Thursday, March 12, 2009

Raynella Dossett Leath murder trial with Deputy Robocop Sniper Update

Pirate News CourtWatch 10 March 2009

UPDATE: "Once a revered Knox County Criminal Court judge, Richard Baumgartner on Tuesday shuffled into a federal courtroom in shackles, accused of covering up the drug-trafficking crimes of the mistress he met via a Drug Court program he helped found. Baumgartner, who sent thousands of people to prison in his nearly two-decade-long tenure as judge, was arrested Tuesday as he drove away from his East Knox County farm and hauled into U.S. District Court with shackles on his feet and a chain wrapped around his belly and connected to handcuffs."
-Jamie Satterfield, Knoxville News Sentinel, Former Judge Richard Baumgartner faces 7 federal counts of failing to report felonious activity, May 16, 2012

UPDATE: Reporters Committee on Freedom of the Press reports on the ban of Pirate News in this case

by John Lee
Pirate News TV

Black Widow Trial #2

KNOXVILLE, TENNESSEE -- Raynella Dossett Leath is charged with the premeditated first-degree murder of her 2nd husband David Leath, who died of a single gunshot wound to the head. Three shots were fired, with the 2nd shot fatal. Hung jurors predecided case before trial, which is the crime of perjury and contempt of court.

Why did Judge Baumgartner refuse to allow evidence of Raynella Dossett Leath's prior felony conviction for shooting at the husband of her 1st dead husband's mistress and love child? She lured Steve Walker and then fired five shots at him. She pled guilty to attempted murder, er, aggrevated assault, but that felony conviction was expunged, which is not allowed in Tennessee. This 2nd murder occurred while she was on parole for that shooting, only six months after that shooting.

Bea Arthur is not the defendant in this case, no matter how bad she hates men

Since when is shooting at your husband's mistress' husband not relevant to shooting your husband?

Dossetts' daughter Katie Butler testified "My mother wouldn't hurt anybody". This "opened the door" to prosecutors' cross exam, "But your mother pled guilty to chasing a man and shooting five bullets at him!" But prosecutors FAILED to ask that question. Law School 101. This proves that prosecutors sandbagged on this case, losing it on purpose.

Why did Judge Baumgartner refuse to allow Ed Dossett's body be exhumed to check for morphine overdose and other drugs? The medical examiner in that case, Dr Randall Pedigo, was gunned down by TBI cops for homosexual rape and hiding guns for KPD-approved murder of cops.

Since when is cattle stampede a cause of death for district attorneys?

Why did the judge set bail at "an unbelievably low" price of $5,000 for first degree murder?

Is the black widow an assassin for the mafia and drug-dealing intelligence agenies that control Knoxville? Is Baumgartner protecting those assassins?

James Bell is the best and highest paid defense lawyer in town, who often defends police officers -- and hitmen employed by federal police agencies, such as Charles Daniel Gray, who Ed Dossett wanted to prosecute before his untimely death. This mass-murdering serial-killing drug-dealing hitman now works in the Knox DA's office as a salaried "informant", while homicide prosecutor Bob "Dr Death" Jolly was fired and blacklisted for convicting government assassins.

Deputy Robocop Sniper Trial

The Clifford Clark Redflex sniper case was scheduled for a discovery hearing in Baumgartner's court yesterday, right in front of Court TV cameras.

The hearing was transferred to Judge Leibowitz' court, and TV cameras were banned. To be exact, only Pirate News TV was banned, despite a written emergency motion to the court per Local Rules, and the US Constitution requiring public trials and free press.

A discovery meeting was scheduled for the defense immediately after. KPD and prosecutors destroyed all evidence that the camera was shot, by hiding/destroying/reusing the camera housing with alleged bullet holes, and hiding/destroying the 3 alleged bullets.

The alleged camera with bullet holes was actually removed by contractors on the same day of the hearing, replaced by Lasercraft cameras (that export 90% of ticket taxes to England and Communist China).

The audio portion of KPD's in-car video was destroyed, which would have proven perjury of the cop's initial testimony that Mr Clark "confessed" (which the cop recanted under oath in court).

The trial for March 26 was rescheduled, since the Redflex witness "was out of the country" that month (Redflex is located in AUSTRALIA not Arizona).

Judge Leibowitz and Baumgartner both agreed that the prosecution will be dismissed with prejudice if the search and/or traffic stop was invalid, to be decided in written order before May 1st.

Court TV was not allowed to see this world-famous case in Baumgartner's court, perhaps because Knox County deputies claim to be the actual sniper(s), and may be subpoenaed to testify to that fact.

