Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools (WWASPS)

Perry will go down due to corruption and Casa by the sea

<< < (2/5) > >>

Oscar:
From the article Detective Monte Morast-- What a Real Slim Ball:


--- Quote ---You might all remember Detective Morast from my series on Michael Perry. Detective Morast is the officer that arrested Michael Perry on Friday the 26th driving the red Camaro supposedly stolen during the homicide. Morast is the same officer that perjured his testimony at the trial of Michael Perry, and I can prove it. He is the same Detective that booked Michael Perry into the county jail under the name of James Adam Stotler who was a 16 year old juvenile at the time in direct violation of the law. He is the same Detective that supposedly got a "tip" that Jason Burkett was in possession of the White Isuzu and the Camaro the day before Michael Perry's arrest as James Adam Stotler. He is the same Detective that just happens to be good friends with the step-father of Kristin Willis who was granted immunity in the Perry and Burkett cases. This officer is real slim and it is about time that his antic finally caught up to him.
--- End quote ---

More articles:

A Michael Perry Letter, by K. D. Adams, Associated Content, February 20, 2009
A Michael Perry Theory, by K. D. Adams, Associated Content, March 27, 2008
Michael Perry or Jason Burkett, by K. D. Adams, Associated Content, April 1, 2008
Open Letter to Texas Governor Rick Perry, by K. D. Adams, Associated Content, January 27, 2010
The Real Michael James Perry, by K. D. Adams, Associated Content, November 28, 2007
Michael James Perry, by K. D. Adams, Associated Content, April 23, 2009
Michael James Perry Revisited, by K. D. Adams, Associated Content, May 19, 2008
The Impending Execution of Michael James Perry, by K. D. Adams, Associated Content, January 1, 2010
More About Michael James Perry, by K. D. Adams, Associated Content, May 1, 2008

The case got it all. Corrupt cops and friends of the police who had family members who was granted immunity.

Oscar:
The medical examiner who testified in the case against Michael Perry was fired because he falsified his resume:

MICHAEL JAMES PERRY: WILL FIRING OF MEDICAL EXAMINER PAUL SHRODE IMPACT ON HIS EXECUTION? THE COURRIER OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, THE CHARLES SMITH BLOG

BuzzKill:

--- Quote ---He is the same Detective that booked Michael Perry into the county jail under the name of James Adam Stotler who was a 16 year old juvenile at the time in direct violation of the law.
--- End quote ---

Well now - Perry was arrested and booked as Adam Stoller b/c he was driving Adam Stoller's grand ma's car, and was in possession of Adam Stoller's drivers license.  He was also notably bare footed.

Perry claims he could not have committed the murders b/c he was in jail when they occurred. But he was arrested driving one victim's car, and in possession of another victim's wallet and ID.  Being as there were bloody shoe prints at the scene of the crime, one wonders if this explains why Perry had no shoes - if perhaps he had noticed the blood and tossed them. But there is no dispute that he was driving Ms Stoller's Camero and using her grand-son's ID. They were unquestionably dead at the time of Perry's arrrest.  [the ME screwed up]

He also claims his confession was false and coearsed. However, he gave a picture perfect description of Ms Stoller's fatal wound and explanation of how she got it, as well as how she got into the lake. He also took the police to discover the bodies of the two murdered teenage boys.

He claims he was beaten up by the cops. He uses photos of himself in hospital as proof. He neglects to explain he was in a vehicle that ran over a cop and then into a plate glass store front.  Its plausible one of the officers smacked him around. It is also plausible he got banged up when the truck went into the store front.

As to his confession, he also confessed to a nurse at the hospital. When she asked why he had been arrested, he laughed and said "I shot some woman".

He is guilty. The crime was as cold blooded and selfish as they come. If one believes in the death penalty, it is hard to imagine a case better deserving of it. That said, I'd argue his youth and mental health as mitigating factors and try to get his sentence commuted to Life.

