Exhibits‎ > ‎

P2

Part one: (of P-2, are the two warning shots) 
   
But Part two (the second half of this page)
Has the best perjury/obstruction of justice.
 
Part one-
These are clearly two warning shots, 2 1/2 to 3 feet directly over the head of the first assailant, as he is coming at me in/through my doorway.[1] 
-Just as I testified to but taken away from me by wrong-false states testimony of Stevens and officer J.Prior.

 But the prosecutor through his police investigator (at TR: 137-8) told the jury that these first two shots were at “eye level”, “hairline” and would have just missed hitting anyone in that doorway, in the head.  And then relied heavily on this “evidence” -that these were definitely not warning shots, but  “within inches of” his head/head shots- in his closing arguments.  See footnote one of P-1


Part two:  (of this Page)

It is the rods through the holes, [through the wall] these angles that shows movement and the position/location from which the shots were fired.  (Specifically see how much movement there was between shots 3 and 4.) 


-Also notice that the shots were all fired from, and hit on K. Steven's/(the armed-assailant entering my home) his left!

So how could K. Stevens possibly be hit on the right side of his face with “bullet debris” as he watches me not move over in the dark, [his] right corner of that room?

Granted the second two shots don’t look all that good, until taken on the whole: Where I only knew of the two assailants directly in front of the door; I’d already fired the first two warning shots; and even paused; and the next two shots were fired, un-aimed in “cover-fire” while in retreat, and in serious, serious panic.

 But!  What all this does show is that deputy Stevens LIED to the jury on all these other material facts:

 Where he testified that I never moved, never changed positions or location from the first shot to the last shot[1] (TR: 118-22).  And, that I was crouched down in the dark “right corner” of the room, “to the far right in my field of his vision, over in the corner...” and I was dark and “in the shadows” [and never moved][2] (TR: 248-50).  (Implying what? That I’m the liar/my testimony of my actions/reactions of fear and movement was false. And what?  A “laying in wait”/ ambush type shooting.)  These, as opposed to his initial statements in (A-42, where he “saw A/P to his Left… by the Kitchen entrance…” and at A/B-5, I was “between the kitchen and living room doorway” [to his Left, the light and “silhouetted”].  These lies/his lies in opposition to and in rebuttal of my [truthful] testimony[3].  -Which by its’ very nature/facts and my initial statements (of sorry if a cop got shot and I thought I was being robbed), the warning shots and the pause makes me not guilty under State v Castonguay.  (All indications that shooting a cop was not my chosen intention)

 

Why is he going out of his way to lie/ perjure himself[4] this way?[5]  –To counter/ Rebut and discredit my testimony of what [actually] happened (that he [Steven’s] should of had no way of knowing/ hearing).  Did the prosecutor asked him to come back in and lie/“rebut” my testimony of what actually occurred, even if it meant lying and contradicting his own earlier statements?  -Steven’s is also the only one that’s got three “announcements” and working on his fourth one, even before that first shot.  He also gets hit in the face (the right side of his face/closest to the door) with “bullet debris” (at TR: 177).  HOW?[6]  Is there anything that this man hasn’t or won’t lie about?  Is that why the prosecutor brought him back in for the “rebuttal”?)      

The prosecutor then capitalizes on, and exploited every one of these lies/perjuries[7] in closing/ and for this conviction: at (TR: 254), you heard what Steven’s and what the investigator said.  “He [Stevens] literally avoided death by a matter of inches” [it was so close that] “he felt the bullet-debris powder/residue from that shot.”[8]  (TR: 268), “It was dark, was he laying in wait, these are the things you have to decide.”  (TR: 255), “In fact one would conclude from the evidence we heard in this case a shadow fired the shots…” [9]

But!  I’m certain that legally and Constitutionally the police and prosecutor are not allowed to lie to, and mislead the jury like this.[10]   

Although admittedly, this is good, Real Good: Lying, Government, and prosecuting at it’s best.  Make the Truth appear as lies, and clothe your Liars in Government uniforms of Credibility.  –Do your magic/ slight of hand/ slight of truth.  Right after some credible/believable [truthful] testimony, the prosecutor goes to his Bull-pen to recruit for rebuttal anyone of his [biggest/best] liars to go in and LIE[11], so that the just given testimony/ the truth appears to be lies, therefore the defendant appears to be a liar (and non-credible) and thus Guilty.  A trick of the truth; like a magician making a coin disappear then pulling it from someone’s ear or an illusionist turning his beautiful assistant into a tiger, all smoke and mirrors, a trick, a slight of hand. –Convictions (and/or beatings) are more important then the truth, justice or a fair trial to him/them, (cops and people like this).[12] 

  


[1] These photos (along with a couple others) show a lot of movement between the third and fourth shots, and also between the first, third and fourth.  (I’ll make them available to, and even explain them to anyone interested.)

