Home

FREE PAUL EVERETT
 
 PLEASE DO NOT GET DISCOURAGED, READ HIS WHOLE STORY. PAUL IS INNOCENT.
 
 
CONTACT PAUL AT:
PAUL EVERETT /Q13157
UNION C.I.
CELL # P-3228
7819 N.W. 228TH ST.
RAIFORD, FL.
32026- 4430

ANY CONTRIBUTIONS TO A DEFENSE FUND FOR PAUL CAN BE MAILED TO:
GLENDA EVERETT
P.O. BOX 2232
SYLVANIA, GA.
30467

**NO AMOUNT TOO SMALL… 100% GOES TOWARDS HIRING AN ATTORNEY.
 
 
 
 

ENCLOSED IS THE STORY OF A MAN WHO HAS BEEN ON FLORIDA'S DEATH ROW SINCE JANUARY 9TH, 2003 AFTER HE WAS FORCED TO CONFESS TO A CRIME HE DID NOT COMMIT. WHILE THOSE OF US WHO LOVE HIM HAVE REASON TO BE OPTIMISTIC THAT HE’LL SOMEDAY COME HOME TO US WHERE WE DESPERATELY WANT HIM TO BE, THE SAD REALITY IS THAT THE DECK IS STRONGLY STACKED AGAINST HIM DUE TO THE FACT THAT WE AS A SOCIETY HAVE BEEN CONDITIONED TO BELIEVE EVERYTHING WE READ AND NOT TO DOUBT THE INTEGRITY OF AUTHORITY FIGURE SUCH AS JUDGES, PROSECUTORS, ETC… THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO CAN HAVE PROFOUND IMPACTS ON OUR LIVES IN MANY WAYS AND THEREFORE SHOULD BE SCRUTINIZED MORE INTENTLY, YET BECAUSE THEY WEAR NICE SUITS AND HAVE A SILVER TONGUE. WE TAKE THEIR WORDS AT FACE VALUE AND ALLOW THEM TO MOLD OUR THOUGHTS. AS A RESULT OF THIS, THERE HAVE BEEN 30 INNOCENT PEOPLE EXONERATED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA ALONE SINCE 1976, AFTER HAVING BEEN CONVICTED OF MURDERS THEY DID NOT COMMIT. THE MAJORITY OF THOSE WHO WERE EXONERATED SPENT 10, 15, 20 YEARS ON DEATH ROW BEFORE THEY WERE RELEASED! SEVERAL OTHERS WERE NOT RELEASED BECAUSE THEY WERE ONLY EXONERATED AFTER THEY’D BEEN MURDERED/KILLED/EXECUTED AT THE HANDS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, WHO COULD ONLY OFFER APOLOGIES TO THE FAMILIES OF THOSE WHO WERE EXECUTED FOR SOMETHING THEY DID NOT DO. THOSE OF US WHO KNOW AND LOVE PAUL WILL NEVER BE CONSOLED BY APOLOGIES IF HE TOO BECOMES ONE OF THE MANY INNOCENT MEN KILLED BY THE STATE. HIS MOTHER, SEVEN SISTERS, TWELVE NEPHEWS, AND FOUR NIECES, (AS WELL AS SEVERAL LIFE-LONG FRIENDS) ALL WANT HIM HOME. WITH A COLLECTIVE EFFORT WE CAN HIGHLY INCREASE THE CHANCES OF MAKING THAT HAPPEN.

 

[TO THOSE OF YOU WHO KNOW PAUL:]
WHILE IT IS TRUE THAT PAUL’S LIFE TOOK A DRASTIC TURN WHEN HE BECAME ADDICTED TO DRUGS, EACH OF YOU WHO TRULY KNOW HIM KNOWS IT WAS NEVER IN HIS PERSONALITY TO BE AN EVIL, VIOLENT-NATURED PERSON. HIS HABITS WERE CERTAINLY A DETRIMENT TO HIMSELF, BUT YOU ALL KNOW HIS LIGHT-HEARTED, HAPPY-GO-LUCKY PERSONALITY NEVER CHANGED. YOU KNOW HE DOESN’T HAVE IT IN HIS HEART TO TAKE SOMEONE’S LIFE. NOR WOULD HE EVER HAVE TO RESORT TO SEXUAL BATTERY AS BEEN DEPICTED…WE KNOW THAT AND WE’VE ALL BEEN QUIET IN VOICING THOSE FACTS FOR FAR TOO LONG. IT’S TIME FOR THE PEOPLE WHO KNOW HIM, BE WILLING TO HELP HIM… MOST OF YOU HAVE THOUGHT, “I WISH THERE WAS SOMETHING I COULD DO TO HELP”, BUT THINK THERE’S NOTHING THAT CAN BE DONE, SO YOU SIMPLY DO NOTHING. THERE IS PLENTY THAT CAN BE DONE… AND NOW IS THE TIME FOR IT TO START HAPPENING. PAUL’S VOICE ALONE IS TRAPPED WITHIN THE WALLS THAT CONFINE HIM, BUT THE VOICES OF US WHO KNOW AND LOVE HIM CAN BE CAN BE LOUD AND VERY EFFECTIVE IF WE MAKE THE CHOICE TO BE HEARD. THE FIRST STEP IS FOR YOU TO BE SIMPLY MAKING CONTACT WITH HIM! FROM THERE YOU’LL BE SURPRISED AT HOW VERY LITTLE EFFORT ON YOUR PART CAN HAVE A HUGE IMPACT ON MAKING PAUL’S FREEDOM A REALITY AND NOT JUST SOMETHING WE HOPE FOR. SO PLEASE WRITE TO HIM, TODAY.

