Updated Thursdays

Sunday, October 30, 2011

South Park Monster (Part 3)

Carlos Coy has been painted in the media as a serial predator. Someone who has molested girl after girl after girl; the tagline for the article is "Fans saw Carlos Coy as the invincible rapper, the gangsta who could become an icon for outcast Hispanics everywhere. But they didn't know his weakness -- young girls did."

In this article Lomax uses the opinion of Judy Johnson, clinical director for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice's Sex Offender Treatment Program in Huntsville.  She works for TDCJ, of course. Here’s what she thinks:

In general, Coy's past reflects some similarities with profiles of pedophiles, she believes. Most grow up without a strong male figure in their lives;

You can't be convicted of being a pedophile, ‘child-lover’. Coy was accused of being a child molester. It’s a small distinction, but an important one. A pedophile will always be a pedophile; someone who wants to have sex with children. A child molester may be a pedophile, or may have simply lacked opportunity to have sex with grown women, or may have had sex with a child he believed to be an adult. But Judy wants Coy to sound like a pedophile, an incurable pervert, so she starts drawing correlations and making assumptions.

I assume she’s referring here to the fact that Carlos Coy’s father left the family for a period of about ten years. I don’t know why she assumes that there were no strong male figures in his life. He had family, teachers…But okay, no father means you’re a pedophile. You know who else shares the trait of losing a father early in life? Fucking rap stars. Tupac Shakur, Notorious B.I.G., 50 Cent, Sean Combs, Jay-Z.

A year ago, the Pew Charitable Trust published a report that found that 2.7 million children in the U.S. now have an incarcerated parent.

Since 93.2% of prisoners are male, most of those kids are growing up without a father. What does that mean for them? Is the government putting them at higher risk of being labeled pedophiles by incarcerating their dads for everything from murder to having a roach in the car? Talk about a self-sustaining system...guaranteeing government jobs generation after generation.

…they can "groom" associates to ignore the obvious signs of their perversion; and serial pedophiles often establish ways -- even dance studios for children -- to attract more potential victims, Johnson says.

"That's very common for pedophiles to create an avenue where they can have one victim right after another," she says. "It's unfortunate, but a lot of predators create their 'candy stores.’

Oh, my God. Someone call Justin Beiber and tell him that he’s doing it wrong. Apparently the way to attract young girls is to produce raw, obscenity laced tributes to the drug trade, murder, and getting blitzed out of your fucking mind!

Who believes this bullshit? There are easier and more direct ways to surround yourself with prepubescent children than working for ten years to become a recognized figure in the underground rap scene, then somehow convincing a woman who swears in court that she doesn’t like you to leave her daughter with you for the night. How about becoming a school janitor, for instance?
Or a prison guard? Is she really trying to say that Coy became a rapper to surround himself with nine-year olds?

she says that the onset of pedophilia doesn't occur suddenly in middle age, it begins developing much earlier. "They don't say, 'Ooh, she's really sexy, she's really coming on to me, I think I'll just explore this possibility,'" Johnson explains. "The preference was already there. Otherwise, it would have been sort of repulsive."

So where are the other victims? I’m not asking for more teenagers who tarted themselves up to go to a rap concert. I want to know where the other pre-pubescent victims are. According to the Mayo Clinic:

“Heterosexual pedophiles, in self-report studies, have on average abused 5.2 children and committed an average of 34 sexual acts…”

Now these are self-reported studies, so those numbers are probably a little low. According to the Counter Pedophilia Investigative Unit:

A 1994 National Institute of Health survey of 453 pedophiles, conducted by Dr. Gene Abel, showed these criminals were collectively responsible for the molestation of over 67,000 children. That’s an average of 148 children per individual pedophile.

So let’s say that, in spite of the hordes of nine-year-olds who were drawn to him because of his child-luring rap, Carlos Coy was only half as effective as the average pedophile. Then we’ll cut it in half again because he was young when he was locked up, and maybe didn’t have as much time as the reporting pedophiles did. That would have given him 37 victims. Now if he’s a true pedophile, he has a ‘preferential age range’. True pedophiles are not attracted to pre-pubescent AND pubescent children.

If Judy Johnson, TDCJ's expert on Sex Offender Treatment thinks that Coy is a pedophile, there should be 37 more 8 or 9-year old victims out there. All we got, post-sentencing, were the claims of teenage girls, none of which had to be proven, and none of which resulted in a court case. Even the case of the 14 year old who accused Coy of assaulting her after he was released on bail, which should have created some kind of physical evidence, was dropped after the one conviction was obtained.

Saturday, October 29, 2011

Weekend Reading 17

South Park Mexican's Dope House Records: Help Wanted

SPM's Dope House Records seems to be expanding its workforce. In the midst of a tough job market, they're hiring.
A Linked in job announcement seeking a "Social Media Specialist" is circulating the web.

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

South Park Monster (Part 2)

My second objection to this article is the implication that Jill Odom was pursuing punitive (punishing) measures against Carlos Coy. Although I don’t know the exact nature of their relationship in 200-2001, it does not appear to have been particularly hostile, even considering Miss Odom’s legal actions of the time.

In April of that year, Jill Odom filed a lawsuit seeking to have Coy formally declared the father of her son, Jordan Dominique Odom, and to have him begin paying child support.

While she praised Coy for his informal support of herself and the child -- "If I needed something, he would get it" -- her lawsuit hardly reflected that Coy had come up with assistance on a steady basis.

Articles mentioning Miss Odom invariably say that she ‘sued’ Coy. I guess that may be the correct term, but in general use it implies an aggressive action. In reality, it appears that she simply asked the court to declare him the father of their son. I think it’s likely she realized that he was making it big, and she wanted a concrete legal arrangement to provide for her child.

Even Coy's response seemed somewhat casual; in fact his lack thereof almost led to a default judgment in the case. After DNA testing to confirm paternity, the settlement called for Coy to pay $28,000 in back child support and $2,000 more for Odom's prenatal and birth expenses. He was to contribute $1,500 to a college fund for the boy, and begin paying $900 monthly in regular child support. Odom received primary custody.

Whether or not you agree with what she did, it was the smart thing to do. She could have prosecuted him at this point, but there is no mention of her filing any charges. From what she said at the trial, it appears that he had been taking care of her and she didn’t have a problem with him. If she was working at a strip club at age 13, she’s probably one of the millions who had to grow up fast and make hard choices; she admitted in court that Coy did not know her real age.

He did know she was only a middle school student, because he used to pick her up after her seventh-grade classes.

Uh, what now? The way he says this, it sounds like Coy used to walk in with the soccer Moms and sign her out of class. What does this guy mean, he picked her up from school? Did she have him walk her out of the building every day? Pick her up in the front? Wait at a nearby corner, or a gas station?

But even if she wasn’t sneaky enough to say ‘Meet me at the Valero’, Carlos Coy was a high school freshman for two years…He was a 17-year-old in a class of 14 year-olds.

From his point of reference the idea of someone being held back for two, three years would have seemed perfectly natural. So no, going off this information I don’t think it’s obvious that he would have known that because she was in middle school, she was a certain age.

The Pasadena woman said that when she became pregnant, Coy offered to marry her. That was quickly nixed by her parents, who refused to have anything to do with him.

So eventually, the parents knew that there was sex involved. No charges were filed at this time, which suggests that either they just didn’t give a fuck, or they knew their daughter was capable of making choices at that age, knew she wasn’t victimized, and figured it would make more sense to get child support than a court date.

When the suit naming Coy as the legal father was filed, Odom was 20 years old; apparently doing a good job raising her son, (Coy mentioned that he was proud of his son, and that he was doing well in school) and not trying to put Coy behind bars. That decision was made for her a year later, by Other Mother.

On September 25, a stunned Carlos Coy was behind bars, charged with aggravated sexual assault of the girl and also of Odom, the mother of the child he'd fathered in a relationship that began when she was 13.

I can’t stress this enough; he was charged for sleeping with Jill Odom…But never prosecuted. The DA’s office chose not to go forward with the one case that offered physical evidence, choosing instead to convict him of a crime using nothing more than accusations.

Another SPM shirt

If you're on our Facebook page, you may have already seen this T-shirt with Carlos Coy as Tony Montana. Please remember that I am not the one selling these, but you can order your own from Swag-city.com. You can also find it to your right under 'Links'.

Sunday, October 23, 2011

South Park Monster (Part 1)

The article ‘South Park Monster’ is an 8 page article written for Houston Press by John Nova Lomax in 2002. While it is very informative, I’d like to take it a few points at a time and really look at the story it presents.

“He was 17 and still a freshman when he decided to drop out for good, he told the Houston Press's Craig D. Lindsey in a 1999 interview. "One more year in high school," he said, "and I would've went to jail for fucking all those little young bitches."”

That is probably one of the most repeated quotes by Carlos Coy; it even came up during his trial. Finding the actual article it came from was an absolute BITCH. It’s from ’99, by a guy named Craig D. Lindsey. Lomax borrows heavily from this article to write ‘monster’. Here's the real quote:

"I was 17 years old in the ninth grade before I decided to go ahead and leave school," he says. "One more year in high school and I would've went to jail for fucking all those little young bitches, you know."

So this here we have unassailable proof of Coy's prediliction for underage girls, right? Wrong. Let’s take it apart.

Coy was still a freshman when he dropped out at 17 years of age.
Most schools begin enrolling Sept 1st. Carlos Coy’s birthday is not until October, meaning he would have been 15 when he began 9th grade for the first time.

Texas law provides an affirmative defense (Not a get out of jail free card, just a defense to use in case someone presses charges) for having sex with someone under the age of 17 as long as the individuals are within three years of each other's age. While I find the idea of kids having sex distasteful, the law seems to say it’s A-okay; 15 to 17-year-old Carlos could legally have sex with a 14-year-old born on or before Oct 5 every day up until his 18 birthday, with the full approval and endorsement of the great state of Texas.

Now I’m guessing that he didn’t actually drop out to avoid being charged for having sex with his classmates; he’d spent two years a freshman, he was probably frustrated, bored, and decided continuing on was pointless. Most of us in that situation would. The quote is a statement (I dropped out) and an observation (eventually, I might have gotten in trouble). He’s not saying “I dropped out so I wouldn’t get into trouble.”

This quote is shocking, not because it reveals some kind of perverse or illegal behavior, but because it draws our attention to the fact that the difference between ‘Puppy Love’ and ‘Sexual Assault of a Minor’ is one day. You hit that 18th birthday and the girl you’ve been kissing after class for years is suddenly off-limits. You can't even touch her over her clothes without opening yourself up to charges. We don't want to admit that the laws are stupid, and arbitrarily criminalize behavior that has been smiled upon up till a certain birthday. We don’t like to think about the fact that a kid can get sent to prison for the rest of his life for having consensual pre-marital nookie on Prom Night.

Coy is not suggesting that he had committed a crime, or done anything other than what every teenage kid who enters high school with a dick and half-decent game has done. He’s pointing out a well known cut-off date that all young men in Texas would be wise to keep in mind. All you high school kids out there had better calculate the difference in age between you and any girl you happen to be sleeping with. If it’s more than 1,095 days, you better either break it off the night before your eighteenth birthday or never, ever piss her off after that date.


Update: Per http://www.the33tv.com/news/kdaf-romeo-and-juliet-law-takes-effect-in-texas-20110901,0,7606735.story
it looks like the three-year spread has been increased to four years as of Sept 1, 2011...Thanks to Wolfe Pack for the information!

