Exhibits‎ > ‎exhibit5‎ > ‎

exhibit 5b

BORTOLUSSI’S -attempted and busted PERJURY:  starting on page 156 to 157, lines:

 

 20- …I WAS ON THE DRIVEWAY OF THE PROPERTY JUST NORTH OF THE PORCH.

22- Q.  AND AT THE TIME THE OFFICERS ACTUALLY ATTEMPTED TO MAKE ENTRY, WERE YOU IN VISUAL CONTACT WITH THEM? 

24- YES

25/1- DID YOU HEAR WHAT HAPPENED AT THE TIME THEY ATTEMPTED TO GAIN ENTRY? 

2- YES

3- COULD YOU TELL THE JURY WHAT IT WAS IN THE SEQUENCE THAT YOU HEARD IT? 

5- I HEARD THE KICK AT THE DOOR, THE WORDS SHERIFF’S OFFICE BEING YELLED AND A 'SIMULTANEOUS' KICK AND SHERIFF’S OFFICE YELLED. [1]

8- Q.  SHERIFF’S OFFICE WAS YELLED TWICE?
 
9- IT WAS IN THE – IT WAS, SIMULTANEOUS ON THE SECOND YELLING, SHERIFF’S OFFICE.

On cross-examination, pages 159-60:

14- Q.  NOW YOUR RECOLLECTION IS A KICK FIRST? 

15- YES

16- Q.  NO ANNOUNCEMENT OF PURPOSE OR INTENTION PRIOR TO THE KICK?

18- ONLY ANNOUNCEMENT I HEARD WAS SHERIFF’S OFFICE AFTER THE FIRST KICK. 

20- Q.  PRIOR TO THE KICK?

21- A.  NO RECOLLECTION OF ANY WORDS BEING SPOKEN.

22- Q.  THEN YOU THINK THERE MAY HAVE BEEN SOME THING SAID AFTER THE FIRST KICK…? 

24- A.  DISTINCT WORDS, SHERIFF’S OFFICE WERE YELLED. 

25- Q.  AND DO YOU KNOW BY WHOM? 

1- A.  NO, I DO NOT.

6- …IT WAS DARK.  I COULD NOT SEE WHO WAS YELLING. 

7- Q.  HOW MANY OF THEM YELLED? 

8- I COULD NOT SEE WHO WAS YELLING.  THERE WAS FIVE PEOPLE ON THE FRONT PORCH AREA. 

10- Q.  WELL, WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO SEE, DID YOU HEAR FIVE VOICES? 

12- A.  NO, I DID NOT HEAR FIVE VOICES I HEARD ONE VOICE. 

14- Q.  SO ONLY ONE YELLED? 

15- A. I HEARD ONE VOICE YELL SHERIFF’S OFFICE.  {Once.  Not twice, once.}
 
 
So, why this/his overwhelming need to lie, and perjure himself to this jury? 
-'Stand-up cop'? [willing to perjure and obstruct justice, for the 'Dirty-Cop' Brotherhood]
Where is this mans’ credibility or integrity as a witnesses or representative of the State?
Is that why the Courts don't want to address this either?  It's more important to protect even Dirty Cops.

At least his last part more closely matches up with his earlier official AP&P report, of the one “announcement” one voice/one person, after the kick.  But even his turned in AP&P report has already been contaminated by Dent and Potters earlier conversations with him.

 
                                                            (Next, page 9/ his AP&P report )

[1] Two things here, If there is no conspiracy, witness tampering or obstructing of justice going on here, why this attempted two announcements and this "Simultaneus"? And from who?  Especially in light of his earlier AP&P report, given up in discovery.  While keeping in mind that Exhibit 7 police report and statements are still being suppressed (from me) at this point   

 

Comments