If you have read most or all of the transcripts and documents in this
case, you're already aware of the significance and importance of the
Curry wiretap transcript linked herein. I decided that it was best to
turn it into a PDF instead of copy / pasting into this post.
According to the government, this wiretap tape (and thousand(s) of
others) were not admissible because of an alleged chain of custody
issue or a claim that they "were not timely sealed". Why do
I doubt the veracity of such a statement? Well, of course because of
the 'Oscar the Hitman' tapes and the complete lack of concern over
chain of custody and even validity of these recordings by the
government in this case.
Recall that the defense did call an expert to testify in relation to
the Oscar tapes and he was extremely limited in his testimony by the
government and the Court. The expert attempted to testify as to the
issues and potential anomalies with the recordings, but was cut-off
and told that he was only allowed to offer limited testimony.
It's unimaginable to me and others that the government did not take
proper care with the Curry wiretap recordings and I'd be interested
to know if they were all inadmissible in Hakeem Curry's trial as
well. At the same time, the government claimed there was nothing
exculpatory on these tapes - an outright lie. Additionally, this
particular recording was never turned over to William Baskerville's
defense attorney, though I have no idea about other recordings.
Significance of
December 4, 2003
Throughout the discovery process the government refused to state a
specific date in which this alleged meeting with Paul Bergrin and
numerous gang members took place on a Newark street corner. Anthony
Young testified that he could not recall exactly, but that it was
after Thanksgiving in 2003. Obviously an exact date would have been
extremely important to the defense. How else would Bergrin be able to
pinpoint specifically where he was and others were that supposedly
attended this non-existent street meeting that Anthony Young testified
took place?
The defense knows where Hakeem Curry was "after Thanksgiving,"
but again, that was too vague to dispute in trial. Thanks to the
government, we now know the specific date they claim this meeting
took place. View this document and scroll to page 12 (numbered pages
within the doc):
Do you see the footnote (#2) on page 12? It states:
Phone records showed a call from Bergrin to Curry at 7:13 p.m. on December 4,2003, 27T7544, and (according to Young) Curry said that evening, “My man on his way. Mr. Bergrin is on his way.” 9T2252.
The
Curry Wiretap Transcript
If
the meeting according to Anthony Young occurred around 7PM. they are
locked into actual
perjury
and suborned perjury with deception to the Court. But in any event,
as the verbatim
transcript
linked below shows, there was no meeting on December 4, 2003. There
are no further
calls
between Hakeem Curry and Paul Bergrin that entire night.
More
Discussion of the Transcript
I
intend to discuss specific statements in the Curry wiretap transcript
and several other transcripts of recordings during the coming week.
We intend to prove to you, the people, that the government's version
of events in this prosecution and the two trials is worse than simply
false. So stay tuned...
No comments:
Post a Comment