Archive for the ‘even more made up facts’ Category

After presiding over the suppression hearing and issuing a first order denying suppression, McCracken Circuit Court judge Hon. Craig Clymer issued a second order setting aside the first order and substituting this one for it. Here is that second order:

Supplemental Suppression Order

It gets better. After the completion of the trial and after the conviction, Hon. Craig Clymer issued a third order supplementing the second order denying suppression, with additional findings of fact and conclusions of law. Here is the third order:

Supplemental Suppression Order

Judge Clymer states that McGuire did not conduct a stop of my vehicle.

See if you agree. Here is McGuire’s Uniform Citation:

Uniform Offense Report

Pretty clear that McGuire fell in behind my vehicle and stopped it.

Then there’s this:

where McGuire said that he stopped my vehicle, and there’s this:

where McGuire talked openly about stopping my vehicle on a hunch.

But the kicker is that in the suppression hearing itself, McGuire admits that he put his emergency lights on before my car came to a complete stop.

I often wonder if, even today, there will be a fourth, or maybe even a fifth order denying suppression post trial and not based on the suppression hearing. His third order is, ironically, ‘unusual, suspicious and disturbing.’

After presiding over the suppression hearing, McCracken Circuit Court judge Hon. Craig Clymer entered an order denying suppression. Here is that first order with his findings of fact and conclusions of law:

The First of Three Orders Denying Suppression [Frog Gravy legal case]

First Suppression Order

The full-text Motion For Discretionary Review is here:

Get your Pepto Bismol. Here is the full-text reply to the Motion for Discretionary Review by Dark And Stormy Night Gregory Fuchs.

Remember, this to-be-published case was affirmed by the Kentucky Court of Appeals, and the case now sits with the Kentucky Supreme Court.

If this case becomes binding case law, guess what? Exculpatory toxicology crime laboratory testing will be irrelevant. DNA won’t matter. If you are pulled over, you might as well waive the option for clearing yourself by opting for blood analysis.

Your fate will be in the hands of a rogue, lying deputy and whatever coached speculation he offers over a lengthy period of time. Science matters not in the least in the state of Kentucky, according to this decision.

So, you see, this case is not about me anymore. This case will affect pretty much every criminal case in the future.

Commonwealth Full-Text Response To MDR [Frog Gravy legal case]

20111010084852102 (1)

Music for this post:


Since I am transcribing a read-only document, I will present it in parts. The author is Assistant Attorney General Gregory C. Fuchs. The document is so poorly written that it is difficult to transcribe. I will present the table of contents at the end. The document is in the public domain. If you want the read-only pdf, email me, or file an open records request.

I will also place the full-text reply on this site.

Here is yet another of the many versions of the Commonwealth’s ever-changing story.

As someone at Mason’s site pointed out, there are a gazillion ways to point out that the body is a corpse. Gets old, after a while.


Appellant was indicted in McCracken Circuit Court for possession of a controlled substance, cocaine, tampering with physical evidence and operating a motor vehicle under the influence of drugs. (TR 1). Prior to trial, appellant moved to suppress all evidence derived as a result of the stop of the vehicle that she was driving as the stop was based on an uncorroborated tip. (TR 17). The court held a hearing on the motion on November 27, 2006.

At that hearing, the arresting officer Deputy Eddie McGuire was the only witness. He testified that on June 28, 2006 that he had received a report from dispatch that Vernon Wilkey had called 911 to report that a female with blond hair driving a dark blue Buick with Washington plates had asked about purchasing heroin. (Tape 11/27/06 14:05:00). The deputy later observed a dark blue Buick driven by a female with blonde hair on US 60 in the right lane with its left turn signal blinking. (Tape 11/27/06 14:07:00) And when the deputy slowed down to pull in behind her, appellant pulled over to the right side of the road. (Tape 11/27/06 14:07:20). It was then that the deputy pulled over to the side of the road too and activated his lights (Tape 11/27/06 14:07:35).

The deputy then approached the vehicle and asked about the report he had received and in speaking with her noticed that she had glassy eyes, unbuttoned and unzipped pants and a full cup of beer in the console as well as an open bottle of wine. (Tape 11/27/06 14:07:55 et seq.; 14:08:45). The officer administered a horizontal gaze nystagmus field sobriety test which indicated that appellant was impaired or intoxicated on some substance. (Tape 11/27/06 14:09:45).

Appellant told deputy that she was on three prescription drugs including Clonazepam and he obtained consent to search her vehicle and recovered the prescription bottles, beer and bottle of wine. (Tape 11/27/06 14:10:14-38). Appellant was then arrested for driving under the influence. (Tape 11/27/06 14:10:48).

