A California bill seeking to limit restaurants to serving children water or unflavored milk with their meals, SEE SB1192 HERE, passed the Assembly this week and is now making its way to Gov. Jerry Brown’s (D) desk.

The bill, aimed at combating childhood obesity, would not preclude children or parents from ordering alternatives, however, according to ABC 7.

If Brown signs the bill into law, California would be the first state to have such a law, CBS Sacramento affiliate KOVR reported.

According to CBS, several California cities have already passed similar restrictions, as have other cities across the U.S.

The American Cancer Society was a fervent supporter of the bill, CBS reports.

“Some of these kids are drinking up to three sodas a day. This is setting them up for tremendous cancer risks down the road,” Stephanie Winn of the American Cancer Society told KOVR. “Because now we know that 20 percent of all cancers are tied to being overweight.”

A study from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that two-thirds of children ages 2 to 19 drink at least one sugary beverage a day. The CDC also found an association between frequent soda consumption and obesity, Type 2 diabetes, heart disease, kidney disease, nonalcoholic liver disease, tooth decay and cavities, CBS News reported.

However, some parents have balked at the idea of state intervention into their parenting.

“I think the government shouldn’t determine what’s available when I as a mother know what’s best with my child,” Inez Deocio said, according to CBS.

The Independent Journal Review reported that another California parent, Ken Barnes, said Thursday, “Why is this law even necessary? I’m old enough to remember when my mom would say ‘put down that soda, drink some water if you’re thirsty.’




A judge ordered a New Jersey couple Thursday to give a homeless Philadelphia man whatever’s left of the $400,000 they raised for him.

Katie McClure and her boyfriend, Mark D’Amico, were told by the Burlington, New Jersey, judge to turn over the remaining money they raised through a GoFundMe campaign for Johnny Bobbitt, according to NBC Philadelphia.

The judge also demanded that McClure and D’Amico provide a full accounting of each dollar they collected, the station reported.

Bobbitt inspired the fundraising campaign after he gave McClure his last $20 when she ran out of gas on a freeway exit ramp last November outside Philadelphia.

The relationship soured, and Bobbitt claimed in court that the money — nearly $403,000 raised from about 14,000 online donors — never fully ended up in his possession. Bobbitt claims he has only received $150,000 of the money.

The couple admitted to inside edition the money was put in their personal account.

D’Amico told the Philadelphia Inquirer that he withheld the cash because the veteran allegedly has a drug problem. The couple initially purchased a camper for Bobbit to live in and placed it on property controlled by McClure’s family. But Bobbitt was kicked out in June, making him homeless again, according to NBC Philadelphia.

During an appearance Monday on NBC’s “Megyn Kelly Today” show, D’Amico said more than $150,000 of the money remained.

He denied misusing the funds but admitted to the Inquirer that he spent $500 of it at a casino.

Jacqueline Promislo, an attorney for Bobbitt, said by email that she’s “very concerned” that much of the money will be gone by the time it’s accounted for.

Asked if Bobbitt might sue to seize some of the couple’s personal assets, she said, “We will represent our client to the best of our abilities to recover all of the money raised for him.”



A customer, who shops often at FYE stores, is upset that a new candy, which is made to look like the meth from a popular television show, is on the shelves ready for sale.

“It’s really irresponsible to the millions of people suffering from this terrible drug,” Parker Twede told KSL 5 TV. “I am not easily offended, and I couldn’t stop thinking about this.”

Twede said he was shopping for old vinyl records at the FYE location in the Provo Towne Center Mall, when he spotted the rock candy being marketed as “Blue Sky” meth from the “Breaking Bad” series.

“It’s presented in a little baggie at the checkout, at children’s eye level,” Twede said. “Frankly, it appalled me that this product even exists.”

The product is a spoof from the Emmy-winning show “Breaking Bad,” which aired for five seasons. It tells the story of Walter White, a high school chemistry teacher turned meth cook and dealer. The series’ logo and an image of the main character, Heisenberg’s hat and face cover the candy’s packaging. The rock candy is designed to resemble the nearly pure blue meth the science teacher cooks in the show.

“I watched it all the way to the end and then back some,” fan of the show, Joey Sorris told KSL 5 TV. “There could be a warning on the label, but then again, I don’t think anyone actually believes this is real meth.”

Twede, and others who find the product inappropriate, said it’s not about tricking people into thinking it’s real, but glamorizing a tragedy that is drug addiction.

“I have personal friends and family where meth has affected their lives,” Twede said.

Twede wrote a letter to FYE officials asking them to remove the product from the shelves.

“Hello, I was at your store in Provo, UT yesterday and was completely appalled by one of the products you carry. Let me preface by saying that I am not by any means easily-offended. When I saw the end cap full of breaking bad candy meth, I couldn’t believe my eyes. What kind of example are you trying to set for the children in your store? This is beyond unacceptable and tacky. I have several family members and friends who have been affected by this horrible drug. To say this is insensitive is a giant understatement. I ask that you please remove this product from your stores as it is glorifying meth use. Shame on you. -Parker Twede, Salt Lake City, UT”

“If I were the company, I would be pulling it off the market,” Alex Goaslind said as he was pushing his child in a stroller around the City Creek Center. “Something that resembles a drug should not be made into candy. I wouldn’t want my kids to eat anything that resembles meth. Why is this even out there?”

The FYE rock candy doesn’t say “meth’ anywhere on the package. Rather, it says “Blue Sky,” which is the street name for the meth the lead characters cook in “Breaking Bad.”

KSL 5 TV talked to a number of people at City Creek Center to get their feedback on the “Blue Sky” rock candy.

David Proffitt started laughing when he saw the candy.

“It’s not really meth. I think it’s funny,” Proffitt said. “And if kids are watching ‘Breaking Bad’ to make the association with the product, then that’s a bigger problem than this store selling the candy.”

Twede isn’t taking it lightly.

“Remember the candy cigarettes from the ’80s and ’90s? They were pulled from the shelves because they were glamorizing smoking, and that isn’t even illegal,” Twede said. “I would hope this could be addressed and FYE would be gracious enough to get rid of this product.”







To honor the lobsters who suffered and died when a truck carrying them overturned on Route 1 in Brunswick last Wednesday, PETA sent a letter today asking the Maine Department of Transportation for permission to place a 5-foot tombstone memorial near the crash site urging passersby to “Try Vegan.”

“Countless sensitive crustaceans experienced an agonizing death when this truck rolled over and their bodies came crashing down onto the highway,” says PETA Executive Vice President Tracy Reiman. “PETA hopes to pay tribute to these individuals who didn’t want to die with a memorial urging people to help prevent future suffering by keeping lobsters and all other animals off their plates.”

