October 27, 2011

Injustice is served

Injustice is served when Judge Nakahara allowed perjury in his courtroom and let the prosecutor use perjured testimony in order to unjustly and wrongly convict my brother and me.

Injustice is served when Judge Nakahara did not want to hold an evidentiary hearing at which the prosecution witnesses could testify about their perjured testimony. He did not want to hold an evidentiary hearing because he did not want the truth to come out. If he had held an evidentiary hearing, the outcome of the prosecution witnesses’ testimony would have contributed positively to the administration of justice. Click here

Injustice is served when the prosecutor based her case on lies, and she persuaded her witnesses to testify falsely under oath in order to deceive and mislead the jury. There is no doubt that she committed subornation of perjury and her witnesses committed perjury. Click here.

Injustice is served when an unfair and a chronic liar prosecutor prosecuted my brother and me. During the trial, she was misleading the judge and the jury by false statement of fact. She got caught lying when she lied to Judge Nakahara. She acted in bad faith when she lied to him. Click here. The right to a fair trial is a due process right that includes the right to have a fair prosecutor. My brother and I were prosecuted by an unfair and a chronic liar prosecutor. That is a violation of our due process rights to a fair and impartial trial.

Injustice is served when the prosecutor and her inspector lied by saying that Angesom was at Roaring 20s strip club at the time of Abraham’s death. They lied to cover up Abraham’s murder in order to obtain a conviction and advance their career. What they did is a crime because covering up murder is a crime. It is a felony. Click here

Injustice is served when Judge Nakahara ridiculed the defense witnesses, and he persistently made inappropriate and prejudicial comments about defense witnesses in front of the jury. Click here 1, 2

Injustice is served when Judge Nakahara and the prosecutor let the Meharis get away with the crime they committed in order to unjustly and wrongly convict my brother and me. Click here.

Injustice is served when the Meharis have gotten away with the crime they committed, and my brother and I have been wrongly convicted.

All I know is, the conviction is a wrongful conviction because the verdict is contrary to the evidence. Let the evidence speak for itself. The evidence clearly shows that my brother did not open the door for me, and also shows that the Mehari brothers (the criminals) deliberately lied about what occurred in their apartment in order to conceal their crime. Click here

All I know is, the verdict was produced by the compelling influence of a bias judge, whose prejudgment of the cause had created a predetermination to convict my brother and me. The conduct of the trial was grossly unfair. Full and impartial consideration by the jury was impeded. There is no doubt that Judge Nakahara's willful and prejudicial misconduct had affected the jurors' rational thoughts. If the jurors were rational and if they had decided the case based on the evidence, my brother and I would have been acquitted. Upon the evidence adduced at the trial, no rational trier of fact could have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Click here.

Trial testimonies:

Sincerely,                                                            Asmerom T. Gebreselassie
Cc:   
Commission on Judicial Performance
The State Bar of California
ACLU