Judge Baumgartner tells hung jury to get back to work

Last month, Baumgartner convicted a Vietnam veteran for sexual assault, since shooting ordinary video at a public swimming pool is now classified as kiddie porn. All parents and journalists can now be arrested for kiddie porn. And the jury got home in time for dinner.

It was creepifyin to see Judge Baumgartner in city council with his $250,000 stripper, bragging how he "cured" her of shoplifting by keeping her out of jail...

I was threatened with a $150,000 lawsuit from CTV for rebroadcasting my own public speech during that same city council.

Is this video why Pirate News TV was banned from cable access by CTV?

Donate to Pirate News Legal Defense Fund

See also:

Robocop camera ticket companies bribe EACH politician $72,000 per year

Tennessee Rules of Evidence

Rule 402. Relevant evidence generally admissible; irrelevant evidence inadmissible. —All relevant evidence is admissible except as provided by the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of Tennessee, these rules, or other rules or laws of general application in the courts of Tennessee. Evidence which is not relevant is not admissible.

Advisory Commission Comments. Once evidence satisfies the definition of relevance, it becomes admissible unless a rule excludes it.

Rule 403. Exclusion of relevant evidence on grounds of prejudice, confusion, or waste of time. —Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.

Advisory Commission Comments. The Tennessee Supreme Court approved this rule for both civil and criminal cases in State v. Banks, 564 S.W.2d 947 (Tenn. 1978).

Rule 404. Character evidence not admissible to prove conduct; exceptions; other crimes. —(a) Character Evidence Generally. —Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity with the character or trait on a particular occasion, except:

(1) Character of Accused. —Evidence of a pertinent character trait offered by the accused or by the prosecution to rebut the same.

(2) Character of Victim. —Evidence of a pertinent character trait of the victim of crime offered by an accused or by the prosecution to rebut the same, or evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the victim was the first aggressor.

(3) Character of a Witness. —Evidence of the character of a witness as provided in Rules 607, 608, and 609.

(b) Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts.–Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity with the character trait. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes. The conditions which must be satisfied before allowing such evidence are:

(1) The court upon request must hold a hearing outside the jury’s presence;

(2) The court must determine that a material issue exists other than conduct conforming with a character trait and must upon request state on the record the material issue, the ruling, and the reasons for admitting the evidence;

(3) The court must find proof of the other crime, wrong, or act to be clear and convincing; and

(4) The court must exclude the evidence if its probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. [As amended by order filed January 31, 2003, effective July 1, 2003.]

Advisory Commission Comments. Part (a) has always been the law in Tennessee for criminal prosecutions.

T.C.A. § 40-17-119 [repealed; see 1991 comments] regulates character evidence offered to prove a rape victim's alleged consent.

In civil actions, Tennessee is one of a minority of jurisdictions admitting character evidence in some situations to prove circumstantially conduct involving "moral turpitude." Spears & Solomon v. International Insurance Co., 60 Tenn. 370 (1872). The proposed rule would change that minority position; character would be inadmissible circumstantially in all civil cases. Of course, if character is directly at issue in a civil action, such as in a defamation action, character evidence necessarily is relevant and admissible under Rule 405(b).

The Commission drafted Part (b) in accord with the Supreme Court's pronouncements in State v. Parton, 694 S.W.2d 299 (Tenn. 1985). There the Court established precise procedures to emphasize that evidence of other crimes should usually be excluded. In the exceptional case where another crime is arguably relevant to an issue other than the accused's character —issues such as identity (including motive and common scheme or plan), intent, or rebuttal of accident or mistake —the trial judge must first excuse the jury. Then the judge must decide what material issue other than character forms a proper basis for relevancy. If the objecting party requests, the trial judge must state on the record the issue, the ruling, and the reason for ruling the evidence admissible. Finally, the judge must always weigh in the balance probative value and unfair prejudice. If the danger of unfair prejudice outweighs the probative value, the court should exclude the evidence even though it bears on a material issue aside from character. Finally, according to Parton, the trial judge must find that the evidence is "clear and convincing"that the defendant committed another crime.

Advisory Commission Comments [1991]. [In place of the second paragraph of earlier language, which is rescinded, insert the following language as the new second paragraph:]

The character of the victim of a sex crime is not governed by Rule 404(a)(2), but rather by T.R.Evid. 412.

Advisory Commission Comment [2003]. The third condition for admitting other crimes, clear and convincing proof, has been required by case law before and after adoption of the Rules of Evidence. This principle was first enunciated in Wrather v. State, 179 Tenn. 666 (1943), reversing a mother’s conviction for murdering her adult son by arsenic poisoning. Evidence that she killed her father-in-law and brother-in-law with arsenic was not clear and convincing. The Supreme Court again approved this standard in State v. Parton, 694 S.W.2d 299 (1985).

