I have discussed William Baskerville's case on this blog in past and its connection to the Paul Bergrin case. In my last post, I included updates and addressed the evidentiary hearing ordered by the court. I have the feeling that US District Judge Sheridan expected to move to the hearing rather quickly, but once again, William has an uninterested attorney assigned. However, this time no attorney will be allowed to sabotage his case. I believe that the letter was mailed to the court yesterday. William copied to me and I am publishing here as I believe that we need to keep this case in the sunshine, as we say in Florida.
The letter to the court:
Reg. No. 25946-050
FCI McKean Medium
Honorable Judge Peter G. Sheridan, U.S.D.J.
United States District Court
Clarkson S. Fisher Court And
Untied States Courthouse
402 East State Street
Trenton, New Jersey, 08608
RE: UNITED STATES V.WILLIAM BASKERVILLE Court Appointed Attorney
CIVIL NUMBER 13-5881(PGS)
CRIMINAL NUMBER 03-836(JAP)
Dear Honorable Judge Sheridan,
I am writing to inform you of my various attempts to make initial contact with my recently Court appointed counsel Mr. Bruce Throckmorton. As of the date this Court appointed Mr. Throckmorton to my case, I have made several attempts to communicate with him via email dating from December 12/10/2018- January 14, 2019 which have been to no avail,( See attached Exhibit 1) I had family members continuous make calls to his office and cell phone some he answered and return back but as of late he has not responted, on January 10, 2019 I had the unit Counselor Mr. Miller send him a email to set up a phone conference, and on January 15, 2019 the unit Case Manager Mr. Nero gave me a legal call to try to reach Mr. Throckmorton which was also to no avail.
As a result of my inability to make contact with counsel and counsel's inactions with respect to contacting me I am now respectfully requesting that the Court implement the following solution, which is to appoint new counsel or allow my previous appellate counsel, Mr. Mark A. Berman to be reinstated as my counsel of record regarding my current legal proceedings. At this point I must mention that a potential conflict of interest may exist regarding Mr. Berman being that I previously filed ineffective assistance of counsel claims again him. However, I am willing to waive any potential conflicts of interest issues that may have existed.
It is my position that Mr. Berman is best suited to represent me because of, (1) his familiarity with my case, (2) his strong work ethic and open line of communication with clients, (3) his representation would save the Court valuable time and resources and allow my defense to proceed more fluidly, and (4) his willingness to accept input from me regarding matters pertaining to the case.
In the past I have dealt with lawyers who were unwilling to allow me to provide them with any input or who have litigated my case without informing me of their plan of action. Those experiences have lead to many set backs. I am a litigant who is very much involved in researching my own case and I am hands-on when it comes to the issues I believe should be raised. (Mr. Berman has affirmed these facts in his declaration. Doc. 16 pgs. 6-7 pars. 22-26) I very much would appreciated a lawyer who is going to respect that and allow me to participate in my own defense.