Friday, October 21, 2011

Weekend Reading 16

Not much reading today, but check out Lala's pictures of the Playamade Mexicanz video shoot at Dope House Records this week! You can find her on Facebook, Twitter, Youtube and check out Lala's World at 12:30 am Thursdays, 2:30 am Fridays on Channel 55 in Houston.

Share photos on twitter with Twitpic

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

Opinion Piece

I found an interesting article on the problem of false allegations of child abuse; it talks about why it happens, how it happens, etc. It seems that most professionals hold the belief that children would never, ever lie about sexual assault, and that children must be believed at all costs; even if the interviewer has to ‘help them along’ a bit.

We tend to assume that the mother in Coy Vs. Texas knew all along what she was doing, that she made up the accusation. It’s entirely believable that that’s true. However, she did not get all the way to trial by herself. There was a system in place that greased the skids, that allowed her to either knowingly imprison an innocent man or that convinced her that her own half-accepted idea was the truth.

Those of us with children fear for their safety. It’s just a fact of our lives, a constant wondering of “Are they okay?” “Who are they with?”. Most of us respond to that fear by keeping our kids away from people and situations that we dislike or mistrust.

At trial, Mom testified under oath that she disliked Carlos Coy because he ‘used drugs and beat women’. One has to ask, why the hell would you allow your daughter to spend the night his house, then? Even if you had no thoughts of inappropriate sexual behavior, why would you risk exposing your daughter to a man that you truly thought was dangerous?

But let's say that you do allow your precious nine year old daughter to spend the night at the home of a man who you believe is a threat to women and weed. You've spent the day shopping with him and his family and although you don't want to, you let her go.

Later that night, he drives her back to your house and you find out she's feeling ill. This dangerous man, whom you strongly dislike, gets invited to stay for a little while and have menudo with your family. He eventually goes home and you sit there, thinking. Did I make a mistake? What if she's not really ill? What if...God forbid...this man, whom I believe to be violent and out-of-control, and whom I entrusted my daughter to, molested her? Panic!

The girl supposedly told her mother about the abuse the next morning. Now, whether she said "Mom, I need to tell you something" or if the mother said "Honey, I need you to tell me something", we'll probably never know. We do know that the girls watched movies that depicted oral sex. We know that she had a sleep disorder, which probably involved nightmares. If we take the mother's statements in court at face value, that she believed Coy was a bad person, she's probably feeling a certain amount of guilt at letting her daughter stay at his house. So whoever brought up the supposed abuse, the other was primed and ready to support the story.

Eventually they end up in the hands of the professionals, who exist to confirm and prosecute stories just like theirs.

At this point there is no turning back. If there was even the slightest chance that the case was prosecutable, the professionals would have held on with both hands and their teeth.

In the 1989 case of Jay Van Story(Lubbock County), CPS workers told the 7-year-old victim that she would never see her mother again unless she helped them prosecute Van Story. He remains in prison.

The only thing that makes me suspect that the mother in Coy’s case was a willing participant, rather than a legitimately concerned Mother is the suggestion that after the CAC told her she had no evidence and they would not proceed, she brought them Jill Odom's story. That, to me, suggests a malicious intention to see Coy imprisoned no matter what. If they had told her the case would not be pursued, she probably brought Odom to their attention with the expectation that they would prosecute that case, and not her daughter's.

Monday, October 17, 2011

The Conviction Mill

In 2000 Brandy Briggs, a young mother from Harris county, was tried for murdering her baby son. The medical examiner, Patricia Moore, decided that she had shaken the 2 month old, named Daniel, causing his death. The DA’s office allowed her to plead guilty to the lesser charge of ‘injury to a child’ for a reduced sentence of 17 years.

Much later another medical examiner named Luis Sanchez reviewed the case and changed the cause of death from ‘homicide’ to ‘undetermined’.