 

[TO THOSE OF YOU WHO DO NOT KNOW PAUL:]
IN 2001 AT AGE 22, PAUL WAS FORCED TO CONFESS A MURDER, AND AS A RESULT OF THAT FALSE CONFESSION HE WAS SENT TO DEATH ROW. AT THE TIME OF HIS CONFESSION, HE WAS COERCED BY COPS WHO WERE AGGRESSIVELY THREATENING HIM WITH THE DEATH PENALTY. IN ADDITION TO THOSE THREATS, PAUL HAD BEEN INVOLVED WITH A SHADY GROUP OF DRUG DEALERS (ONE OF WHOM COMMITTED THE MURDER PAUL WAS CONVICTED OF) AND AFTER PAUL HAD BEEN IN CUSTODY IN ALABAMA ON MINOR, UNRELATED CHARGES. HE RECEIVED A THREAT STATING THAT IF A CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL WAS ARRESTED FOR THE MURDER, THE LIVES OF PAUL’S FAMILY MEMBERS COULD BE IN JEOPARDY. WITHOUT HESITATION PAUL TOOK THE FALL FOR MURDER TO INSURE THAT WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE AND TO THIS DAY HE DOES NOT REGRET HIS DECISION TO DO SO. HOWEVER, PAUL LOVES LIFE, WANTS TO LIVE, AND DESERVES TO LIVE; HE IS NOW PUTTING UP A STRONG FIGHT FOR HIS LIFE. HIS EFFORTS ALONE ALMOST CERTAINLY WILL FALL SHORT OF MAKING THAT FEASIBLE, BUT WITH THE HELP OF HIS FAMILY, FRIENDS, AND A FEW COMPASSIONATE PEOPLE LIKE YOU, WE CAN ALL GIVE HIM A CHANCE. SIMPLY CONTACT PAUL, HEAR HIS STORY FOR YOURSELF AND GET TO KNOW HIM… FROM THERE YOU’LL HAVE NO DOUBT THAT HE’S WORTHY OF ANY AND ALL HELP YOU’RE WILLING AND ABLE TO PROVIDE.

[TO ALL:]
ENCLOSED ARE ILLUSTRATIONS THAT SHOW A DIFFERENT SIDE OF THE STORY THAN THE SUPPOSEDLY CLEAR-CUT, BLACK AND WHITE VERSION THE MAJORITY OF YOU HAVE BEEN SUBJECTED/LEAD TO BELIEVE. THE PROSECUTOR WHO PROSECUTED PAUL, LAID OUT A THEORY THAT’S INTENDED TO LEAVE NO ROOM FOR DOUBT. IF YOU KNOW PAUL, YOU SURELY HAVE DOUBTS ALREADY… IF NOT, READ THE FOLLOWING ILLUSTRATIONS AND THERE’S YOUR DOUBT. THERE IS MORE TO THE STORY THAN THE SNIPPET OF SELECTIVE (AND MOSTLY FALSE) INFORMATION THE STATE PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE HAS PROVIDED FOR PUBLIC PERCEPTION. THEY’VE PAINTED PAUL AS A HEARTLESS MONSTER AND HE IS NOT. HE’S AN INNOCENT MAN ON DEATH ROW AND NEEDS OUR COLLECTIVE HELP, NOW.

PLEASE TAKE IN ALL THE INFORMATION YOU NOW HAVE AND THINK FOR YOURSELF, COME TO YOUR OWN CONCLUSIONS; DON’T HAVE YOUR THOUGHTS MOLDED BY THE LIKES OF STEVE MEADOWS.

THE FOLLOWING IS A COLOR-CODED GUIDE. LISTED IN IT ARE INDIVIDUALS, AS WELL AS BRIEF EXPLANATIONS ABOUT HOW THEY EACH RELATE TO THE PREDICAMENT I'M IN. WHEN READING THE SUBSEQUENCE PAGES AND YOU COME TO A CERTAIN COLOR, SIMPLY QUICK-REFERENCE BACK TO THIS GUIDE IF NEEDED TO BE.

 

Pink- appropriately relates to Steve Meadows. Meadows is the prosecutor who prosecuted me. He is widely known as a very influential politician who has many strings to pull. And as a shady prosecutor who blatantly pulls those strings at will to get any and all results he wants. An attachment you’ll find in relation to meadows fully illustrates just how blatantly he disregards’ protocol and policy, knowing all the while that he is untouchable in bay county Florida, based largely upon the fact that the seats of power there are filled with his cronies. That attachment gives weight to me words on the page that follows the story in Meadows… the page in question regards a statement made by Bay County’s medical examiner at that time, in which she states that both anally and vaginally she finds no signs of non consensual sex. The footnote on that page was written for my sister, but is now intended for any and all who read this. In light of meadow’s track-record for getting medical examiners to say what he wants, it’s no surprise that I was convicted of sexual battery with serious physical force as the result of that same medical examiner, who found no signs of non-consensual sex and who’s testimony at trial was a complete 180, inflaming the jury to the point that no matter who would’ve been in the defendants chair would have been convicted. Meadows got the results he wanted because his puppet said what he wanted her to. It’s not hard to get a conviction when there’s a stable of hand-picked “experts” who’ll say whatever they’re programmed to say. Those of you who know me, you know I would not have to resort to sexual battery…those who don’t know me, apply common logic to the info you now have.