Advisory Commission Comment [2005]. The word “person” in Rule 404(b) has been construed to refer solely to the defendant in a criminal prosecution. State v. Stevens, 78 S.W.3d 817 (Tenn. 2002).

Rule 405. Methods of proving character. —(a) Reputation or Opinion. —In all cases in which evidence of character or a trait of character of a person is admissible, proof may be made by testimony as to reputation or by testimony in the form of an opinion. After application to the court, inquiry on cross-examination is allowable into relevant specific instances of conduct. The conditions which must be satisfied before allowing inquiry on cross-examination about specific instances of conduct are:

(1) The court upon request must hold a hearing outside the jury's presence,

(2) The court must determine that a reasonable factual basis exists for the inquiry, and

(3) The court must determine that the probative value of a specific instance of conduct on the character witness's credibility outweighs its prejudicial effect on substantive issues.

(b) Specific Instances of Conduct. —In cases in which character or a trait of character of a person is an essential element of a charge, claim, or defense, proof may also be made of specific instances of that person's conduct.

Advisory Commission Comments. This proposed rule changes Tennessee law, which does not permit character to be proved by personal opinion.

Cross-examination of character witnesses for the accused raises a delicate problem. The examining lawyer can ask the witness about rumored arrests and charges concerning the defendant, because the witness's knowledge of the rumors might impeach the witness in the eyes of the jurors. If the witness admits having heard unfavorable rumors, the jury may decide that the witness's reputation or opinion testimony is entitled to little weight. If the witness has not heard the rumors, the witness's testimony may likewise be taken with a grain of salt because the witness is unfamiliar with the accused or the accused's community.

The indirect effect of such a cross-examination may be the more damaging to the accused. While the jury will be instructed to consider the rumors only as affecting the character witness's credibility, the practical danger is that such rumors —even if untrue —place the defendant's character in a bad light with the jurors. In an effort to alleviate the problem, the proposed rule sets out detailed procedural safeguards. The cross-examiner must apply to the court for permission to inquire into specific instances of conduct, the jury must be excused, and the court must determine both that a factual basis exists and that probative value for impeachment outweighs prejudicial effect on the accused's character.

Part (b) allows substantive proof of specific acts where the character is an element of a cause of action or a defense. For instance, the defendant who called a defamed plaintiff a "crook"can prove the plaintiff embezzled funds.

Photo Tickets Pad Campaign Coffers of Arizona Politicians

Arizona politicians have collected $36,265,795 in campaign cash from a tax on speeding tickets since 1999.

10 March 2009

"Clean elections" defined as money laundering.
Poly ticks defined as many bloodsucking creatures.

A tax levied on speeding tickets funds the re-election efforts of two-thirds of Arizona's politicians and provides lawmakers with a personal financial incentive to protect controversial photo enforcement programs. In 1999, a ten percent surcharge was imposed on all traffic tickets to create the "Citizens Clean Election Fund." The fund allows politicians to avoid tedious fundraising efforts.

After raising just $5 each from 220 people in a district, candidates for public office qualify for public financing money to match private expenditures. In effect, these lawmakers collect $16.50 for their campaigns each time a photo radar ticket is issued on an Arizona freeway.

This adds up to big money. In 2008, traffic tickets generated $10,095,771 in revenue for the clean elections fund. Out of this amount, $7,710,739 million was disbursed to lawmakers and candidates during the primary and general elections -- an average of $72,063 each. In just the past four months, the new freeway speed camera program has already added another $3.3 million to the total amount collected for lawmakers. Over the past four election cycles, Arizona politicians collected a total of $36,265,795 in campaign cash from the tax on speeding tickets. Opponents of the state photo ticketing program are crying foul.

"Photo radar pays for politicians to get elected," Shawn Dow, a volunteer for the activist group, told TheNewspaper. "Voters want the cameras gone but the politicians want them to stay since it pays for their election. This is the reason that the people believe our government is corrupt."

Dow raised the election funding issue before the state House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee last Thursday while testifying against House Bill 2170. This legislation is portrayed as a repeal of former Governor Janet Napolitano's freeway photo program, but the text of the proposal actually allows freeway photo ticketing to continue against truckers and other holders of commercial vehicle licenses.

Some of the biggest supporters of photo radar are recipients of significant ticket funding.

"Photo-radar tickets aren't issued," state Senator Rebecca Rios (D-Apache Junction) told the Arizona Republic in February 2008. "They're earned."