PETA—whose motto reads, in part, that “animals are not ours to eat”—notes that lobsters are intelligent individuals who use complex signals to establish social relationships and can take long-distance seasonal journeys, often traveling up to 100 miles in a year. Chefs typically place live lobsters into pots of boiling water while they’re still conscious—a cruel practice that has recently been banned in Switzerland—and a PETA investigation of Linda Bean’s Maine Lobster revealed that live lobsters were impaled, torn apart, and decapitated, even as their legs continued to move.






California Democrats call for boycott : Stop eating In-N-Out

California Democratic Party Chairman Eric Bauman is calling for a boycott of In-N-Out Burger after the Irvine-based fast food chain this week donated a$25,000 to help Republicans this November.

“Et tu In-N-Out? Tens of thousands of dollars donated to the California Republican Party,” Bauman wrote on Twitter. “It’s time to #BoycottInNOut — let Trump and his cronies support these creeps…perhaps animal style!”

The burger chain started in Southern California decades ago by a Christian family, whose granddaughter Lynsi Snyder still owns the company. It proudly displays its religious views — There’s a Bible verse on some packaging — and has in recent years contributed to Republicans and pro-business causes.

In addition to its $25,000 this week, it donated $30,000 to the GOP in 2017 and $30,000 to the in 2016. It has also contributed to the California pro-business political action committee, “Californians for Jobs & A Strong Economy,” which helps elect moderate Democrats. Most recently, it gave the PAC $80,000 in 2017.

But the popular fast food restaurant is facing a wave of backlash in deep-blue California following this week’s contribution, especially on social media.

“Wow, so we all need to stop eating In-N-Out like yesterday,” one person wrote following a tweet of the contribution Monday by a Sacramento Bee reporter.

“This is going to be the hardest breakup I’ll ever have to go through,” another person wrote, followed by another tweet reading “This is the best California publicity Shake Shack could ever ask for.”

But some social media users who identified as conservatives and Republicans cheered the contribution, including the spokesman for Republican John Cox, running for California governor.

“Time to go buy a double double animal style,” Matt Shupe wrote on Twitter.

Another Twitter user wrote “Wait, does this mean California liberals (basically most of the state) won’t eat In-N-Out anymore? Shorter lines?!”







Mom investigated for letting 8-year-old walk dog around the block

Just after returning home from a walk around the block with her dog, Marshmallow, an 8-year-old Wilmette girl expected a visit from a playmate. Instead, police officers arrived at the family’s door.

An anonymous caller had contacted police after seeing the girl walking the dog alone, said her mother, Corey Widen. While police never pursued charges, the seemingly common activity launched an Illinois Department of Children and Family Services investigation to see if Widen was neglecting her children, she said.

“For something like this to happen to me, there’s something really wrong,” said Widen, 48, who agreed to let her 8-year-old daughter and 17-year-old son get the Maltese puppy last year as long as everyone took turns walking her. Widen, who asked that her daughter’s name not be used, said the girl’s walk around the block – most of which Widen says she can see out her windows – is the only time her home-schooled daughter is unsupervised. “The funny thing is … I’m a joke with my friends because my kids are around me all the time.”

Widen’s story is not unique. Mothers in the Chicago area and across the country have found themselves at the center of investigations by police or child welfare officials after their children were spotted alone but unharmed – playing in parks or left for minutes in a car parked outside a store – activities that could pass for typical or harmless but now are perceived by some as unacceptable.

When Chicago author Kim Brooks decided to leave her then-4-year-old son in the car for a few minutes on a cool day to run an errand, she was shocked when a stranger called police to report it.

“I didn’t really understand why it was happening,” she said. “I certainly felt ashamed. Not because I thought … I did something horrible, but because whenever you are called out for behavior, especially when it has to do with mothering, (it’s shameful).”

Brooks, who was visiting her parents in her Virginia hometown when the incident occurred about six years ago, eventually completed community service and parenting classes in exchange for prosecutors there agreeing not to pursue misdemeanor charges, she said.

The 40-year-old Edgewater mother wrote about her experience in a new book, “Small Animals: Parenting in the Age of Fear.” She said she has heard from other mothers who have had similar experiences – all reported by someone who thought their children were in danger when they weren’t actually at risk.

Even if mothers are eventually cleared by police or child welfare officials – which Widen says happened in her case – the families are unnecessarily put through invasive and stressful investigations that are a waste of time and resources, experts say, adding that the problem stems from vague laws that often ensnare well-meaning parents who are trying to give their children freedom or responsibility..

And the expectation that mothers should keep a constant eye on their children, even when there’s little to no real risk, is one that does not often extend to fathers, said Barbara Risman, sociology professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

“This shaming mechanism underlies the cultural logic that women should spend all their time making sure their children are never alone,” Risman said. “The opposite is true of dads. No one presumes fathers have a moral responsibility to take care of (their children). When they do, they get praise and positive reinforcement.”

The judgment placed on moms who give their children more freedom is not logical, Risman added. “We create street myths about dangers, and then everyone fears that it will happen to their child. And then we overcompensate. Children are not allowed the freedom really to become themselves.”

Brooks said this leads to subjective reporting to police based on what someone perceives as wrong, often based on a fear of what could happen, not what actually is happening. And “in the last generation or two, we’ve had a radical revision of what is (accepted as) safe for children.”

But those charged with investigating child abuse and neglect cases say it’s important to thoroughly check out all allegations, and it’s hard to create a system that doesn’t have at least some level of subjectivity.

“We want to investigate … because you just don’t know,” said DCFS spokesman Neil Skene. “You also don’t want to say (to the public), ‘Don’t call us unless it’s serious.’ There are all these other cases where we say, ‘if only someone had called us.'”

Like in many states, the law in Illinois is vague. It defines a neglected minor as a child younger than 14 left “without supervision for an unreasonable period of time without regard for the mental or physical health, safety or welfare of that minor.”

But DCFS investigations are separate from criminal ones; even if police decide a parent has not broken the law, there could still be child welfare repercussions.

DCFS last year revised some of its rules pertaining to inadequate supervision cases, now offering clearer definitions. As part of a settlement this year in a class action lawsuit brought by parents who say they were wrongfully cited for neglect under the previous rules, some parents may now request a review and possibly get their citations withdrawn, Skene said. That’s important because if DCFS has made a finding of neglect, there are consequences included being barred from certain job or volunteer opportunities.