 

Bright green-relates to Freddy Wilson, a.k.a. Bubba. The foot-notes attached to him are self-explanatory.

Dark green-relate to Bubba’s nephews Travis and Joey who are also explained in the footnotes of bubba’s mug-shot page.

Red-relates to Steve Colson. Colson is the victim’s on-again off-again boyfriend. The illustrations relating to him speak for themselves… he’s one of several who should’ve been thoroughly investigated, but after just a quick glance, was disregarded. Even as a layman, when you read the relating pages, red flags have to fly! (Important to know, Steve is the neighbor mentioned in those illustrations.)

Blue-relates to Chad Lindsey. Lindsey is a detective in Panama City and is one of three detectives who aggressively badgered and badgered and badgered me over and over in various ways for two weeks until I gave a false confession to the murder which I did not commit. It’s easy for the average person to say “I’d never confess to a crime I didn’t commit, no matter what “… but until you’re in that position, you don’t know what you would do, so don’t be so quick to talk about what you don’t know. Enclosed you’ll see a deposition in which Lindsey sort of admits to badgering me, but of course sugar coats his statements…I’m actually shocked that he even gave a sugar coated version of his threatening tactics. In any event, even the sugar coated sugar version reveals a threat of the state of Florida sticking a needle in my arm, so it doesn’t take much imagination for a person to have a decent idea of what the true and more aggressive version was actually like. (Also in the deposition are brief mentions of Bubba, Travis, and Joey.)

Orange- Relates to Michael Moose. I personally don’t know who he is, but the illustrations that relate to him show he’s yet another individual who should’ve been thoroughly investigated, but was not looked at beyond an interview at his home… the some home that a k-9 blood hound was lead to by following a scent from the victim’s back door! 

Yellow-relates to motions I have had to file myself due to the fact that my state paid attorney is scared to step up on various political toes and is apparently under the impression that I’m one of the many idiots who thinks my best interests are in his heart! Well I’m not one of the typical low I.Q. clients who will fall for anything that rolls off his tongue… actions tell me what I need to know, not words. And his actions tell me he’s state paid, as in paid by the state, the very state that is trying to kill me for something I did not do. After realizing the state paid attorney was only another card in the deck that is heavily stacked against me, I had to take my life in my own hands and file the enclosed motions in which my best interests are finally represented for the very first time.

One such motion is titled petition for post conviction relief pursuant to Florida rules of criminal procedure 3.850/3.851 (successive case) flip to the 2nd page and begin reading from claim one. That motion was dismissed by the trial judge mere days after it was filed. I subsequently filed the enclosed petition for writ of Miranda to the Florida Supreme Court. Again, flip to page 2 and read from claim one. That motion is still pending, now 6 months after it was filed on 5/29/09. The fact that it’s still pending is a good sign because those types of motions are quickly denies when the argument has no merit, so I’m optimistic that I am semi close to making some progress. However, without an attorney who truly wants to fight for my life, I’m just a seal in shark infested waters, treading lightly and hoping to reach the beach.

 

Purple- relates to miscellaneous illustrations that will have footnotes to explain their relevance.

While there isn’t necessarily any one item here that clearly will make you say “he didn’t do it”. The collective groups of illustrations here certainly paint a very different picture that the one Steve meadows painted, which was painted with the intention to make a person draw only one conclusion. With the knowledge you now have, you have to ask yourself why meadows methodically and intentionally swept so many facts under the rug. The answer is that is wasn’t his intention to get it right, he only wanted a conviction, and being that I had given a forced confession. I was the easy CONVICTION and he conformed his tactics to make sure he secured the conviction…as he was running for re-election!!

It is not lost on me that an innocent life was taken and that her family instinctly needs someone to whom their hate and blame can be placed. I have a mother, 7 sisters, and 4 nieces… if our family experienced the horrible nightmarish tragedy that Kelli’s family and friends have dealt with, I can’t fathom the anguish we would live with thereafter. But I do have a good idea of how my thirst for revenge would be my oNE and only focus. I’ve kept that in mind each time I’ve been in the court room and received the coldest, hate filled stairs from the eyes that have shed countless tears for Kelli. And if hating me has somehow given her family something to focus on other than their senseless loss, then that’s a burden I can handle. My family too has experienced a similar loss, and if the state of Florida continues on its plan to kill me, another innocent life will be taken. Two wrongs do not make a right… the second wrong can be corrected before it’s too late! I’m innocent and I do not belong in this Hellish world the past seven of my life have been spent it. As previously stated, there have been thirty innocent exonerated from Florida’s death row. Not one was exonerated through efforts of a state appointed attorney who had worked their cases. No, their FREEDOM WAS regained by the help of their family, friends, and in some cases pen pals who saw their plight and were able to help. Through that collective effort, those thirty innocent people were able to obtain attorneys who fought for their lives and eventually won, even though it was sadly too late for a few. The others are out there in the world right now, living life with an appreciation most people will never understand… I know that somehow, some way I’ll have my day when I walk out of this prison and start living the productive, fruitful, happy life I was always destined to live. But I also know it’s going to take an attorney who will fight the battle along with my family, old friends, those of you will become my friends, and lots of hard work of my own. I hope today is the day when my push for freedom is strengthened by those of you who are willing and able to get behind me and give a push of your own… the appreciation ill have for that will never be conveyed with simple words.

