Such a Disgrace!
On information and belief, in 2001, Defendant Lori L. Pelzer (“Pelzer”) stole the identity of her great-aunt, Lynn G. Yacoubian (“Yacoubian”), to acquire a Capital One credit card in the name of "Home Assist Real Estate, LLC", of which Pelzer was a managing member. Pelzer used the card toward her participation in the Mrs. South Carolina International beauty pageants for several years, groceries, restaurants, haircuts, videos, cosmetic dentistry, and other personal sundries. Capital One declined to prosecute after Pelzer satisfied the account.
Again, on information and belief, in 2002, Pelzer stole the identity of Yacoubian, to acquire a 1992 Ford Excursion from Ronnie Burns Ford located in Chesnee, South Carolina. Ronnie Burns Ford declined to prosecute after Pelzer satisfied the account.
Additionally, Pelzer and her brother,
Xavier Troy Smith (“Smith”), defrauded Yacoubian, by promising to invest
Yacoubian's money in their real estate business, Home Assist Real Estate, LLC
(“Home Assist”). Further, Smith convinced Yacoubian to purchase distressed
homes as investments. Instead, Smith converted Yacoubian's money for his
personal use, leaving Yacoubian with two defaulted mortgages. Yacoubian sued in
the State Court, Case Number 03CP4004186, and was awarded a judgment against Home
Assist in the amount of $25,600.00, and against Smith,
both for conversion and breach of trust in the amount of $95,743.69.
[Previously, Smith has been incarcerated at the South Carolina Department of
Corrections.]
In the matter of Lamar Advertising
of Columbia, Inc. (“Lamar”) v. Home Assist Real Estate, LLC, Judgment Roll
Number 247286, Lamar, represented by counsel, sought to enforce its judgment
before Defendant Strickland. During a hearing in early 2004,
Strickland ordered Pelzer, officer of Home Assist, to make installment payments
to Lamar, which Pelzer failed to pay. Strickland issued his Order and Rule to
Show Cause for Contempt against Pelzer. In response, Pelzer authored a letter to
Strickland, dated August 10, 2004, in which she stated that she was unable
to comply with the court’s order because she and her husband were financially
distressed, and that she closed Home Assist in June 2004, during the
proceeding. Strickland dismissed the matter without prejudice. (Pelzer, her
husband, Melvin K. Pelzer, and her brother, Smith, were the managing members of
Home Assist, who looted the company of its assets, leaving the company's
creditors unpaid.)
On December 16, 2004, Pelzer’s
husband, Melvin K. Pelzer (“Melvin”), purchased a homestead valued
at $261,167.00 on 216 Chalfont Lane in Richland County,
South Carolina, as reflected in Deed Book R-1008, page 1467 in
the Richland County Register of Deeds Office.
Additionally, on December 16, 2004, Melvin obtained a home equity loan valued at $52,223.00, secured by the Chalfont Lane property, as reflected in Deed Book R-1012, page 2314. Subsequently, Pelzer and Melvin opened Pelzer Premier Realty, a general partnership, in early 2005, after entry of the judgment referenced below against Pelzer directly, and during the litigation in the Yacoubian case. In the year 2005, Yacoubian assigned her judgment against Home Assist and Smith to LaConey, who attempted to enforce the judgment before Defendant Strickland.
On November 7, 2005, Pelzer was Ordered to appear, as officer of Home Assist, before Defendant Strickland, on December 7, 2005, for examination and to produce documents. Prior to the commencement of the proceedings, Strickland and LaConey were alone in the courtroom, at which time, Strickland advised LaConey to “check out” the attractive woman who worked in the courthouse cafeteria. Strickland warned LaConey, “she has six kids, though”. Upon Pelzer’s entrance into the courtroom, Strickland’s countenance toward LaConey became hostile. [Pelzer is a former beauty pageant contestant who was crowned Mrs. South Carolina International in 2009.] LaConey alleged, and presented evidence to Strickland, that Pelzer had engaged in fraudulent conveyances to place her personal assets and the assets of Home Assist beyond the reach of LaConey and other judgment creditors. It is undisputed that Pelzer did liquidate Home Assist, without statutorily winding up, to the detriment of LaConey and other judgment creditors. During LaConey’s examination of Pelzer, Strickland chided LaConey for being too “thorough” and snickered, sneered, and nodded his head during Pelzer’s recalcitrant responses. Pelzer stated the documents, ordered to be produced, were located at her attorney’s office. LaConey demanded to examine the documents in court for the record. Strickland ordered Pelzer to appear again on January 5, 2006, to produce the documents. Pelzer failed to appear, purportedly due to “surgery”. Strickland ordered Pelzer to appear again on February 13, 2006, to produce the documents.
During the hearing on February 13, 2006,
Strickland refused to compel Pelzer to produce the documents, as previously ordered,
then he dismissed the matter without prejudice on February
16, 2006. Amazingly, Pelzer filed Articles of Dissolution for Home
Assist with the South Carolina Secretary of State on February 14,
2006, two days before Strickland’s Order of Dismissal.
On March 31, 2003, Robert K.
Freeland (“Freeland”) was awarded a State Court judgment, Judgment
Roll No. 247572, against Defendant Pelzer personally. In
November 2006, Freeland assigned the judgment to LaConey. LaConey
proceeded to enforce the judgment before Defendant Strickland.
On June 4, 2007,
Pelzer was served through her counsel, Derwin T. Brannon, Esquire, with the
State Court’s Order and Rule to Show Cause for Supplementary (collection)
Proceedings, which included a restraining order against the transfer,
interference with or disposal of Pelzer’s property, pending further direction
of the court. However, on June 7, 2007, Pelzer
restructured Pelzer Premier Realty, a general partnership in which Pelzer was a
general partner, to Pelzer Premier Realty, LLC, thereby encumbering her
partnership interests in her company.
During the proceedings before
Strickland, on July 16, 2007, Pelzer yelled in open
court, “I’m not paying Mr. LaConey a dime! I’m READY to go to jail! I’m
READY to go to jail!”, after which Strickland dismissed the matter
without prejudice.
On January 7, 2008, Strickland, acting
without jurisdiction, and in his personal capacity, dismissed the matter with prejudice, without
notice, without a hearing and without application by the parties. In his order
with prejudice, Strickland prevaricated that a hearing was held on July
16, 2007; however, no such hearing was held. Further,
Strickland omitted that he previously dismissed without
prejudice. Therefore, Strickland’s Order of Dismissal with Prejudice was void.
No Petition and Order of Reference to
Judge Strickland, conferring jurisdiction upon Strickland, appear in the
record, after Strickland’s Order of Dismissal without Prejudice
was filed. Under Rule 53, South Carolina Rules of Civil of Procedure, a
Master-in-Equity has no authority and jurisdiction to adjudicate a matter,
unless an Order of Reference has been filed by a State Circuit Court Judge.
“Any orders issued by the master, without the Order of Reference first being
filed, are void. Further, the master may be held liable for any resulting
injury incurred by litigants.”
On May 1, 2009,
LaConey filed his motion for disqualification of Strickland. Strickland filed
his Order of Recusal on May 5, 2009. Additionally,
LaConey moved the State Court to vacate Strickland’s Order of Dismissal with
Prejudice. LaConey’s motion was ignored.
On August 6, 2009,
Defendant Barber, Chief Administrative Judge for the State Court, Ordered
Pelzer to appear before Judge G. Thomas Cooper, Jr. on September
23, 2009. Pelzer failed to appear. Judge Cooper directed LaConey to
surrender the certified mail delivery receipt, evidencing service upon Pelzer, to
Judge Cooper in open court. The delivery receipt has mysteriously vanished.
