More than 7 years ago, a jury unanimously found me not guilty of the self-defense shooting of my ex-stepfather, Billy Akers; I am now again to stand trial a second time, June 20, 2012 for this same tragedy.
Akers was known to local authority to be unstable, violent, and "always" armed. He came to my secluded residence in February 2005 after a confrontational phone call ended in disagreement., and attempted to break into my home after being told to leave. I fired two shots to scare him off. The first hit the corner of the door, the second hit Akers’ shoulder, and he later died as a result of the wound. I called 911 and reported what had happened.
Immediately, before any investigation and even before my assailant had died, I was placed under arrest and charged with murder. I was told by Country Deputy Prosecutor Drew Dickerson that I could ‘Prove later it was self-defense’, contrary to Indiana State Law IC 35-41-3-2; "No person in this state shall be put in legal jeopardy of any kind what-so-ever for protecting himself."
There was no grand jury hearing. There was no proper probable cause hearing(s) as mandated by Due Process. There was no probable cause affidavit presented even though I have requested it for 6 years now.
Without probable cause ever being established, In August 2005 I stood trial for murder. In less than an hour, the jury arrived at a unanimous not guilty verdict.
Due to an error in the presentation of the verdict and both the Judge Webster’s and my appointed counsel’s negligent handling in not clarifying the error before the jury was dismissed; the verdict was disregarded, and a mistrial was declared, allowing the state to ignore double jeopardy and try me a second time for a charge I had already been found innocent of committing.
During a motion to Dismiss in 2007 the Jury was summoned, presented and prepared to testify in open court, under oath, of their not guilty verdict, however, Judge Webster refused to allow them to verify and validate their verdict.
The 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires that “no [search or arrest] warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause.” An arrest without a warrant must be supported by probable cause. Lack of probable cause in a warrantless arrest makes that arrest an unreasonable seizure. In criminal cases the court must find that probable cause exists to believe that the defendant committed the crime before the defendant may be prosecuted.
Obstruction of justice is a broad concept that extends to any effort to prevent the execution of lawful process or the administration of justice in either a criminal or civil matter. "No person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Please help me in demanding a federal investigation of the people responsible for the extreme mishandling of my case and more importantly my rights and freedom!
I am the ONLY person in ALL of recorded history to be framed with altered evidence then have the judge conspire with the D.A. and court-appointed counsel to suppress the NOT GUILTY verdict.
Is this what so many have fought and died for...is this the judicial system the forefathers had in mind when they wrote the Constitution