The Chicago-based Family Defense Center, which defends parents and advocates for reforms in DCFS policies, has defended mothers who have been reported for leaving their children alone for even a quick walk to take out the trash, said Executive Director Rachel O’Konis Ruttenberg. “They might not all eventually have a finding made against them … but it’s traumatic.”

The revised rules have made things “a little more fair now,” said Sara Gilloon, the center’s director of legal services, but “nobody can stop someone from calling police” or DCFS.

That’s what happened to Natasha Felix, a Chicago single mother. A passer-by’s call to a DCFS hotline sparked a two-year battle that eventually ended with the Illinois Appellate Court throwing out a child neglect citation. The caller in 2013 saw Felix’s three children, ages 5 to 11, and their 9-year-old cousin playing in a park, unaware that Felix had been checking on them from the window of her Ukrainian Village apartment every 10 minutes.

Similarly, in December 2007, Tinley Park mother Ellen “Treffly” Coyne was arrested after she briefly left her sleeping toddler in a parked car outside a Crestwood store so Coyne and her other children could drop change into a Salvation Army kettle. The charges were dropped a few months later.

After similar stories of responsible parents charged with neglect for letting their children go to playgrounds alone, Utah legislators last May voted to protect certain parenting freedoms by revising that state’s child neglect law. The first-of-its-kind, so-called “free-range parenting law” now specifically lists certain parenting rights, like allowing children to play at the park unsupervised, walk to and from school alone, and sit unattended in a parked car – all under certain conditions.

When Wilmette police arrived at Corey Widen’s door on Aug. 2, they inquired about the age of her daughter and how long she had been gone on her walk, Widen said. After hearing Widen’s answers, police determined she had done nothing wrong, Deputy Chief Pat Collins said.

The anonymous caller then contacted DCFS, Collins said. DCFS would not comment on the investigation.

Widen said the incident has caused her entire family stress after DCFS investigators visited her home, and talked to her children, other family members and their pediatrician. After about two weeks and several interviews, investigators told Widen’s attorney last week that they did not find evidence of neglect, Widen said.

“Everyone needs to allow the parent to do what is best for their family,” she said. “No one will dictate my parenting choices.”







House Passes Bill To Allow ‘Concealed Carry’ Across State Lines

The House approved a bill on Wednesday that would ease legal restrictions for carrying concealed firearms across state lines – a move pushed by the National Rifle Association that comes just weeks after mass shootings in Las Vegas and Texas.

On a mostly party-line vote, the measure easily passed, 231-198, although 14 Republicans voted no. Six Democrats voted for the so-called reciprocity measure, which would allow a gun owner with the proper permit in any state to carry a concealed firearm to another state where it is also legal.

The bill now goes to the Senate, where it is likely to encounter a much tougher battle.

In the House version, GOP lawmakers added a measure aimed at strengthening tracking in the national background-check database of legal and mental health records that might prevent some gun purchases. Just last month it was revealed that Devin Patrick Kelley, the gunman who killed 26 people at a church in Sutherland Springs, Tex., legally purchase firearms used in the attack despite a record of domestic assault in the Air Force that should have disqualified him.

However, as The New York Times reports: “… the background check measure was not enough to win over most Democrats, nor did it persuade law enforcement officials in some of the largest cities, including New York, who say the legislation would force locales with strict gun laws to bow to places with few or no gun restrictions.”

The bill angered many Democrats who argued that following mass shootings that have killed 80 people, the times called for stricter, not looser gun measures.

Connecticut Democrat Rep. Elizabeth Esty — who represents Newtown, Conn., where 20 first-graders and six teachers and staff were killed in a 2012 mass shooting – said the bill would undermine states’ rights, “hamstring law enforcement and allow dangerous criminals to walk around with hidden guns anywhere and at any time. It’s unspeakable that this is Congress’ response to the worst gun tragedies in American history,” according to The Associated Press.

The NRA’s executive director, Chris Cox, is quoted in the Times as saying Thursday’s vote is a “watershed” for Second Amendment rights and that the bill would ensure “all law-abiding citizens in our great country can protect themselves in the manner they see fit without accidentally running afoul of the law.”


Good Evening Everybody! This Marty from Dawg’s Blog. If you listened to the noontime report you know what happened on the Bail Hearing. I want to talk about that but will get the afternoon session out of the way first.

The afternoon session was kind of monotonous. Dr. Richard Leo was on the stand testifying. He wrote some information about false confessions, but he’s not able to talk about whether Robert Woody gave a false confession. I think he’s only going to be allowed to give his opinion on why people give false confessions. If you search Dr. Richard Leo and false confessions, he will come up on some TV shows where they talk about crimes. He is highly educated, he has a couple of doctorates and PhD. They haven’t finished this evidentiary hearing, this 402 hearing. They will finish it next Tuesday morning, they pushed the jury back one-half of a day to finish this hearing.

Dr. Leo has written a large amount of books, journal articles and there is a scientific standard for him. It was refreshing to see an expert get up there and answer questions intelligently on both sides. He is intelligent, articulate. I think he has a good basic knowledge of things. I talked to him briefly in the hallway and he seemed like a down to earth guy. He’s not afraid to be challenged, have someone ask tough questions, and he doesn’t look like he has anything to hide (like our last expert).

He talked about the methods of interviewing and interrogating. Now those are two different things. You may be doing an interview talking to a police officer out on the street. If you are in custody or at the station that is an interrogation after you’ve been arrested. He based his criteria on that. He discussed high risk interrogations where they feed the suspect questions which is happened in this case (but he can’t talk specifically about that). His research is false confessions and he has written 19 books. He was asked by Marlissa Ferreira if any of his literature is on truthful confessions? He said yes, and he went through many of them and they finally stopped him, because large parts of some of his books go into that. He started working with Oakland PD prior to them doing recordings (audio or video) he did 122 interviews where he observed the interviews in person and he’s done a large number since watching video or listening to audio. He has been cited by SCOTUS four separate times. In some of the cases that he’s been involved with, he’s testified 350 times as an expert, 250 times in California, he’s done work on thousands of cases. Some cases he was consulted, he looked at the case and didn’t want any part of it. He has testified for prosecution three times. The studies he does are common knowledge to the general public, I took that to mean he was talking about publications, internet articles and his books that are available to anybody. He talked about manipulative interviews or interrogations. He says there are different ways for officers, techniques that they use, to obtain confessions. Sometimes to beat it out of them, finesse it out of them, lie to them, it is called a ruse. Police Officers are allowed to do that (Remember that!) It’s what allows them to lie while working undercover, so it’s definitely used for that, but it is more widely used than that. It has been tested by law many times, but Police Officers are allowed to lie to you. They can say many things it doesn’t mean it’s true.