On June 25, 2010, Defendant Barber,
Chief Administrative Judge for the State Court, filed his Order, without
notice, without affording LaConey an opportunity to respond in a meaningful
way, and without certifying his familiarity with the record, in
which he decided, “Because the dismissal was never appealed, Judge Strickland’s
ruling has become the law of the case. This Court has advised Mr. LaConey that
it will not be scheduling Supplemental Proceedings, a function generally
performed by the Master-in-Equity. Mr. LaConey may proceed with Supplemental
Proceedings in the Pelzer case, but only through the appointment of a Special
Referee.” Barber omitted that LaConey had previously sought relief by
his motion to vacate Strickland’s Order of Dismissal with Prejudice. Additionally,
had Barber reviewed the record, he would have known that he had previously
assigned the matter to a circuit court judge, which is not that,
“This Court has advised Mr. LaConey that it will not be scheduling Supplemental
Proceedings”. Barber lacked authority to issue final order in the
matter, on the basis that Judge Cooper, not Barber, was the
assigned successor judge with sole authority to issue a final order.
On July 2, 2010,
LaConey sent his letter, with attachments, to Defendant Lee, Chief
Administrative Judge for the State Court, advising Lee of the status of the
said cases and seeking supplementary proceedings in aid of his judgments. On July
15, 2010, Lee responded with her letter, a copy of which has been
filed in the State Court record, in which she advised that she was in the
process of reviewing the record in the case for any appropriate action; that
LaConey was not listed as a party of record in the case; that she had requested
the State Clerk of Court to correct the record; and that she had requested all
relevant materials pertaining to the case from Strickland’s office. Lee failed
to respond.
On October 14, 2010,
LaConey sent a letter to Lee, a copy filed in the record, advising her that he
is the sole caregiver of his gravely ill mother, that he
needs his money to make his mother comfortable in her final days, and that he
would become deeply disturbed, if his mother passes before these matters are
resolved, due to the stated improprieties. Lee failed to respond.
Pelzer closed both Home Assist and Pelzer
Premier Realty, LLC, due to fraudulent business practices. Both were sued in
the State Court and judgments were awarded against them. [The South Carolina
Department of Labor Licensing and Regulation suspended Pelzer’s Realtor License,
Number 22672, in May 2012, for falsification of her license application for many
years, by concealing the numerous court judgments awarded against her.
On or about August 26, 2011, Defendant
Walter Shawn McDaniel (“McDaniel”), acting under
color of law as a Deputy with the Richland County Sheriff’s Department,
under the direction, control, and supervision of Defendant Lott, arrested LaConey for two counts of Harassment, Second
Degree, Case Numbers: I926375 and I926375, against Defendants Strickland,
Barber, Lee, and Benjamin, relative to his enforcement of the said judgments. Both
Arrest Warrants contained virtually identical language alleging that LaConey
had harassed all the judges, on four separate occasions, for years. Neither
Strickland, Barber or Lee, nor law enforcement had ever warned LaConey to cease
and desist communications with them, nor did they hold LaConey in contempt. LaConey
has never had any contact whatsoever with Defendant Benjamin.
At the time of LaConey’s arrest, McDaniel seized LaConey’s personal computer and disclosed to LaConey that McDaniel had been investigating LaConey for an extended period. McDaniel further disclosed that he was aware of the frail medical condition of LaConey’s mother, who suffered from congestive heart failure, emphysema, and breast cancer, and that LaConey was her full-time caregiver. McDaniel warned LaConey to stop legal proceedings against Pelzer and to “think about [his] mom because [his] mom would be the one to suffer”. Additionally, McDaniel informed LaConey that Defendant Lee was responsible for LaConey’s arrest, and that McDaniel needed to notify Lee. McDaniel proceeded to dial a number, then he spoke into the phone handset, “[y]es, the individual has been arrested. Alright. Alright. Alright. Alright, good-bye”. The Richland County, South Carolina Bond Court, an adjunct of the State Court, set LaConey’s bond at $15,000.00 surety, which LaConey maintains was excessive for the charges.
On August 29, 2011, after LaConey was released on bond,
LaConey returned home to find his mother hadn’t eaten or taken her medication
since LaConey’s arrest three days earlier; thereby, unduly jeopardizing the
health and safety of LaConey’s mother, as previously acknowledged by McDaniel.
Fortunately, LaConey’s mother suffered no injuries.