Rios herself earned $35,634 in campaign funds from speeding tickets last year. Other legislators appear less supportive of photo radar by introducing legislation that make minor modifications to the way programs are run. State Representative John Kavanagh (R-Fountain Hills), for example, introduced House Bill 2722 last year which would have mandated that the profits from any local jurisdiction's use of a speed camera on a state highway be directed into the Arizona Highway Patrol Fund so that it could be used to fund additional traffic ticketing details. Kavanagh has taken $156,654 in campaign funding from speeding tickets.

The clean elections fund does have other sources of revenue besides traffic tickets. A $5 check-off on income tax forms generated about $6 million which was spent on "voter education" efforts directed by the Citizens Clean Elections Commission. Money left over in the fund from the off-years without elections goes into the general fund.

Georgia: Red Light Cameras Struggle in Face of Longer Yellow

Lilburn, Georgia suspends red light camera program after extended yellow time cut violations by 80 percent.

On January 1, a new Georgia law kicked in forcing a one-second increase in the duration of the yellow warning light at intersections with red light cameras. The result has been devastating for red light camera makers as violations -- and revenue -- immediately plunged for the months of January, February and March. Last week, the city of Norcross dumped photo enforcement. Now the UK-owned red light camera maker Lasercraft is offering its customers a 90-day suspension of service to prevent cities from dropping their automated ticketing contracts. The cities of Lilburn and Snellville accepted this offer yesterday and suspended their red light camera programs.

"With the passage of House Bill 77, effective January 1, 2009, there has been a precipitous decline in the number of citations issued through the program," Lilburn Police Chief J.B. Davidson wrote in a memo to the city council.

The mandated increase in signal time created dramatic and instant results. In 2008, Lasercraft issued an average of 1,559 citations each month. In January, that number dropped 80 percent to just 313. Norcross also saw an 80 percent drop in violations. According to a 2001 report by the Office of the U.S. House Majority Leader, the findings in Lilburn and Norcross are not coincidental. The report argued that changes in national signal timing guidelines systematically reduced the amount of warning time available to motorists. It argued further that those with a financial incentive in using enforcement to deal with the additional violations created may have played a role in the changes (view report).

"This strongly suggests that inadequate yellow time is the major cause of red-light entries," the Congressional report stated. "If the vast majority of red light entries occur in the first second after the yellow light expires, it is reasonable to assume an additional second of yellow time on that light will yield a nearly 80 percent decrease in red light entries."

To date, Lilburn's three red light camera intersections have issued 57,528 tickets worth $4,026,960. Thanks to the longer yellow, however, monthly income from the program dropped $80,000 forcing Lasercraft to pause to discover what more might be done.

"The program vendor has proposed a plan to suspend the program for a ninety-day period, and the vendor will waive all Lasercraft charges during the suspension period," Davidson wrote.

Lilburn voted to accept the suspension to give Lasercraft time to come up with a plan to increase the number of citations. In a letter to Davidson, Lasercraft officials hinted that deactivating some cameras and presumably moving them to higher volume intersections could be part of the solution.

"In ninety days, on or before June 7th, the city and Lasercraft will meet to review the most current citation counts and make a decision as to reactivation of approaches, continuation of the suspension period, or de-commission of the program," Lasercraft Regional Director Ty Sellers wrote.

Lasercraft's letter also implied that violations may increase as drivers adapt to the longer yellow. This has not proved true in places such as Fairfax County, Virginia where the benefit of an increased yellow time appeared permanent. A 1985 report by the Institute of Transportation Engineers summarized the best opinion of experts as confirming the permanence of the benefit view report in PDF, see page 8).

"Research has consistently shown that drivers do not, in fact, adapt to the length of the yellow," the ITE report stated.

Although it is too early to draw any conclusions, accident data for January and February appear positive for the intersections with longer yellow. A copy of the Lasercraft letter and the police chief's memo to city council are available in a 325k PDF file at the source link below.

Source: Details on Suspension of Red Light Camera Program, City of Lilburn, Georgia and Lasercraft, 3/10/2009

See also:

Battle of Athens Tennessee 1946 - 500 citizens open fire and make citizens arrests of 300 crooked cops for bogus traffic tickets

75% of judges are not licensed lawyers - Since judges (prosecutors) in traffic court are not required to have a license to practice law, how can they require citizens to buy a license to travel?

Constitutional Right to Travel - Police officer Jack McLamb says you don't need a Communist driver's license internal passport extorted at gunpoint by police state death squads

1 comment:

Dragonater said...

Judge Baumgartner suspended and facing felony charges: