Exhibits‎ > ‎exhibit 1‎ > ‎

exhibit1a

The trial judge, the Utah Supreme Court and Utah’s Attorney General are all finding and arguing that officer Brown in this case believed it to be a No-knock warrant, and that he then executed it in a No-knock fashion  -Sending officers to the front and back of the house/surrounding it.  And then Forcibly broke in WITHOUT knocking or ANNOUNCING THEIR AUTHORITY.  (See my case and testimony)  (Also see Exhibit 6)   (then their testimony)

So, why are the officers in my case allowed to lie to the jury (as to how they always have and always do it, and then the [Judge and] prosecutor acting like they don’t know how these type of warrants are actually done, especially when those cops/officers go out of their way to ask for a No-knock warrant, and it’s the crux of this case [whether I should have heard their “announcement” and known that in fact it was cops and not robbers breaking into my home)? 

It seems pretty ineffective assistance of [Trial Counsel] not to know this (or not to pursue this fact or their actual practices) where it’s the crux of this case. 

                       Also see their whys  (See next page/ White)  


Comments