|
Both Steven Jones and Leslie Allen Merritt Jr. are being framed by the Arizona DPS???
The more I read about NAU student Steven Jones the more I think he is being framed by the NAU Police (which is operated by the Arizona DPS) for murder. Jones’ attorneys argued that the case should be sent back for reconsideration because prosecutors presented misleading and inaccurate testimony and omitted key information from one of the four victims.This case sounds a lot like the Phoenix case of Leslie Allen Merritt Jr. which looks like he is being framed by the Arizona DPS for some freeway shooting. Sadly in both cases it looks like the prosecutors and Arizona Department of Public Safety are habitual and pathological liars who will do anything to get a convictions so they can polish their shiny tin badges and claim to be heroes who are protecting us from imaginary heroes. While framing innocent people and sending the innocent people to prison for years. If this is the best the police and prosecutors can do it's a perfect example of why we don't need them. You have heard the old line, that a grand jury could indite a ham sandwich. This seems to have happened in both the Steven Jones and Leslie Allen Merritt Jr. cases. I included an article about Leslie Allen Merritt Jr. after the article about Steven Jones.
Somebody made a comment to me that the NAU Police Department is not the same as the DPS. I know both the ASU Police and U of A Police were run by the Arizona DPS. I always thought the NAU Police were also run by the Arizona DPS. If I am wrong on that I am sorry.
Judge: NAU shooting suspect's indictment stands Anne Ryman, The Republic | azcentral.com 5:43 p.m. MST February 19, 2016 FLAGSTAFF — A Coconino County Superior Court Judge ruled Friday that the first-degree murder indictment of Steven Jones stands in the shooting death of fellow Northern Arizona University student Colin Brough; the case won’t be returned to a new grand jury. His bail also will remain at $2 million, although Judge Dan Slayton indicated he may be open to home detention if certain safeguards could be put in place, such as 24-hour GPS monitoring. Jones’ attorneys argued that the case should be sent back for reconsideration because prosecutors presented misleading and inaccurate testimony and omitted key information from one of the four victims. Slayton denied the motion after hearing about an hour of arguments Friday. Jones’ attorneys said prosecutors failed to provide key evidence, including statements from some witnesses who corroborated Jones’ story that he was under attack by the supposed victims. "It's the totality of the circumstances here," said Joshua Davidson, one of Jones' attorneys. Prosecutors, though, said they presented evidence fairly and impartially to the grand jury. "The defense's argument fails on every single point," Coconino County Deputy Attorney Ammon Barker said. The defense also contended that prosecutors did not present information on the extent of Jones’ injuries to the grand jury. Jones told police he was punched and later wrestled to the ground. Police reports say officers observed injuries on his head, back, chest, arms and knees as well as swelling on a wrist. Prosecutors said Jones’ injuries weren’t relevant to his self-defense claim. "The injuries are superficial ... they are just little scrapes and bruises, nothing more," Barker said. The court hearing included emotional pleas from the victims and their families, who opposed a motion to have Jones' bail reduced so he could gain release while awaiting trial. "I don't feel safe with this young man here," said victim Nicholas Piring, referring to Jones, who was in shackles and a blue jail jumpsuit just a few feet away. Piring attended the hearing along with victim Nicholas Prato. More than two dozen of their friends and family members, dressed in black, packed the courtroom. Brough's parents sat in the front row. His mother, Claudia, wore multiple buttons with photos of her son. She closed her eyes tightly and shook her head while listening to the court arguments. Jones was indicted Oct. 15 on first-degree murder and aggravated-assault charges in the death of Brough and the wounding of Piring, Prato and Kyle Zientek after a fight on the Flagstaff campus. Jones pleaded not guilty. The indictment says Jones, an NAU freshman, acted with premeditation "intending or knowing" that his conduct would cause death. Jones told police he acted in self-defense, and he feared for his life when he got a gun out of his car. He told police that Colin Brough and another man were running at him when he shot them. Jones’ attorneys said prosecutors omitted evidence that Zientek told police he saw Brough "step up" in Jones' face right before Jones fired his weapon. Prosecutors said Zientek’s statement alone wouldn’t have been enough to sway the jury. Barker said Zientek placed Brough about 4 feet away from Jones when Brough was shot; other witnesses have said Brough was even farther away. “The law does not state that a person may use deadly physical force if someone gets in their face a little bit,” Barker wrote in a court filing. The early morning shooting on Oct. 9 occurred after a verbal altercation between two groups of students turned physical, according to police reports. Jones told police that he was punched and his friends pushed to the ground outside an apartment complex, then chased by a group of students who shouted obscenities and threatened to kill them. Prosecutors contend that Jones was never threatened with deadly physical force by the victims. "You cannot bring a gun to a fist fight," Barker said. The victims were all members of the Delta Chi fraternity. Jones was a Sigma Chi pledge. But there’s no evidence of fraternity rivalry. The two groups involved said they had never seen each other before that night. NAU police released newly redacted video showing the moment Steven Jones was handcuffed and detained. NAU student Colin Brough, 20, died at the scene. Three other students, Nicholas Piring, Nicholas Prato, and Kyle Zientek, all 20, were wounded. Follow the reporter on Twitter at @anneryman and reach her 602-444-8072 or anne.ryman@arizonarepublic.com
Judge denies motion to return Phoenix freeway shooter case to grand jury Megan Cassidy, The Republic | azcentral.com 3:50 p.m. MST February 19, 2016 A judge on Friday denied defense attorneys’ motion for remand in the case of Leslie Allen Merritt Jr., the man accused in a string of freeway shootings late last summer. Should the motion have been granted, it essentially would have reset the case by sending it back to a grand jury. Defense attorneys in December filed a motion that alleged investigators had bullied a key witness into second-guessing her alibi for Merritt, and that prosecutors intentionally withheld from the grand jury cellphone data that would have been beneficial to Merritt. Prosecutors denied the defense attorneys’ claims. In a motion filed last month, prosecutors said the defense was mistaking the grand jury for a trial jury, although the two are held to different legal standards. On Friday, defense attorney Jason Lamm echoed his motion before Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Warren J. Granville. Lamm highlighted the Arizona Department of Public Safety’s interview with Merritt’s fiancée, in which they threatened her with domestic terrorism charges and lied about having a video of Merritt committing the crime. Although case law permits interrogators to deceive a suspect, he said, the same liberties don’t apply to witnesses. “The big picture needed to be presented — not just what the state wanted the grand jury to hear,” he said. In his response, prosecutor Edward Leiter underlined the fiancée’s vague replies when investigators asked about Merritt’s whereabouts at the time of the crime. Leiter said that although there’s no case law that allows investigators to deceive witnesses, there’s also no case law preventing them from doing so. Leiter argued that this was a matter better suited to a trial jury. “The recourse is not remand,” he said. “The recourse is suppression.” In denying the motion, Granville acknowledged that a grand jury setting allows for hearsay testimony and is not subject to the same credibility standards as a trial jury.
More articles about how Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery is framing Leslie Allen Merritt Jr.
|