FRANK CARSON et al…….

A VERY FRUSTRATING DAY

FRANK CARSON CASE 06/01/2016

BY WILLIAM THOMAS JENSEN (TOM)


This is the afternoon blog of what I observe in court today. The morning session is available on Blogtalk Radio in a recorded format on Dawgsblog.com. I don’t normally do that, but time constraints today made it necessary. Today was court at a snail’s pace to the extreme. I am frustrated to the max with what the prosecution is trying to do with the cell phone intercepts. These tapes contain absolutely nothing that a jury of 12 would ever convict anyone on, but I have been told by the defense attorneys that the prosecution can indict a ham sandwich. I expect we will have to endure a long trial, which will end with yet another failure by the DA to convict on their latest political prosecution.

The afternoon session finally gets going at 2:00 PM, with the court clerk swearing in another translator for the Athwal brothers. We then start hearing about a body wire recording made at the office of Frank Carson that was done on 09/19/2013. It concerned a person named Amil Atala who the defense attorneys claim in a Federal Informant. Defense attorney Robert Forkner brings up that there is a Brady Issue on this recording, and the informant. Forkner: “It should have been turned over to us.” Marlissa Fereirra said that Mr. Atala was a witness, and not an informant in a trial that he participated in. Forkner states that Mr. Atala had worked for the FBI, and the Stanislaus County DA’s office on other cases. Forkner requests information concerning his prior status, and benefits given. Marlissa Fereirra states that Mr. Atala had been paid $500.00 twice by the Modesto Police Department to move away from the Modesto area. Judge Zuniga requests that DA Investigator Kirk Bunch contact the prosecutor in the case Atala was involved with, and gather information.

Defense attorney Percy Martinez states that DA Prosecutor John Goulart had dismissed a case pending against Mr. Atala in exchange for his cooperation in this trial.

The body wire recording involved a visit to Frank Carson at his office. Members of a Hindu Temple went to Frank Carson to seek legal advice concerning a situation at the temple. Much argument went back and forth on this recording. Frank Carson claims attorney client privilege on this recording. Judge Zuniga asks Marlissa Fereirra why this recording is relevant.

Marlissa Fereirra states that Frank Carson advises the people from the Hindu Temple to file complaints against law enforcement in order to undermine the credibility of the investigators, that it was an overt act, that it went to Frank’s state of mind. She wanted the judge to take everything together in context while making her decision on letting this in.

Defense attorney Martha Carlton Magana states that someone on the investigative team chose to put a body wire on a client of Frank Carson, and violated his attorney client privilege. We now take a protracted break to give the judge time to make her decision.

It is now 3:49 PM, and Judge Zuniga struggles to speak through the coughing fits she has had lately. This little lady gave me pneumonia, which I am currently recovering from. She starts out by saying that the attorney client privilege does not apply because of the presence of a 3rd party. She says that the 3rd party presence destroys the privilege. Judge Zuniga states that Marlissa’s argument that Frank Carson was encouraging false claims to be filed against the investigators was not valid. She states that there was no evidence of an overt act.

Judge Zuniga then states that the recording was relevant to show Frank Carson’s state of mind only. This seems to me to very severely limit the ways Fereirra can utilize this recording. I was very disappointed in Judge Zuniga’s ruling on this issue. Judge Zuniga states that shifting the blame to others is relevant to Frank Carson’s state of mind. Judge Zuniga sustains the defense attorney’s objection to obstruction of justice with regards to this recording.

It is now after 4:00 PM, and it is disclosed that the remaining testimony in this preliminary hearing will include either Prop 115 testimony by Kirk Bunch for Robert Woody, or testimony from Robert Woody himself. I don’t think Robert Woody has been offered a sweet enough deal to get him to testify, so expect Kirk Bunch to do his version. I don’t think this should be allowed, but anything goes in a preliminary. We will also have testimony from the cell phone ping expert Tim Cook. It was brought out that the prosecution has issued subpoenas for the bank records of Georgia DeFelippo and Frank Carson. We will also be hearing testimony from Detective Jon Evers. Marlissa Fereirra states that there still is an unresolved issue concerning this. God I hope something gets done tomorrow.

Sincerely; William Thomas Jensen (Tom)

Advertisements

5 comments

  1. Tom, Tom, Tom, why in the hell would they get anything done when they have an open bank account to completely piss away. Thank you tax payers of Stanislaus County.

  2. Well Stanislaus County is in such good shape and nothing is needed so the DA is having a field day with tax payers money. To hell with improving and helping our community and the homeless and families struggling just to barely get by day by day. If the DA had to pay for everything out of their own pockets we would see a different tune being played here. All tax payers need to start complaining heavy as too how tax payers money is being wasted on this case and to date their still is no real evidence and it has not been determined how Korey died. The old saying goes shit or get off the pot. DA needs to wipe their asses and move on.

  3. Wow! So you feel safe talking to your attorney and getting advise, but then the DA can turn around use your advise to a client to talk about your state of mind? Even if it is not connected to this prelim. Or even if it is! Isn’t violation of attorney client privilege really crossing the line? Isn’t that criminal in nature? How many days are they going to spend on conscience of guilt? Has anyone ever been convicted on conscience of guilt?

    • I personally Do not think you can have a conviction on what somebody was thinking only if they have some actions to apply that guilt to. and what they call an overt act in a conspiracy. But I guess now the DA thinks we can be convicted for thinking a bad thought or just an attorney doing his/her job or someone exercising their due process rights.

  4. Well hell, we all will be going to jail then for just thinking. OMG what will they come up with next. The DA get more stupid every second. Do you think she will ever wise up?

Comments are closed.