In any event, I’m genuinely grateful that you’ve taken the time to hear me out, and I hope you’ll continue to read through the attached illustrations and draw your own conclusions about my predicament. If you feel I’m a worthy cause, you know how to contact me. If not, thank you for your time, have a great day, and good luck in all you do.      

 

Humbly, Paul Glenn Everett

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
                                                                                                                                    
 
 

 Beach Police Department
Booking
 
 

                 Case#

Offense

Date

Agency

Officer

 960349854  AGG BATTERY  06-07-1996  BCSO  MCCORMICK
 01-19224 DUI  06-08-2001  PCBPD  RUBEL 
 01-19224  POROTECTIVE CUSTODY  06-08-2001  PCBPD RUBEL 
 

Fred Wilson, A.K.A. Bubba, as well as his nephews Travis and Joey are natives of Panama City Beach. They are among the first few people I met only a day or two after I got there and I soon began selling them drugs. As locals who were familiar with other locals to whom I could potentially sell drugs to, I used them to bridge the gap between myself and that particular demographic, and therefore I spent a good bit of time with them over the weeks that followed. Although I knew the three of them, especially Bubba, were more than just a little bit sketchy, I didn’t think I’d be around that area long enough for that to have an effect on me… as I have said, my intentions were to hustle up a few thousand bucks and head west to California with the hopes that my “fresh start” would be waiting for me there or somewhere along the way. Unfortunately, that wasn’t to be.

 
 
 
I’ll first draw your attention to question 8, its answer, and reaction above. At age 41, he says he’s never gone over the age limit! Really!?? He’s had a DUI (as shown below his booking photos), but has never in his life gone over the speed limit?? A logical person knows that’s a lie!! If you infact come to that conclusion, notice the activity in that questions reaction above, now look at how very similar the activities are in the reactions to questions 4 and 6. Even as a layman, a person has to question how a so-called “expert” in voices stress tests can over look that strong similarity and conclude no deception. Steve Meadows gets the results he wants in Bay County!!!
 
                                                                                                        PANAMA CITY BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT
                                                                                    PANAMA CITY BEACH, FLORIDA
 
                                                                             PCBPD CASE NO. 01-31016
 

THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION PERTAINS TO THE DEATH OF KELLI BAILEY WAS OBTAINED BY INVESTIGATOR KEVIN KNIGHT:

 

            On November 3, 2001 this officer made contact with Mrs. Karie of Aleza Street. I was advised that she did not know the victim personally and did not recall seeing her. She however did recall seeing a strange man in the area around October 28, 2001. She stated that the man was approximately 5’05 tall, 19 to 20 years of age, with short brown hair. She stated that the man was walking down the street while she was in front of her residence; the man stopped and began to watch her from a vacant lot across the street. She stated that she went into the residence and that she had not seen the man since that date. Other than that, she did not recall any other strangers in the area.

 

The interview was concluded.

 

Notice the height of the man mentioned above. As it relates to the height of Wilson, At 5,01” and 120 pounds, and short hair (which he had at that time) Wilson can easily pass for a 20 year old from a “vacant lot across the street.”
 

                                                                                                                            Lead sheet

 

Pcbpd case no. 01-31016

Victim Kelly bailey

Date: November 5, 2001

 

Casey Rae, with a phone number of 235-6197, called stating that a school mate, John, was told by Travis that his friend, whose name starts with an N killed the lady on Lantana.

 

Sgt. Ray Scott    
 

                                                                                                           PANAMA CITY BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT

                                                                                    PANAMA CITY BEACH, FLORIDA

 

                                                                             PCBPD CASE NO. 01-31016

 

THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION PERTAINS TO THE DEATH OF KELLI BAILEY:

 

on wednesday novemember 7, 2001: at approximately 6:10 p.m. hours, a Mr. Jeff Johnson called the Panama City Beach Police Department and wanted to talk to a detective. This officer made contact with him and Mr. Johnson advised that he used to rent from Steve Colson and that he (Jeff) and his wife lived next to Ms. Bailey. He stated that that “really didn’t know” Ms. Bailey and thought it was strange that Steve Colson called him Friday night November 2,2001 at around ten or eleven o’clock p.m. and advised him that “Kelli had passed away” and that they “didn’t know how long she had been there”. Mr. Johnson thought it was strange that Steve Colson had called him and only wanted to pass on that information. He could offer nothing further.

 

Interview was concluded.

 

Lt. Chad Lindsay

 

 

                                                                                                           PANAMA CITY BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT

                                                                                    PANAMA CITY BEACH, FLORIDA

 

                                                                             PCBPD CASE NO. 01-31016

 

THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION PERTAINS TO THE DEATH OF KELLI BAILEY WAS OBTAINED BY INVESTIGATOR KEVIN KNIGHT:

 

On november3, 2001, this office made contact with a Mr. and Mrs. Shelby Norris, at Lantana Street. Both the individuals had stated that they were somewhat familiar with the victim but did not communicate with her on a regular basis. They believed the victim to be a much quit person. They stated that they knew the victim had a relationship with the neighbor across the street several months ago and they recalled that relationship ended because of a conflict with the man’s ex-wife. They had stated that the ex-wife of the neighbor, identified as “Steve”, had come over to complain about the victim and Steve’s relationship and had stated, the “girl was messing up their marriage.” They stated the ladies name was Tina and stated she was a bartender at Black Angus restaurant. They also stated that she was a very jealous woman. Mrs. Norris also stated that Steve’s daughter appeared to like the victim. They could offer no further information of the victim.

