Louisiana Voice

Only five days are left in the current semi-annual fundraiser for LouisianaVoice.

We need your support to continue bringing you stories like the ones posted today.

I won’t bore you with the details; you know them by now. So, if you can find a way to help support independent investigative reporting, you can give by credit card by clicking on the yellow DONATE button to the right of this post.

Or you can send a check by snail mail to Capital News Service, P.O. Box 922, Denham Springs, Louisiana 70727.

A hundred bucks or more will get you a signed copy of my newest book, a novel entitled It’s All TheIRS, about a guy who foolishly decides to fight the IRS with surprising results.

Thank you, as always.

Read Full Post »

The argument could be made, I suppose, that because I don’t have a dog in this hunt, I probably should just butt out but I just can’t let the actions of a Florida legislator go without commenting on what a petty, vindictive, miserable s.o.b. State Rep. RANDY FINE has to be.

Yes, I’m keenly aware that he will probably never read this to know to what degree of total disgust and contempt I hold him in, but I’m saying it even if the only person whose feelings it assuages are mine.

Fine, a Republican supporter of Gov. Ron DeSantis’s fight with Disney, has labeled himself as one of Hillary Clinton’s true deplorables by using the Special Olympics as a weapon to reek some sort of sick revenge over a local school board member with whom he apparently has issues.

That’s just about as despicable as one can ever get. It’s probably some sort of new depth to which an elected official can dive in the sewer of political spats.

Fine, who sponsored a bill punishing Disney over the state’s LGBTQ education law, attempted to pull the rug of financial FUNDING out from under the Special Olympics for the city of West Melbourne, because school board member Jennifer Jenkins was invited to a fundraising event and he wasn’t.

Seriously? Someone should bitch-slap this sanctimonious little saggy-jowl twit just for general principle.

At the same time, he also threatened to pull funding for a flood risk reduction project in West Melbourne – all because he (wait for it) doesn’t like Jenkins, whom he referred to as a “whore” in a text to West Melbourne City Council member John Dittmore.

Apparently, his dislike of Jenkins stems from Jenkins’s support for school mask requirements and other Covid safety measures during the pandemic. Well, that’s certainly justification for cutting funding for Special Olympics and flood protection. Nothing there to remind us of the small-mindedness of the type people who support the likes of Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis.

Of course, Dandy Randy tried to spin the confabulation in his favor by the tried-and-true Trumpian method: denial.

He predictably denied that the conversation ever took place and said he never threatened to ask DeSantis to veto funding for anything.

But he did an equally predictably stupid thing: he put his threat in writing in the form of a (ahem) text. (Oh, when will they ever learn about that damn social media?)

The messages to Dittmore were released by West Melbourne city attorney Morris Richardson as part of a public records from (who else?) Jenkins.

“Jenkins just put your project (flood protection) and Special Olympics funding on the veto list,” he wrote in a text to the city councilman. In another text (one is never enough), he told Dittmore that it would be “smart” to cancel the event with an “apology for wading into politics.”

“You guys will have to raise a lot of money given that’s who you want to honor, not the person who got you money in the budget,” he wrote.

But Fine never threatened anyone, don’t you see?

Jenkins somehow managed to take the high road in this messy affair. “I’m not surprised by it,” she said. “It’s typical for someone to attack a woman with sexual innuendos when they are threatened by their strength.”

I suppose this ugly episode does deflect attention from Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, another of those Trumpian Republicans who one wit said never had a high school sweetheart until he was 38.

But unfortunately, it does not conceal the sad truth that Florida is doing a deep dive into authoritarianism, hoping to take the entire country with it in the process.

The only hope is that with both residing in Florida and both seemingly casting solicitous eyes toward the White House, they will be successful only in destroying each other and perhaps leave the door open for a decent Republican (if there is one left out there) to fill the void.

And the Democrats had better start looking for a strong (and younger) candidate of their own.

Read Full Post »

Venire

və-nī′rē, -nîr′ē

noun

1. A writ issued by a judge to a sheriff directing the summons of prospective jurors.
2. The panel of prospective jurors from which a jury is selected.

