Impeachment

In Memory Of:

Benjamin M. Schoonover

Knights in Dirty Armour II

Chapter XIV

IMPEACHMENT

“This is a disagreement of professional opinion, which we are going to have a lot of in this trial. And his opinion and the radiologist’s opinion are both opinions, nothing more.” Judge Dynda Post, Tr. pg. 967 lines 12-15.

{“Opinions” are not evidence and opinions, fed the witnesses by George Klatt, according to Dr. Distefano in limine during the first trial, are all that supported any conviction.}

“It looks to me to be about two inches in length…and there is that crack right there, right there, … and right here and right here …” Dr Philip Barton, Tr. pg. 948 lines 1-7.

Mr. Rowan: “I am going to hand you what has been previously marked as Gilda Schoonover Exhibit Number 1 and ask you to look in the finding area.” Tr. pg. 966 lines 2-4.

Prosecutor Ramsey: “Judge, may we approach? [Bench conference held]... “This is apparently a hospital record where a radiologist has apparently looked at this cat scan and determined that she did not see any fracture there. … I am certainly going to object to him testifying as to what she allegedly found and he didn’t find.” Tr. pg. 966 lines 5-15.

Mr. Rowan: “Judge, this is impeachment…”

Tr. pg. 966 line 16, Mr. Rowan was not allowed to finish his sentence as he was interrupted and overruled by Judge Post.

Mr. Adams: “on behalf of Mr. Schoonover I object to him talking about this second fracture. I ask the jury disregard it. We have been given no notice of this. It’s nowhere in the medical records. I can’t find this anywhere from the previous trial and I don’t know the significance of it and I object to it.” Tr. pg. 949 lines 3-8.

{The “significance” is to enflame the jury with non-existent injuries.}

Prosecutor Ramsey: “Well, Judge, actually my question was directed to the original fracture.” Tr. pg. 949 lines 10-11.

Mr. Adams: “I just ask the jury to disregard about the second fracture being found that the medical examiner didn’t find and we were unaware of.” Tr. pg. 949 lines 12-14.

Judge Dynda Post: “Overruled. Mr. Adams, these are fractures of the same general area. These are CAT scans. I presume those were the ones that were introduced before.” Tr. pg. 949 lines 15-17.

{They are not the “ones” introduced before as there were no such fractures on the original or the hospital radiologist’s report. I would submit that it is incompetence for a Judge to “presume” anything!!}

Mr. Adams: … “I want to make a record for severance. It became apparent that this is mutual antagonistic defenses. My client is unable to receive a fair trial while being tried with the other defendant.” Tr. pg. 949 lines 22-25.

{Had there been the proper severance I would have been free to testify for Marie.}

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

During the beginning of Mr. Rowan’s Closing: “I would love to be up here and tell you exactly how Benjamin fell. I can’t do that. I know there is furniture in this house, just like there is in your and my house.” Tr. pg. 1286 lines 2-4, … Mr. Rowan was interrupted.

Prosecutor Ramsey: “Judge, I’m going to object. May we approach?” Tr. pg.1286 lines 5-6.

[Bench conference held.] Prosecutor Ramsey: “Judge, counsel is about to make statements that Benjamin may have climbed on furniture and things of that nature and there is no evidence* to support any of that in the record and I’m going to object.”

Mr. Rowan: “Judge, it’s a reasonable inference from the evidence* that this house has furniture, that’s all I am saying.”

Prosecutor Ramsey: That’s not in the testimony.”*

Judge Post: There is no reasonable inference because there has been no testimony* about anything involving that room other than the rock hard floor. The objection is sustained.”

Mr. Rowan: “I move for a mistrial, Judge. Thank you.”

Judge Post: “Pardon me?”

Mr. Rowan: “I move for a mistrial again. Thank you.”

Judge Post: “Grounds?”

Mr. Rowan: “Because you are fairly limiting my closing argument and that is simply - - you know, it’s - -Judge, what I am arguing is a fair inference from the evidence* in this case and you are not allowing me to do that so, therefore, you are not giving me a fair trial. Tr. pgs. 1286, 1287.

*Note the nomenclature: Mr. Ramsey uses the word “evidence,”

Mr. Rowan uses the word “evidence,”

Then Mr. Ramsey uses the word “testimony,”

Judge Post uses the word “testimony.”

Mr. Rowan is correct that there is “evidence” as

Mr. Ramsey had introduced several photographs of the

Dining room and adjacent foyer in the original trial.

The furniture is obvious.

It is reversible error for Mr. Ramsey to have deliberately

misstated the facts concerning this matter. It was also

reversible error for Judge Post to ignore the “evidence”

and deny Mr. Rowan the right to present to the jury his

argument how the accident happened that resulted in the

untimely death of our boy.

Charles Ramsey’s argument was that Benjamin could not have slipped while running and sustained the injury he received. We all agree that such is more impossible than possible.

Benjamin could NOT have inflicted upon himself the “second set of fractures” that are not in the hospital reports OR, according to Kevin Adams, not even in the Coroner’s report, that the jury was told about because Judge Post presumed they existed and allowed Charles Ramsey to use to graphically demonstrate how “Benjamin’s brains were gushing out the top of his head” for 45 minutes.

The simple fact is that Benjamin fell backwards, a rotational fall, from either the chair, piano bench or table, onto the adjacent concrete floor, at an impact rate of, quoting Dr. Goldsmith in the Journal of Paediatric Medicine and the California Oakland Tribune, “A child falling three feet straight backward onto concrete can experience force of up to 173 time the acceleration of gravity.”