 

Mrs. Norris stated that the only other people that she had noticed were a white male who was walking down the street. She stated that he appeared to be very dirty and long blonde hair. He also had a mustache and beard. But she could not give any further information as to his whereabouts or residents.

 

The interview was concluded.

 

Lead sheet

Pcbpd case number: 01-31016

Victim: Kelli Bailey

Date: November 7, 2001

 

Paige Ellison called at 6:25 a.m. regarding a possibly tip. Ms. Ellison stated she met a man at Frank Brown Park. This man was acting weird. She said he stated he worked real estate out of his home. She described him a white male, blonde and balding. She kept her distance from him; he said “do you think I’m Ted Bundy or something?” Ms. Ellison said she believed the man’s name was Steve. This man never mentioned the murder but was just acing strange. He said he lived next to Charlie Lahan. Ms. Ellison was at that park rollerblading.

 

Sgt. Ray Scott  

 

PANAMA CITY BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT

PANAMA CITY BEACH, FLORIDA

 

PCBPD CASE NO. 01-31016

 

THEFOLLOWING INFORMATION PERTAINS TO THE DEATH OF KELLI BAILEy

 

on Tuesday November 6, 2001 at approximately 12:45 P.M. Hours, David Deese called the Panama City Beach Police Department and stated that he worked at the hospital with Ms. Bailey and that sometime this past summer Ms. Bailey told him that her neighbor, she had been dating, would watch her through her windows. He further stated that Ms. Bailey told him that on one occasion that while she was undressing, he (the neighbor) was looking at her through a window but that it did not bother her and that she just went to another room. Mr. Deese could offer no information and only wanted to pass on the aforementioned information.

                                               

Interview was concluded

Lt. Chad Lindsey

 

*As previously stated, Steve Colson is the neighbor*

 

 

 

 

 

 

           

 

        

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 



 

PANAMA CITY BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT

PANAMA CITY BEACH, FLORIDA

PCBPD CASE NO: 01-31016

DECEMBER 4, 2001

THE FOLLOWING INVESTIGATIVE REPORT WAS PREPARED BY SGT. RODNEY TILLEY:

 

On November 12, 2001At approximately 5:45 p.m., Lt. Lindsey and this investigator went to the residence of Michael Keith Moose, located at 506 Azalea Street. Upon making contact with Mr. Moose, Lt. Lindsey and this investigator did a follow-up interview concerning his whereabouts on the date of the homicide, November 2, 2001. Mr. Moose produced a list of customers that he had visited during that day involving his pool service business along with the names of people he spoke to during the day. The phone numbers of Mr. Moose’s residence and cell phone were obtained by Lt. Lindsey. These investigators were also invited to tour his residence, which we did, also covering the back yard area and his vehicle. Mr. Moose was very cooperative but also appeared to be very nervous and stated such. This investigator advised Mr. Moose of our process of eliminating individuals in the investigation at which time he was asked if he would cooperate to the point of conducting a voice stress analysis test, at which time he advised he would love to cooperate but that he was aware that these test were unreliable and stated the he may wish to speak to an attorney prior to submitting to such a test. With that these investigators back off of the request and did not mention it again during the interview. The interview lasted approximately 20 minutes and was ended with a very friendly attitude.  

On Thursday, November 8, 2001, at approximately 5:00 p.m., Sergeant Doug Pierce with the Panama City Police Department, with the use of his K-9 bloodhound, Hoover, attempted to track the route of the suspect by using the sweater that was found on Azalea Street. The K-9 tracked south on Azalea Street to a fenced area approximately 100 yards from the place where the jacket was found. From there he continued to track south across Middle Beach Road. Hoover then began to track in circles. Sergeant Pierce stated that when Hoover does this it means that he has lost the track and is trying to regain the scent. Hoover was then taken to the rear door of the victim’s house where he tracked east to Azalea Street then south again following the same track. Sergeant Pierce stated that it is better for the dog to track at night and that he would return and meet with this officer at 5:30 p. m. to try to regain a track.     

On Thursday, November 8, 2001, at approximately 5:30 p.m., Sergeant Pierce with the Panama City Police Department returned to the victim’s house and again tried to track as before. The K-9, Hoover, followed the same track down Azalea Street south until we reached across Middle Beach Road, at which time, he again lost the track. Sergeant Pierce asked if we could make a block for scent elimination. At this time Sergeant Pierce and I traveled east on Hibiscus Street then turned north on Wisteria Street. We continued to travel north until we reached the intersection of Wisteria Street and Petunia Street. While at the intersection of Petunia and Wisteria, Hoover appeared to pick up the scent he had been following earlier. Hoover tracked to the house at the corner of Wisteria and Petunia, 506 Wisteria. Hoover tracked to the door of this residence at which time contact was made with Mr. Moose. After talking with Mr. Moose for a short time I and Sergeant Pierce left the house. At this time, Sergeant Pierce stated that this did not mean that Mr. Moose is the suspect but, he does feel that Mr. Moose needs to be further interviewed.

v  All evidence collected in this case had been turned over to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement for analysis.

v  In and for the fourteen Judicial Circuit Court Bay county, Florida

v  Paul Glen Everett

Defendant

V.                                                                                                                          Case No. 01-2956

State of Florida

Plaintiff

Petition for post conviction relief pursuant to Florida rules of criminal procedure; 3.850, 3.851.