Article 408 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the State of Louisiana says in part:

In parishes other than Orleans, the jury commission shall select impartially at least three hundred (300) persons having the qualifications to serve as jurors, who shall constitute the general venire. A list of persons so selected shall be prepared and certified by the clerk of court as the general venire list, and said list shall be kept as part of the records of the commission. The name and address of each person on the list shall be written on a separate slip of paper, with no designation as to race or color, which shall be placed in a box labeled “General Venire Box.” (Emphasis added.)

The law further says that the jury commission “shall meet” at least once every six months (or when ordered by the court) to supplement the General Venire after deletions of those who have died or otherwise become disqualified to serve.

Petit jury members are drawn from the General Venire. A petit jury is a regular trial jury, assembled to determine criminal or civil liability.

Article 416 says of the drawing of a petit jury venire:

A petit jury venire for the first week of a session shall not be drawn from a general venire containing less than two hundred fifty (250) names, and no petit jury venire for any subsequent week shall be drawn from a general venire containing less than one hundred fifty (150) names. (Emphasis added.)

Gary Holder, is a retired military and commercial airline pilot whose son, Chris, was convicted of second-degree murder in a 2014 split-jury verdict. The victim was Chris’s mother and Gary Holder’s wife, a physician. The elder Holder is convinced his son was misdiagnosed at age 15 and was administered 34 major psychotropic drugs over the next five-plus years, some of which were clearly labeled not to be given patients under the age of 18 and to avoid combining medications.

He said Chris went into what was diagnosed as a “prescription drug-induced schizophrenic rage” that led to his killing his mother.

He also feels his son received inadequate legal representation and that the defense attorney failed to request a continuance of the trial when the Holders’ expert witness encountered a conflict during the week of trial. He also says the original defense attorney failed to object to the method of jury selection.

Gary Holder spent seven years researching court records after he received word from a friend who told him the jury selection in his son’s trial in Bossier Parish had been manipulated. He said he subsequently discovered some significant – and alarming – information:

The 26^th Judicial District, comprised of the parishes of Bossier and Webster:

• Has no records of the construction of the General Venire or of the Qualified General Venire;
• Has no records of any requests to be excused from jury duty;
• Has no records of the mailing of questionnaires/summonses or their return;
• Only 45 potential jurors were chosen for the Grand Jury venire, rather than the minimum of 50 persons required by law.
• Records of unserved or excused members are inadequate or non-existent.

Holder researched seven venires over those seven years and discovered that on the first day of session in all of the venires he examined, “the maximum number of jurors is 141 and it should have been 250. Every venire that was examined showed that they were far under the number 250.”

Moreover, Holder noted that on the questionnaire and summonses that were sent out to each potential juror, a statement at the bottom of the form said, “If you request to be excused you must provide and attach to this questionnaire a current letter from your doctor if an illness or a handicap prevents you from serving as a juror. Requests to be excused from jury duty for any reason must be in writing and mail to the judge’s office…” (Emphasis added.)

“There were 409 potential jurors that were excused,” Holder said. “Of that 409, there were only 144 letters requesting to be excused and of those requesting to be excused, only 89 had a signed letter by the judge. Of all those excused, there was never any supplementation of the General Venire for those individuals that were excused,” he added.

In the movie The Runaway Jury, based on the John Grisham book of the same title, there is a scene in which a blind man approached the bench to inquire of the judge as to why he was not considered for jury duty. The judge explained that he was not required to serve because of his handicap. But the man persisted, saying the court was guilty of discrimination because he had not requested a waiver and indeed, wished to be considered.

He was subsequently chosen and was selected as foreman of the jury.

While purely fiction, the episode does provide an object lesson that could be applied to the 26^th JDC and quite possibly other judicial districts as well. Pursuant to the Louisiana Constitution, persons 70 years of age or older may claim an exemption for jury duty based on age if they do not wish to serve. But there is no requirement that they be excused.