Because the entire State Court was the alleged victim in those cases, according to McDaniel’s Report of Investigation, both the State Court Solicitor’s and Public Defender’s Offices conflicted out of the case. Ashley A. McMahan (“McMahan”), while acting under color of law as South Carolina Assistant Attorney General, and acting under the direction, control, and supervision of Defendant Wilson, proceeded with the case, and Attorney Mathias G. Chaplin (“Chaplin”) was unlawfully appointed by the State Court to “represent” LaConey. Chaplin was later relieved as LaConey’s “counsel”, based on LaConey’s proposition that, as an attorney who practiced regularly before the State Court, Chaplin was conflicted in his representation of LaConey. State Court Judge Dianne S. Goodstein (“Judge Goodstein”) concurred and appointed Joshua Koger, Jr. as substitute “counsel” to “represent” LaConey, by her order, dated March 17, 2013. [The fact that Judge Goodstein struck through, “Fifth Circuit Court of General Sessions” on her Order and replaced it with “Summerville”, reasonably infers that Judge Goodstein did acknowledge the conflict of the State Court in adjudicating the relevant charges.]
After Koger failed to notify LaConey that he was “appointed” more than a year earlier, Koger requested McMahan to arrange a meeting between Koger and LaConey on the pretext of a court appearance. LaConey did appear and was introduced to Koger by McMahan. LaConey responded with a disciplinary complaint against Koger for failing to contact LaConey after his appointment. The Disciplinary Office dismissed the matter for “lack of jurisdiction”, notwithstanding that Koger violated at least Rules 1.3, 1.4, and 3.2, South Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct. Subsequently, Koger refused to communicate further with LaConey, until June 30, 2014, when Koger emailed notice to LaConey that his purported trial would commence on July 7, 2014.
LaConey
proceeded to post derogatory comments about Koger online, after which, Koger
moved the State Court to be relieved as LaConey’s “counsel”. Additionally,
Koger lodged a false criminal complaint with both Defendant Jeanette W. McBride
(“McBride”) and the Richland County Sheriff’s Department, Court Security
Office, a judicial division of the State Court, located within the State Court
building, alleging that LaConey had threatened to “blow up” the State Court
building, based on statements which may not be construed as a crime or fraud.
On
July 3, 2014, Defendant Andrew Caldwell (“Caldwell”), acting under color of law as a Deputy with the
Richland County Sheriff’s Department, under the direction, control, and
supervision of Defendant Lott, seized LaConey’s cellphone and arrested LaConey on
the charge of Threatening the Use of Destructive Devices, Case Number 2014A4010400166.
After Caldwell placed LaConey in handcuffs, LaConey’s mother entered the room
and inquired, at which time, Caldwell yelled at LaConey’s mother and threw his
business card in her face, as she struggled to stand with her walker; thereby,
causing LaConey extreme emotional distress.
Contemporaneously,
Bass, acting under color of law as a Deputy
with the Richland County Sheriff’s Department, under the direction, control,
and supervision of Defendant Lott, arrested LaConey on an unrelated charge of
Harassment, First Degree, Case Number 2014A4010202394, against Defendant Pelzer.
The Arrest Warrant for the Harassment, First Degree charge cited that, “[LaConey]
has filed three false judgments against [Pelzer] and set up several websites
devoted to destroying her image. After Judge Strickland told [LaConey] to leave
[Pelzer] alone, [LaConey] has not and he sent [Pelzer] a text message where he
referenced Pelzer’s empire falling down and quoting the Book of Revelation
where it talks about the death of an empire. [LaConey] has been harassing
[Pelzer] for over 7 years.” (LaConey challenges any of the defendants to
present evidence that “Judge Strickland told [LaConey] to leave [Pelzer] alone”.)
Purportedly, the alleged incidents of harassment occurred over a seven-year period.
Mysteriously, however, LaConey was arrested for alleged harassment against
Pelzer, contemporaneously with the Threatening charge. LaConey was initially
denied bond, based solely on Pelzer’s unfounded allegations. [The charge was
later nolle prossed for lack of probable cause.]
Because the entire State Court was the alleged victim in the Threatening case, again, both the State Court Solicitor’s and Public Defender’s Offices conflicted out of both cases. McMahan, acting under color of law as South Carolina Assistant Attorney General, and while acting under the direction, control, and supervision of Wilson, proceeded with the cases. A State Court Judge improperly appointed William A. Hodge (“Hodge”) to “represent” LaConey.