(Successive case)

Comes now the defendant, Paul Glen Everett, Prose, submitting to this honorable court an issue regarding pre-trial statements and newly discovered evidence in support of defendants claim that those statements were taken in violation of his rights protected by the Fifth Amendment.

 

Back Ground of Facts

1.      Defendant was found guilty of first degree murder, burglary accompanied with battery, and sexual battery, with serious physical force… verdict rendered November 21, 2002; the jury recommended a sentence of death… recommendation rendered November 22, 2002; on January 9 2003 this court entered a judgment of conviction and sentenced defendant to death with respect to murder in the first degree and consecutive life sentences with respect to the underlying charges.

 

2.      This matter was appealed to the Florida Supreme Court who denied relief and allowed the judgment, conviction, and sentence to stand on November 24, 2004.

 

3.      On March 29, 2006 defendant appealed for post-conviction relief with this honorable court and was granted an evidentiary hearing which was held December 17th, 18th, and 19th 2007. On July 17th, 2008 this honorable court  denied relief on all claims.

 

4.      To the best of the defendant’s knowledge, a subsequent appeal to the Florida Supreme Court has yet to be filed.

 

5.      This court has jurisdiction to consider this successive 3.850/3.851 motion. The issue contained herein is distinct and separate from the issue on appeal and thus, jurisdiction lies in this court. State v.savage, 598 50.2D 1016 (FLA 5th DC 1991) (trial court had jurisdiction to consider 3,850 motion because motion was not directed at case pending on appeal.) furthermore, under 3.851. Defendant must file this claim within one year upon discovering the new evidence for which this certain claim is based. Defendant respectfully requests this honorable court to consider this successive 3.850/3.851 motion and ultimately issue a decision based on the merits.

 

Claim one

Newly discovered evidence supports defendants claim that law enforcement officials violated defendant’s Fifth Amendment’s rights. The evidence supports this claim was discovering during the evidentiary hearing and therefore unpresentable  prior to or during said hearing.

Throughout the litigations regarding defendants pre-trail statements have been deceptive representations pertaining to how officers of the Panama City beach police department conductive the interrogations in conjunction with an Alabama detective and were eventually able to obtain a seemingly unprovoked confession. This honorable court, as well as the Florida Supreme Court, having been subjected to only selective information concerning how the statements were obtained, ruled in favor of the states claim that after defendant and invoked his right to remain silent until counsel be appointed, (on two occasions),he later retained contact with Sgt. Rodney Tilley “ expressing a desire to talk about the case.” This supposed “ Reinitiation of contact” by the defendant led this honorable court to rule the statements admissible, as was upheld by the Florida Supreme Court. Without more than defendants word against the word of arresting officials, further litigation of this issue was not possible in this honorable court.

However, during the evidentiary hearing in December of 2007, detective John Murphy of Baldwin County Sherriff’s Office (Alabama) gave testimony, via telephone, of his role as a go-between, acting on behalf of the Florida officers assigned to this case. While it was previously made to appear as though DET, Murphy’s contact with Everett was for the purpose of investigating unrelated Alabama cases, and that during those discussions Everett would express a desire to talk about this Florida case, DET. Murphy’s own testimony reveals that to be false. During DET. Murphy’s  testimony at the evidentiary hearing he stated his initial contact with Everett was about an Alabama case, which was before even the Florida officers initially contacted defendant. DET. Murphy stated that all further contact with Everett was pertaining to this Florida case, not an Alabama case as the state has made this honorable court believe. In fact, DET Murphy’s testimony also revealed that fact that Florida officials strategically decided to have DET Murphy initiate all contact with Everett in hopes that DET. Murphy could “get him to talk” as a result of a supposed “report” DET. Murphy had with defendant. (transcripts of the evidentiary hearing will reflect these allegations as fact)

Still choosing to be selective with fact and fiction DET. Murphy denied using scare tactics to elicit a confession. For example: repeatedly saying “Paul you have to confess… if not, the state of Florida will strap you to a table, put needles in you, and kill you.”  During such conversations DET Murphy would show crime scene photos consisting of the layout of the victims’ body. This strategy, coupled with redundant threats of the death penalty, was methodically designed to elicit an incriminating response. Although none of DET. Murphy’s own statements reflect the use of such scare tactics, this honorable court needs to look no further than LT. Chad Lindsey’s deposition, taken August 6, 2002 and it will be evident that threats of the death penalty created coercive environment and set the tone for the subsequent interrogations. (See exhibit- A… from line 6 of page 4 to line 15 of page 6) those statements by LT. Lindsey were made directly after Everett ended the initial interrogation by clearly stating “I wish to have a lawyer present…” which is documented in the first interview, dated November 15, 2001. Referring to his statement “Now’s the chance to tell the truth, you know, because I don’t want the State of Florida stick a needle in your arm.” LT. Lindsey explains in his deposition, “and it was done in a effort to maybe leave an impression for Mr. Everett.” It did, in fact, leave an impression which consumed every waken hour of Everett’s thoughts and eventually dictated Everett to make a false confession in a desperate attempt to save his life. After Lt. Lindsey’s threats of the death penalty, as well as numerous threats of the same flavor made by DET Murphy which he chooses to conceal, all subsequent statements should have been suppressed. In the denial of Everett’s direct appeal the Florida Supreme Court itself cited Rhode Island V. Innis, 446 U.S. 291 (1980) and specifically referred to the following language therein: . That is to say, the term “interrogation” under hat is to Miranda refers not only to express questioning, but also to any words or actions on the part of the police (other than those normally attendant to arrest and custody) that the police should know are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response from the suspect…”

