Hello Everybody, this is Marty from Dawg’s Blog with tonight’s podcast of the Frank Carson et al. trial on Friday, February 15, 2019. If you listened to the noontime report, Praveen Singh was and is still on the stand. Marlisa Ferreira had completed her direct examination and the sh** hit the fan this afternoon and things went sideways, as this case has a tendency to do.
The jury came up around 1:14 or 1:15 PM and the Judge was on the bench just about two or three minutes later. Percy Martinez started with Praveen Singh again, asking him if he is been charged in a number of criminal cases in federal and state courts? Asked if he is been charged with the some fraud cases, real estate fraud and also accused of plotting to shoot a neighbor who was a correctional officer, there is an accusation of a solicitation of a robbery, six counts of mail fraud, seven counts of false statements to banks and Percy Martinez asked if he was trying to get help from Kirk Bunch on his pending cases? He says no, I wasn’t. Percy Martinez asked them on 11/5/2013 interview with Kirk Bunch he said he wanted his cases to go away? He said no, that’s not true. Percy Martinez asked him if he told Kirk Bunch the reason that he wanted to talk to him is to deal his charges away? He said well, yes and no. (So he doesn’t really want to come flat out admit it). He asked Praveen Singh if he said that if he could brush his other cases under the mat, make all his cases go away? (The idea of taking a broom and the sweeping the the dirt underneath the carpet type of thing) He said well, yeah, I did say that. On 11/15/2013 interview, he told Kirk Bunch that he was ready to deal. His reason was to deal? He said yes, I did that. Again, he admitted to stating that he wanted to brush his cases away. He offered details of the Frank Carson cases that he had been involved with, including homicide cases. Percy Martinez asked him if he was willing to trade information to help himself? He said no. (But just before that he said he offered to trade information on cases). Percy Martinez asked him if he was willing to trade information on three homicides that were being handled by Frank Carson? (apparently he had some involvement in, he was willing to turn over some notes or go get some notes from Frank Carson’s office). Praveen Singh said he was not actually going to give the information, he just told Kirk Bunch he would get all the notes and all the files to the investigators. He told Kirk Bunch that, but said he wasn’t really going to do it, I guess. He said his boat was sinking and Frank Carson’s, his boat is sinking too. Frank Carson did something that he doesn’t know anything about. He also said made a statement: I don’t give a F&# about who’s right. Basically, he is saying F&$ everybody, I’m taking care of myself. Kirk Bunch had asked him during that interview if he had any loyalty to Frank Carson? He said he gave up his own brother in the same way, why wouldn’t he give up Frank Carson? He said yeah, I said something like that. He denied holding anything back in regards to Korey Kauffman case, said he didn’t want to sit in jail. He denied telling Kirk Bunch that, is what he is saying. He said that again: I don’t give a F&^#, F&*@ everyone. He said he doesn’t care about anyone, he will do what the investigators want, that’s what he said in that interview. He didn’t know Korey Kauffman or anything about that, is what he kept saying also. He also said that he would wear a wire on Frank Carson to get information. He did keep saying the Frank Carson denied any involvement. Frank Carson never talked about any incident or actions that in his yard, where they caught anybody or trying to catch anybody. He said Frank Navarro had asked in that same interview if Frank Carson was looking for people in the yard? He did not recall whether he said that or not, he was refreshing. After he refreshed, he had told investigators Frank Carson never talked about hiding in the yard and he never hired anybody to go back there, that he knew of. In the 2/5/13 interview he told investigators: I don’t know shit on Korey Kauffman, and he was more than willing to testify against Frank Carson.
He said he first heard about the homicide after the search warrant was served, probably talking about the July 15, 2012 search warrant, and he didn’t know anything in regards to Korey Kaufman’s going missing or being murdered. He was not sure about hearing about the thefts before or after March 30, 2012. He asked the Investigators why isn’t Frank Carson getting arrested? He says I am worried about myself, is what he told the investigators. Kirk Bunch asked about Frank Carson saying it is done, is not a problem anymore, it is been handled, it is done, something like that. He didn’t really recall that. He refreshed and he said yes, Kirk Bunch did say that. So, it is Kirk Bunch who said it him, not the other way around. Kirk Bunch said Frank Carson said: stay off the property.
There was an objection to that, I don’t know where they were going with it and why it was objected to, but Kirk Bunch had made a statement about staying off the property. There was a sidebar.
