Emotions during the Motions

by Marty Carlson

10-20-2016


As a reminder, this is Court day 148 in custody day 432

The afternoon session started about 1412 hrs. And it was a motion brought on by Frank Carson and Percy Martinez in regards to a conflict of Robert Woody’s attorneys, namely Martin Baker.

Percy Martinez began the argument by saying there was a termination of attorney-client conflict by the attorneys, Bruce Perry and Martin Baker, as was read into the record in court in July by Bruce Perry.

They felt that there was misconduct on the part of Martin Baker in regards to Beverly Woody’s testimony, as they should have known that that testimony was in fact perjured and created testimony on Beverly Woody’s part. When Beverly Woody was asked if she had told anybody about this story she was telling in court she pointed at Martin Baker and said “yeah him”.

Percy Martinez was arguing that Baker assisted the investigation instead of representing the best interest of his client and in fact instigated the perjurer’s testimony leading to a conflict with his client, Robert Woody and his testimony.

Percy Martinez continued to argue that this activity has continually put his client and all the defendants in this case at risk because of the ever-changing testimony.

Martin Baker immediately looked around the gallery of the room and eyeballed this writer and the other blogger in the room Tom Jensen and made a comment that made a nice snippet for the blog page. He was apparently concerned about his reputation and looking good, not at all concerned about representing his client any further. He did say that Frank Carson has no standing to make a motion in this situation only the court does, if the court feels that there is a problem. He requested an in-camera disclosure of the information that has been further supplied by Robert Woody.


Percy Martinez argued that they are talking about issues before the plea was made and other events that have also occurred. Percy stated that Woody’s stories were given with the assistance of Martin Baker, and privilege had been waived for all the statements made to the investigators. He stated attorney-client privilege had been waived and then broken. In addition, because of his activities, Martin Baker is highly likely to be called as a witness in this case.

Martin Baker argued again that Frank Carson has no standing to make such a motion and there is no law in the books that allows somebody that is not represented by an attorney to claim a conflict. That would have to be done by Robert Woody himself in a Marsden motion.

Percy Martinez said that Martin Baker and Robert Woody have arranged for Beverly Woody to not face charges in her activities and the blatant perjury in this case, there were obvious considerations given to Beverly Woody.

Martin Baker repeated that they still had no standing, as no damages to Frank Carson have occurred or will likely to occur in the future.

Percy Martinez argued that Beverly Woody had been holding a piece of paper up to the window at the jail and telling Robert Woody how to lie and what to say to get a better deal. Robert Woody did say this about his mother and in one of the phone calls that she had been taking care of the situation.

Martinez continued to argue that Woody lied about Walter Wells and Frank Carson after meeting with Martin Baker in April, but told yet another story in July to investigators. Martin Baker was fully aware that this was a lie.


He said that Martin Baker knew that the lies were being told and had assisted Robert Woody by telling Woody, you need to make the story sound better to get a deal.

Martin Baker said it was a good story on a blog, that’s the second time he mentioned the blog, but again he repeated the Frank Carson has no standing.

Jesse Garcia made an argument saying that both Percy Martinez and Martin Baker were presenting quite a challenge for the court, he feels that Martin Baker is making light of his breaches and his slight of the Canon and ethics, which are at the core of Robert Woody’s testimony.

Jesse Garcia stated that on July 2014 Jeff Hirschfield from Stockton, reviewed some of the information in the files but the decided that there didn’t appear to be a conflict.

Garcia went on to say Martin Baker’s representation falls far below the standard of competence as a representative of somebody facing a homicide charge. He stated the case in point was Beverly Woody and apparent coaching of Beverly Woody’s testimony then and in April of this year, he for some reason decided to take a recording of the interview of his client.

He stated Martin Baker invited his client to expand his story and knew full well of the false testimony being offered by Beverly Woody. He stated the defense needed to be attacking the confession and testimony of Robert Woody and how it may have been made worse with the participation of Martin Baker and/or Bruce Perry.

He stated that Robert Woody seemed to have a conflict in his entire representation. Bruce Perry and Martin Baker never provided discovery to Robert Woody to prepare him for the court testimony. This representation continues to be a mockery of the court system.


Robert Forkner argued that they the Rules of Court were not followed by Martin Baker and Bruce Perry, which says waivers from other clients involved in this case were never done, as they were witnesses that possibly could be end up being cross examined. He stated in this situation the motion should be upheld on that issue alone.

