WITNESS TAMPERING, PART 1
The first time I heard the information contained in Gerardo Gonzalez Jr.'s affidavit, was in 2009. He's a friend of mine and I hadn't spoken to him since my incarceration in 1997. During my trial, I always wondered why there were no police reports on him, considering he was in the inner circle of friends of both me and Bill Brown. When I finally spoke to him after all those years, I found out that not only was he questioned by both FBI and State detectives, he also testified in front of the Grand Jury.
Where are those police reports? Where is his Grand Jury transcript? By law I was suppose to receive EVERYTHING prior to my trial. However, if you listen to what Gerardo Gonzalez Jr. accuses Michigan State Police detectives of, it's easy to understand why I was never given the police reports or the Grand Jury transcript of his testimony.
First, the detectives accused Mr. Gonzalez of dealing marijuana. Then, they promise to help him, IF, he gave them information. After Mr. Gonzalez gave the detectives the only information he knew, the detectives told Mr. Gonzalez that his information was not what they were looking for and then provided Mr. Gonzalez with the information they wanted to hear. The Michigan State Police detectives were not investigating, they were trying to provide Mr. Gonzalez with a script.
The encounter with the detectives that Gerardo Gonzalez Jr. describes, happened in June of 1996. None of the specifics of the case were known to the public. Why were those detectives planting their story-line in the mind of a potential witness? If Mr. Gonzalez would have wanted to receive the "get out of jail free card" that the detectives were offering, all he has to do was repeat the information he was told. Information Mr. Gonzalez had never heard until the detectives provided it. Michigan State Police detectives were providing script and incentives to all takers. Lucky me... Gerardo Gonzalez Jr. is an honorable man. Few are.
This police interview of Joel Torres reveals that Michigan State Police Detective Don Brooks, was willing to break the law and he was not worried about being caught... because he recorded himself doing it. Detective Brooks offered Mr. Torres all kinds of incentives, if Mr. Torres would provide the detective with information about ME... not information about Bill Brown or the case in general, just information about ME.
During my trial, Joel Torres testified that Bill Brown told him that he ( Bill Brown ) killed Rose Larner. Prosecutor John Kelsey told the jury that Mr. Torres was an untrustworthy witness. It's funny how Mr. Torres is an untrustworthy witness when he's testifying at my trial but when he was the State's star witness in another case, he was trumpeted by the prosecutor as being a reliable witness. Regardless of what anyone thinks of Mr. Torres' actions, he is an honest and truthful man. And although he was willing to cooperate with The State... he would not lie for them.
Take a close look at how confident Detective Don Brooks is that he will be able to provide Mr. Torres with a deal to get him out of jail. However, Detective Don Brooks crossed the line into criminal activity when he promised Mr. Torres that any deal he makes can be kept purely confidential. THAT, is not allowed under Michigan law. Any deal made to a witness in return for their cooperation and testimony MUST be revealed.
You see, Detective Don Brooks knows that he can get a judge, a prosecutor or even the Parole Board to give Mr. Torres special consideration, if he, Michigan State Police Detective Don Brooks, makes the request. Detective Don Brooks is so confident in his ability to do so, he's bragging about it in a recorded interview. Going so far as telling Mr. Torres that he'll make the deal behind closed doors, so the deal never has to be revealed.
Remember Detective Brooks' offer of secrecy. I will be coming back to it in PART 2.
Midway though my trial, Troy Lafarier was visited by Michigan State Police detectives while he was incarcerated in a Jackson prison. After detectives visited Mr. Lafarier, he was served with a subpoena to testify at my trial. I've never received a Police Report detailing that prison interview. However, what Mr. Lafarier asserts happened during the interview is extremely disturbing.
Immediately after Michigan State Police detectives visited Mr. Lafarier, he contacted a family member, who then contacted The Court. Mr. Lafarier asserted that Michigan State Police detectives threatened to bring retaliatory actions against him if he did not testify in a "certain manner." Michigan State Police detectives said that they would talk to the parole board in opposition of Mr. Lafarier's parole and make certain that he had problems at the facility he was incarcerated in. Mr. Lafarier further stated that he was afraid and intended on taking the Fifth instead of lying for the detectives.
As I have already shown you, Detective Don Brooks clearly revealed that these acts of retaliation were well within the power of Michigan State Police detectives. And according to Mr. Lafarier, the retaliatory actions were not only limited to the Parole Board, the Michigan State Police detectives also stated that they could make sure an inmate had "problems" within the prison system itself.
It's kind of funny how the Cotton Facility, where Mr. Lafarier was incarcerated at the time these threats were made, is the same facility where I was harassed and rode out of within the first week and a half of my arrival.
Detectives threatened to retaliate against witnesses who would not cooperate and give them the information they wanted to hear. Were those threats carried out? One man has come forward saying, YES. This man asserts that he was threatened by Michigan State Police detectives and they made good on their promise of retribution.
Once again, Michigan State Police detectives provided a man with information, then offered to get the man out of jail if he cooperated. However, this man, Mr. Robert Micheal Wood, would not agree to be part of their criminal conspiracy to frame me. As a result of Mr. Wood refusing to cooperate, Michigan State Police detectives made good on their promise of keeping Mr. Wood in prison. Michigan State Police detectives were extremely vocal about their power to sway the Michigan Parole Board's decisions. Mr. Wood's affidavit proves that their power of influence was real.
I have shown you undeniable evidence that Michigan State Police detectives coerced, threatened and intimidated witnesses. They were employed as an Instrument of Intimidation for the prosecutor. Clearly, their actions can be labeled as Witness Tampering.
If you were threatened or mistreated by detectives during the investigation of my case... or if you were offered incentives for favorable information and told that those incentives would be kept confidential, please send me your story.