[2] This after he’d already gotten in/before the jury, that he may have seen a form in the window (“it looked like the form of a body”) on their way past it.  (He was the only one to see it, and on cross he confirmed he probably really didn’t see anything.  –But now he’s got that seed planted/that possibility, that  what if scenario)

[3]Of me grabbing my gun [after the first kick and the glimpse of those two], firing two warning shots [because he and his gun was entering my home], the pause, then because of his continued attack/lack of retreat, I fired two more unaimed-cover-fire shots while in retreat and in real serious panic by now, because I didn’t want to, or want to have to shoot or kill anyone.  I’m retreating, backing away from this deadly confrontation (back through my kitchen doorway), I didn’t want to get shot, nor did I want to have to shoot anyone.  (I’m not the aggressor here all my actions are defensive/ protective, in self-defense, out of fear, in warning and defusing/ retreating.)  -Granted the prosecutor should try to discredit any lies with the truth.  But he can’t use intentionally made-up false testimony especially by representatives of the state in an effort to discredit me/the truth.   

[4] These are clearly lies/perjuries by him of the physical facts/realities, and also with his two earlier accountings.  Did he come up with this on his own?  Or did the prosecutor encourage him to make this up/lie about these.  Who initiated this into perjury, and obstruction of justice?  (Not that he needed much encouragement judging from all his stories.)  Just as baffling, if he was sequestered, HOW did he know to come back in to tell those LIES/ those contradictions to his earlier statementsand the actual physical realities?  -Someone needs to be held accountable for this perjury, abuse of power and intentional obstruction of justice. 

[5] To better obstruct justice?  To better ingratiate himself as a good-lying stand-up cop?  (And to who his fellow cops or the prosecutor.)  This can also be seen in his testimony about the “bullet-debris” hitting him on the right side of his face/closest to the door (TR: 117).  See footnote 7 How?   And going from initially hearing 4 shots to hearing and seeing 5 shots, at TR: 124 -5, after his sergeant testified to hearing five.

[6] How?  Those bullets hit above, behind and all to the left of his face and head.  How is he going to be hit with "bullet debris" on the right side of his face? He’s such a drama queen and a liar!  (just more lies/more everything then anyone else, perfect cop material, I see lead detective in this man’s future)

[7] This goes for Alexander & Rigby’s perjured testimony on the how and whys, at TR: 252 “The announcement for policy reasons, for safety reasons.”  TR: 267 “Don’t think for a moment that the sheriff’s office and the police department have not analyzed the situation from view point of officer safety.” Yes they have.  See: White, Wilson and Exhibit 6 for 20 years of how they’ve been doing it.  Look up the legislative intent behind Utah’s 77-23-10.(2).  (Look up police and prosecutorial misconduct, lying and perjury.)

[8] How and how come all this hot, flying, (1500 to 1800 ft./sec.) burning lead and gunpowder that hit him in the face never made it in any of his earlier reports.  He’s just saving it for Court?  Please.  

[9] How could they not with all the false, perjured, made-up evidence and bullshit thrown at them?  But what kind of outcome do you think you’d get now; in light of the TRUTH, and these new witnesses and the now Non-credibility of those cop witnesses?

[10] Specifically under Napue v. Illinois, 360 US 264, “Giglio”, “Bagely”, “Agurrs”, 427 US at 103, (Utah cases; St. v. Jurrell, 608 P.2d 224-5, Walker v. St., 624 P.2d 667) also see Bergur v. US, 295 US 78, 88, Mahorny v. Wallman, 917 F.2d 469, Santan-Camacho, 833 F.2d 373-4 all mandate a reversal in this case

[11] Definitely this one [Stevens] is- See all the physical evidence (photos) and his earlier statements.   

[12] So does abuse of power, perjury and obstruction of justice apply only to presidential blowjobs for headlines and political gains or does to also apply to the police and prosecutors and to the real world with its’ wrongful convictions and the actual loss of peoples liberties, rights, freedom and families?   



[1] And also clearly way over the head of anyone that would have/could have been standing on that front porch.  

 

Comments