alleged altered transcripts

From page 10 of the plea hearing transcript :

The following is a break down of the above, noting the series of questions asked in rapid fire succession, where the Court expected a single answer to all the questions?? :

8 questions (A)-(H) :

[15] THE COURT: All right. And so - and

(A) you don't want to risk that potential [16] downside outcome {?}

(B) and so you're willing to enter a plea of guilty pursuant to Alford {?}

or

(C) [17] ask me to accept your plea of guilty, a straight plea of guilty with a waiver of any [18] appellate rights. {?}

(D) So we're not going to see you back here {?}

- we're going to go to [19] sentencing on a one to ten. Whatever that goes, that goes. No promises obviously [20] made. But if you're in prison and you're dissatisfied with that outcome,

(E) you're [21] saying your lawyer says you're waiving any procedural defects.{?}

(F) You're not going [22] to be back here with a new lawyer on a different day saying: Judge, I didn't make a [23] statement of guilt. I wasn't guilty. That procedurally this didn't work, this didn't [24] happen correctly.{?}

(G) Is that true?

(H) So you're waiving that.{?}

[25] THE DEFENDANT: No, I know what I'm doing.

The following demonstrates the logic problems that occur when eight questions are asked expecting a single answer :

How can questions (B) and (C) have the same answer?

Questions (E), (G), and (H) require a "yes" answer in order to be consistent with a "no" answer to questions (A), (D), and (F).

It is this kind of logic problem that demonstrates my allegation that the plea hearing was extensively altered.

The following is my allegation of what I recall the Court asked me :

THE COURT: So, we're not going to see you back here saying you weren't guilty?

My answer was correctly stated in the transcript. Where my answer meant:

"No, I won't be back here, I know what I am doing pleading to a fictitious charge."

Which follows logically to the Court's brief single question.

The foregoing was put in the federal record in ecf 51, pages 11-13.

Also, why is the Court asking about the Alford plea, "...so you're willing to enter a plea of guilty persuant to Alford..." When the matter was already explained and settled, and the guilty plea had already been signed?

Therefore, using logical inferences and deductions, the foregoing allegations demonstrates what happens when a transcript is carelessly and feloniously altered.

Go to next alleged altered transcripts II