Continued from part 8.d
(Court Transcripts Volume 15 of 31 pgs. 62-63)
Judge: All right. Ms. (Doe), what we’re to do is we’re going to start the movie and what I’d like for you to do for me, is when it gets to the part where it stops – where you stopped watching, I want you to turn to me and say, now. Can you do that for me?
Jane Doe: Yes.
Judge: Okay. Can you hear it, okay, (Jane)?
Jane Doe: Yes.
([Jane Doe] in presence of attorneys and court watching movie, “Scary Movie.”)
Judge: That’s all you saw?
Jane Doe: This isn’t the one I seen at my house.
Judge: That’s not the one you saw at your house? Have you ever seen this?
Jane Doe: Yes.
Judge: Did you see the whole thing?
Jane Doe: Yes.
Judge: So, that’s a problem. Okay.
Judge: Thank you, Ms. (Doe), you may step out in the hallway.
Chip: Judge, that raises another question which I’m pretty sure the movie that she’s seen part of is “Scary Movie 2” and while she’s here, I don’t know if it wouldn’t just be worth doing exactly what you’ve done –
Judge: Well, I guess we can ask her. I mean, I don’t know.
Never in the trial had I seen this judge more distraught. His words were coming out in a muddlement of spits and spurts, as if he’d just been told his nuts needed to be removed. Listen to his very next words (on the same page, 63): “I don’t – I mean, we can’t read her mind and, you know, a ten-year-old –“
He was completely stunned. I just wish someone would have asked him, “Why the fuck are you so shaken up? You’re supposed to be neutral.” But don’t worry, as you’ll see in future letters, the judge made up for his slip-up as the trial went on.
The most eye-opening thing he said, and I’m sure you noticed it, too, came after the child told him that she saw the whole movie. His response, “So, that’s a problem.”
The question of all questions is, why would the truth be a problem? His statement defines what this trial was about; a task to keep the truth hidden. Those words slipped out of his mouth in the stupor of being caught off guard, but they are an admission to the fact that he was on the D.A.’s side. In fact, he was their secret weapon.
I’m going to show you how they proceeded to handle this “problem”, but first let me say this.
As I read these transcripts, I’m blown away at how sharp and persistent Chip was. He even knew that they probably had convinced the child that it was “Scary Movie 2” that she had seen all of, and Part One that she only saw five minutes of. And he was right. Not that I’m riding his jock, but I do feel bad because, before going through all these transcripts, I felt that he didn’t give it his all. I see, now, that he did. But no lawyer should have to defend an innocent man against such unfair forces that pyramided to the judge himself.
Chip was a fairly new attorney at the time but came highly recommended. He’s, now, considered one of the best trial lawyers in the nation, and still hasn’t lost a case since losing mine. But the deck was stacked too high in my case, and I didn’t help. I wasn’t even paying attention to all this shit. My dumb ass was at the table revising the script for the film I was working on. Dope House was in preproduction on a movie called “SPM”, which was about my rise in the rap industry. I guess we can add a whole new ending to that one.
I’ll start back on the same page, which is Chip requesting that the child come back to the stand.
(Court Transcripts Volume 15 of 31 pgs. 63-64)
Judge: I don’t - - I mean, we can’t read her mind, and you know, a ten-year-old - -
Chip: I’m frankly satisfied with the Court asking her the question. There’s more than an abundance of material to support the position that we’re taking. So, if we could - - if the Court could ask her if the other movie was “Scary Movie 2” and how much she’s seen.
Judge: Okay. Bring her in.
Ms. (Doe), I need to ask you a question. All right. You said that you had already seen this movie, the whole thing; is that right?
Jane Doe: Yes.
Judge: Do you have any idea what movie - - the one you said you only watched part of it - - do you have any idea what movie that was?
Jane Doe: Yes.
Judge: Can you tell me what it was?
Jane Doe: It was part two.
If you remember, she said it was Part One that an “adult” said was “too nasty” to watch. Now she’s saying it was Part Two that was cut off, which makes less sense because if Part One had all these sex scenes, why would they cut Part Two short and let her see all of Part One? It’s just a traffic jam of programmed lies, and I doubt she saw five minutes of any movie. But so much went on behind closed doors that we’ll never know the truth behind this child’s testimony.