On July 7, 2014, the day of LaConey's purported trial for the two Harassment, 2nd Degree charges, LaConey appeared before Defendant Clifton B. Newman (“Newman”), who granted Koger's motion to be relieved as LaConey's counsel, then declined to appoint substitute counsel for LaConey, notwithstanding that Newman concurred with Defendant McMahan’s proposition that a mental health evaluation was appropriate for LaConey. Additionally, after LaConey asserted his right to court appointed legal counsel, Newman reiterated his denial to appoint substitute counsel, and directed LaConey to "work it out" with McMahan, under threat of trial within hours. Newman further denied LaConey's motion for a continuance to prepare for “trial”. Faced with the threat of “trial” within hours and without an opportunity for preparation, and while under duress, LaConey pled no contest to both Harassment, Second Degree charges, pursuant to North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970). The sentencing sheets reflect that Newman recommended mental health counseling as part of LaConey’s sentences. Therefore, Newman compelled LaConey to negotiate with the prosecution when Newman had a reasonable doubt of LaConey’s “mental capacity”. [The fact that McMahan previously clerked for Newman, for two years, is a glaring appearance of impropriety, under the attendant circumstances.]
On July 26, 2014, during LaConey’s unlawful confinement, Pelzer posted Ripoff Report No. 1165206 at https://www.ripoffreport.com, in which she boasted, in relevant part, “I am HAPPY & finally have a sense of safety now that Glenn K LaConey has finally been ARRESTED on charges pertaining to me and the many false, made up court look a like documents along with my pictures and slanderous threatening statements he has made all across the internet since 2011. This man has stalked me and harassed me for over 3 years!!!! . . . I have among other things experienced detriment to my business character through his convincing made up stories about me distorting all the truth regarding a court matter my great aunt pursued against my brother and my previous company which I sold to a larger Realestate [sic] Brand in 2004 HomeAssist Realestate [sic]. The matter in which I was asked to appear in court was dismissed because of sever [sic] reasons but one in that my name was never attached to that matter. I was merely representing my company in a court proceeding and there he was this guy ... I had never seen him nor knew of him and couldn't understand why I was even in court in the first place!”
In
or about August 2014, LaConey appeared before Newman for a bond hearing on the
Threatening and Harassment First Degree charges. Before absconding to Georgia,
Pelzer appeared and rendered unfounded, unsworn, hearsay testimony in open
court, while seated in the gallery, that LaConey had stalked and threatened
harm to her and her family. Even if Pelzer’s unsworn testimony as a court
witness were admissible and she is immune therefor, Pelzer would not be
immune for her unfounded allegations to Bass that LaConey had filed “three
false judgments” against her, “created several websites devoted to destroying
her image” and sent Pelzer a text message referencing her “empire falling
down”, after “Judge Strickland” purportedly “told LaConey to leave Pelzer
alone”.
On September 25, 2014, by his Order, Newman set bond for LaConey at $25,000.00 surety. LaConey posted bond and was released from detention on October 3, 2014.
On June 11, 2015, LaConey filed a Post-Conviction Relief action, Case Number: 2015CP4003441, to vacate his Alford pleas to Harassment, Second Degree, Two Counts. The State Office of Indigent Defense appointed David Kellum Allen to “represent” LaConey. A hearing was convened before State Court Judge J. Durham Cole (“Cole”) on February 5, 2016. On April 8, 2019, Cole filed his Order of Dismissal without notice and without additional hearings. LaConey appealed the matter to the South Carolina Supreme Court, Case No. 2019-000658, on April 22, 2019. The State Office of Indigent Defense appointed Susan Barber Hackett to “represent” LaConey in his appeal. On May 4, 2020, the State Supreme Court transferred the case to the State Court of Appeals where it has been continued with no further action.
Subsequently, Wilson substituted McMahan with Defendant Nicole T. Wetherton (“Wetherton”). Wetherton, while acting under color of law as South Carolina Assistant Attorney General, and while acting under the direction, control, and supervision of Defendant Wilson, proceeded with both the Threatening and Harassment First Degree charges.
