The way that I read each day of the Paul Bergrin trial transcripts was to send them to my Kindle, four at a time. There are a total of 37 volumes from this second trial and it's similar to reading 37 books. I argued to publish the transcripts with the hope that some sharp attorney or law student would discover important inconsistencies in the government's theories - yes, that's plural as they have numerous major theories, all based on the Kemo murder conspiracy, that Judge Cavanaugh allowed them to present as facts to the jury.
You will find that Volume 34 has the
government closing presented by AUSA Minish; it has more, but that is
as far as I made it before falling asleep. What did I discover?
The extent to which the government's
case hinges upon the calls corroborating Anthony Young's claims is clear. It
proves the extent to which the government erroneously relied upon the
calls and the extent of how that erroneous reliance tainted the
proceedings. They specifically cite the November 25 and December 4th
calls. It also underscores how improper it was for the government to
use the Pozo 404b evidence.
Gee - USDJ William Martini was correct
to begin with! Are you surprised? You shouldn't be.
So, the government retraction of the
December 4 reliance in the response brief and the false apology for
advancing that so-called suggestion in the letter dated 1 July 2013,
is the usual spin and straw man crap. The entire presentation by the
government to the Court is built on the false testimony of Anthony
Young. Really it is mind-numbing when you examine the uncorroborated
reliance on Young, a violent career criminal, in this case as well as
AUSA Minish repeatedly refers to
corroboration of Anthony Young's statements throughout his closing
argument; however, none of it is real. In the closing it is claimed
as fact, but in the actual testimony it was clearly questionable. I
could refer to any specific government claim of corroboration of
Young's testimony and easily dispute it.
It's better if you read the entire
Volume 34, or at least the government's entire closing argument
(pages 8451-8584) to understand the reliance on the recorded calls
the jury never hears and Anthony Young's false testimony, but if
you're short on time, read pages 8504-8508 in Volume 34:
BERGRIN 34 03_13_13 (link removed - contact me privately for a copy)
This entire case is mind-boggling. But
you'll notice that the reliance on Anthony Young's testimony of the
meeting on a street corner that never happened is disseminated
throughout the case and has infected the entire prosecution of Paul