In fact, Article 783 of the Code of Criminal Procedure says in no uncertain terms:

No person or group of persons shall be automatically excused. (Emphasis added.)

In the seven venires examined by Holder, “every juror over the age of 70 was summarily dismissed and there is no documentation showing any request to be excused. There were 77 jurors over the age of 70 that were summarily dismissed. Not a single one of those sent in any request to be excused,” Holder said.

Finally, Article 416.1 says in part:

The questionnaire may constitute part of the sheriff’s return and may be made part of the record. When served in accordance with this Section, a person may be cited for contempt for failing to appear in response to the subpoena. (Emphasis added.)

“Of the seven venires that were examined, on the first day of the session(s) there were 71 no-shows but…only 10 writs that were issued for those 71 no-shows. Of the remaining 61 no-shows, there is no record of any request to be excused,” Holder said. “Why (were) these individuals excused and who authorized their excuses? Were they told in advance they didn’t have to appear?”

Holder saved his most inflammatory accusation for last.

“A request was made to LPR Investigations, a (Texas) forensic document and handwriting examination private investigative firm specializing in forensic document examination and handwriting identification investigations,” he said.

“LPR Investigations scanned 26^th JDC notice jury questionnaires and associated documents. More than 227 documents were discovered to have been altered and/or forged. LPR Investigations submitted seven reports on jury questionnaire authentication and accomplished a forensic report on each venire,” he said.

TOMORROW: What were those alterations? What was forged?

Read Full Post »

We’re in the final days of our semi-annual fundraiser and as we enter those last days, LouisianaVoice is revealing alleged manipulations in the state’s jury system – or at least in the 26th Judicial District which encompasses Bossier and Webster parishes.

Serious charges, to be sure, but a story that no one else seems to want to delve into because it takes a lot of time and legwork. And with any research project, there are expenses – travel, legal filings, and document copies.

You generosity in helping us keep this kind of reporting going is appreciated more than you could ever know. You may contribute by credit card by clicking on the yellow DONATE button to the right of this post or by mailing a check to Capital News Service, P.O. Box 922, Denham Springs, Louisiana 70727.

Those giving $100 or more will receive a signed copy of my latest book, It’s All TheIRS, a novel about a man who decides to fight the IRS and which, while a work of fiction, actually contains real accounts of IRS bullying of American citizens as the only legalized domestic terrorist organization.

But you have to act fast. This fundraiser ends Saturday.

As always, thanks for being you.

Read Full Post »

The 26^th Judicial District Court may have outsmarted justice and made a mockery of the state constitution requirements for selecting jury venires and in the process, managed to get its britches caught on its own pitchfork.

Funny thing is, the practice of alleged jury manipulation and document forgeries may well not be limited to the two-parish (Bossier and Webster) 26^th JDC.

Moreover, as many as 25 percent of the inmates at Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola currently serving sentences as a result of split-verdict convictions could conceivably see those convictions thrown out, depending on the results of a case now pending before the Louisiana Supreme Court.

One can only imagine the cost in re-trying thousands of inmates but that’s the price you pay when you manipulate jury selection and/or refuse to comply with the unanimous verdict requirements for felony convictions.

On April 20, 2020, two years ago almost to the day, the U.S. Supreme Court RULED that jury verdicts in trials for serious crimes (felonies) must be unanimous.

The ruling came on a landmark Louisiana case, Evangelisto Ramos v. Louisiana, in which a 10-2 jury verdict of guilty in a murder case was overturned, dealing a death blow, theoretically, at least, to Jim Crow laws as they applied to the selection of black jury members and their lack of influence on verdicts.

Louisiana and Oregon were the last two states that did not require unanimous jury verdicts in felony cases before the Ramos decision two years ago. Now, the only – and by far the biggest – question remaining is this: Does Ramos apply retroactively?

And how does Ramos impact Jim Crow?