Tim Raines chimed in saying they have been waiting a year to hear Robert Woody’s testimony, and the continued representations from Martin Baker, Bruce Perry and the DA’s office, that he would in fact testify. Even though Walter Wells and Frank Carson, had been released from involvement in this case, there was no information given to their involvement until the Beverly Woody testimony in April.

Robert Woody continues to be a threat to these defendants as they are subject to him changing his story again. There was no information given to the defense until April, that Beverly Woody had the intention of testifying also. There was no other recourse by the court as to the prosecution also knowing that this testimony was false.

It was not until July 2016 that they knew that Frank Carson and Walter Wells were not there. In fact Tim Raines referred to a comment made by Bruce Perry about not having to sit through another six-month trial to represent Robert Woody, and was eager to get this over with.

Tim Raines argued that it’s been one year of evidence in the court needs to do an inquiry on what has occurred here in this case. He went on to say that Walter Wells is still at risk as every defendant is with the continued representation of Martin Baker in this case.

Martin Baker was obviously not very happy about what he was hearing and began to take an extremely assertive stance towards all the comments directed towards him. He repeated again that still no one has any standing to declare a conflict for Robert Woody. He stated again, “is there a risk of any sort to these defendants?”


Martin Baker stated these arguments are offensive and somewhat entertaining for the blogs but not anywhere near valid.

Percy Martinez began to argue again that there continues to be prejudiced against Frank Carson and their interest lies with stopping the unethical testimony being offered in this case.

Percy stated that at the bail hearing for Frank Carson the court was informed that threats were made to Robert Woody family at his house, but directed the courts to the previous testimony in this case where Robert Woody never actually talked to any investigators in fact he was steered away from them by the brothers.

Percy argued that Martin Baker had set up the 7-22 interview, where Woody once again changes story and then shortly thereafter receives a deal.

He stated that Martin Baker provided assistance to Robert Woody and his story to make it more believable. He then said Bruce Perry had put a stop to those statements after returning from vacation in Hawaii. He stated that the court has an obligation to stop this type of representation.

Robert Forkner suggested to the court that they put Woody on the stand to see what he was told about the polygraph and what he was told with regard to the other issues. Another consultation with an attorney for Woody would ensure the integrity of what’s going on.

Tim Rien advised the court that there is a possibility the district attorney will be submitting charges against Beverly Woody but he didn’t believe so. Beverly Woody telling Robert to simply “tell the truth” while holding a piece of paper up against the glass at the jail during a visit it is extremely problematic and suborning perjury. She also testified during her time on the stand that she would be willing to lie for her son.

He stated that Beverly Woody had pointed to Bruce Perry as the one she had told the story to previously. He stated if it was not for Steve Jacobson who had told Woody his story about Walter Wells which was not consistent from the stories in the past.

Martin Baker argued that everyone is slandering him right now because they are exempt from legal ramifications during a court proceeding, and the judge agreed that they are exempt in a hearing like this. He has developed a very defensive posture and stated he feels they are calling him a rogue attorney taking advantage of the situation. He again mentioned concern about the blog reports and the fact that they are not legal arguments. He stated he does not understand how changing an attorney at this point would help anybody in custody as it would create a long delay.


Percy Martinez stated that Woody has given no less than 14 different stories and Baker had told him during one of the videos that he needs to make it more believable to get a deal. He stated that Frank Carson is at risk in the event that another story comes out.

We then took about a 15 minute break that stretched to almost 25 and when we returned the judge made a ruling.

Judge Zuniga ruled the Percy Martinez had not put in any legal authorities in his motion. The arguments that he had made were no help. The judge ruled that Robert Forkner’s arguments as to waivers obtained from previous clients involved in this case does not apply as Woody’s case is separate from the current case at hand.

She also stated that Percy Martinez papers filed did not articulate specific laws or authorities for her to be able to rule appropriately. The judge cited several court cases concerning conflicts and how Percy Martinez’s arguments did not fit in.

Unless there are some rights that have been violated, another person cannot argue incompetence with regard to another attorney. That would be up to Robert Woody. Again she cited further case law with regard to attorneys being changed while representing a client.

At that time, she ruled all motions denied.

That was the end of the day and there were some scheduling issues for next week’s schedule discussed, and it sounds like it will be just motions heard again on Monday at 10 AM and no testimony in the preliminary hearing to continue until Tuesday at 9:30 AM.