There was no child abuse, there was no murder.

There were no “Bruises to the murder victim” as Judge Post broadcast to the public prior to the trial.

There was no “Brains bulging, squishing and gushing out the top of his head” as Charles Ramsey three times pantomimed to the Jury.

There were no fractures as Prosecutor Ramsey lamented to the jury …

at least not prior to Benjamin’s death in St. Francis Hospital.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

There is hard evidence in the transcripts of the trials to show that Marie is innocent of any crime. She was not in the same room with Benjamin to even witness how he fell. Her own testimony, that of Nora Stanart as an “ear witness” and my own suppressed testimony confirms that fact.

There is hard evidence in the transcripts [and broadcasts to the media] that Judge Post is not a competent Judge. For myself only, she charged me herself with a charge that, in the words of the Court of Criminal Appeals, I did not commit and could not be charged with. She deliberately usurped her authority totally ignoring no less than three of our U.S. Constitution laws and Oklahoma Statutes and sent me to prison to die without a trial for her illegal charge. This is nothing less than tyranny.

Even outside Judge Post’s Kangaroo Kourt prior to trial she broadcast to the media what she wanted the Prior Daily Times to print for the jurors to read: “Bruises on the Murder Victim consistent with Child Abuse” … Read as fact! A Judge would not lie to the press! What “bruises” to warrant her preconclusion that Benjamin was a “Murder Victim” ? From the Tulsa World, December 18^th, released information from the Department of Human Services: “The boy showed no marks or bruises.” Did DHS lie?

Even if Benjamin was covered with bruises and had broken bones and injuries, as does in fact play a direct part in the other 29 child deaths reported by the Tulsa World that date, confirming without doubt they were in fact victims of child abuse, such comments to the public prior to trial shows prejudice or incompetence. As confirmed by the nurses and physicians that examined Benjamin from head to toe at the Mayes County Medical Center and found “No signs of any injury,” take your pick: Deliberate Prejudice or Incompetent?

Brings to my mind when the Quean “lost her cool” and took her wrath out on an innocent child spectator in her courtroom the day she was forced to order my release because “we have nothing else we can charge him with.” She made quite a scene with her tantrum as her concealed violent core fractured her fragile façade of composure.

There is hard evidence in the transcripts that Prosecutor Ramsey either fabricated evidence or had it fabricated for himself. Dr. Philip Barton changed his testimony three times over the course of events. What favour did he owe Charles Ramsey warranting what borders on perjury? No one else saw the many fractures Charles Ramsey had him testify to.

Charles Ramsey’s egregious misconduct as well as Judge Post’s incompetence warrants an investigation that will surely result in their removal from the offices they abuse or maybe even disbarment. Attorneys have told me that “She should not be a Judge” and “He is a dishonest prosecutor” but no one seems to have the balls to initiate such an investigation.

This author has discovered other cases with similar; though not quite so egregious, misconducts involving these two tyrants. All have involved “State appointed” defense attorneys. Others who have been subjected to the perversion of Justice.

This author will continue to pursue facts of these other cases to substantiate that what I seek is a little political house cleaning; not selfish vengeance. I have always agreed with Chuang Tzu concerning the seeking of vengeance: “First go dig two graves.” My mission has expanded beyond Justice for my innocent wife to include the provision of sufficient cleaning supplies to remove a couple of little “Dirty” stains from the judicial system in Mayes County Oklahoma.

This author, being illegally forced behind prison walls, as a “fly on the wall,” has met a few, very few, and even only “one” is too many, that our system has thrown into that den of inequity that does not belong “caged up” for our protection. They pose no threat to our society. They have injured no one or they have long ago attained the purpose of their incarceration: “Correction.”

A long time Corrections Officer, now a deputy sheriff, told me, “We need to lock up those we are afraid of, not those we are mad at.” Suffering punishment for the sake of vengeance is little less than sadistic. Are we that barbaric? Are we beyond the ability to actually “Correct” a person who makes a mistake? Is our only answer to correcting a mistake cruelty and violence?

Are we so obsessed with the misconception of the ancient rule “Spare the rod; spoil the child” that caging in violence for all infractions of the law is our only answer? For those we are afraid of, there is little choice. But for those we are “mad at,” those we can “correct,” let’s use that “rod,” not in violence but as the tool it was intended. The way a good orchestra conductor uses his to correct and prevent 100 musicians from playing out of tune. Spare direction, spoil the child.

A few learn fast. A druggie who steals to support their habit, for example, will not be helped by being put in a cage for thirty years. Not only a burden on the system already over crowded but a burden when released too old to work or learn. Can’t survive on Social Security; only thing to do is throw a brick through a store window to get back into prison; the only life they know.

“Get down off your soapbox, John, you can’t carry the world on your shoulders.” Ok, so I have been told, and I understand that. But I can help a few. And if going that extra mile costs me a little something I will have no less than the satisfaction that I helped another human being through a crisis no one reading this can understand unless they have walked in my shoes. If I can help just one get back on track to be a good member of our society I will not have wasted my time and effort. I will be a failure, only if I don’t try.

One of my quests is to contact a Sandy Alice Shepherd, last known Cave Creek Arizona who is a lost witness to the fact that teen Keith Brown was factually far removed from the scene of the crime for which he was convicted. Solid evidence lost of his innocence and if she is not found the rest of his life will be wasted away in prison.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

Next:

The traverse and rebuttal to Marie’s Appeal.

Back / Next / Home