Dr Leo has studied psychological coercion, where they use psychological methods. Said some people may feel forced to make a statement, which does not necessarily lead to accurate statements.

I watched “Making of a Murderer” this weekend, all 10 episodes. Yes, I was a couch potato this weekend. It was interesting that relate to this in their interview with a 16-year-old boy, Brandon. Many people feel that boy wasn’t part of it, but he was 16 years old, wasn’t allowed to have a parent, took him out of school, lied to him and he made statements that didn’t help him. His lawyer’s kind of set him up and didn’t help him out.

His studies show people that make false admissions and why they make false admissions. One technique is over exaggeration, where they say something might happen, like in this case they told Robert Woody you’re going to get the death penalty, you are going to prison for the rest of your life, these guys are trying to put you away for the rest of your life, etc. etc. etc.

He talks about containimation. I thought this was important. Contamination is the leaking of non-public knowledge during the interrogation or interviews of the suspect. Police don’t release all information to the public, they hold details back so only people that are involved would know certain things. For instance, if someone was shot, a nonpublic detail might be the caliber gun that was used. There are certain things that only the police and the person responsible would know. So, if they are releasing that information to a subject of an interrogation that is contaminating.

He looked the Robert Woody interview, he looked at the techniques used in the interview and said they are almost all high risk. He was asked how he would know that and he said there have been studies since 1980s when there were developments in DNA testing that led to learning that people were giving false confessions.

He reviewed the transcripts and recordings used in the Robert Woody interview and he said they were high risk and he would consider them coercive. He said there were numerous statements by law enforcement officers that were high risk. There was some that he identified techniques, but he needed context, so he looked at transcripts to give him context.

I’m not going to go through all of it, it was really drawn out and long. When we came back from lunch, Marlissa Ferriera asked many questions that were confusing, and she took a very long time doing her cross examination. Dr. Leo told her at one point that these are bizarre questions, because I’m already not allowed to testify in Robert Woody’s confession. I think that set Marlissa Ferriera off, so she went into a little more question, she was asking questions within a question, and she wasn’t letting him finish his answers. So, I’m not going into all of it, but much of what she said didn’t make sense to me, so I’m sure it won’t make sense to you. The Judge looked confused often and asking her to clarify. The witness was constantly confused and asking her to clarify.

Marlissa Ferriera asked about Robert Woody, if he talked to his family. He only read the transcripts, he didn’t interview Robert Woody or his family. But he was able to work up a profile from what Robert Woody did from the transcripts. Dr. Leo’s report was in December 2017. They talked in general terms about Robert Woody’s first three interviews, 6/25/17, 7/17/12, the Body wire worn by Informant 14.3 (Miranda Dykes), but nothing specific.

Dr. Leo did look at some of the videos. He said they did use some of these techniques that could raise a false confession. Marlissa Ferriera asked if he used case law in his report (he is attorney too – highly educated guy and very willing to answer questions). He didn’t recall the case law that Marlissa Ferriera referred to, he says he does refer to case law in his reports but doesn’t recall right now if he used the cases she cited. He did talk about Robert Woody how it was involuntary. He said Marlissa Ferriera wants him to make a legal conclusion and he’s not going to do that. They discussed counsel not being present during Robert Woody first interview on March 2014. During the polygraph his attorney was in the next room, but then they lied to him about the results of the polygraph. Even though polygraphs are not allowed in court. Robert Woody thought the polygraph would exonerate him and it did, it showed Robert Woody was telling the truth. But then they lied to him and his attorney about the results.

Remember, there is nothing illegal about what those officers did. They are allowed to lie, but you cannot lie to them.

The hearing is not over and they will finish it up next Tuesday. The Jury will come in at 1:30 next Tuesday. There is no court for the rest of this week. They will finish a few other things up too. They may move Mike Maunakea back, because they have some questions they need to discuss. The defense is saying he was used as an informant to work off some “beefs” including one for his son. I don’t know details, but that is what the defense is saying.

Before I get into the motion hearing, I want to talk about one other thing. I make an effort to try to give you an even-handed review of what happened in court. I try to keep it honest and straight up, I really do. With Jim Cook I was not able to do that and let me tell you why. Jim Cook, I felt, was willing to totally sacrifice his integrity to make the amount of money that he did. My personal opinion was that Jim Cook is a “wanna be cop” who says he believes in truth, justice and putting people in jail in his mind only.

What he was willing to do in his testimony and mapping, showing different things at different points of interest. It’s why eyeballing and using a protractor are misleading, In my opinion. There are tools he could use through Google Maps that would give precise locations through GPS.

My problem with Jim Cook is what he was willing to do, plus they briefed him in so deeply to the case. (they even showed him autopsy report of Walter Walter’s Dad. Why?) This fed what he was trying to do, he was willing to do whatever they wanted him to do or say whatever they wanted him to say and so he fudged his work. I’m not going to say he committed perjury that is for someone else to decide. Maybe we should call it poor work, but he proved himself wrong. He impeached himself. What he did was improper. What he did was unethical, it was inappropriate. I’m not putting him down for lack of education in general, but he doesn’t have any experience in the proprietary field of cell phone expertise. All he did is read CDR’s and map with protractor and eyeballing it. And these are the results we get? I have a real problem with someone like that. He’s not an expert, he’s a whore, he is doing it for the money. He has no integrity, he’s arrogant, and he won’t answer questions by the defense. Jim Cook was doing it for the money. That is my opinion. So I was not unbiased with Jim Cook. I try to run it down the line on these reports. I cannot do it with Jim Cook. Dr. Leo was such a breath of fresh air. He answered defense questions and then answered Marlissa Ferriera questions on cross, when he could understand them. So that is my issue. I’m going to leave it there. It really is unbelievable that Jim Cook could even be declared an expert. There is no reason that man should ever be called to testify for anyone ever again. Hopefully when people google Jim Cook, cell phone expert, a lot of this information will come up.

So, I covered the Bail Hearing in the noontime report, but I think it’s important that we talk about it now.