Eventually the Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that she had insufficient legal representation, and tossed out her conviction. After a long, drawn-out investigation, in which their own pediatric pathologist told them he didn’t see any evidence of trauma, the DA’s office decided not to press charges again.

Now, the original trial took place under Rosenthal’s predecessor. There was no reason for Rosenthal to make excuses about it, but he did.

"It's not a situation where I can say she's completely innocent," Rosenthal said Monday. "It's a situation where we can't prove our case."

Wait just a damn minute. I thought that the judicial system was supposed to proceed under the assumption of innocence; innocent until proven guilty, right? If the state can’t prove its case then you HAVE to say she's completely innocent.

Brandy Briggs plead guilty out of fear and spent 5 years in prison. She lost custody of her other son. Her life was ruined because the DA’s office was able to prove a case using an incorrect medical report. When it all finally came to light the best that Rosenthal could do, being too proud to offer an apology, was to accuse her of not being ‘completely innocent’.

Briggs is not the only one that has been royally screwed by Patricia Moore’s autopsy reports. In 2009, Judge Mark Ellis decided that in the case of another woman imprisoned for ‘felony injury to a child’, the fact that the report was changed from ‘homicide’ to ‘undetermined’ was not enough to get her out of jail. It did not “unquestionably establish her innocence”, he said.

What? If the report had not claimed there was a murder back when the case was taking place, would there even have been a trial? What the FUCK? Once you’re found guilty you lose the right to be presumed innocent, even if you can prove that the evidence against you was a lie.

This is like some sick cult. Convict whoever you can, whenever you can, by whatever means you can. Don’t worry about the Appeals Court, they’re our buddies.

The good news here is that although no one seems to give a rat's ass about a Medical Examiner who can't do her fucking job, apparently someone WAS able to get their conviction overturned after it became obvious their trial lawyer was a dipshit...So at least we know it's possible.
Maybe Carlos Coy will never be given another trial; maybe the state has too much to lose by revealing how his conviction was obtained. However, it's possible the TCCA will overturn his conviction based on the conduct of his original lawyer and let him go free.

Friday, October 14, 2011

Weekend Reading 15

This was posted back in 2008 on a law firm's blog. It's titled Houston Rapper Plans to Release Album from Jail . It's kind of inspiring, check it out. If you read one post from one of the blogs listed to your right everytime you visit this site, you'll find yourself with a much better understanding of our legal system in no time.

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Letter to Pat Lykos 6

Middle of the month, time for another letter. Please, consider sending one as well! You are free to use this one, change it around a little, write your own, or simply print out one of the flyers to your right. If you’re not sure how to start, please check out this post and this one. Your letter will help, even if it’s just a few sentences long. I’m going to start sending a letter twice a month, and I hope you’ll consider doing the same. Justice is worth .88 cents and a few minutes of your time.

The Honorable Pat Lykos
1201 Franklin
Houston, TX 77002


I’m writing to you today about the case of Carlos Coy, TDCJ #01110642.
With the recent exoneration of Michael Morton in the headlines, I hope you’ll take the time to examine Coy’s case. Evidence hidden for two decades and a six year fight by the Williamson County’s DA office to prevent DNA testing of physical evidence suggests a terrible lack of concern in justice for both the victim and the accused. I believe that the attitude that resulted in an innocent man serving 25 years in prison was pretty common until recently. Texas seems to be moving towards a new era of concern for those wrongfully incarcerated.

The problem with finding Brady violations is that if evidence is concealed competently, people like me with no legal training or experience have no idea where or how to look. You have years of both, and a willingness to reconsider the mistakes of the past.

Please, take a little time to help; review the case files from Coy vs. Texas and see if anything jumps out at you. In 2009, you said "I want the public to know the lawyers, investigators and support staff of the Harris County DA's Office are dedicated and incredibly talented individuals who are always striving to improve the administration of justice and ensure that we always do the right thing." I believe that you mean that.
Thanks for your time

Me, my address, blah blah blah

There’s mine. Please, take a few minutes today and write one of your own. It will help.