Then, Percy Martinez asked Praveen Singh: you didn’t make those comments about “it is done”, Kirk Bunch did? He said that’s true. He asked him if Frank Carson said, “it’s over with, along with it is done”. He said no, he didn’t say that, Kirk Bunch did. Praveen Singh was asked, did he say Frank Carson said “stay off property”? He said no, Kirk Bunch did. Kirk Bunch also said Frank Carson put you in this position? He said yes, that’s what he said. He talked about getting arrested due to dumb ass people or if he was going to get arrested was due to a dumbass Frank Carson? He said yes, that’s what Kirk Bunch said.
He was asked about the did he file a 20 million claim? There was an immediate objection, then they all raced to the sidebar. I don’t know what that was about. In 2016 Frank Carson was in custody and Praveen Singh had gone to one of the Carson owned properties on McHenry and told the tenants something that led to an objection. I don’t know what that was about either. They went to another sidebar and the judge said we’ll get back to that later. So there’s an issue of some sort there.
Percy Martinez asked Praveen Singh if he had made a false statement under oath in the last 10 years? He said no. He asked him if he testified in United States versus Salado case? He said no. He asked him if he testified in Fresno Federal Court during that time that they’re talking about? He said no. Percy Martinez stated that he wanted to refresh his memory and the Judge says there is no memory loss, he’s just denying it. So Percy Martinez wanted to impeach him with the transcript of the testimony that he gave in that case, that he said he didn’t do. That raised major objections from Marlisa Ferreira and they went to a sidebar and it turned everything upside down for the rest of the day.
The jury was out of the room and 2:32 PM. The sidebar didn’t resolve the issue and they ended up having to try to work this thing out. I’ll try to explain it the best I can, but it’s really a mess. So the jury came up it 1:46 PM and they were out of the courtroom at 2:32 PM, so that is about 45 minutes.
The Judge is asking what the objection is by Marlisa Ferreira and Marlisa Ferreira is saying that the testimony that was given by Praveen Singh in that federal case, Frank Carson was the attorney that had put Singh on the stand. Praveen Singh testified that he was a Fresno Police Department reserve police officer for seven years when he was asked what his occupation was. That was one of the responses he gave along with some of the things. Apparently the next day Praveen Singh did not show up in court, probably for cross exam, I don’t know the details and so his testimony was stricken in that case. Marlisa Ferreira’s argument is: the testimony was struck in that quoted case (she still looking for the documentation of what she’s trying to say and she can’t find it in all of the stack of paperwork she has) and once the testimony is struck, it does not exist. So, he cannot be impeach with his own testimony under oath, because it doesn’t exist, that’s Marlisa Ferreira stance.
There was a long delay here. Everybody was trying to read and figure out what’s going on here. It really turned into a mess. The attorneys were trying to figure it out and we ended up taking a break. The jury ended up being done for the day, but she did bring them back up about 4 o’clock.
Judge Zuniga finally said is pretty clear from the record that the testimony was stricken. Praveen Singh had left the one day and did not return for cross examination the next. There is no explanation for his absence, apparently and so his testimony was struck by that the federal court.
Percy Martinez’ argument is: his testimony was taken, he took an oath to tell the truth, he didn’t do that and he testified that he was a Reserve Police Officer for seven years with Fresno Police Department and Praveen Singh was never a regular or reserve police officer anywhere, let alone Fresno. He says Marlisa Ferreira was trying to divert from the truth. Praveen Singh is a perjurer and the prosecution is well aware of this fact. The prosecution is hiding the truth and this should not be hidden from the jury. Praveen Singh’s credibility is the issue here for the jury to decide. It is not the facts of that federal case that they want to bring out. It is the fact of the one thing that he said that he was a police officer with Fresno Police Department. He tried to lie to the court and this was in front of a jury in federal court, to gain credibility with that jury in that court. Percy Martinez says he cannot say it’s unreliable information because it was testimony in a federal case. He says no part of the case is going to be discussed, not the merits of the case or anything else, just his false testimony only.
Jai Gohel argued that Praveen Singh said he never testified in another case and he has lied about another case. The prosecutors and attorneys involved can prove it. There are many areas to impeach on this issue. He also it had brought up the fact that the prosecutor on that case is now a federal judge or magistrate and Jai Gohel said he is more than willing to subpoena him and get him in court.