On
July 21, 2016, after declining numerous plea bargains from Wilson’s
office, LaConey’s bond was revoked, by extrajudicial Order of Defendant R. Knox
McMahon (“McMahon”), on the pretext of a pre-trial competency to stand trial evaluation.
McMahon’s Order for the evaluation provided for LaConey’s release from confinement,
after he complied with the evaluation on August 1, 2016, and that LaConey's bond would “remain in
effect". Additionally, the Order required an additional State Court
order for ongoing pretrial confinement of LaConey. Defendant Hodge was a
signatory to McMahon’s Order.
Shortly
after LaConey complied with the competency evaluation, LaConey filed a pro
se motion for speedy trial. While the motion was untimely, it did put Wetherton
and Wilson on notice of LaConey’s intent to pursue speedy resolution of the
case, upon favorable results of the competency evaluation. [The interval since LaConey’s
arrest and finding of fitness to stand trial, crossed the threshold dividing
ordinary and presumptively prejudicial delay. LaConey was denied trial for
the Threatening and Harassment First Degree charges both before and during
his protracted, unlawful, pre-trial confinement.]
Subsequently,
Defendant Wilson substituted Wetherton with Defendant Meagan B. Burchstead
(“Burchstead”). Burchstead, while acting under color
of law as South Carolina Assistant Attorney General, under the
direction, control, and supervision of Defendant Wilson, proceeded with the
Threatening and Harassment First Degree charges.
In
April 2017, after failing to take any action to affect LaConey’s release from confinement,
as ordered, failing to seek change of venue, and upon LaConey’s pro se
motion, Hodge was relieved as LaConey’s “counsel”. McMahon, by his
extrajudicial Order, appointed the State Eleventh Circuit Public Defender’s
Office to “represent” LaConey in the State Court. State Eleventh Circuit Public
Defender, Robert M. Madsen (“Madsen”), assigned Assistant Public Defender,
Jason Scott Chehoski (“Chehoski”), to unlawfully “represent” LaConey. Notwithstanding
that the State Court was disqualified from and conflicted out of the
case, under South Carolina Code (“State Code”) § 14-5-350 (1976), state circuit
judges lack jurisdiction to appoint state circuit public defenders in state foreign
circuits. Additionally, under State Code § 17-3-520(B)(1)(14) (1976),
530(A)(B)(1)(2) (1976), state circuit public defenders lack jurisdiction to
represent criminal defendants in state foreign circuits. Therefore, the
appointment was null and void, and deprived LaConey of bona fide legal counsel.
LaConey maintains that both Hodge and Chehoski
knowingly and improperly acquiesced to the void orders of appointment. Chehoski, who ignored the proposition that the entire State
Court was disqualified, lacked jurisdiction to appoint his office to represent LaConey,
and that his office lacked jurisdiction to represent LaConey in a state foreign
circuit, stated he does “whatever a judge orders [him] to do”.
Both
Hodge and Chehoski refused to provide LaConey with a copy of the competency
evaluation report; thereby, precluding LaConey from assisting in his own
defense. [Mysteriously the Examiner’s Report of Evaluation has vanished from
the court file held in the custody and control of Defendant McBride, Clerk of
the State Court.]
During a hearing on LaConey’s motion, before Defendant Jocelyn T. Newman (“Jocelyn”), the daughter of Defendant Clifton B. Newman, Jocelyn contacted McMahon via telephone, in open court, to inquire whether LaConey’s bond was in fact revoked for the purpose of the pre-trial evaluation. LaConey and other members of the court were not privy to the conversation. According to Jocelyn, “McMahon was unable to recall the attendant circumstances.”