Grits for Breakfast: Texas high criminal court overturns life sentence ...

Grits for Breakfast: Texas high criminal court overturns life sentence ...: Having recently been discussing "Brady violations" (failure to reveal exculpatory evidence) by prosecutors, Grits should mention a notable ...

Sunday, October 9, 2011

Justice for Judges?

Holy Shit. Someone is actually calling for a former prosecutor to be punished for hiding evidence and allowing an innocent man to serve 25 years in prison. Now granted this is Williamson County, not Harris County, but still; it’s fucking PROGRESS.

Have you been following the Michael Morton case? Morton was convicted of the 1986 murder of his wife. A prosecutor and the police department apparently sat on evidence that could have proved his innocence during the trial.

It appears that this evidence was not only concealed from the defense, but was not even submitted to the judge in this case. Now, on top of this, the Williamson County DA’s office has been fighting for six years to prevent DNA testing of a bloody bandana found near the house. Finally they lost, the bandana was tested and…Hang on now, I don’t want to give anyone a heart attack when I reveal the startling fact that…the DNA on the bandana was not a match for Michael Morton. It was covered in his wife’s blood, and some as-yet-unrevealed felon/murder suspect’s DNA. This guy is also suspected of a similar killing. From 1988.

If this prosecutor had not sat on these documents, they might have been able to clear Michael Morton and actually FIND the guy who murdered Christine Morton. Instead, they imprisoned the wrong guy and allowed a vicious killer to roam free, and possibly kill again. Way to fucking go! Just remember, it’s for the children.

Will they go through with the punishment? Will someone in Williamson County stroll down to the Ball-Mart and get a pair? Will this former prosecutor be required to answer for his actions? I don’t know, we’ll have to keep an eye on it. This is very encouraging though, because if someone in Texas is willing to point out that a judge should be held responsible for his actions, maybe it's not too far a stretch to hold less-than-judges accountable, too. Maybe we're about to see an avalanche of cases examined. Maybe this will usher in a new era of responsibility in government. Maybe...hang on, I don't think I can maintain this level of optimism without a stiffer drink.

Anyway. Those involved in Coy’s conviction have not stood still during his incarceration. While Judge Ellis remains at the 351st court, prosecutor Lisa Andrews now works with Coy’s former defense lawyer, Chip Lewis. Prosecutor Denise Oncken now appears to be Chief of the Crimes Against Children Division of the Harris County DA’s office.

They can fuck someone up big time whenever they wanted to, which is why we must continue the fight for justice; they could pick any one of us, at any time, strip away everything we love, stomp our names into the dirt, and there isn’t a damn thing most of us could do about it. You can be rich, you can be famous, but if you’re on their list, you’re going down.

Making this judge answer for what he did 25 years ago will not bring back the lost years Morton spent in prison. It will not provide his now adult son with a new childhood. But it will give faith to people like us that there may, someday, be some justice for the  judicial system.

Saturday, October 8, 2011

SPM's Birthday Party Tonight

Those of you in Houston, check out Quota's FaceBook page for information! Dope House will be there, Rasheed, Lucky Luciano, Low G , Quota himself, Baby Bash and a few others!

Friday, October 7, 2011

Weekend Reading 14

This is an unofficial update on Coy's cases, his book, and S.O.N. put together with excerpts from letters he's written. Thanks go out to SOUTHPARKMEX713!!

Thursday, October 6, 2011

Letter to Pat Lykos 5

Here are my letters to the DA’s office, one for DA Lykos and one for ADA Baldwin Chin. I appreciate other letters in support. Let’s see if we can get the Post Conviction Review Section to take a real look at Coy vs. Texas!