Not only were Lt. Lindsey’s words known to likely elicit an incriminating response, they were spoken with the intention to do so, as Lt. Lindsey alludes to in his deposition. It is a bedrock principle of the law that a confession can never be received into evidence where a prisoner has been influenced by any threat or promise. Bram v. United States, 168 u.s. 532, 543, (1897) here, the entire questioning procedure utilized by law enforcement officials reveals a calculated attempt to influence, threaten, and cause defendant to make a coerced confession out of fear for his life.

At this point defendant is simply using Lt. Lindsey’s statement to illustrate the fact that there has been mass deception throughout the course of litigation regarding this issue of the violation of defendant’s Fifth Amendment rights. However, it is at this honorable court’s discretion to couple Lt. Lindsey’s statement with the testimony of Det. Murphy, which shed a more accurate light on the nature of his contact with Everett and recognize that the safeguards of Miranda were manipulated to appear as though they were kept intact but, in fact, were disregarded. With that recognition it will be evident to this honorable court that the original denial of the motion to supplies was erroneous, caused by, and based upon deceptive malfeasance by law enforcement officials. Accordingly, defendant asks that all convictions and sentences be overturned and that a new trial be granted without further delay. Alternately, defendant asks that an evidentiary hearing be granted.

 

Claim two

Ineffectiveness assistance of counsel

All previous counsel on behalf of Everett has fell below effective standards. Trial counsel, Walter smith led the line of questions which evoked Lt. Lindsay’s revelation of the threatening statement aimed at Everett that ”… was done in effort maybe leave an impression…” having taken that statement as a result of his own questioning, trial counsel was grossly ineffective to overlook and/or disregard its relevance. Furthermore, trial counsel was ineffective for his failure to secure the presence of dept. Murphy at the suppression hearing, which in turn denied defendant of crucial testimony that would have been very significant at the suppression hearing and would have likely resulted in a ruling favorable to the defense. Counsel for direct appeal (David Davis) as well as counsel for post conviction (Charles lykes jr.) each had access to, and therefore knowledge of, Lt. Lindsay’s deposition. Failure to recognize and litigate the revelation of the threatening statement therein was ineffective assistance of counsel. Sufficient efforts from an effective attorney almost certainly would have resolved this issue with an appropriate outcome years ago based on lt. Lindsay’s statement alone. Should this matter go before his honor for an evidentiary hearing and/or trial I would humbly ask his honor to appoint new, Conflict-free counsel this cause as well as for subsequent proceedings. As an alternative I would ask current counsel be allowed to litigate the issue in this successive motion, and that he be compensated accordingly.

Tolling of time

In the event new counsel is appointed to this case, defendant would ask this honorable court to grant an extension of 180 days to the overall procedural time-clock as that it would take that amount of time for new counsel to be familiar with the case and develop new strategy. In an event, defendant asks this honorable court for no less than a 90 day extension to the overall procedural time-clock as the outcome of this successive motion will alter the course of pending appeals. Defendant also asks this honorable court to hold all pending proceedings in abeyance until this matter be resolved

In conclusion

Defendant respectfully asks this honorable court to look at the totality of claim one’s issue, from the pre-trial motions to suppress as well as all motions and rulings regarding said issue to date, and recognize the necessity of an immediate new trail and/or evidentiary hearing based upon the deceptive measures taken to get a conclusion, which very possibly would have never transpired has arresting officials acted within the realm of the laws integrity.

Respectfully submitted

Paul Everett

December 5,2008

Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing motion and that the facts stated in it are true.

Paul Everett

Certificate of service

Copies sent by u.s. mail to:

Honorable Don T. Simmons, Cicuit Judge

JDE grammar, ESQ, assignment State Attorney

Eassandra K. Dolgin, ESQ, assistant attorney General

Harold Bazzel, clerk of the Circuit Court, Bay County

Roger Maas, communion on capital cases

Charles Lykes, Jr, appointed registry counsel

In and for

Florida Supreme Court

 

Paul Glenn Everett

Plaintiff                                                                                                        case no. sc03-73

Vs.                                                                                                          Trail court no: 01-2956-c

State of Florida

Defendant

Petition for writ of mandamus

Comes now, Paul Glenn Everett, pro se, submitting to this honorable court this petition for writ of mandamus.

Background facts

1.      Plaintiff is a death row inmate who was convicted of first degree murder, burglary accompanied with battery, and sexual battery with serious sexual force; verdict rendered November 21, 2002. On November 22, 2002 the jury recommended a sentence plaintiff to death with respect to murder in the first degree murder and consecutive life sentences with respect to the underlying charges.

2.      This matter was appealed to the Florida supreme court who denied relief and allowed the judgment, conviction, and sentence to stand on November 24, 2004

3.      On March 29, 2006 plaintiff appealed for post-conviction relief with the trail court and was granted an evidentiary hearing which was held December 17, 18, and 19, 2007. On July 17, 2008 the trail court denied relief on all claims.

