Published on Jan 28, 2016
We are on a mission of “Vindicating Mary of False Charges by Government Terrorists”
Please go to our CrowdRise fundraising website: https://www.crowdrise.com/vindicatingmaryoffalsechargesbygovernmentterrorists5/fundraiser/cliffordstafford
DO NOT VOTE FOR WAYNE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE MICHAEL HATHAWAY THIS NOVEMBER
The ordeal of Clifford and Mary Ann Stafford at the hands of the Domestic Terrorist unit known as the Wayne County Deed Fraud Task force continues.
Mr. Stafford was sentenced to 18 months probation Jan. 13 for “obstruction of justice” related to a predatory Wells Fargo mortgage neither Stafford was connected to. Wells Fargo itself stated it did not initiate the criminal complaint although it is listed as the complainant.
On the same day, Wayne County Circuit Court Judge Michael Hathaway (of “MO’ WATER SHUT-OFFS’ fame ***), ordered that a postconviction “Ginther hearing” be held for Mary Ann Stafford, after reviewing her pro se motion for the hearing.
The motion alleges “ineffective assistance of counsel” during the Staffords’ trial Nov. 30 to Dec. 4, 2015, referring to attorney Steve Lockhart, and also references both prosecutorial and judicial misconduct.
Judge Hathaway first assigned attorney David Goldberg to conduct the hearing. When Goldberg told Mrs. Stafford that he was not going to hold the hearing as ordered, Mrs. Stafford fired him and retained another attorney at significant cost, Craig Tank, to do so.
However, Mr. Tank has now informed VOD that he cannot hold the Ginther hearing because there is no time to review trial transcripts before a sentencing date Judge Hathaway set for Friday, Feb. 12 at 9 a.m. Instead of objecting to Hathaway’s action, Tank said he would deal with Ginther issues AFTER the sentencing.
However, the Michigan Supreme Court decision in Ginther says such an evidentiary hearing must be held at the trial court level:
Although Ginther would have us reverse his conviction, until he establishes the factual substantiality of the claims that the judge should have disqualified himself, that another lawyer should have been substituted and that the plea of guilty was impermissibly induced, the only relief we could properly grant would be to require an evidentiary hearing concerning those claims.
A defendant who wishes to advance claims that depend on matters not of record canproperly be required to seek at the trial court level an evidentiary hearing for thepurpose of establishing his claims with evidence as a precondition to invoking the processes of the appellate courts except in the rare case where the record manifestlyshows that the judge would refuse a hearing; in such a case the defendant should seek on appeal, not a reversal of his conviction, but an order directing the trial court to conduct the needed hearing.
Meanwhile, another pro se motion alleging prosecutorial misconduct against Wayne County Assistant Prosecutor Jennifer Douglas and misconduct as a public official against Investigator Mary Williams-Jones is being prepared in defense of Mrs. Stafford. With reference to that motion, see story below:
Prosecutor who sent innocent man to death row is disbarred
February 6, 2016
AUSTIN, Texas — A former prosecutor who used false testimony and withheld evidence to send a now-exonerated man to Texas’ death row has lost an appeal to overturn his disbarment.
The Dallas Morning News (http://bit.ly/1TPB1fq ) reports that the Board of Disciplinary Appeals on Monday upheld the decision of the State Bar of Texas to disbar Charles Sebesta. The board’s decision is final.
The bar revoked the Burleson County district attorney’s law license in June, finding he had engaged in prosecutorial misconduct in the case of Anthony Graves.
Graves was sentenced to death in 1994 in the slayings of six people in South Texas two years earlier. A federal appeals court reversed his conviction in 2006.
Graves spent 18 years in prison, including 12 on death row. He filed a complaint in January 2014.
Information from: The Dallas Morning News, http://www.dallasnews.com
READ MARY A. STAFFORD’S LETTER DETAILING THE COUPLE’S LIFE AT :