One more point: WWASP is terrible but they do not create psychopathic killers. Neither can they "cure" them.

wdtony:
I suppose I was correct in asuming Perry was on prescription-meds. I just wonder what they were. That combined with the "program experiences" he had is a perfect recipe for suicide or homicide. Many people on psychiatric medication often report not realizing what they were doing at all or sometimes that it didn't seem real when they are found doing something outrageous. of course most of these people don't have such a sordid past as the kid in these reports.

In other words, don't give a mean dog LSD, and don't torture it... it probably won't end well.


Perry said he was released from the last facility April 9, 2000, when he turned 18, and was "basically homeless" until the time he was arrested Oct. 30, 2001, because his parents would not allow him to move back home.
Perry said he became involved in drugs shortly after he left Casa by the Sea in Mexico, a program for troubled youth, and lived in California until returning to Montgomery County about six months later.
"I learned to live a pretty rough life," Perry told the jury, "drinking on a daily basis and using drugs on a daily basis."
Perry said he also frequently used all sorts of illegal drugs and prescription drugs.

BuzzKill:
Tony, I believe he was talking about illegal use of prescription drugs. Nor can he argue he was out of his mind or unaware of what was happening as he gave such a clear headed account of events at the time of his arrest.  

What follows are excerpts from letters written to Perry concerning his appeal and his case. I think you can get an idea of how he was attempting to explain things from what was written in reply, as well as the objections raised to his various explanations.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As far as the ME / Time of death and all, I really don’t know what more I can say. Clearly the ME was wrong. It makes me think of that Arkansas ME who said the boys on the tracks died of natural causes when they had bullet holes in their heads.


Possibly, the tattoo parlor alibi might stand up to scrutiny, but the jail time won’t.

Being as the ME clearly has no idea when the woman was killed its hard to see how your presence at a tattoo parlor alibis you. It seems to me the killing could well have taken place before or after your parlor visit.


The very fact you tried to deceptively use the jail time as an alibi pretty much destroys your credibility. This is why I stress the importance of being honest.


Now, you seem to be trying to say somehow Jason had the poor lady’s car on the 24th before he murdered her on some later day. . . Sorry Michael, this just will not fly. No way in the world. The lady and the two boys were dead when you got pulled over and there is no way around it.


As for your confession, I know very well that false confessions can and do happen. That is what got me interested in your case to begin with. I was able to understand how you might give a false confession.


But I have to go on to say, when you describe the lady’s shooting so well and it matches so perfectly with her wounds and when you have taken the police to the boy’s bodies, well, it becomes much harder to believe you knew nothing about it.

Certainly, you were there, and saw what happened, at the very least.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Well, to jump right in to the issue at hand – Yes, I have read your account “reasonable doubt”. In fact, I have read it over and over. It appears to me you have written a “true” account but with a lot of what I call data drop out. The information you left out changes the picture significantly. This is why I say it is less than honest. For example – You write as if you all were just sitting around the apartment, minding your own business, when in bust the cops, who then begin whooping up on you. Not exactly the truth, now is it? Not exactly. I mean, you left out all that transpired just moments before: running the cop over and the shooting, the chase, and the wreck and the fleeing on foot to the apartment. All this goes a long way to explaining why the cops busted in like they did.

BTW "No" I do not think it is OK for cops to beat on anybody. But as I said befor, they are human; and even a good cop might loose it and knock around on someone who had been involved in all that – shooting at them an all.

As for the cop telling the ER your injuries were a result of police interaction – maybe he meant the flight and chase and subsequent wreck. I don’t know Michael – I am just saying that the fact you were in this wreck will diminish your argument that the cops beat a confession out of you. It looks worse when you try and hide the fact this chase and wreck happened – b/c it looks dishonest. When you leave out such important parts of the story it destroys your credibility,  so that even if it what you say is true, people won’t believe it.

