Updates

UPDATE - Sept 15, 1998  

BROWN ADMITS PERJURIES, ENTERS GUILTY PLEAS

Exactly as we have predicted, after delaying these matters through his year-and-a-half "investigation" of these ADMITTED PERJURIES, and six more years of endless appeals in his efforts to AVOID A PUBLIC TRIAL, and having been found to be doing so "in bad faith" by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and after having been ordered to prosecute this case by that court, the Pennsylvania Attorney General has proceeded to offer Mr. Brown a plea bargain he simply could not refuse. And he did so with the full knowledge of our elected officials

Michael Brown has pled guilty to two counts of perjury - six other related charges will be dismissed. (The 9th count, charging that Michael Brown "did conspire with state police investigator John Herzog and District Attorney Joseph A. Massa" has already been "deleted" by the Attorney General's Office). In fact, that was the very first thing he did upon the return of this case from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

The Attorney General has accomplished his goal of avoiding a public trial and thereby preventing the public disclosure of the facts, circumstances, and the truth surrounding Mr. Brown's claim that his perjured testimony was both coached and coerced by police and the District Attorney of Warren County, and that he was coerced to provide this testimony under threat of the death penalty - for crimes the prosecution knew he was neither an eyewitness to, nor a defendant. The Pennsylvania Attorney General's office has succeeded in protecting the true perpetrators of the most corrupt prosecution ever conducted in this Commonwealth. Congratulations, Mr. von Geise and Mr. Fischer. Congratulations to our elected "representatives", and of course, Governor Tom "Walking Tall" Ridge.

There is but one opportunity left to restore justice to Warren County. We have made it a point to ensure that Judge Paul H. Millin, President Judge of the 37th Judicial District is fully informed of the circumstances of this case, and requested that he reject the plea bargain offered by the Attorney General and accepted by Mr. Brown. Either justice will prevail on Friday, October 9, 1998 - or corruption will have triumphed.


UPDATE - 10/10/98:

BROWN SENTENCED FOR LYING TO JURY

Judge Millin has chosen to perpetuate this travesty and to close the final door to justice - rather than provide Mr. Brown and the citizens of Pennsylvania the public trial that would have exposed this entire travesty.

Yes, Justice walks a little taller in Pennsylvania today, Governor Ridge. Indeed! Watch out she don't fall on you!


BOMBSHELL! - Dec 13, 1998

BROWN ASKS TO WITHDRAW GUILTY PLEAS

This is getting very interesting - and what happens next promises to be even more so. First of all, it appears that Michael Brown has again been duped into believing he would get little or no time if he pled guilty.

In deciding these matters, Judge Millin has only three choices:

1) DENY Mr. Brown's Motion to Withdraw Guilty Plea AND his Reconsideration of Sentence. In such event these matters will most surely be appealed by Attorney Segel. Although simply denying this motion is clearly the easiest and most direct option, it has the very distinct disadvantage, from the perspective of this corrupt Commonwealth, of keeping this matter active (on appeal). While the previous eight years of delay have served the conspirators very well, it is an entirely different ball game now. Now, they want it DONE, FINI, KAPUT, OVER WITH!

2) GRANT Mr. Brown's Motion to Withdraw Guilty Pleas. In this event, will the Attorney General begin another (endless) round of appeals? Drag it out for ANOTHER EIGHT YEARS? Or will he offer Mr. Brown a sentence he REALLY can't refuse - like "get his clothes and go home" - like the DA did? Just how much more absurd can this get?  Or would he actually PROSECUTE these charges? Right, the day after hell freezes over.

The Court's granting of this motion would of course leave the Attorney General in a very uncomfortable position, (see above) and worst of all, might actually result in a PUBLIC TRIAL! So forget that!

3) GRANT Mr. Brown's Motion for Reconsideration of Sentence, thereby rendering withdrawal of plea moot. This would mean reducing the sentence - to the very most that Michael Brown would accept (have to make it look good). It's great benefit (to this corrupt Commonwealth) is that it (alone) would close the door on these matters once and for all.

The primary problem here though, from Judge Millin's perspective, is that his collusion is not yet readily apparent, although it is quite clear he has neither respect for, nor appreciation of, the function of a PUBLIC TRIAL, the INTEGRITY of our judicial system, nor the interests of JUSTICE. Nor any inclination towards rooting out of the corruption PERMEATING HIS OWN JUDICIAL DISTRICT.

But does he really want to jump into this mess with both feet? A matter that he inherited? Why would he?

Well for one thing, we expect the ENTIRE COMMONWEALTH would be extremely grateful, including our Legislators, Governor (Tough on Crime) Ridge, and most assuredly, the Office of the Attorney General. We wouldn't be surprised to see Judge Millin nominated to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court for such a bold move.

A relatively minor problem with this scenario though, is that there is no valid basis for reducing Mr. Brown's sentence, not for real. At least not of record. As we have previously advised Judge Millin, the parts of the record that relate to the "circumstances  attending  the  commission  of  the  crime" are "unavailable" - (draw your own conclusions).

AVOIDING the disclosure of these circumstances is of course, precisely what this entire judicial charade is all about - from start to finish. It is not surprising that the parts of the record that could vindicate Mr. Brown (and, of course, implicate the entire 37th Judicial District) are missing. These portions of the record, including all of Michael Brown's police statements, have been (unlawfully) "released" (by Judge Millin himself) to the Pennsylvania State Police for their phony "New Task Force" - and/or (unlawfully) "removed" from the record by the Attorney General's Office.

In addition, the transcripts of the Evidentiary Hearing concerning the withdrawal of Michael Brown's (original) guilty pleas are missing from the record (under very suspicious circumstances).

