FRANK CARSON et al…….

EVERY GIRL IS CRAZY ABOUT A SHARP DRESSED MAN

FRANK CARSON et al CASE

William Thomas Jensen

04/28/2016


Court was delayed today, as the defense attorneys and prosecution hashed out issues that could not be discussed in public. Many of us waited the entire morning, and were told at noon time that these issues had been resolved, and that the continuing testimony of Patrick Hampton would resume at 1:30 PM.

At 1:39 PM, defense attorney Percy Martinez asks Patrick Hampton about Linda Sue Burns. Prosecuting DA Marlissa Fereirra interrupts Percy Martinez, and blurts out that she is not the same person that we have heard about before. Martha Carlton Magana strongly objects that Marlissa was doing what is called a speaking objection, and providing an answer for Patrick Hampton. The defense attorneys accuse Marlissa of committing misconduct. They ask the judge to admonish her, and tell her to not provide answers that should be answered by the witness. Judge Zuniga says she needs to look into this situation, and well rule on it later.


At 1:46 PM, Patrick Hampton is put back on the stand. He is dressed in a brand-new orange and white striped jumpsuit. It even looked like it had been pressed. This man really knows how to dress for the ladies. Hampton starts out in style, mouthing “Fuck You” to Percy Martinez. The judge seemed to be unaware of his antics. Hampton is shown a letter that is an agreement concerning his testimony for the Daniel Udder trial. Hampton says he has been provided reports by Steve Jacobson regarding his arrest in Oakdale.

Defense attorney Percy Martinez starts speaking about an incident of Hampton’s concerning a person named Joey Ross. Defense attorney Martha Carlton Magana says Joey Ross was her godson. It turns out that Joey Ross had been murdered in Oakdale 9 to 10 years ago. Patrick Hampton had provided information on that case. The information that Hampton provided concerned a person named Eddie Mayfield, and the defense attorneys believe it was false. Hampton said Mayfield confessed to him. Percy Martinez wants to find out if Hampton was provided a reward for his testimony. Marlissa kept objecting that Martha Carlton Magana had a conflict of interest, and that this line of questioning should not be allowed. Marlissa looked very concerned about what was being said. She tried to block this testimony by saying that it is an ongoing investigation, that there are other suspects, and that there is no viable basis for what the defense attorneys are trying to do.

Percy Martinez said that he never suggested that Hampton was a suspect, and that the defense attorneys believe that he was only an informant. At this moment, Marlissa begins to laugh, and says that Percy Martinez called her a snitch. I must have missed something. She asks Percy Martinez if he has any factual information on this. Percy requests an in camera on the subject. Marlissa objects, and judge Zuniga states that she doesn’t want to do that right now. Zuniga says: ” I need to work on this tomorrow”, and will rule on it Monday.

This case has gotten so complex, that we now have two clerks working at the same time.

Defense attorney Martha Carlton Magana brings out a report done concerning Daljit Atwall, and tells Hampton that it is the paperwork that Steve Jacobson provided to you. Hampton agrees that is true. Hampton flips a bird at Percy Martinez, and says another one of his wisecracks. Judge Zuniga, finally having enough of this, tells him to: “Stop It.”

Percy Martinez talks about the March 15, 2016 arrest date of Patrick Hampton. He asks Hampton if he had threats against him. Hampton says yes. Percy asks Hampton if he told Steve Jacobson that the threats were from Percy Martinez. Hampton says: “Yes.” Hampton said that he was aware that officers were outside of the Oakdale house, when they came out from the bushes. I believe Hampton had taken a dog outside when they came out of the bushes. He was arrested, and taken to the Oakdale police department. Hampton stated that Steve Jacobson was there. Percy asks Hampton whether Steve Jacobson asked him questions at that time. Hampton said yes.

Hampton denied that he had cut off his ankle bracelet. He said that he had quit charging the ankle bracelet, as required by his probation. When asked if he had been disciplined for doing this, Hampton said yes.

It was brought out that on January 13, 2016 Hampton sent a text message to Kirk Bunch saying that he couldn’t handle the pressure and media coverage, and told about threats against himself. Percy Martinez gets Hampton to admit that he never told Steve Jacobson about any threats from the attorneys.

Patrick Hampton said he didn’t think that he had talked to Steve Jacobson about the threats while he was at Oakdale, or during the car ride to the district attorney’s office. Patrick says that he had asked Steve Jacobson to not record their conversation at the District Attorney’s Office. This conflicts with earlier testimony from Patrick Hampton.

Patrick Hampton said that a person named Ralph Demonte had told someone named Connie Rodriquez about threats against Patrick. He said his friends were concerned for his safety. He said the threats were from two Arabic guys that drove by in January, and were seen about one week later.

Patrick Hampton said that he was taken to the Modesto downtown jail and placed in a cell that is usually used as an infirmary on the first floor. Hampton again gets foul mouth, and spurts out wisecracks. Hampton says that he was provided reports from Steve Jacobson about 1 ½ weeks ago at the jail. Hampton states that he is going to be released on June 13. He says that he has received no special treatment for this recent arrest. When asked if he had notified anyone about the threats from the two Arabs, Hampton said he had not. Once again, Hampton says: “Fuck You”, and makes some wisecracks. Judge Zuniga, getting increasingly upset, tells Hampton: “Stop acting like a child.” I can’t believe the latitude that Hampton receives from this judge. Judge Zuniga tells Hampton that he may be her first shackled and chained witness that she has had in her 30 years on the bench.