So, the issues that the DA was complaining about, first came up when Marlissa Ferriera got caught talking to Mike Cooley in the hallway, during a break, when he was testifying. Nobody knew that she had talked to the Judge about it first. Cooley said he didn’t like the way they were talking to him and he wanted to leave. But they hadn’t talked to him yet, because he was still on direct examination from the DA. He was being a drama queen. When she got caught talking to Cooley in the hallway, Jai Gohel watched this happen, she threatened Jai Gohel and it started a sh** storm when he got into the courtroom. Marlissa Ferriera went on one of her patented rants. First thing she said and Judge Zuniga noted it today, that these are the most unprofessional attorneys she has ever worked with. I don’t know why she’s allowed to say these sorts of things, but no one else is. In my opinion, when Marlissa Ferriera gets caught on something, she goes into a full-on aggressive mode. When she was ranting, Judge Zuniga reacted positively when Marlissa Ferriera said the defendants OR should be revoked. Judge Zuniga is very expressive in her face and when Marlissa Ferriera mention revoking the OR, the judge perked up. So that is what Marlissa Ferriera did. They set a date for the hearing and Marlisa Ferriera filed a motion.

Judge Zuniga says Daljit Athwal was not cooperative with ABC when they came to investigate and search. She said he was passively resisting and they ended up handcuffing him, but he made a few phone calls. Judge Zuniga held that against him and said it was a violation.

When Baljit Athwal walked up and talked to Frank Carson on one or two occasions at the courthouse, she found Baljit Athwal to be in violation. There is no evidence they’ve had any personal contact outside the courthouse, no phone calls, meetings, etc. She also mentioned in Dec 2016 everything that had happened and how the DA had screwed up and she (Judge Zuniga) saved her case for her, but she didn’t mention the sanctions she promised and didn’t do. She went off a little on Daljit Athwal and Baljit Athwal.

Then she came to Frank Carson and some of things she says it is obvious she does not like Frank Carson. She kept saying thing “….cause that’s what he does”. She went on and on about Frank Carson. He is intimidating witnesses, he is trying to intimidate Kirk Bunch and she said: “I believe that, because that is what he does, he is always doing that.”

She split the baby in half like she always does. She revoked their OR (no-bail release) but did not remand them into custody. Frank Carson now has a $600,000 bail, Baljit Athwal has $250,000 bail and Daljit Athwal has $200,000 bail. They have to post bail by next Tuesday, before court.

I don’t’ think the violations were that severe, it didn’t rise to the level of giving them bail. This was more of an issue that has been created. They didn’t write reports on a year or two later on some of these so-called violations. They wrote these reports after Marlissa Ferriera mentioned them in a rant to Judge Zuniga.

Tune into the podcast at the 37 minute mark to listen to the calls that came in to the podcast tonight.








Eighteen weeks and sixty-six days in the courtroom, I am witnessing a monumental meltdown of the case against Frank Carson and the Athwal brothers in the killing of Korey Kauffman. The prosecution in a murder case usually establishes the cause of death very early in their case in chief. We still have no absolute proof of how Korey Kauffman actually died. No evidence has been presented to the jury on the cause of death. Korey Kauffman had the life style where he simply could have died from a drug overdose. He and his Stepfather Kevin Pickett visited the Mulberry Mobile Home Park in Turlock to buy drugs on the day that he allegedly died.

Korey Kauffman had several people who threatened his life just days before he became missing. There was a Norteno gang member named Rudolfo Gonzalez who tried to run him over, and threatened his life over a scrapped and dismantled trailer. Korey was supposed to share the proceeds from the recycling of that trailer with him. Korey Kauffman and a man named Danny Cisco, according to testimony, had stolen some tools from a tire shop that was associated with a man named Jason Armstrong, and the Hells Angels. Everyone was afraid of Jason Armstrong, especially Michael Cooley. Michael Cooley was desperate to get the tools returned to Jason Armstrong. Michael Cooley was involved with these tools in some manner. The prosecution has tried to show that Robert Woody and the Athwal brothers threatened Korey Kauffman with the famous “Your Ass Is Grass” threat from a dark car with tinted windows. The testimony concerning this alleged threat is conflicting at best.

The judge has limited the defense attorneys from using a “Third Party” defense argument in everything except Michael Cooley. The defense is prepared to present three witnesses that will testify that Michael Cooley confessed to them that he killed Korey Kauffman. After watching and taking notes on much of the Preliminary Examination, and much of the real trial, I have Michael Cooley pegged as my number one suspect. If you really look at Michael Cooley’s actions after Korey Kauffman went missing, you can see how he was trying to deflect his guilt onto someone else. Frank Carson, who was the victim of theft by Korey Kauffman, was the logical person to frame. It is interesting that testimony in this trial has shown that Michael Cooley had stolen many items from the Carson property. The trail leading from the Carson property that went to the hole in the fence, went through Michael Cooley’s back yard. Michael Cooley buried Korey Kauffman’s bicycle in his back yard. Why would he do this?

Michael Cooley had a rather easy time in convincing the District Attorney to believe that Frank Carson had been the person behind the death of Korey Kauffman. The District Attorney hates Frank Carson. Frank was very hard to beat in the courtroom, and was a frequent critic of the District Attorney’s Office. Frank Carson was pressing charges against DA Investigator Steve Jacobson for assault in the courthouse. There were court proceedings concerning jury tampering by Steve Jacobson in the AJ Pontillo case. Frank Carson defended AJ Pontillo, and won the case outright. Even the alternate jurors were in favor of acquittal in that case. Frank Carson had the courage to run against Birgit Fladager for DA of Stanislaus County. During the campaign, it was revealed in the Modesto Bee that he was a person of interest in the killing of Korey Kauffman. This doomed his bid for DA. He wanted to “Drain the Swamp.” So many things are wrong with our District Attorney’s Office. Just as Jacobson was going to be tried for assault, and jury tampering, Frank Carson’s world was turned upside down by being arrested. Everything magically went away concerning Jacobson’s legal issues.

Nothing has gone right for Marlisa Ferreira thus far in this trial. We have testimony from Kevin Pickett who is the Stepfather of Korey Kauffman. Kevin Pickett testified that Korey Kauffman had lived with him every day since he was very small. Kevin Pickett testified that Korey Kauffman went missing on March 29, 2012. This is a day before the prosecution says he was killed by the Athwal brothers on the Carson property. We have a picture of Korey Kauffman’s grave stone. It clearly lists his date of death as being March 29, 2012. Kevin Pickett was a prosecution witness, but his testimony seems to be a silver bullet for the prosecution’s theories in this case. Kevin Pickett testified that Korey Kauffman knew Michael Cooley, but was not his friend. Micheal Cooley testified that Korey Kauffman “Was like a son.” I think Kevin Pickett knows the truth here.