4.      On December 5, 2008 plaintiff filed a successive 3.850/3.851, pro se, with the trail court based upon newly discovered evidence which was obtained on December 18, 2007 during the evidentiary hearing, and was therefore not able to present prior to and/or during said evidentiary hearing. On December 17, 2008 circuit Judge Don T SIrmons dismissed the successive motion.

5.      To the best of plaintiff’s knowledge, after July 17, 2008 there have been no motions filed by appointed counsel on plaintiff’s behalf. On fact a motion of any kind has been filed by appointed counsel, plaintiff is fully unaware of it.

 

Claim one

Judge Don T. SIrmons erred in dismissing plaintiffs pro se successive 3.850/3.851 motion.

On December 18, 2007, detective John Murray of the Baldwin County (Alabama) sheriff’s office gave testimony at plaintiff’s evidentiary hearing, detailing his contact with the plaintiff. Prior to this testimony it was made to appear as though a confession was obtained by panama city beach police, in conjunction with det. John Murphy, as the result of plaintiff re-initiating contact with Florida officials via Det. Murphy throughout the litigation regarding plaintiffs confession the courts have been lead to believe that dat. Murphy was making contact with plaintiff for the purpose of investigating unrelated Alabama cases and that during those investigative discussions plaintiff would “express a desire” to talk about this Florida case, and therefore all claims of violation of fifth amendment rights have been routinely denied. However, det. Murphy’s own account of his contact with plaintiff shows that his initial contact with plaintiff was in fact about an Alabama case, but happened before Florida’s officials ever began their investigation of plaintiff’s involvement in this Florida case. At that point DET. Murphy and plaintiff spike only of a minor offense committed in Alabama, nothing about this Florida case. Approximately one week later Panama City Beach police came to the Alabama jail where plaintiff was in custody and began their initial interrogation regarding this Florida case, which was ended quickly as a result of plaintiff invoking his right to remain silent until an attorney be appointed. In the subsequent days, the Alabama detective, John Murphy, became familiar with detective Rodney Tilley of the Panama City beach police dep. In December 2007 at plaintiff’s evidentiary hearing, DET, Murphy revealed two important facts about how his and DET. Tilley’s conversations and mutual strategies occurred; 1. DET. Murphy’s initial contact by “expressing a desire” to talk about this Florida case during discussions about an un-related Alabama case. 2. DET. Murphy’s testimony also disclosed DET. Murphy would initiate all contact with plaintiff with the hopes he could “get Everett to talk” as a result of a supposed “rapport” DET. Murphy had established with plaintiff. These two facts had never been revealed prior to the evidentiary hearing in December of 2007, and thus DET. Murphy’s testimony amounts to newly discovered evidence, which strongly supports plaintiff’s claim that incriminating statements used to convict him were taken in violation of plaintiff’s Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights. Pursuant to 3.851, plaintiff had one year to file a successive motion for post-conviction relief upon the discovery of the newly discovered evidence. During the only conversation plaintiff has had with appointed counsel since the evidentiary hearing, plaintiff was told by counselor that it wasn’t necessary to file a successive motion on this issue and it was made clear that the counselor had no intentions of filing such a motion. However, it is clear that the profound relevance of this newly discovered evidence makes a successive motion for post-conviction very necessary, contrary to appointed counsel’s belief. Therefore, knowing appointed counsel would not be filing a successive motion; plaintiff filed the motion prose in order to insure the validity of the newly discovered evidence would not expire as of December 18, 2008, once year from the date of obtaining the evidence. That motion (see exhibit-A.1) was filed December 5, 2008, received by Judge Don T. Sirmons on December 8, 2008, and dismissed by said judge on December 17, 2008 due to the fact that plaintiff is represented by counsel… appointed counsel who was not going to file a motion that needed to be filed, and therefore the circumstances dictated plaintiff to file the motion pro se, or else take the risk of losing evidence that almost certainly merits a new trial free of the illegally obtained confession. In regards to a 3.851 motion pending motion, has not been told about it by counsel, has not received a copy of it, and is fully to the successive motion, was filed march 29, 2006 and was eventually denied on all claims on July 17, 2008, which means there was no 3.851 motion pending when judge sermons used that as a reason (in part) to dismiss the succession 3.851 motion. In any event, a pending motion that has a set deadline, such as the one year time period a person is allotted to bring newly discovered evidence to the courts attention, otherwise a pending motion would be venerable to “being put on the backburner” intentionally so that one year time period could expire, which in turn creates the possibility of mass injustice nationwide, and all branches of law from criminal law to civil law.

In conclusion

Plaintiff humbly asks this honorable court to grant this petition for writ of Miranda and direct and the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing based upon the issue outlined in exhibit – A.1 (including its exhibit, enclosed as exhibit – A.2) which I pray this court will fully digest and consider in its decision in this cause. Plaintiff would also ask this honorable court to appoint new conflict-free counsel to litigate the successive 3.851, should this court order an evidentiary hearing be held, in the event this cause is in fact sent back to the trail court for an evidentiary hearing, plaintiff asks this honorable court to hold all pending proceedings in abeyance until this matter be resolved, and that the overall procedural time-clock be tolled accordingly.

Respectfully submitted

Paul Everett

May 29, 2009

Under penalties of perjury, I declare I have reviewed the foregoing motion and that the facts stated in it are true.

Paul Everett

Certificate of service

Copies sent by U.S. mail to:

The Florida supreme court

Steve white, ESQ, assistant attorney general

Roger mass, commission on capitol case