 |
Wisconsin's Evidence Preservation statute is a focus of
Steven Avery wrongful conviction litigation. |
Updated - A judicial ruling last week is widely misreported as 'Avery loses right to appeal.' Wrong.
The circuit court stop was a necessary procedural step in which the case was heard in front of the
corrupt Judge Angela Sutkiewicz. Now, the case will be appealed to state appellate court, as Steven Avery's legal team indicated last Spring, the same appellate court that granted Avery's request to remand the case to circuit court. The question facing Avery was how long Sutkiewicz was going to take to issue her corrupt
decision and order.
Sutkiewicz works backwards. Judicial result first, then draft an order and
opinion to support the position of corrupt Wisconsin law enforcement.
Wisconsin police did not frame Steveny Avery in a vacuum. Law enforcement did so in a terrain in which police misconduct and criminality are protected in the state judiciary.
See April 21, 2019, for example:
The prosecution led by
Attorney General Joshua Kaul (D) is employing the legal services of corrupt state attorneys including
Mark Williams, Asst Attorney General and Special Prosecutor Thomas J. Fallon, and Special Prosecutor Norman Gahn.
Madison, Wisconsin — A
ruling handed down in early August
in Manitowoc County Circuit Court is an adverse ruling for Steven
Avery, the protagonist in Wisconsin's Making a Murderer
post-conviction litigation.
The ruling was widely expected. The
Aug 8 decision and order in online here.
This case will be decided in appellate court.
Judge Angela W. Sutkiewicz again failed to schedule any proceedings though Sutkiewicz was ordered in a
Feb 25, 2019 state appellate court ruling to "conduct any proceedings necessary to address the claims raised in the supplemental postconviction motion ... ."
Attorney Kathleen Zellner file an explosive
motion Jan 24, 2019 seeking a hearing because the
Calumet County Sheriff's Office secretly transferred evidence, the remains of a murder victim,
Teresa Halbach, to private custody in 2011, in violation of
state statutes that govern
preservation of physical evidence collected, subject to criminal investigations, (
Avery Legal Filings).
"[T]he State, in its response to Mr. Avery's motion, makes no effort to deny the due process violations Mr. Avery alleges, i.e., that the State concealed a police report, failed to give statutorily-mandated notice to Mr. Avery and his attorneys of its intent to destroy biological evidence, then facilitated the destruction of the same evidence. The State should not now reap the benefit of its past statutory and due process violations. Such an outcome would contravene the sense of basic fairness inherent in our justice system.," writes Zellner in a
Feb 1 legal filing.
Judge Sutkiewicz divined that the State destruction of evidence accomplished
by a conspiracy that includes two of the DoJ attorneys now defending the
conviction in post-conviction litigation was done in good faith.
Sutkiewicz also determined what the state purported to be a murder victim's remains was not
scientifically established as a murder victim's remains, hence the State
may secretly destroy the evidence, and the defendant has no recourse.
The State previously suggested to the Court in its Dec. 28, 2018 filing
that Avery and Zellner drop their appeal without the State ever having
"admitted or disclosed that it had given the bones back to the Halbach
family in 2011 without notice to Mr. Avery or his counsel," notes
Zellner in her Feb. 1 legal filing.
In other words, law enforcement may hide evidence it claims is a murder victim, destroy this evidence, hide the destruction, then claim the evidence cannot be determined to be exculpatory.
Good enough for Judge
Sutkiewicz who acknowledges what Zellner uncovered.
Writes
Sutkiewicz: "The report of Deputy [Jeremy] Hawkins indicates that he, Sergeant
Investigator Mark Wiegert, Attorney Thoman Fallon and Attorney Norman
Gahn removed materials stored in evidence, and released them to the
Halbach family," (
p 2).
---
Can you imagine if Fallon and Gahn had to explain themselves as witnesses in open court, had Sutkiewicz held proceedings to determine the status of claims of potential exculpatory value of the remains that law enforcement illegally destroyed? How about an examination of Fallon and Gahn's motives to determine good faith?
Wisconsin
Attorney General Joshua Kaul continues to allow these two DoJ attorneys who
disregarded Wisconsin's Evidence Preservation statute to argue this post-conviction case, though their
conduct is suspect and worthy of a criminal investigation in itself.
Judge Angela W. Sutkiewicz covered for Thoman Fallon and Norman
Gahn, who along with a host of Wisconsin law enforcement are a criminal element.
In the coming weeks, the Wisconsin population may learn what a
Brady motion violation is, and
why the
state's Brady violations should also result in vacating this
wrongful conviction.
Further, as the Wisconsin DoJ and local law enforcement are incapable of policing themselves, surely a FBI probe is needed here in Wisconsin.