I can tell you one thing that I know: Jane Doe said that her cousin, (G), was in the same room as her father, (John Doe), about to watch a movie. How they convinced her of that is mind-boggling, because there’s no [possibility] (G)’s mother (who is Mary Doe’s older sister) would ever let her daughter be in the same house as John Doe, much less in the same room. Mary Doe’s family despised John Doe because of the domestic terrorist that he was. There’s a reason why Jane Doe was diagnosed with tension headaches since the age of two, since she was able to relate that her head hurt. There’s a reason she developed insomnia, photophobia, phonophobia and was on anti-depressants at nine-years-old, (eight months before she allegedly made these claims of an assault.) In my criminal trial, the judge broke his back keeping those reasons hidden, among other things. He helped make this family look like a group of God-fearing Christians, who played Monopoly on Saturday nights and prayed before each meal. But in civil court, the civil judge was more fair, and so more of the truth was exposed.
All I’m saying is that there’s no way her five-minute-story about her cousin and dad and family all watching a movie could be true, yet she believed it was. The D.A. walked her through a step-by-step account of a non-existant event, and the child didn’t miss a beat. But if you look a little closer, you can see evidence of foul play. Because when you program information,all that’s there is what was programmed. With that said, let’s revisit her five-minute-story.
1.) She doesn’t remember when she watched the movie.
“Jane, you saw this movie awhile back.”
2.) She does remember every person in the room.
3.) She doesn’t remember exactly who said the movie was “too nasty.”
“Jane, if you’ll remember we said the movie was too nasty.”
4.) She does remember how long the movie played.
She only knew the information given to her, but it’s common sense how easy it would be to remember the person who got up and said “No, you can’t watch this.” That was the main act of what this scene was about. But that’s just my view, man. There’s no way I can tell you “I know” what happened. All I can do is show you what happened in court and allow common sense to speak for itself.
The main reason I showed you this ordeal, this plot, this scheme was to give examples of how, first of all, they could completely control this child’s testimony when given enough time, how the judge and D.A.’s worked as a team in my trial, how the puppet master could make the child believe a story that wasn’t true, (which was the point Incandesio’s letter brought up.)
Now, we’ll go back to this “problem” that the judge brought up while thinking out loud; this pesky problem of the truth popping up on them. First, I’ll need to rewind the trial to where Jane Doe and her mother were called back to court to find out how much of the movie the little girl saw. That’s when she said she saw about five minutes of “Scary Movie.”
Well, after she got off the stand, the D.A. called her mother, (Mary Doe), to the stand. I didn’t show you that testimony in its chronological order because I began comparing the eerie similarities of the “about-five-minutes” story to the “about-one-minute” story. So, let’s go back to where Oncken puts Mary Doe on the stand and asks about “Scary Movie.” Remember, this was done without the jury present.
(Court Transcripts Volume 15 of 31 pg. 44)
D.A. Oncken: Okay. And do you recall whether or not - - and do you recall when that might have been that you watched the movie?
Mary Doe: I can’t recall.
D.A. Oncken: No idea?
Mary Doe: No idea.
D.A. Oncken: Okay. And do you recall if you watched the entire feature or not?
Mary Doe: No, we did not.
D.A. Oncken: Okay. And why did you not watch the entire feature?
Mary Doe: I didn’t really care for it. I thought it was supposed to be a funny movie. It turned out it was some funny movie but not all of it, so I turned it off.
On the next page we see Chip getting a turn at questioning Mary Doe about “Scary Movie.”
(Court Transcripts Volume 15 of 31 pgs. 45-46)
Chip: Ms. (Doe), you testified that you don’t really recall seeing this movie?
Mary Doe: I do recall.
Chip: Okay. Who rented the movie?
Mary Doe: I did.
Chip: Where did you rent it.
Mary Doe: Blockbuster.
Chip: Which one?
Mary Doe: Telephone.
Chip: Telephone and what?
Mary Doe: Bellfort.
Chip: Telephone and Bellfort?
Mary Doe: Correct.
Chip: So, you have a regular account there?
Mary Doe: Yes, I do.
Chip: Now, you don’t recall exactly when you watched this movie. Was it - -
Mary Doe: No, because I watch a lot of movies.
Chip: Was it more than a year ago?
Mary Doe: I can’t – I cannot say that.
Chip: All right. Was it within the last three years?
Mary Doe: I cannot say that. I don’t know.
It makes sense to say that Mary Doe must have been told, “If something comes up that’s not in the story we rehearsed, or you forgot what we rehearsed, just say you don’t know or can’t remember.” And Mary Doe, even to a fault, stuck to that formula.
Chip exposes that by showing how she remembers seeing the movie, remembers that she didn’t care for it and turned it off, remembers that she’s the one who rented it and where she rented it, but, oddly enough, can’t remember if she saw it within the last three years.