We have the testimony of the drug addicted thieves that have been destroyed on the stand by the defense. Christina DeFelippo’s description of Michael and Ricky Cooley as the “White trash twins” is spot on. Eula Keyes was destroyed on the stand. Why the investigators never did cell phone analysis on the Cooley and Keyes phones confounds me. Perhaps they did not want to find out the truth, because it would stop their case against Frank Carson.

Jim Cook, the self-proclaimed cell phone expert just might have destroyed his career with his work on this case. He had already been thoroughly impeached on the stand by the defense, and then committed suicide by checking on his cell phone tower mapping by using Google Map. Jim Cook testified on the stand that he had never used Google Map in his mapping. The very next day, it was revealed by Marlisa Ferreira that he had used Google Map, and had determined that all his mapping concerning Frank Carson’s property being in an overlap zone was incorrect. This puts a dagger into her case. Without a doubt, Jim Cook committed perjury when he denied on the stand that he had never used Google Map. What do you want to bet he never gets charged by our District Attorney? Jim Cook had been “Eye Balling” his analysis, and using a protractor and compass instead of using Google Map to accurately make his maps. How many innocent defendants have been convicted based on his faulty work? I think all of his convictions will need to be looked into. He could be busy for years dealing with the fallout from this mess.

We are going to have testimony from the female officer that totally contaminated the crime scene and evidence that was discovered in the woods near Mariposa. Nothing that was collected at the crime scene was handled correctly. The defense will show that key “Game Cam” photographs of people at the grave site in Mariposa have disappeared. The time line of what allegedly happened the night that Korey Kauffman’s body was allegedly moved from Pop N Cork Liquors to the mountains is impossible. You just can’t do everything the prosecution says was done in the timeline that has been presented in the testimony.

Marlisa Ferreira will very soon put Robert Woody on the stand. He will be shown to be a serial liar by the defense. He has changed his story at least 13 times since the beginning of this fiasco. He will probably change it again. The defense has a tape where he is telling his father: “They want me to lie daddy.” That just comes naturally for Robert Woody. His mother held up a sign at the downtown jail telling him to change his testimony in order to conform to what she had just testified to. He will be destroyed on the stand by the defense.

This whole trial will boil down to what we call reasonable doubt. I have no doubt that the jury will find that there is much more than reasonable doubt. They will see that it is probable that one of the prosecution’s witnesses in this case was the person who actually killed Korey Kauffman. The sick thing is that I am convinced the prosecution actually knows it is probable that he killed Korey Kauffman. Through their hatred of Frank Carson, this person will probably never have to answer for his crime, and Tony Kauffman will never get the justice he deserves.

Sincerely; William Thomas Jensen (Tom)




Jerry Brown signs bill eliminating California’s cash-bail system

California will become the first state to let people leave jail before trial without having to post bail, under a law signed by Gov. Jerry Brown on Tuesday that largely leaves pretrial release decisions up to local judges — a change praised by legislative and judicial leaders but condemned by some criminal defense advocates.

SB10 abolishes the long-standing system of requiring newly arrested defendants to put up bail, in an amount based on the seriousness of the charges, to be freed while awaiting trial. Bail-bond companies and other advocates say the current bail system promotes public safety and encourages defendants to show up in court, but opponents note that poor people are kept in jail because they can’t afford to pay their way out.

More than 48,000 county jail inmates in California — two-thirds of the jail population — have not yet been convicted of a crime, and most of them are being held because they are unable to post bail, according to a recent state study.

With the new law, scheduled to take effect in October 2019, “California reforms its bail system so that rich and poor alike are treated fairly,” Brown said Tuesday after signing the bill.

Assemblyman Rob Bonta, D-Alameda, a co-author of the bill, said the bail system “has allowed the wealthy to purchase their freedom regardless of their risk, while the poor who pose no danger languish in jail.” The new measure was also praised by Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye after the state’s Judicial Council, which she chairs, took an unusually public position in successfully pushing for revisions to an earlier version of SB10. The current system was “outdated, unsafe and unfair,” she said in a statement, and it took a “three-branch solution” — the governor, legislators and judicial leaders — to eliminate it.






By Warren Yates

August 28, 2018 – On my last commentary approximately 3 weeks ago, I said that for those of you followers of my commentaries and also for the people on the jury of the alleged Carson murder canine and equine show, if you get my drift, I am going to reprint from one of my prior commentaries a couple of years ago proof that chief deputy district attorney Marlissa Ferrera was proven to be a bald faced liar in the preliminary hearing.

So to refresh the memories of my prior readers and to enlighten the jury members and I know some/all of you are reading this, here is part of an article I wrote during the preliminary hearing.

March 13, 2016 Now wait a minute, you don’t mean to tell me that Ferreira lied during this hearing are you? You better bet your sweet bippy I am as follows: Then we get on to Ms. Ferreira’s claim that no deals have been made for any of these star prosecution witnesses. Earlier in the hearing a person by the name of Ronald Glenn Cooper Junior was brought from Pleasant Valley State Prison to testify for the prosecution. Again, Ms. Ferreira states that there were no deals made. Well let me insert a comment from one of my earlier commentaries regarding that:

But this morning we had the pleasure of listening to Deputy District Attorney Elizabeth de Jong as she took the stand to defend the DEAL made to potential three striker Ronald Glenn Cooper Junior. She was certainly trying to do the “Nae Nae” dance in response to the defense attorneys questions why a deal was cut to let Mr. Cooper, a fine broth of a lad by the way, chortle chortle, get 4 years on what should have been a three strikes case. After all, all he did was break into a house, apparently steal something, terrorize a female and stick a knife up to her throat and terrorize her. He pled to inflicting corporal punishment on a spouse co-habitant.

Now comes Deputy Public Defender Benjamin Rosenstein who apparently has no problem in telling the truth. He represents both Ronald Cooper Junior and Michael Cooley. And right out of the gate Mr. Rosenstein states that both of his clients are promised leniency in their unrelated cases for their testimony. THIS MAKES FERREIRA A BALD FACED PERJURER!!! LIAR IN OTHER WORDS!!!

Immediately after hearing this truth, Dist. Atty. Ferreira immediately begins to attack Mr. Rosenstein saying he has only been an attorney since 2012. And that has mainly been in one court and that is no way Mr. Rosenstein could know if all local prosecutors always ask defense attorneys to request continuances. Obviously Mr. Rosenstein said something that ruffled the feathers of the Dist. Atty.

It is so refreshing to have a county employee who is not afraid to tell the truth. I commend Mr. Rosenstein for his candor and honesty. I certainly trust that Mr. Rosenstein will not be castigated, criticized, coerced or compromised in any way because of his courage and wanting to set the record straight.