Defense attorney Jesse Garcia now takes over. Jesse talks about a July 27, 1994 letter to Patrick Hampton that is in evidence. It is a letter from Brad Nix. It is now 3:40 PM, and we are done with Patrick Hampton for the day.

Defense attorney Percy Martinez wants to allow Frank Carson to use transcripts from the in camera hearing, and have them for his use in his jail cell. Percy asserts that Frank Carson is an officer of the court, and prepares most of the motions in this trial. Percy says that Frank Carson is a criminal defense expert, and needs these transcripts to work on his defense. This is objected to strenuously by Marlissa Fereirra, and judge Zuniga says she wants to look at it over the weekend before she makes a decision. Defense attorney Robert Forkner says that he had spoken to Marlissa earlier in the day about this, and that she had no objections at that time. Marlissa talks about how there are people blogging on the Internet, and how she is concerned. She is concerned about these transcripts going into the jail at all. The defense attorneys assert that Frank Carson has thousands of pages of testimony and reports in his jail cell already. They say that the jailers have been told to not mess with these papers at all. The defense attorneys say that no one is allowed in Carson’s cell. They say that Carson cell is right next to the deputy cage, and that the lights are on 24 hours a day. Percy says that these papers could be brought back to court every day, when Carson leaves.

Judge Zuniga says that she will talk to who’s in charge at the jail. It is suggested that she talk to Sgt. Blake.

Talk then goes to the recusal motion brought by defense attorney Robert Forkner. Judge Zuniga says that she will look into it on May 13, and finish ruling on it by May 20. It appears that this preliminary trial could be ending by May 20. Don’t hold your breath.

Court will resume at 10:00 AM on Monday.

Sincerely; William Thomas Jensen (Tom)

WAZZUP DAWG WHAT IS A PRELIMINARY HEARING?

Here is a definition from findlaw.com:

Usually held soon after arraignment, a preliminary hearing is best described as a “trial before the trial” at which the judge decides, not whether the defendant is “guilty” or “not guilty,” but whether there is enough evidence to force the defendant to stand trial.

I wanted to explain some of the questions that I’ve been receiving about preliminary hearings as of late.

So I went online and looked up some definitions which is the one above and can break it down a little more hopefully for more clarification.

*Preliminary hearings are much shorter than trials a typical preliminary hearing may take from a half hour to two hours and some pre-lambs only last a few minutes.

*Preliminary hearings are conducted in front of the judge alone without a jury. Trials can be conducted by judges alone when the defendant waives the right to a jury but preliminary hearings never involve a jury.

*The burden of proof, which is still on the prosecution, is much lower during a preliminary hearing that it is during a trial. At trial the prosecution has the burden of proving each element of the charged offenses beyond a reasonable doubt. But at the prelim, the prosecution has only to show probable cause that the accused committed the charged crimes. In other words announced evidence to justify a belief that a crime occurred and the defendant committed it.

*The goal of a trial is determined the defendant’s guilt. The goal of a preliminary hearing is to screen cases – to weed out week cases and protect defendants from out unfounded prosecutions. Unofficially, however, each side uses up limitary hearing to check out the other side evidence. As a matter of course, both the defense and the prosecution can not to put on so much evidence that they show their whole hand. And because the defense doesn’t have to, it often doesn’t put on any evidence at all.

Now what to expect at the preliminary hearing:

In reaching is probable cause decision the judge listens to arguments from the government, and from the defendant. The prosecutor may call witnesses to testify, and can introduce physical evidence in an effort to convince the judge that the case should go to trial. The defense usually cross-examine to government witnesses and calls into question any other evidence presented against the defendant, seeking to convince the judge that the prosecutor’s case is not strong enough, so that the case against the defendant must be dismissed before trial.

The Rules in a Preliminary Hearing

Many of the same procedural rules that govern trials apply in preliminary hearings. For example, ordinary witnesses (nonexperts) may testify only to what they have perceived; they may not give opinions. And the defense and prosecution may object to evidence and testimony offered by the other side.

However, one important difference between preliminary hearings and trials is that frequently hearsay evidence is admissible in prelims.

I did this is sketchy give you a little background some information about preliminary hearings and you see there are some differences and the standard of proof is not very high in a preliminary hearing.

The thing about this particular preliminary hearing it is very expensive it is reaching the $4,000,000-mark right now.

How long are the people of Stanislaus County are going to allow this to continue on, I would have no problem if they would put some information out there of some guilt or something was done here. I have been in court since November and have yet to see any evidence of any involvement of any of these defendants of a murder. The closest thing that came to that was the mother of an admitted murderer who testified to what she heard and testified nothing to what she saw were experienced herself. In addition this mother testified on the stand and it made it that she would lie for her son.

I personally think that something needs to be done, the Board of Supervisors need to have some pressure put on them to what is being done in this case and put a stop to it. It is obvious that the current DA in office is not willing to take the bull by the horns and take control of this situation. We need a call on our district supervisors and talk to them and let them know how we feel. People we need to start writing letters and showing up the Board of Supervisors hearings.

Just for information:

Address:

1010 10th Street, Ste 6500
Modesto, CA 95354
Get Directions

Mon – Fri: 8 am – 5 pm
Closed Weekends & Holidays


District 1
William O’Brien

Vice Chairman
(209) 525-4440
District Map


District 2
Vito Chiesa

(209) 525-6440
District Map


District 3
Terry Withrow

(209) 525-6560
District Map


District 4
Dick Monteith

Chairman
(209) 525-4445
District Map


District 5
Jim DeMartini

(209) 525-4470
District Map