Attn: Baldwin Chin
Assistant District Attorney
1201 Franklin Suite 600
Houston, Tx 77002

I was really pleased to receive your letter from the 21st of September. I have great respect for your work on behalf of those exonerated by the DA’s office and was glad that this case has been brought to your attention.
There may not be any DNA evidence reported in the case of Mr. Coy (cause number 908426), but as in the case of Mr. Ricardo Rachell, just because it was not reported does not mean it doesn’t exist. Granted, the few papers on this case do not suggest that there is any, but looking at the facts of Mr. Coy’s case, I don’t understand why there wouldn’t be.
The supposed crime was reported only hours after occurring, and a document available from the Texas Attorney General’s website called ‘Texas Evidence Collection Protocols’ recommends that evidence be collected as soon as possible. Why would Houston Police Department and the Children’s Assistance Center not collect physical evidence? Is there physical evidence which can not be tested because of the limits of technology?
In 2007, Mr. Gilbert Amezquita was cleared of his wrongful conviction, despite not having any exonerating DNA proof or the assistance of the PCR Section (I don’t believe it existed at that time). The objectively verifiable evidence that freed him was ignored by HPD. I would like to search for evidence that might clear Carlos Coy but unfortunately, the Family Code does not allow me access to what would normally be public documents.
Please, consider looking into this case again, for those of us who can not.
Thank you again for your time and your diligence on behalf of the wrongfully convicted.
Me, My Address, blah blah blah.

The Honorable Pat Lykos
1201 Franklin Suite 600
Houston, Tx 77002


I received a letter from your Post Conviction Review Section. I can’t tell you how much I appreciate you passing on my letters about Carlos Coy, TDCJ #01110642. As someone who has not been involved with the judicial system for very long, it is very encouraging to see an official in your position making an effort to address my concerns.

Unfortunately, as the PCR Section pointed out, I have no ‘objectively verifiable’ evidence of Coy’s innocence. All I have are a few public documents and a strong belief that his trial was terribly mishandled.

I found a document at the Texas attorney general’s website called ‘Texas Evidence Collection Protocol’. While I understand that protocols are not rules, I was surprised that there seems to have been no effort made to collect any physical evidence in Coy’s case, despite it having been reported to law enforcement within hours of the supposed incident.

Days passed between the initial report and the eventual police interview, and even more between that and the examination at a medical facility. I just don’t understand why HPD did not make every effort to collect any evidence except for testimony.

Please, consider looking further into this. We rely on you for justice.
Me, my address, blah blah blah

It can be extremely frustrating to watch the wheels of justice grind so slowly. Remember that persistence is needed; persistence, and letters. Those in power are not smarter than us. They're not better. Please, join me in showing your support for Carlos Coy to the Harris County District Attorney's Office.

Sunday, October 2, 2011

Evidence Collection Protocol

I’m using a document I downloaded from the Texas Attorney General’s website. It’s dated 1998, and I think the fact it’s still available means that it’s still the good word. It basically lays out the procedures and protocols for collecting evidence from a sexual assault or molestation victim. The link is at the end.

As far as I can figure out, this is the timeline we’re looking at:
Supposed incident was Sept 1st.

Next day:
Police were notified

Some time afterwards:
Officer David Milligan shows up at house to investigate

Sept 7th:
Ruiz interviews mother and child.

Sept 10th:
Interview at the CAC with child, Father, and Aunt.

So your kid comes home and tells you she’s been molested. What do you do? Well, apparently you call the authorities to begin an investigation and then you don’t do shit; just sit back and wait for the police to start their paper trail. What, that’s not what you would do?

I don't know if Mom rushed the child to the hospital after she said she was molested, but going off the limited information that's publicly available it doesn't appear that she did. Let’s say she calls the police and leaves it at that. Did they wait till the end of the three day weekend to start doing their fucking jobs? I don’t have a date for this but eventually an officer named David Milligan shows up, apparently at the house, speaks to Mom, but discovers that the child is not there.