I will take the latter question first. Following Reconstruction, southerners remained as determined as ever to deny African-Americans their rights. In fact, with the freedom of slaves, there was a severe labor shortage on southern plantations. But by continuing to honor split jury decisions in open violation of the 6^th Amendment, blacks began finding themselves convicted of crimes and sentenced to Angola where they were then rented out to the plantation owners for profit.

Allowing convictions with split jury verdicts, it became immensely easier to convict blacks of felonies and if there happened to be the inconvenience of a couple of black jury members, any propensity by them to acquit was quickly voted down by the 10-vote majority, meaning their presence was, for appearance’s sake, just for appearance’s sake.

As a point of clarification, unanimous jury verdicts have always been the requirement for capital murder cases.

And with some 6,000 inmates incarcerated at Angola, making Ramos retroactive could wreak havoc on the Louisiana judicial system for years to come. An already strained to the breaking point system would simply collapse under the added expense and time involved in holding new trials for as many as 1,500 prisoners.

To be sure, the problem is of Louisiana politicians’ own making. In 1898, Louisiana took the lead over other southern states by passing a law that recognized the split jury decision. Only then, the approved split was 9-3, where it remained until the state constitutional convention scaled it back to 10-2.

The ramifications of Ramos aside, there’s a case in the 26^th JDC that should have officials squirming uncomfortably – all because a retired military and commercial pilot spent seven years of his life documenting what he maintains are manipulated venires, violations of venire requirements and outright forgeries and altered documents.

Gary Holder is not your garden variety malcontent. He is a father whose world was turned upside-down on the night of Nov. 18, 2011.

“My son Chris was misdiagnosed at age 15 and for the next five and one-half years, the doctors had him on 34 major psychotropic drugs, as many as eight or nine drugs at the same time. Every one of these drugs has two “black box” warnings:

• Do not give to children under the age of 18 years or young adults (age 26), and
• Do not combine.

“That night, he went into what was diagnosed as a prescribed drug-induced schizophrenic rage and brutally killed his mother, my wife,” Holder said. “The subsequent trial was a political trial because District Attorney Skyler Marvin was up for reelection and also [becase] Chris’ mother was a prominent physician.”

Holder said after the trial, an individual called him to say he had some information concerning the jury selection in Chris Holder’s trial. “He said he had a friend that worked in the (Bossier) clerk of court’s office (who) told him that the jury had been manipulated and that they had been doing this for many years.”

He said he spent the next seven years investigating the jury selection procedures of the 26^th JDC and thoroughly reviewed numerous General Venires. “I discovered that in each venire, every jury selection law in the Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedures, federal laws, the rules and regulations of the Louisiana Supreme Court, the US Constitution and the Louisiana Constitution had been violated.

“I also discovered numerous documents had been altered and/or forged. I hired one of the nation’s most qualified forensic document and handwriting analysists to examine the paperwork.” (More on that in a subsequent installment later this week.)

In February, the Louisiana Supreme Court agreed to take up the 25-year-old murder conviction of REGINALD REDDICK to determine if Ramos will indeed be applied retroactively.

Because of the discreprancies Holder insists he has uncovered in the 26th JDC, the cases of his son, Ramos, and Reddick are inextricably interwoven.

“The hearing of Reddick is long overdue and needs to be heard and argued in the open,” the senior Holder said. “It is very clear that Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry is against the idea of retroactivity for these 1500 or more inmates,” he said. “He believes that he has the number of justices on the Louisiana Supreme Court to block this ban. He also believes that the justices on the Louisiana Supreme Court can hide behind the black robes of the United States Supreme Court justices and their ruling in the Ramos case on retroactivity. But Landry cannot hide behind the rampant cesspool of corruption and cheating. Nor can he hide from the stench of the corruption and the cheating in the jury selection process.”

Indeed, the state attorney general – nor any other attorney, prosecutor or otherwise – should ever “have” a judge or judges to achieve any purpose. A judge, by definition, should be impartial, weigh all the evidence, and render a just and fair decision. To say Landry “has” the judges he needs is to taint the Louisiana Supreme Court from the outset.

TOMORROW: How jury venires are manipulated

Read Full Post »