We here in Stanislaus County know that there’s a powerful political machine we have to contend with. Thank you Mr. Rosenstein for your service to the citizens of Stanislaus County. This young man has more integrity and search for the truth in his little finger then Ferreira has in her whole body. Just saying…

This November in approximately 9 weeks the citizens of Stanislaus County are going to be voting for one of two people for the office of district attorney. It is imperative if you wish to reclaim the integrity, honesty and confidence of the office of district attorney,


birgit fladagator had stated in an open candidate forum that if a case was brought to the office of the Dist. Atty. and a person were factually innocent or not guilty, she has ordered the rookie deputy district attorneys of which there are many because her management skills have made many seasoned deputy district attorneys leave the office several of whom have publicly stated they left because of her.

What that means is if you are one of your loved ones was arrested in a questionable case and it was shown that you or your loved ones was factually innocent, the Dist. Atty. will proceed against you or your loved one costing you many many thousands of dollars to bail out, pay for attorneys fees, lose time at work or lose your job because of false allegations just so the fladagator can train green fresh out of law school recruits to go out and rip and tear people whether guilty or innocent and deprive them of their constitutional right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

If you vote for birgit fladager may God have mercy on your soul or the soul of your innocent loved ones when the fladagator comes knocking on your door to eat you or one of your innocent loved ones. If you vote for her you deserve whatever happens to you or your loved ones because of her vindictive, vicious prosecutorial misconduct because if she does not like you or that loved one of yours, she will go to whatever tax payers expense it takes to persecute prosecute, no persecute is a more accurate definition of what she will do to you.



What does the Modesto Bee say?

April 28, 2018 at 3:30 PM: The Bee does not believe Fladager is as awful as her critics paint her. But we do believe it’s time to give the office a fresh start. Voters will narrow this four-person field to two candidates on June 5 (assuming no one gets 50 percent), and those two candidates should be John Mayne and Patrick Kolasinski.

Three election cycles back, Mayne drove a truck carrying candidate Fladager in a parade. Now he insists the DA’s office cannot be fixed without sweeping new leadership. Kolasinski says the DA’s office suffers from a crisis in both leadership and management, and needs help from someone who understands the private sector.

That’s a debate we’d like to hear more of in November – from John Mayne and Patrick Kolasinski.

June 4, 2018 at 4:46 PM:

Stanislaus County

District Attorney: John R. Mayne, Patrick Kolasinski – DA’s office can use fresh air.

It is unmistakably clear that the Modesto Bee clearly supports John Mayne for the office of district attorney of Stanislaus County. YOU SHOULD TOO IF YOU ARE SMART!

Okay let’s get back to more information as to why the fladagator needs to be removed from office in 10 weeks. I am going to insert a paragraph or so from my last commentary on August 8, 2018. The fladagator has never made one court appearance in what could be described as the most sensational criminal trial ever in Stanislaus County.

I’m just going to throw in here again the fact that the FLADAGATOR has not once graced the court with the honor of her presence. Chortle chortle. Judge Zuniga even commented on that fact during the preliminary hearing. You would think that the prosecution Queen Bee would be all over this case taking credit for what a great job her staff is doing. But no!!! WHAT IS SHE AFRAID OF? WHAT IS SHE ASHAMED OF? WHAT IS SHE WORRIED ABOUT?
She sits up in her penthouse like the Queen of Tarts. We may never know unless she wants to tell us during her going away party in November 2018 when John Mayne takes over as an honest, ethical, principled, moral and truthful Dist. Atty. GO JOHN MAYNE!!! Drain the swamp John!!!

I thought about contacting the United States Justice Department requesting an investigation and action against a Dist. Atty. who believes in prosecuting innocent people to give her rookie district attorneys practice. But then I got to thinking about it, and our current Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions won’t even indict our own domestic enemies like clinton, strock or stroke and he has been stroking the FBI, holder, some say comey I say commie, lynch, brennan I lost my security clearance boo hoo hoo,

So I guess hoping they would come into indict and arrest the fladagator would be too much to hope for. The fladgator is just a small drip in the big pond of corruption.

Let us not forget an issue that arose approximately 3 years ago when the flat a gator used taxpayers money to defend the chief deputy district attorney dave “cockroach” harris for jury tampering.

The article states that Stanislaus County Deputy Dist. Atty. dave harris is asking the fifth appellate district court to let him go.

harris claims Superior Court Judge McFadden has abused her discretion and exceeded the bounds of reason. Oh boo hoo hoo!!!

He also asked for a peremptory writ of prohibition restraining respondent court from enforcing its judgment ordering petitioner committed to the county jail for five days for contempt of court. Oh boo hoo boo!! Put him in for a few days to see what it’s like!!

harris requests relief from the appellate court in that it issued an immediate stay of these proceedings which are to continue July 27, 2015 in the Stanislaus County Superior Court Department to until the appellate court rules upon and made orders to the Superior Court regarding petitioners requested relief as follows:

DA harris asked the court to issue a peremptory writ of mandate directing the respondent Superior Court to dismiss the order to show cause against the petitioner.

harris asked that the Superior Court remove Frank Carson as co-prosecutor. Boo hoo hoo!! Cry baby harris.

Attorney Frank Carson made Judge Steffan aware of the misconduct by harris in tampering with the jury in the AJ Pontillo case and of withholding exculpatory evidence from the court and the jury that could have put Pontillo in jail for life had he been convicted. Pontillo was completely exonerated on all charges.

harris also asked the appellate court to issue a preemptory writ of mandate and/or prohibition directing the respondent Superior Court to recuse Judge McFadden from the proceeding, and appoint and unbiased and impartial judicial officer to preside over the order to show cause. Oh boo hoo hoo!!!

Tampering with the jury is a felony and DA harris is getting a break because DA fladagator is not going to charge her chief deputy with a crime.

So while we are talking about favoritism and covering things up, someone told me that they saw in a motion filed with the Carson case, a workman’s comp kerfuffle involving investigator Bunch. Don’t know anything about it so maybe one of our readers can check it out and advise me. I’ll never be up to speed on this case. I am relying on trusted sources when I speak what is currently going on in court since I have not been able to attend for some time.

So prosecutorial misconduct, waste of taxpayer’s money to protect their own, trying to cover up a felony committed by her chief deputy harris, withholding exculpatory evidence and generally embarrassing, disgracing, degrading the office of district attorney of Stanislaus County is the current bill of fare. Maybe we should call her flaky fladager. Since all of the fladagator’s prosecutorial misconduct obviously began the day she took office and decided that she was going to win her cases either illegally or it legally.