This was a completely made-up story, and if it wasn’t obvious enough, I’m about to prove it.
As you know, Jane Doe came back and said she saw all of “Scary Movie”, thus causing the “problem.” So what they did was regrouped, came up with a new plan, and once the jury was present, they executed a fresh story, which, I believe, this testimony took place the next day.
(Court Transcripts Volume 16 of 31 pgs. 37-40)
D.A. Oncken: And specifically, have you seen the movie entitled Scary Movie. And that would be the first one that came out?
Mary Doe: Yes I have.
D.A. Oncken: Okay. And do you recall if you saw that one at the movie theater or home rental?
Mary Doe: I recall, now, that it was at the movies.
D.A. Oncken: Okay. So, by and large, the four that I’ve asked you about, Scream 1, Scream 2, I Know What You Did Last Summer and Scary Movie the first one, you believe you watched those at the movie theater?
Mary Doe: I believe so.
D.A. Oncken: Okay. Now, I know this is difficult; but do you have any idea at what point in time you might’ve watched these, what year you might’ve watched these?
Mary Doe: I can’t recall.
D.A. Oncken: Okay. Now, let me ask you some questions about when you would go to the movie theater and watch these particular four movies that we’ve just described. Would your children always accompany you?
Mary Doe: Yes.
D.A. Oncken: Okay. Is going to the movies like something ya’ll usually do for entertainment?
Mary Doe: Yes. And we go skating. We go swimming. We go to the baseball games, basketball games.
D.A. Oncken: So, it’s just one of many things you do for entertainment?
Mary Doe: Yes.
D.A. Oncken: And when you take the children to the movie, could you describe to the members of the jury what your kids do during the movie. I mean, do they sit there the whole time and intently watch the film; or what do your kids do during the movie?
Mary Doe: They’ll watch it, and they’ll go buy popcorn. They’ll go to the rest room.
D.A. Oncken: And let me ask you specifically, when your daughter (Jane Doe) would go buy food or popcorn or go to the restroom, would you always go with her each time or would she go by herself or with other family negligence; or how would that work?
Mary Doe: Most of the time, with me or with family members. Sometimes she would go by herself to the rest room.
D.A. Oncken: And would ya’ll do this during the course of the film, the feature film?
Mary Doe: Yes.
D.A. Oncken: So, you wouldn’t do all the rest room, all the popcorn and drink and food-getting prior to the movie?
Mary Doe: No. Not at all the same time.
Chip: Objection, your Honor. This is leading.
D.A. Oncken: So, Miss (Doe), in regard to those four movies that I asked you about, do you recall whether or not there was any explicit language, any type of cuss words or foul language in those movies?
Mary Doe: Somewhat.
D.A. Oncken: And what do you do about your children listening to foul language that’s in movies?
Mary Doe: I just tell them, try not to hear it or see it: and my kids don’t know bad words. They don’t say bad words.
D.A. Oncken: They don’t use them?
Mary Doe: They never use them.
D.A. Oncken: What about your daughter, (Jane Doe)?
Mary Doe: Never.
D.A. Oncken: Certainly not to you?
Mary Doe: Exactly.
D.A. Oncken: Miss (Wrong last name) - - I’m sorry. Miss (Doe), in regard to those movies I have named, Scream 1, Scream 2, I Know What You Did Last Summer, Scary Movie the first one, what about anything that is explicit, sexually, in there?
Mary Doe: They always cover their face. I tell them, and they do it on their own, also.
It’s weird because this same D.A., same judge, court reporter, bailiff all know what Mary Doe said a day earlier, when the jury was out. But that was just a chance to get their shit straight. Then, once the jury’s in, they say whatever’s best to say.
The theater story, which offered longer restroom breaks, longer food fetches and closer supervision as it applies to making sure the kids covered their eyes and ears, was the better option. It’s all made up as they go along; it has nothing to do with the truth, and the judge just sits there, knowing it’s all bullshit.
So, that was the best they could do about the “problem”, that’s what the jury heard. They had no idea of everything that happened before this story became what was presented to them.
And yes, they were allowed to watch “Scary Movie”, which, obviously, didn’t make much of a difference, but they were only allowed to see parts of the real movie that played in that courtroom.
I’ll finish by reminding you that this was only a taste of how these people operated. For an innocent man to find himself in a prison cell, a lot of things have to go wrong, and a lot of wrong things have to go on. I’ll continue to show you the truth, using the official court transcripts, because it’s important to me that you know who I am, and who I’m not.