As may be deduced from "attorney" Bonavita's "brief", these are extremely critical documents. This hearing was, in fact, the ONLY proceeding of any substance whatsoever in Mr. Brown's entire case - and focused on precisely these circumstances. And I seriously doubt "attorney" Bonavita has recounted all this referenced testimony from memory. So, WHERE are these documents?

This seems to be a good place to stand back and take a look at the larger picture. The compelling question that arises from such a view is: WHY IS THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA GOING TO SUCH EXTREME LENGTHS IN ORDER TO AVOID THE PROSECUTION OF AN ADMITTED PERJUROR IN A CAPITAL MURDER CASE?!?

Everything in this entire case from the moment that Michael Brown publicy stated "I WASN'T THERE" - to the present - exists precisely as a result of just such an effort. An effort undertaken for the specific and singular purpose of AVOIDING A PUBLIC TRIAL FOR MICHAEL BROWN. By hook or by crook.

It is obvious "THE COMMONWEALTH" could care less whether Michael Brown goes to prison for 14 years, because he "stood there and watched" or he goes scot-free - JUST SO THERE ISN'T A PUBLIC TRIAL!

The essential questions here are, first, is Michael Brown guilty of these very serious charges? Did he single-handedly deceive our entire law-enforcement system, utterly destroying the investigation of this henious crime, falsely placing Mr. Buckley in jeopardy of the death penalty, allowing the true perpetrator to escape justice, subverting the entire judicial process, and denying Kathy Wilson's family the justice to which they are entitled?
OR
was he given confidential crime scene information by police, duped into providing this information in statements which resulted in his own (FALSE) arrest, and coerced to commit these perjuries, obstruction of justice, etc., through the KNOWINGLY FALSE prosecution of these false charges, and the complicity of his own "attorneys"?

These are the questions that are at issue. Questions that need to be addressed (and ANSWERED) at a PUBLIC TRIAL. If Michael Brown committed these perjuries on his own, he should be tried, and sentenced accordingly. To whatever degree he acted in concert with authorities, he, as well as they, should be tried and sentenced accordingly. If his actions were in fact coerced by authorities he should be tried and set free, and THEY should then be tried and sentenced accordingly.

The record leaves not the slightest doubt that Michael Brown was a mere puppet in these entire matters. But don't take our word for it - real Attorney (well, as real as they get around here) Elliot Segel says it fairly well at Michael's sentencing on October 9, 1998. (See also attorney Segel's Sentencing Memorandum) It should also be noted here that this was the only instance in these entire proceedings that Mr. Brown was represented by an attorney who was not part of the conspiracy to coerce his false testimony, and his own guilty pleas. (The only problem of course, is that these were matters to have been presented as a complete defense to these charges - not as mitigating circumstances at his sentencing.)

We believe the information presented here is sufficient to cause any reasonable person of normal intelligence to recognize, and to have grave concern over, what is actually going on here. That is, A DECADE LONG COMMONWEALTH-WIDE CONSPIRACY to subvert the rule of law, the administration of justice, and the judicial process itself, not to mention the obliteration of OUR Constitution.

And to understand that this corrupt conspiracy may only be defeated through a PUBLIC TRIAL OF MICHAEL BROWN - BY A JURY OF HIS PEERS. That is what trials are for. And they are PUBLIC for very good reasons too. Of which this case is a prime example.


UPDATE - Jan 9, 1999

Brown to Get Another Day in Court

Whoopee!

Michael Brown gets to be sentenced again.

Of course what the headline should have read was:

"Brown's Motion to Withdraw Guilty Plea Denied
Court Vacates Sentence - Grants Re-sentence"

But time marches on, and the question now is - what kind of a deal has been worked out? How much of a reduction are they going to have to give Michael Brown for him to just shut up and do his time?

Both this article, and Judge Millin's Order of December 17, 1998, indicate that the Court intends to give credit for time Mr. Brown served on the original charges of murder, and accomplice to kidnap and rape. This credit is utterly without legal justification.

This is a rather cute little twist on the options we presented in the prior update section ( option #3). The effect, and implication of this sentence is that Michael still stands as a (convicted) perjuror in crimes of such henious nature that they demand the maximum sentence of three-and-a-half to seven years. That is, he's still the fall guy. Of course Judge Millin did run these (two) charges concurrently - and give him unlawful credit for his prior incarceration. Perhaps that is an indication of some sympathy towards Mr. Brown, some recognition of the truth of this case. But I very seriously doubt it.

The real strategy, is to give him as much time as they can (to make it look good - and to make him look bad). But not so much time that it would be worthwhile to appeal (given the fact that an appeal would take a couple of years). The really cute part though, is that if Michael appeals these matters, he would be in danger of losing the two years credit he has been (unlawfully) granted. Quite clever.

One thing that is apparent is that Mr. Brown has still not learned the lesson that what "they" tell you - off the record, and what they do, are two completely different things.


UPDATE - Feb 6, 1999

Brown's Request for Leniency Denied

Well, we would hardly say that - receiving credit (unlawfully) for 757 days (out of 1277) is surely nothing to sneeze at.

We expect attorney Segel will appeal the Court's denial of Mr. Brown's motion to withdraw his guilty pleas. It really does appear that both he and Mr. Brown were duped into believeing that Michael would receive no additional time. The nature of attorney Segel's claims would seem to require a hearing. The problem of course, is that an appeal would take at least a year, just to get this case back to the trial court for a hearing.


ANOTHER BOMBSHELL!!
 

Last
Articles
Intro
Documents
First

 

The Village Law Review