Further, Jocelyn examined Pelzer,
unsworn, while she was seated in the gallery. Pelzer stated that LaConey had
been stalking her outside her bedroom window for years, whenever she was
intimate with her husband, Melvin K. Pelzer. Pelzer never called the police,
nor secured any photographic evidence, in support of her allegations, during
the years of the alleged incidents. Chehoski failed to challenge Pelzer’s
unsworn statements and utterly refused to argue for LaConey’s release. Jocelyn
denied LaConey’s bond, notwithstanding the signed and filed Order by McMahon. In
her Order denying LaConey’s bond, Jocelyn prevaricated that, “Judge McMahon
revoked bond on July 21, 2016, for reasons beyond a competency evaluation.
Motion to reinstate bond denied”, though “McMahon was unable to recall the
attendant circumstances”.
On August 1,
2016, LaConey completed the pretrial competency evaluation. On February 2, 2018, Jocelyn
held a competency hearing and, by her filed Order, found LaConey fit to stand trial.
In her Order, Jocelyn cited, “[i]n a report dated August l, 2016, the
examiners found that Defendant presently has sufficient mental capacity to
understand the charges against him and assist in his own defense and thus is
fully competent to stand trial pursuant to the standards set forth in S. C.
Code Ann. § 44-23-410 and State vs. Blair, 275 S.C. 529, 273 S.E.2d 536
(1981)”. [Jocelyn’s undue delay in holding a
competency hearing, and issuing her findings, did compromise LaConey’s right to a speedy trial and equal protection.]
Jocelyn filed a
separate Order setting the trial “for the week of June 11, 2018”. In that Order, Jocelyn conceded that,
with respect to the Threatening and Harassment, First Degree charges, “[d]ue to the nature of the
allegations against Defendant, both the Fifth Circuit Solicitor’s Office and
the Fifth Circuit Public Defender's Office were deemed to have conflicts of
interest and were, therefore, barred from being involved in this case.” Yet,
Jocelyn failed to consider the conflict of interest of all State Court
officials and the necessity for change of venue.
After Defendant Burchstead failed to set the matter for “trial” on June 11, 2018, and failed to produce discovery, Jocelyn dismissed the charge of Threatening the Use of Destructive Devices, by her Order, filed August 30, 2018. Subsequently, Defendant Wilson substituted Burchstead with Defendant Kinli B. Abee (“Abee”). Abee, who acted under the direction, control, and supervision of Wilson, proceeded with the Harassment First Degree charge against LaConey.
After Defendant Abee failed to set the matter for trial, and to produce discovery, the charge of Harassment First Degree was finally nolle prossed on October 19, 2018, based on lack of probable cause. LaConey was finally released from confinement on October 22, 2018. LaConey suffered confinement for a total of 30 months, 27 of which were consecutive, in vain, when he should have been released years earlier, by extrajudicial Order of Defendant McMahon, notwithstanding that McMahon was disqualified. LaConey lost his job and all his material possessions, including all his mother’s precious, and sentimental effects. [LaConey was diagnosed with treatable cataracts, prior to revocation of his bond pending the competency evaluation, which would have been covered by LaConey’s vision care plan provided by LaConey’s previous employer. LaConey’s untreated cataracts worsened, during his extensive pre-trial confinement. Now LaConey is without vision care coverage and is forced to seek care from state subsidized coverage, subject to reduced quality of care.]
Upon LaConey’s release from confinement, LaConey requested the return of his cellphone, which was seized by Defendant Caldwell, pursuant to LaConey’s arrest on July 3, 2014. LaConey was informed via email that neither the Sheriff’s Department nor the Attorney General’s Office was in possession of the phone, which contained irreplaceable and invaluable data, including the only remaining photographs and videos of LaConey’s mother, before her unfortunate demise. Additionally, LaConey has been denied access to his email account at glenlaconey@outlook.com because his password was lost with his other property. The account contains invaluable data. Defendant McMahan’s, Wetherton’s, Burchstead’s, Abee’s and Wilson’s loss of LaConey’s phone, and presumed evidence in chief, reasonably infers that neither McMahan, Wetherton, Burchstead, Abee nor Wilson had any intention of prosecuting either the Threatening or Harassment, First Degree charges, as further evidenced by the said Defendants’ failure to produce discovery. Therefore, LaConey’s protracted, pre-trial confinement, without probable cause, was rendered purposeless and intentionally punitive.
Comments
Post a Comment