So he makes his report without ever speaking to the child, which then wends it’s way through HPD . Finally, Mom and the child are called in to speak to Officer Ruiz. This happened the 7th. They’ve allowed 6 days to pass. How the fuck is anybody supposed to find any kind of physical evidence after a week? Although I don’t see any mention of this at the trial, we know from the appeal that Ruiz actually interviewed the little girl that day. I’ve been told (but can’t verify) that this interview WAS recorded but somehow, magically, the audio malfunctioned. It just decided not to work that day, and was not discovered until it was too late to try again. Supposedly the mother also gave a written statement, but the police decided that it was illegible. Now, Ruiz testified that everything the child said at the second interview was consistent with what she had said at the first, but how the fuck can we know?

[Prosecutor]: Okay. And from what [the complainant] told Fiona [Stevenson], was that consistent with what she had told you just three days before?

[Defense Counsel]: Objection, Your Honor, hearsay.

[The Court]: Overruled. You may answer that question? [sic]

[Officer Ruiz]: It was absolutely consistent with everything that [the complainant] told me.

Apparently everything from that day was scrapped and they were sent home for three days before taking another crack at it on the 10th. That's 9 days after the supposed incident. Why did it take so long? Texas’ own Evidence Collection Protocol states that:

Evidence from the offender and the crime scene often may be found on the body and clothing of the patient. When immediate medical attention is received, the chances increase that some type of injury or physical evidence may be found. Conversely, the chances of finding injury or physical evidence decrease in direct proportion to the length of time which elapses between the assault and the examination.

If they really, truly believed an assault had taken place, they should have had that child at the CAC Sept 2. They could have done a kit on her, one on her clothes, snatched the bed sheets from Coy’s house and built their case on that! But they chose not to. They chose to wait. And wait. And wait. Why?
I don't generally quote Myspace pages, but this has been around for quite awhile and is supposedly written by a friend of the Coy family. Take it with a grain of salt:

...Anyway, Maribel, after 10 days had passed, took
her daughter to CPS.. but they told her that because it had been over a
week since this alledgedly happened, and without any physical evidence,
that there wasn't much they could do.
So she told the CPS investigator,
that Carlos had fathered a child with a 14 yr old, when he was 22...

Emphasis is mine. So according to the internet, the CAC wasn't even going to pursue this case until they found out about Coy's child with Odom. Is it true? Who knows. Is it believable? Hell fucking yeah it is.
It looks like Mom didn’t show up for this interview at CAC; instead it was the child’s Father and Aunt. We know that attending the interview were Szczgielski, the child’s therapist, Fiona Stephenson, the interviewer, and Officer Heidi Ruiz. The Investigating Officer. This is her second interview with the child. Texas Evidence Protocol clearly states:

As few persons as possible should be present during the medical interview/evaluation or examination/evidence collection process. Attending personnel should consist of the examining medical personnel and an authorized support person. Those persons involved in the investigation, such as law enforcement or child protective agency representatives, should not be in attendance during these procedures.

That bold type is in the document, I did not add that. They are very clear that investigative personnel SHOULD NOT be present for the interview. It may seem to contradict itself here, where it says:

Ideally, the interview should be conducted by the team approach. Law enforcement and a Children's Protective Services representative may do the interview together, so that the trauma of multiple interviews is curtailed.

But Law Enforcement already had their interview, three days earlier. Statements were made; why was Ruiz’ presence required again? Was she afraid that the kid couldn’t hold up the story without her? WHAT THE FUCK?

Now, according to the DA’s office, there is no physical evidence available for testing; we got that from last week’s letter. Even though TECP states that

Evidence from the offender and the crime scene often may be found on the body and clothing of the patient. When immediate medical attention is received, the chances increase that some type of injury or physical evidence may be found. Conversely, the chances of finding injury or physical evidence decrease in direct proportion to the length of time which elapses between the assault and the examination.

My question is, why? If they really believed this child had been abused, why did they choose to delay the interviews and examinations? Did any of them believe that they would use any actual evidence in the case? Or did they know that they could get a conviction just as easily using nothing but words?