Which brings me back to the shooting of Mrs Stoller. I believe you when you say you were in jail on the 26/27th. I assume you are correct that the ME gave the 27th as her date of death. The simple fact of the matter is, if that’s the case, the ME is wrong. Its not possible – b/c you had her car and her step gran son’s ID. They found her body on the 27th – OK – you were in jail then – OK – But this has nothing to do with when she died! Don’t you see? The fact you had her car (however it was you happen to have it) proves she was already dead when they pulled you over and locked you up. You need to get up off this story b/c all it is going to do is hang you!

You can not claim innocence based on the ME’s date when you were driving the dead woman’s car! Your trying to say she was killed while you were in jail – but that’s bull shit! She had to have been dead (and her gran son as well) for you to have their things! Don’t you see?!

Now, if you can argue that Jason and the girl did the shooting and you just got caught up in events beyond your control – maybe – but you can’t base it on what you have given me so far. You can not claim total ignorance Michael b/c it was you who took the cops to the dead boy’s bodies. You can argue that your confession to Mrs Stollar’s murder was false but you can’t claim to have had no knowledge.

As for the witness who saw the truck in her drive way – OK – but this does nothing to prove who was in the house, or what they were doing there. This in no way proves the truck wasn’t also there the day before, or the week before. Don’t you see? This doesn’t prove when she died – only that someone parked a truck in her drive on the 26th. Just guessing, I’d say, Maybe Jason went back to see if there was anything he wanted to steal; or maybe he and girl just wanted to take another look around, like any killer going back to the scene of the crime for the rush. Also, Maybe the witness is just wrong. But, it does not exonerate you, even if she is right.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The thing is Michael – the fact you were driving her car, and had the boy’s ID, trumps any other factor when arguing time of death. You would not have had these things had the victims still been alive.

The fact you had them, just proves the witness who thinks they talked to her after your lock up, and the ME, and maybe others, are just wrong – because you had her car!

She was dead when you got pulled over on the 26th and there is no way around it.

It doesn’t matter where you were going with the car. What matters is, it was Her car.

Now, it seems to me, if you were the innocent dupe you claim (as far as the shooting goes) you would be telling a different story – not trying to argue the poor lady was murdered while you sat in jail ( for being pulled over driving her car.) If the fact you had the murdered woman’s car and your dead friend’s ID isn’t significant - if it doesn’t indicate they were dead prior to your arrest – then why delete these facts from your account? If you can explain it somehow – why don’t you?

Its also very damaging, that in your confession, you describe so well how you shot her and that it matches so well with her wounds. I wouldn’t think you could get that information from news articles, or the police. Surely they taped your interrogation? If so, you would be able to show that they fed you facts, if that’s what they did. But just from what was reported during your trial, it sounds like you gave an accurate accounting of events that day.

As for the press being careless with facts, I know that is sometimes the case. In this case though the news accounts jive perfectly with your account except they tell more of the story. Nothing in any articles contradicted what you have said. They just said more.

. . . as far as what the cop said on the stand: well, so what? I mean, the important fact is you had the boy’s ID in your possession, not whether you tried to use it or he made an assumption.

Michael I am not trying to upset you and I am sorry if I have. This is too important to gloss over. You need to argue for a new trial and/or for a commuted sentence on facts that will stand up to scrutiny. . .

You mentioned not having any control in the pre-arrest chase, shooting and so on; The news articles make this clear as well. That was all Jason. But still, you were in the truck and so would also be hurt in the wreck. All I’m saying is people can legitimately attribute your injuries to the crash whether or not a cop also knocked you around.

Like I told you last time, I think it is a terrible mistake to base your argument for a new trial on these facts b/c they lead to other facts that point to your guilt. You could maybe argue that you didn’t know whose car it was but you can’t argue she was still living when you got pulled over.

You could maybe argue that the girl pulled the trigger – but you can’t argue that you knew nothing about any of it. It seems evident, at the very least, you saw what happened and there is plenty that points to your doing what happened even if Jason was “in charge”.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

He quite writing after this letter. He was insistent on keeping to the fantasy that he could lie his way out of prison. I believe he could very possibly have received a commuted sentence if he had not insisted on his innocence and demand for a new trial.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page