| Charges | Introduction | Charges |
|
This section contains the documents relevent to the criminal charges filed by police concerning the alleged assault and the charge of reckless endangerment. It is my primary complaint that these charges - certainly the charge of aggravated assault were false - that the fact they were false was withheld from me, by both the district attorney - and that I was thereby deprived of my right to a trial. These documents include the Criminal Complaint and the District Attorney's Information. Also the "victims" Police Statements, the Plea Transcripts, and the Court Docket Entries. I won't go into my version of "who started it." I would, however point out that there were SEVEN of them, and that they, by their own admissions, crossed the avenue to accost me, and furthermore, that several of them "followed" me to my home when I fled. One other thing, is the charges concerning my actions toward Bryan Cordner. It is my position they are ludicrous. What the police have done is take the figurative statement of an obviously highly anally oriented individual and embellished it to the point of absurdity. I was never closer than 30 or 40 feet to Mr. Cordner. Why would he have to run around the corner and "tell everbody he has a gun" if he had one up his ass? Also, Mr. Haskins says that he, Bryan Cordner, and Justin Morse were already in their car (which was parked on the other side of the avenue) when I came around the corner. As previously stated, Mr. Boyer was one of the individuals involved in this incident, and who had also signed a police statement on the night of this incident. He was decent enough to come forth (about a year and a half later) with this information concerning Mr. Zdarko's "injuries," and also provided me with his recanting statement. This statement was submitted as a supporting exhibit with my PCHA petition. It constitutes the only available evidence concerning the actual nature of Mr. Zdarko's "injuries", and indicates that the charge of aggravated assault was patently false. Neither the prosecution, "defense counsel", nor the court has ever refuted this assertion. It has simply been TOTALLY ignored. Obviously, the actual extent of Mr. Zdarko's alleged injuries are directly relevant to the question of the validity of the charges brought against me. It would also be a very simple matter to determine and demonstrate at an evidentiary hearing. In legal terms it is the witholding of exculpatory evidence. In plain words what was done here is that the fact that this very serious charge was false was withheld from me, by both the District Attorney, and my own attorneys, Joseph A. Massa, and John Aranyos, and instead was utilized to unlawfully coerce my guilty plea. It was in fact, fraud, plain and simple. Neither the District Attorney nor defense attorneys Massa and Aranyos have ever been required to even answer to my assertion that this charge was false, nor that they intentionally witheld this fact from me. It seems most reasonable to expect however, that each was aware of the actual (extremely minor) nature of Mr. Zdarko's alleged injuries.
The falsity of this charge is significant in several other respects, including it's bearing on the question of exigent circumstances as it relates to the legality of the search of my home. It's relavence lies in the fact that a primary requirement in the justification of a warrantless search
is that "a grave offense was committed."
It is important to note that a
Furthermore, the withholding of this evidence constitutes a compelling indication of collusion on the part of District Attorney Hernan and defense counsel Massa and Aranyos. The nature of the victim's injuries is clearly the essential element of this charge, and each were legally bound to disclose such exculpatory evidence. It is simply incredible to believe they were unaware of the fact that Mr. Zdarkos "injuries" were extremely minor - three days before my scheduled trial.
And most disturbing is that, as a result of the court's refusing to grant a hearing, and the Superior Court's upholding of the lower court's refusal,
|