Appellant according to officer was transported to the hospital for a blood test. (Tape 11/27/06 14:10:58). When appellant exited the vehicle at the hospital, the officer saw her watch and a cellophane package with a substance together in the backseat of the vehicle. (Tape 11/27/06 14:11:20). The officer ultimately retrieved the watch and the package upon return to the vehicle which was determined by testing to have cocaine but appellant denied that it was hers though she admitted the watch was hers. (see Tape 11/27/06 14:30:45).

During the cross-examination, the deputy noted that the specific unusual thing he observed in her driving was the use of a turn signal without turning. (Tape 11/27/06 14:15:40). And he was going to stop the vehicle but she pulled over first. (Tape 11/27/06 14:17:00). He noted that the evidence that she was under the influence included the glassy eyes and that she was just very nervous. (Tape 11/27/06 14:19:42).

to be continued.

Note: To show that, once again, Deputy McGuire lies under oath, I will be placing the full text under-oath preliminary hearing that occurred shortly after the arrest, along with the full text suppression under-oath hearing transcript. His stories are 180 degrees different and conflicting. His memory gets even better with time and coaching; his trial testimony differed yet again. We already know that he told a great big whopper to the Grand Jury.

At suppression we are led to believe that McGuire left a blatant controlled substance in plain view on top of his cruiser back seat in full view of the passing public in a public hospital parking lot, for an hour, during the blood draw.

At preliminary, he admitted that the substance was not in plain view and neither was the watch. Both were under the seat, and, only at my specific request that he do so, did he pull the seat back to get the watch. At that point, he claims to have discovered a so-called baggie. By the way, that he acted, in direct response to something that I requested that he do, makes those statements non-hearsay.

I will continue the Gregory Fuchs charade tomorrow. His writing gives me a sick migraine, and I fear that my grammar checker will explode.

If you want the whole thing now, email me at my address in the About section of this site.

Written by Masoninblue and reblogged from Do yourself a favor. Don’t read Frog Gravy all at once. In fact, don’t read Frog Gravy at all because it will make you sick.

As I said yesterday in Part 1,

One of the biggest problems we’ve seen in crime labs is people testifying as experts regarding matters beyond their expertise.

This happened in Crane-Station’s case when a lab tech with a bachelor’s degree from Transylvania University in Lexington, KY, who routinely analyzes human blood samples for controlled substances in the Central Lab of the Kentucky State Crime Laboratory using gas chromatography and mass spectrometry (GCMC), testified as an expert toxicologist regarding the probable effects of Clonazepam on her. He was permitted to do this without objection from her lawyer, even though,

(1) he had not detected Clonazepam, or any other drugs in her blood when he analyzed her sample;

(2) he had no formal training in drug toxicology;

(3) he never had published a peer reviewed article in a professional journal on any subject;

(4) he did not know what constituted a toxic level of Clonazepam in human blood, as opposed to a safe level;

(5) the prosecutor told him that she had admitted taking her prescribed medication when she was arrested, which included Clonazepam, but he had no information regarding what dosage she had taken and when she had taken it.

Nevertheless, he was permitted to express his opinion as an ‘expert’ that she was probably under the influence of and impaired by Clonazepam when the deputy stopped her.

This was a travesty of speculative nonsense and never should have happened.

Now, how is it possible that she could have been under the influence of and impaired by Clonazepam, if he did not detect it in her blood sample?

Well, he testified that it is difficult to detect using gas chromatography and he might have been able to detect it using liquid chromatography, but the Kentucky State Crime Lab cannot afford the equipment to perform that analysis.

Could some other lab have performed the analysis?

Well, as a matter of fact, NMS Labs in Philadelphia can do it and the Kentucky State Crime Laboratory has a contract with NMS to do the test.

Did that happen in Crane’s case?

According to the Director of the Kentucky State Crime Laboratory, the lab sent her blood sample to NMS.

But Ryan Johnson claims that he did not send her blood sample to another lab and the prosecution denies that another lab tested her sample, or that there is an exculpatory lab result from NMS.

However, there is a 2-month gap between the date that Ryan Johnson completed his analysis and the date that it was approved by his supervisor.

Sure looks like he completed his analysis and sent her sample to NMS. They tested it and sent it back reporting an exculpatory result confirming his analysis without generating a written report, so his supervisor reviewed and signed off on his exculpatory result. Then the prosecution turned over his report without mentioning the NMS report.

NMS has referred all inquiries to the prosecutor and, as I said, the prosecutor claims there is no NMS Report or analysis.

This is the kind of bullshit that we are dealing with.

Cross posted from my law blog.

