Exhibits‎ > ‎exhibit 2‎ > ‎

exhibit2a

New copy of Exhibit 2A affidavit pages 3 and 4

This first part is pretty standard blah, blah about how reliable his CI is,[1]

[1] CI/  confidential informant,  is just a nicer way of saying this low-life, scumbag  of a drug addict [ busted, out doing crimes, that would say or do anything to get a fix] now, doing and saying anything not to go to jail, they have a huge incentive to tell the police whatever they want to hear; you want ‘Drug king pins', machine guns, killers, whatever.  Look at the stories, K. Stevens, and Dent and Potter and Alexander and Rigby made up or Bortolussie tried making up, to get out of trouble and they are all police officers, theoretically a ‘drug addict’ trying not to go to jail should be worse.  (see the stories in Exhibit 6h and other supporting documents at the bottom of 6h.)     

and that they are looking for heroin.   Then the WHEREFORE: .... (the real meat of the request)


WHERERORE, [Officer Rigby] prays that the search warrant be issued for the said items:  …… because  there is reason to believe it is necessary to seize property/[evidence] prior to it being conceal or destroyed …….  Affiant [Rigby] fears that if officers are required to knock and identify themselves …. Suspects inside will attempt to destroy [the] evidence ….  Then Affiant Rigby (like in (White) has been a police officer for 15 years and done over 50 search warrants (Also see Exhibit 6).  And based on his training and experience suspects will attempt to destroyed evidence even when the officers were granted authorization to enter without identifying themselves ….  (also see Wilson)


Besides the fact that heroin can be readily destroyed or disposed of, and the suspect has an extensive record [of drugs, assaults, and firearms] (and one buy after dark)

It is further requested that (if appropriate) the officers executing the requested warrant NOT BE REQUIED TO GIVE NOTICE OF THE OFFICER’S AUTHERITY OR PURPPOSE BECAUSE: 

  PHYSICAL HARM MAY RESULT TO ANY PERSON IF NOTICE WERE GIVEN  or (evidence quickly destroyed, dispose of, or secreted). 

            THIS DANGER IS BELIEVED TO EXIST BECAUSE:  [of] THE SUSPECTS EXTENSIVE RECORD  (subscribed and sworn to before me ... )

In both White and Rosenbaum 204 UT Adv Rep (and Miller) It was the “Safety” aspect, (as above) based on the training and experience of these ‘police professionals’ that it is safer for all individuals involved if the police are not required to announce their entry.  So are all these other police officers lying under oath to these other courts (along with Rigby lying to this/first court)?  -or did-
Alexander and Rigby give perjured testimony to my jury?  And if they are lying here (to my jury on this).  Did they lie about giving "notice of authority" that night also?  (See Exhibit 3  Exhibit 4  and Exhibits 1 and  6 ) 
 
                                                                (next page Judges Order/Warrant)
 
As a sub note; with this above affidavit, cases (and he, himself having done over 50 of these) how is it the prosecutor, judge in this case (and higher Courts) and my [half-assed] attorney allowed that perjured testimony, to stand, knowing that it is wrong/false and perjured.  (It’s their job to know this and not allow false/perjured evidence)  
 
Comments