While it is perhaps noble to believe the application of law can fix a case of such magnitude, it is completely naïve:
As what difference does it make what brilliant motion one presents if the court of appeals can just fabricate evidence that simply doesn’t exist.
Since Adam Braseel’s conviction , the court record continues on with a fatal flaw of damaging false evidence, the altering of witness testimony, something perhaps planted, that I certainly am going to try to find out how it got there and by whose hand.
In 2010 we see the lie in the court of appeals opinion, where it is claimed the neighbor, Angie White, identified Adam’s’ car by a particular dent. The court then uses this as reasoning for there being sufficiency of evidence to convict. Which perhaps could be argued, if the original claim were in the remotest sense true. But it is not. And embarrassingly, any one who reads the transcript knows this.
Incredibly, this same false claim again surfaces in the Attorney General’s motion, written By Andrew Coulam, where they ask the court to reverse Judge Angels decision vacating Adam’s conviction.
Now I know Andrew Coulam ordered the trial transcripts, and am sure he read them. But why does he not cite the actual court record for his claim – he cites the 2010 appeals decision.
But didn’t he read Angie White’s testimony? Don’t tell me he did, but then chose to ignore the truth and use the lie from the appeals court to attempt to reverse Angels decision. Is this really how they do things?
This dent story is the only piece of collaborative evidence, and it is completely fabricated, yet this has been on the record for seven years.
If you read the trial transcripts, one thing is completely clear. Angie White testifies she did not see a dent. And as much as the prosecutor tried to trick her by showing her a picture of Adam’s dented car while at the same time asking her if she saw a gold colored car – it was White that had to say NO – I did not see a dent like you are showing me in the picture. It appears Ms White was Coached and Larry Davis did an “interview” with White that was not turned over to the defense
She said she saw a gold colored car alright – a shiny late model, she said.
And here the story unfolds.
Another witness, Jay Douglas, also saw a gold colored car matching the description Angie white gives. Not Adams dented car.
And here, we should have seen this dent story turn around on them, and would have – if Jay Douglas’s statement hadn’t been altered by the sheriff, in effect burying it and hiding the real truth from the defendant that there was a Gold colored car at the crime scene, and it wasn’t his.
This is a Brady violation. A constitutional violation. It is willful and it is exculpatory.
But going back to Jay Douglas seeing this car – he said he saw a couple get out and talk to Malcolm, the man, six foot with black hair with a blonde haired woman – these individuals can now be asserted to be at Malcolm’s as part of his pill mill operation.
So we now see that this altering of evidence by the Court of Appeals, leads down the path to more altered evidence by the Sheriffs office to cover up the other Gold Colored Car – which covers up the couple and what kind of business they did at Malcom’s. Which covers up the drug ring.
A drug ring. Hmmm. This is the very thing that chief investigator Sgt Michael Brown first told me. That Malcolm “paid the price” for the feud between the nurse he was in business with – that Malcolm killed Krista Garner’s horses when he was cut off from the pill supply after she was being investigated for medicaid fraud in conjunction with illicit pain pill dealings and he was being questioned – she still owed him 65k.
Sheriff Myers made the claim that he could find no proof of the horses being killed, but that’s not what the chief investigative officer Michael Brown says.
And here you see why they did not want Michael Brown on the stand, that if he did make a report the sheriff and prosecution destroyed it.
Because he WOULD talk about the drug business like he did to me, And he would say Malcolm paid the price – that he did kill those horses.
Malcolm was killed by his own clan and it’s extensions and they blamed it on an outsider – and they did it over time – allowing a prime suspect to finger some outsider to get an arrest – then bit by bit letting those with personal interests to cover up their parts in the play to create a guilty person out of nothing. Some probably believing their own stories after a while.
But keeping Brown out of the picture led to a problem, since he was the one who discovered both crime scenes – and this leads to the Perjury of TBI agent Larry Davis.
Since Brown was the true investigator of the crime scene – Davis would have to claim that he was the one who walked into the house and found the weapons. Which is as far from the real truth as it gets. There were no weapon in the house when Davis walked in. But by saying Davis discovered the crime scene, they are removing the chief investigative officer from the picture, Someone who knew something andwanted to say it.
The proof is in the pudding:
During the trial there was something blatantly missing. No one talked about what Brown talked about. And what we all know is now a proven fact. No one mentioned what Malcolm did with Nurse Garner and Dr Florence, or his arrest records. No one asked those who claimed to live there, who else came to Malcom’s house – besides this person you claim “did it” – for instance a Blonde and a Dark Haired Man in a Gold Colored Car. And nothing about the murdered high dollar – Prized Arabian Horses.
The silence is deafening.
And this is what happened in the Adam Braseel Case.
The french psychoanalyst called it “the signifier” – or the lie that hides the truth, when disecting Edgar Allan Poe’s, “The Purloined Letter,” where the great detective C. August Dupin discovers the Queens blackmail letter in plain site, yet inside out, where the police had thoroughly scoured.
The inverted letter in this case is the overlooked paragraph from the Tennessee Court of Appeal’s opinion, and again popping up in the Attorney Generals brief, where the small detail of a dented car fender leads to an epic prohibition style tale of mountain decadence of rogue doctors and patient roundups for bodies to write prescriptions to – something so many cashed in on – the windfall money maker – and no on would ruin it by talking. Not even if an innocent man was convicted for murder.
And oh how a group can create a guilty story for someone when it is convenient for them to do so.
This is why, that in a case like this, the only way to get someone released is through the permision and will of the public – to force the court and the Attorney General to first see and then remove it’s error.
Because who would have thought it was them all along.
The signifier – signifies the avoidance of a certain truth which if discovered would reveal our human condition to not be as good as we wold like to believe.
It is interesting to me, in talking with Adam, who has no idea who Lacan is, how closely these psychological observations mirror what his conception of Sin and God seem to be.
Perhaps there is a key somewhere her to how we all might learn to get along someday.
Court Of Appeals claims White saw dent. Page 11 paragraph 3.
AG Claims page 24 – bottom
Angie White Testimony: Trial Transcript – Volume One, page 101, line one.
Prosecutor Strain shows White a picture of Adams car – the driver side with the dent;
Not recognizing this she says.
1 I would recognize that because it has a dent in
2 the front and I do not recognize the dent.
(Strain then puts up the other side, when asked she says it looks like the car she saw but agrees she is not sure that is the car she saw. Angie white explicitly offered she did not see a dent.
Any excuse of a language barrier here is a non excuse. As the continual leading of witnesses by Strain would lead to any confusion by the Appeals court judge if that were the case – however Starin new exactly what she was saying and he and the prosecutors office had six years to correct this and received a copy of the AG’s motion, a proceeding they instigated, which once again has the altered testimony.)