Attorney Hans argued that if it doesn’t exist, this gives a person a clear reason to lie in court because they’re unable to prosecute the individual saying it never happened due to the stricken testimony. So can he be prosecuted for lying under oath in a federal court if this testimony stricken? He said the doesn’t make sense he doesn’t believe that the way the law reads.
Marlisa Ferreira argued that she had brought this issue up to the court prior that Praveen Singh’s testimony to be a problem. Judge Zuniga interrupted her and said you never said a word about the stricken testimony, and we could have dealt with this before had you done so. Marlisa Ferreira refers to the Beverly Woody testimony that was stricken from the preliminary hearing. So it means that that testimony never existed. So it’s not relevant at this point whether he testified or not. Praveen Singh said he never testified, so is he the one on the stand in federal court? She says we don’t know that, we don’t know was him testifying in federal court, maybe it is somebody else, who duped Frank Carson pretending that he was Praveen Singh.Many other people could have been duped by him too. The issue was that he was not crossed and Frank Carson, apparently according to the transcript, was okay with his testimony being stricken in that federal case. Again she says it’s unknown who was testifying or this defendant (who was the attorney in this case) suborned perjury by putting whoever this person was on, they don’t know if it was Praveen Singh and there is no way to authenticate it.
Percy Martinez argued back that it’s odd that the people actually knew it was Praveen Singh, as they provided discovery of Praveen Singh testifying in that case. Praveen Singh had testified falsely and it was in federal court. The investigators did a check and Praveen Singh’s wife showed the uniforms that were hanging in the closet or folded up that he had Fresno Police Department uniforms. But it was all a lie. The entire Fresno Police Department was a lie. The prosecution is hiding by a technicality, by putting Praveen Singh on the stand knowing full well he is lying as before. Praveen Singh’s testimony in February 2011, in United States versus Salado, he knows Frank Carson from the law office of Frank Carson knew who he was, he worked there. There is no question of identity of who was testifying. Kirk Bunch’s report on 8/7/2018 saying that he received transcript from the US attorney as part of the public record and the testimony of Praveen Singh. All officers of the court were ID’d, meaning the prosecution, the defense attorney, the judge, the court reporter, the clerk, and it was Praveen Singh that had testified. They are simply trying to hide Praveen Singh lying under oath.
The jury was called up to be released at 3:55 PM.
There’s been a lot of talk about this. I did do some inquiries, not with the attorneys in this case, but I talked to some other people. The question is Praveen Singh’s testimony was struck in the federal case, so his testimony cannot be considered by the jury in that case; does that mean that he did not testify? Well that’s what the DA is trying to say. But he got on the stand, took an oath, he identified who he was, as they always do when they take the stand, and he promptly lied. So does that mean it never happened because the testimony was struck? This question is still up in the air, as is typical for Judge Zuniga. The attorneys have to do some more research because she’s talking about the evidence code and that it is stricken, so technically it doesn’t exist. Well it did exist, the attorneys were reading his testimony. So physically there’s a document in front of them that they are reading, so it does exist. If it was stricken, why is it still in the record? If it didn’t exist, why is it still in the official record which was turned over by the District Attorney’s Office in discovery? So that’s the question: can he be impeached with his own words or can the prosecution stand behind this, what the defense is calling a technicality.
I’m telling you, I certainly don’t know. It’s an interesting question and this is a type of thing that will end up being case law. That’s where we finished it up. We’re back at the 9:30 AM Tuesday morning. The jury is gonna come in a little bit later because they have to resolve this issue. There is still a lot more of cross-examination to go. These are the type of things of been ongoing in this case and the because of the type of witnesses that they have.
Don’t forget that my PayPal buttons on the bottom of each report. The information is on the website for snail mail: PO Box 1115 in Houston, CA 95326. Checks made out to Marty Carlson Services.
My sponsor is Merced Tile Supply. He’s a good guy over there if you need tile. He’s down there in Merced on Highway 59. No linoleum, no carpet, just good affordable tile! So, check them out.
It was an interesting day, at the end of the day and will see how this plays out. Praveen Singh has talked about being a lifelong friend of Frank Carson and then when it comes down to it he’s willing to give up his own brother. So, I guess there is no loyalty there. I don’t know.
Were back Tuesday at 9:30 AM and I as I always say don’t take my word for it come to court and find out for yourself. Good night everybody!