Supporters of judicial integrity attended the April 17th Judiciary and Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee to request legislative intervention in our wrongful prosecution cases.
These cases involve prosecution for ideological beliefs about the court system, obstruction of justice due to illegal withholding/suppression of evidence, numerous due process violations, witness tampering, serial prosecutorial and judicial misconduct, media interference of investigations and trials, violation of rules of the criminal court, significant upward departures in sentencing and false imprisonment of defendants as well as one of the attorneys representing a defendant.
Individuals have been denied access to justice and the basic right to a fair and impartial trial and the public officials have been and are continuing to act with impunity. Recently, I was jailed for information on this blog regarding these cases.
We have attempted to seek remedy and redress from the MN Court of Appeals, the MN Supreme Court, the FBI, the Attorney General, the Board of Judicial Standards, the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board, Law Enforcement, Dakota County Commissioners, and the First Judicial District Administrator and Chief Judge, to no avail.
I am not at liberty to discuss the background on the case as I have been gagged by the judges involved and risk further incarceration for revealing details of this high profile case. What this amounts to is a weaponization of the legal system to bully and suppress my first amendment rights.
Here’s what I can say, the Assistant Dakota County Attorney engaged in malicious and retaliatory prosecution by unrealistically overcharging defendants and allowing wrongful convictions when she knew the affirmative defense negated any criminal liability. The judge erroneously allowed evidence to be illegally withheld from defendants and excluded evidence critical to the affirmative defense, thereby making the affirmative defense ineffective. Evidentiary rules cannot prevent a defendant from presenting his defense. Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S.284 (1972).
The courts are endowed with an abundance of power and yet have limited checks and balances. Dakota County has demonstrated a willingness to abuse the power entrusted to them and have managed to shield themselves from any accountability.
Cover of the first printing of the Minnesota Constitution, 1857
What we requested from the legislators:
The MN Constitution provides numerous actions that the Legislature can take regarding the Judiciary:
ARTICLE VI, Sec. 9. The legislature may provide by law for retirement of all judges and for the extension of the term of any judge who becomes eligible for retirement within three years after expiration of the term for which he is selected. The legislature may also provide for the retirement, removal or other discipline of any judge who is disabled, incompetent or guilty of conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
ARTICLE VIII, Section 1. The house of representatives has the sole power of impeachment through a concurrence of a majority of all its members. All impeachments shall be tried by the senate. When sitting for that purpose, senators shall be upon oath or affirmation to do justice according to law and evidence. No person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the senators present.
Sec. 2. Officers subject to impeachment; grounds; judgment. The governor, secretary of state, auditor, attorney general and the judges of the supreme court, court of appeals and district courts may be impeached for corrupt conduct in office or for crimes and misdemeanors; but judgment shall not extend further than to removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit in this state. The party convicted shall also be subject to indictment, trial, judgment, and punishment according to law.
Sec. 5. Removal of inferior officers.
The legislature of this state may provide for the removal of inferior officers for malfeasance or nonfeasance in the performance of their duties.
The Legislature appropriates significant tax payer funding to the courts with no oversight of how these tax payer dollars are being spent. Clearly, Dakota County has not demonstrated good stewardship of public funds in these cases as millions of dollars have been spent on carrying out personal vendettas. At my sentencing hearing, (and speaking on behalf of the state) Assistant County Attorney Keena states,
“As to the sentence that the State believes the defendant should receive in this case, it’s the State’s position that Ms. Evavold should be treated the same and receive the same sentence that xxxxxx received in her case. And why she remained silent and her rationale for doing so I think is more reprehensible than actions taken by xxxxxx. This defendant did it purposely for her ideological beliefs about the family court system and her complete disregard for the family court system.”
We are asking for a special counsel investigation into these cases as the Legislature has the power, authority, and duty to investigate any government entity when there is clear evidence of misconduct. This case is of great public interest and must be reviewed to alleviate the adverse administration of justice.
Below are the members that received the information with phone numbers and emails listed. Give them a call or email them to hold them accountable for investigating these cases and take appropriate action against those that are guilty of corrupt conduct in office.