big, but he is just Black enough.

Mark is excluded from every single crime scene latent print.

Not only is the DNA NEVER a match to Mark’s DNA, in some of the cases it is environmentally impossible for there to be any useable DNA evidence. The State will not be allowed to use the term “match” in court when referring to the DNA.

Many, many, many pieces of DNA evidence EXCLUDES Mark. Not inconclusive findings – he is excluded completely!

Not a single witness has ID’d Mark.  There is this one women who has been coached by the prosecutors all these years later. Judge Granville in open court advised Mark’s attorneys to simply impeach her. BTW – Prosecutor Susanne Cohen called defense attorney, Randy Craig, and told him they have reconsidered their strategy since the woman, in Cohen’s words, is mentally challenged.

The Baseline task team – Alex Femenia, Mike Misliesh, Mike Polombo, Heather Polombo; prosecutors Suzanne Cohen, William Clayton, Patty Stevens; County Attorney’s office Andrew Thomas, Keith Manning, and others concealed a nearly 200 page police report on Terry Wayne Smith since 2006. They didn’t wan to give Mark an alibi and withheld this report when he went to trial in 2007. Mark’s defense team was made aware of the report only after I was approached by a contact close to Phoenix Police Department in 2009.

Mark called a Nigger by members of the task team. I’m told specifically by Alex Femanie. Read the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association’s memo here. It also includes an officer's remark that it would be “no surprise if evidence had been planted.”

PLANTING EVIDENCE AND COVER UPS Through anonymous sources at the Phoenix Police Department Mark's defense team was notified of another viable suspect, Terry Wayne Smith, which PPD had tried to cover up by sitting on this information since 2006. They even went as far as converting it from the usual electronic format into Word. A Word document in the PPD's electronic retrieval system is virtually impossible to retrieve.

An extensive investigation was done on Smith by a gang squad officer and it was determined he is responsible for the BK crimes. Police reports show he's even admitted to some of the crimes.

So what does PPD, prosecutors, Suzanne Cohen, Patty Stevens, and William Clayton, Andrew Thomas, police chief Jack Harris, Mayer Phil Gordon, and other city officials do? They attempt to cover up the evidence! Had it not been for internal anonymous PPD sources, Mark's defense team may have never learned of this cover up. But the team did and filed a subpoena for the extensive 100+ page police investigation on Smith and unscrupulous prosecutors, Cohen and Clayton, were forced to produce the 3-ring binder in court, March 20, 2009. Only after being caught and forced! In an attempt to CHA, Cohen remarked in court "we have no position on this." In other words, now caught in the act of hiding clearly exonerating evidence for Mark, she felt that if she took NO position, that her hide might be saved from the actions of her malicious behavior. But wait! Cohen also said at the hearing that the TWS report was not exculpatory. In another desperate attempt of trying to save her skin Cohen prattles on that she just got the TWS report.

So which is it Cohen did you just get it? Do you have no position on it? Or is it not in Mark's favor so you didn't feel compelled to turn it over? And BTW it's not the prosecutor's decision whethere discovery is exclupatory or not, it's up to the judge. So ALL DISCOVERY must be turned over regardless of what the prosecutor thinks.

Prosecutor Suzanne E. Cohen (coyote ugly, unscrupulous,
immoral, and bucking for a judge position off the back of Mark Goudeau)

Now the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association (PLEA) has revealed that there are more cover ups. Again from anonymous sources within Phoenix Police, that it is highly likely evidence was planted in Mark's case. In this letter to Joe Arpio from PLEA President, Mark Spencer, there are even comments from lieutenants and sergeants in the Violent Crimes Bureau referring to Mark as a N--R! CLICK HERE to view Police Supervisor's comments on "planting evidence."