She obviously prefers to take the illegal route when you look over the years since she has been in office and makes a pattern of violating Brady versus Maryland by failing to provide exculpatory evidence in a timely manner. I have written about several cases that she has committed a Brady violation in. I’m sure she must be veeeeerrrrry proud of herself. Chortle chortle.

A little about withholding exculpatory evidence from the defense teams. I’m gonna start with one that goes back a number years in the Scott Peterson case. For what it’s worth, which is probably nothing, I fully feel that Scott Peterson is guilty.

What I’m going to point out is that there was some information that could have been exculpatory had it been followed up on. You can Google this correctional officer’s name and see the whole story.

Lt. Xavier Aponte, who worked in the Investigations Unit at the California Rehabilitation Institute at Norco east of Los Angeles, called MPD with important information.  A phone call between an inmate and his brother had been recorded.  Aponte’s memory of that information was later given to both defense and prosecution in separate statements.”

As you probably remember, the fladagator teamed with Rick Distaso in prosecuting Scott Peterson. And of course this is the case that the fladagator rode in on the coattails of to become Dist. Atty. Rick Distaso as we know is now a Stanislaus County Superior Court judge.

A reasonable person would think that with the tons of investigators employed by the District Attorney’s Office, someone should have followed up possible exculpatory evidence with the same rigor that the Queen’s investigators went after Mayor Sabatino, AJ Pontillo, Frank Drummond, Georgia DeFilippo, Christina DeFilippo and Eduardo “Eddie” Quintanar.

All of the above six persons were persecuted by the flaky fladagator. All of the above six persons were either exonerated, had charges dismissed or were found not guilty. All of the above six persons have a relationship with Frank Carson either through business or familial ties.

Mayor Sabatino, AJ Pontillo, Frank Drummond and numerous others not mentioned here were all represented by Frank Carson in court and Frank Carson whipped flaky fladagator fladager and her minions like a redheaded stepchild. Frank Carson has been infuriating the fladagator for years and years. As I said before, fladagator’s motto is “If I can’t beat em in court, book em”.

With the unfortunate and tragic death of a young man named Korey Kaufman, probably buy one of several people who had threatened him as brought out in court testimony, the fladagator and her minions began rounding up worthless dregs of society and began “squeezing” them to suborn perjury to implicate the Carson 8 in the death of Korey Kauffman. As I showed in the opening paragraphs of this commentary, ferreira has lied in open court regarding some deals made for these dregs. These dregs were given special consideration, light or no jail time, had charges dismissed and I’m sure some of them got gift cards for McDonald’s.

I was in the interview room at the Sheriff’s office with Eddie after he was arrested as his investigator. In the interview room with navarro, bunch, Eddie, myself and Eddie’s attorney. navarro was conducting the interrogation on Eddie and navarro was using his long term prior friendship with Eddie to elicit information that would have been false and perjury if Eddie had been placed under oath, Eddie told navarro he didn’t know anything about the death of Korey Kauffman.

Strange to say, but I kind of liked navarro when I met him for the first time in the interview room. But after listening to him try play on he and Eddie’s prior school friendship and work friendship, I resented the way he was trying to manipulate their friendship. navarro then became a slimeball to me. I can’t go into all the details of the conversation. But I knew what navarro was doing.

After about 25 minutes someone suggested a break. Eddie’s attorney, bunch and navarro left the room and I stayed with Eddie. After a short time Eddie’s attorney opened the door and called me out into the outer room. ferreira, bunch, navarro, possibly “don’t mention domestic violence around me” evers and numerous others were there.

Eddie’s attorney took me aside and said that the “rat pack” mentioned in the prior paragraph felt that I was signaling Eddie somehow prior to him giving his answers and they’ve requested that I wait downstairs. Needless to say, if you know me, you know that I become loud and vociferous when I have been accused of something I did not do. I was true to form and I yelled that I had a license to protect and I would in no way jeopardize it.

I also yelled that I resent being accused of something I did not do and was visibly upset. There were some startled looks on some faces of the “rat pack”. I have always been honest, forthright and ethical and in my career as a police officer and certainly in my career as a private investigator. Their actions caused me to put them all in the SLIMEBALL COLUMN.

Because I did not want the “rat pack” to draw an unreasonable inference toward Eddie from my riotous reaction to their absurd and ridiculous charge, I relented Eddie’s attorneys request and went downstairs to the lobby.

I see that super salesman and I don’t have a degree but I can hook you up with a great data plan cook is off the stand which will allow the jury to enjoy their week off knowing they don’t have to come back and listen to more of his dribble.

I’m going to insert an excerpt here from a prior commentary regarding how fantastic of an expert ole jimmy is from a case in Santa Clara County in January 2010 in which defense attorney Mark Geragos made a fool out of him showing how ole jimmy has been b’esing courts and juries for a long time.

The three attorneys here and Mark Geragos eight years ago pretty well sliced and diced ole jimmy and his boy Cheetah like a chef with a Ginsu knife at Benihana’s.

“Cook, a former AT&T field representative who now trains law-enforcement officials on analyzing wireless devices, presented the jury in Zumot’s murder-arson trial Friday with detailed spreadsheets listing all calls and text messages made and received by Zumot and Schipsi, including ones they exchanged between themselves.

He also produced a series of maps illustrating the coverage areas of the towers the two cell phones used between the evening of Oct. 14 and the evening of Oct. 15.

Cook’s testimony was instantly disputed by Zumot’s attorney Mark Geragos, who produced his own AT&T records and argued that the data Cook relied on doesn’t actually exist.
Geragos showed the jury the AT&T report listing the call data from the two phones. For the three phone calls in which the two phones appeared to be traveling together, the fields that normally display data for cell towers were blank.

Geragos blasted Cook’s findings
and told him to produce the AT&T report on which he based his conclusions. When Cook couldn’t produce that report, Geragos pointed out repeatedly that the numbers Cook was showing the jurors was an Excel spreadsheet that Cook himself had put together — not raw data from the company.

“There isn’t a single record from AT&T that has this cell-tower data,” Geragos said during his cross-examination.”

Though I have a whole lot more I want to write and with the jury being out all this week I will probably be able to have a little time to draft another commentary or two.

So for all of the people reading my commentaries, and for all the jury members reading the commentaries, hopefully you’re seeing that the Dist. Atty. and her minions want Frank Carson put away so bad they will stoop to whatever low they have to to imprison an innocent person and his friends.


Stand by, more to come.