I will be publishing the full text Commonwealth brief online at this site, later today or tomorrow. In the meantime, Mason is putting the finishing touches on his nauseating article titled Forensic Fraud Part 2, and I hope you will enjoy lowering your day a bit, with some Cyanide and Happiness, The Man Who Could Sit Anywhere, with its usual dry, graphic and offensive approach. These guys are too funny to ignore.

Author’s note: I apologize for taking a few days away from Frog Gravy. Initially, I promised to publish full-text transcripts of hearings wherein, Deputy Eddie McGuire testified under oath, in court, to get the initial indictment as well as the ultimate conviction in my case. This will take some time, and I will present the transcripts in sections.

I will place all full-text transcripts at the site

For example, at that site, you can find the full text opening brief, the full text reply brief, the full text motion for discretionary review, and the
full text to be published opinion affirming.

These online publications are transcribed from official court reporter documents, or, as with the briefs and the opinion, they are directly cut and pasted from original documents. As far as I know, I am the only person who has ever insisted on obtaining such transcripts in McCracken County.

All transcripts are a matter of public record and are available in the public domain.

As I write this, from wiki,

Incarceration in the United States is one of the main forms of punishment and/or rehabilitation for the commission of felony and other offenses. The United States has the highest documented incarceration rate in the world. At year-end 2009 it was 743 adults incarcerated per 100,000 population.[4][5][6][7][8]
According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) 2,292,133 adults were incarcerated in U.S. federal and state prisons, and county jails at year-end 2009 — about 1% of adults in the U.S. resident population.[4][5][9][10] Additionally, 4,933,667 adults at year-end 2009 were on probation or on parole.[4] In total, 7,225,800 adults were under correctional supervision (probation, parole, jail, or prison) in 2009 — about 3.1% of adults in the U.S. resident population.[3][4][11] In addition, there were 86,927 juveniles in juvenile detention in 2007.[12][13]

Before I was locked up, I scarcely knew of anyone who had been arrested, much less anyone who had done time. Now, it is safe to say that nearly everyone is touched in some way, by ‘the system.’ Of particular alarm, to me anyway, is the numbers of women, elderly women, children and pregnant women who now spend a portion of their lives in the abnormal and secretive society of our nation’s jails and prisons.

As I have said before, Frog Gravy is not meant to be about me. It is about a criminal justice system gone mad. The women in the stories are from backgrounds that represent a microcosm of society at large, with the exception that, few have obtained college degrees and women of color are over represented. This later statement is changing also. I am white, and I found that white women are more common residents in prisons and jails than in recent years.

Every jail or prison sentence begins with an indictment. Every indictment is handed forth by a Grand Jury. My Grand Jury was the Paducah Kentucky McCracken County Grand Jury. Deputy Eddie McGuire was the only witness. The only truthful statement he uttered in his under-oath testimony at the Grand Jury was that he pulled me over.

Just so that there is no question about me making this stuff up, I will be putting word-for-word all of his under-oath testimony from three hearings on the internet.

I will present the hearings in parts. My indictment took just six minutes.

In those six minutes, McGuire lied about an exculpatory blood test result, and he also lied about a test result on the so-called “gonna be crack cocaine.” There was no field test and there was no confirmatory laboratory test about cocaine or any other illegal drug.

I will post the Grand Jury transcript first. If you are following the legal case, please have a look later today.

Between posting transcripts, I will be posting Frog Gravy posts, and Masoninblue will be posting on various other issues, such as why a lab tech with a bachelor’s degree and no clinical experience whatsoever, was allowed, without objection from Chris McNeill, to testify about the clinical effects of a medicaton that he had never handled, tested for, or published about, to contribute to conviction in my case. In fact, Ryan Johnson, the lab-tech-cum-expert, had published nothing about any drug (or anything else, for that matter) in any peer-reviewed journal, and yet, he was deemed an ‘expert’ in a McCracken County court of law.

Mason is itching to write about this so-called ‘expert’ that they used without objection from my exceedingly useless attorney, Chris McNeill, who should have been on his feet rather than firmly attached to his chair. What happened is so unbelievable, that I cannot resist delivering a heads-up: the man was an approved and acceptable expert in the courtroom during my trial because, I kid you not, he read from a product insert. This is the truth, and it happened in McCracken County, Kentucky. There is no way you can make this stuff up. That the man acted outside of his scope of practice would be a massive understatement.

Also, why, and in what world, does a so-called ‘higher’ Court of Appeals neglect not only the briefs but also the entire record in a case, and then designate it “to be published,” essentially doing away with DNA and other exculpatory blood testing?

How often, with more than two million people locked up and another four-plus million on paper, does such egregious miscarriage of justice occur in this country? Also, why on earth is this country locking up little old ladies while the dangerous violent criminals run the streets? There are some of the questions we need to be discussing.

For review: