Fwd: ALASKA COURT SYSTEM DISTRIBUTION: 3AN-18-00002GC /*#DistID:462073#*/
Faith Southwell
Begin forwarded message:
From: ha...@alaska.net
Date: May 18, 2018 at 9:54:04 AM AKDT
To: ha...@alaska.net
Subject: Fwd: ALASKA COURT SYSTEM DISTRIBUTION: 3AN-18-00002GC /*#DistID:462073#*/
Judge William Morse refused to give the grand jury our public petition for grand jury investigation of judicial corruption in Alaska - see attached order.
Citing the authority proving what Judge Morse did was wrong, I filed a motion for reconsideration, below. I think we may have them cornered with the grand jury avenue. Everyone please read the documents and let me know what you think. Please forward this on to everyone you can. Thaks agsin to all help with this.
David Haeg
(907) 262-9249 and 398-6403
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA
THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE
In the Matter of: )
)
Request for Grand Jury Investigation ) Case No: 3AN-18-00002GC
5-18-18 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
On May 7, 2018 a public petition demanding a special grand jury investigation of judicial system corruption involving the Alaska Department of Law, Alaska judges, and others, was sent to Third Judicial District (Anchorage, Matsu, and Kenai areas) Presiding Judge William F. Morse. The public petition specifically stated:
“Whereas we believe Kenai District Attorney Scot Leaders and Judge Jennifer Wells, in violation of Article 1, Section 8 of the Alaska Constitution and AS 12.40.040, illegally prevented Kenai Grand Juror Ray Southwell from disclosing, to the other jurors, his evidence and belief triable crimes were committed by numerous State Officials within Alaska’s Judicial System (including crimes by DA Leaders, judge investigator Marla Greenstein, Troopers, and Alaska judges) – and that this concerns a risk to the public’s welfare and safety.”
Alaska Statute 12.40.040 required Southwell to disclose his belief and evidence to the other jurors:
AS 12.40.040. Juror to disclose knowledge of crime. If an individual grand juror knows or has reason to believe that a crime has been committed which is triable by the court, the juror shall disclose it to the other grand jurors, who shall investigate it.
Additionally, the petition stated:
“As indicated in the petition itself, the Alaska Department of Law and Alaska judges are involved in what is petitioned to be investigated by the grand jury – thus the need for independent counsel to help the grand jury investigate corruption within Alaska’s judicial system.”
On May 16, 2018 Presiding Judge Morse stated there was no authority for him, nor the judiciary in general, to call a special grand jury investigation and that, instead of giving the public petition to the grand jury, he was forwarding it to the Department of Law – the very entity the public petition demands a grand jury investigate for corruption. It is very clear there is a direct conflict of interest in allowing the Department of Law to decide the fate of public petition that demands investigation of the Department of Law.
Also disturbing is there is abundant authority for Presiding Judge Morse, and the judiciary in general, to call a special grand jury investigation – especially to combat political and/or district attorney/Department of Law corruption:
Alaska Rule of Criminal Procedure 6. The Grand Jury. The presiding judge of a judicial district shall be empowered to call a special jury to be convened…
Alaska Judicial Council, “The Investigative Grand Jury in Alaska”, prepared at the request of the Alaska State Senate:
State grand juries have often exercised investigative powers to battle political corruption. At times, they have acted on their own initiative in the face of opposition from a district attorney:
In New York City an extensive grand jury probe toppled the notorious Boss Tweed and his cronies. Since the district attorney was closely associated with Tweed, the panel acted independently of him, conducting its own investigation and interviewing witnesses without the prosecutor’s help.
In Minneapolis a grand jury hired its own private detectives and amassed evidence sufficient to indict the mayor and cause the chief of police to resign.
Alaska’s grand jury serves two distinct functions. First, it acts as the charging body for crimes committed within its jurisdiction. The grand jury considers evidence presented to it by the state’s district attorney who has investigated the crime or crimes in each case.Although infrequent, the grand jury can also sit as an investigative body. In response to instructions from the court or the district attorney, or in response to petitions or requests from the public, or on the initiative of a majority of the members of the grand jury, the grand jury may investigate concerns affecting the public welfare or safety. These public welfare or safety concerns may arise from criminal or potentially criminal activity, or they may involve noncriminal public welfare or safety matters. After completing its investigation, if the grand jury has found sufficient evidence to charge an individual or individuals with a crime, the grand jury may ask the district attorney to prepare an indictment or indictments. The foreperson of the grand jury then signs the indictment designating it a true bill.
The Alaska Constitution addresses grand juries in Article I, Section 8:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury…The power of grand juries to investigate and make recommendations concerning the public welfare or safety shall never be suspended.
The legislative history of the clause speaking to the investigative function suggests that this function was very important in the minds of the delegates to the constitutional convention, and that the scope of this power was intended to be broad.
Alaska Constitutional Convention
The Committee on the Preamble and Bill of Rights of the Alaska Constitutional Convention submitted a proposal entitled “Grand Juries, Indictments and Information”. The clause that addressed the investigative function read:
…the power of grand juries to inquire into the willful misconduct in office of public officers, and to find indictments in connection therewith, shall never be suspended.
The commentary of the section stated: “The grand jury is preserved, for all purposes, particularly for investigation of public officials.”
The Alaska Code of Criminal Procedure in Section 12.40.030 essentially repeats the Alaska Constitution’s language concerning grand jury powers:
Sec. 12.40.030. Duty of inquiry into crimes and general powers. The grand jury shall inquire into all crimes committed or triable within the jurisdiction of the court and present them to the court. The grand jury shall have the power to investigate and make recommendations concerning the public welfare or safety.
Two other sections of the code seem to speak to the intended subject matter and scope of the grand jury’s independent investigative powers:
Sec. 12.40.040. Juror to disclose knowledge of crime. If an individual grand juror knows or has reason to believe that a crime has been committed which is triable by the court, the juror shall disclose it to the other grand jurors, who shall investigate it.
Sec. 12.40.060. Access to public jails, prisons, and public records. The grand jury is entitled to access, at all reasonable times, to the public jails and prisons, to offices pertaining to the courts of justice in the state, and to all other public offices, and to the examination of all public records in the state.
The language of the first section above suggests that in addition to reviewing the cases presented by a prosecutor, the grand jury is empowered to investigate all criminal or potentially criminal activity that comes to the attention of one or more of its members. The use of the word “present” refers to the informal writing of charges by a grand jury.
Alaska’s Criminal Rules hint at the potential investigative, recommending and reporting powers of the grand jury. Rule 6(e) mandates the oath for grand jurors. The current oath reads:
“You and each of you as members of the grand jury for the State of Alaska, do solemnly swear that you will diligently inquire and true presentment make of all such matters as shall be given to you for consideration, or shall otherwise come to your knowledge in connection with your preset service…”
The oath clearly includes the duty to investigate “matters” coming to the knowledge of the grand jury independently of the charges presented by a prosecutor.
The clear intent of the drafters of the state constitution was to provide the grand jury with broad investigative powers. The language of state statutes is equally broad and no case law in Alaska defines the appropriate subject matter or scope of grand jury investigations.
In general, investigations are initiated by the district attorney. In the case of major investigations, the district attorney may request that a grand jury be empaneled to investigate that case alone. On occasion investigations have been called sua sponte by the judge sitting in the jurisdiction.
One Alaska statute provides that "If an individual grand juror knows or has reason to believe that a crime has been committed which is triable by the court, the juror shall disclose it to the other jurors, who shall investigate it.” This provision suggests that an investigation might be initiated at the request of an individual grand juror.
At least in those areas in which the prosecutor might have a special interest, Alaska could permit the grand jury to retain its own investigators and counsel. This procedure would help to insure a disinterested presentation of evidence and a thorough investigation.
In direct opposition to Judge Morse’s claim, it is very clear both he and the rest of the judiciary have authority to call for a grand jury investigation of corruption within the Alaska Department of Law and Alaska judges.
It is very clear that a public petition for a grand jury investigation of Department of Law and Alaska judge corruption must be given directly to the grand jury and not to the Department of Law. To do so violates Alaska’s constitution (as did the preventing of the Kenai grand jury from investigating crimes by District Attorney Leaders, judge investigator Greenstein, Troopers, and judges), which states:
“The power of grand juries to investigate and make recommendations concerning the public welfare or safety shall never be suspended.”
Judge Morse also claims the petition is so defective it cannot be given to the grand jury.
But because we are the public, and not attorneys, it stands to reason our petition may be inexpertly drawn, and have numerous other flaws. But it's essence is very clear, we the public ask for a grand jury investigation into Alaska's judicial system, starting with the fact that District Attorney Scot Leaders and Judge Jennifer Wells illegally prevented Kenai grand juror Ray Southwell from presenting, to the other jurors, his knowledge and reasons to believe triable crimes were committed by "District Attorney Scot Leaders, judge investigator Marla Greenstein, Troopers, and Alaska judges". We believe the crime by DA Leaders and Judge Wells in stopping grand juror Southwell is enough to justify the start of a grand jury investigation. Our hope is that the grand jury would then wish to examine the evidence that grand juror Southwell was illegally prevented from presenting to the other grand jurors. The grand jury may decide to expand their investigation beyond that. In other words, we believe (and have cited authority that this is in fact the case) it is up to the grand jury to decide what they investigate, not a judge or the Department of Law.
And if the evidence is required to be given to those to be investigated, before an investigation even starts, they will no doubt take action to cover up.
At the heart of this dilemma is the fact we public petitioners don’t know how to physically get our petition into the hands of the grand jury – other than give the petition to a judge or District Attorney (clerks of court stated they would have to give the petition to a judge and not the grand jury) and ask they place it in the hands of the grand jury. But if the judges and District Attorneys are corrupt they will never give the petition to the grand jury. Or claim it is too defective to do so. Or claim they have no authority to do so. This type of cover up was confirmed in the sworn, on-record testimony of long-time Alaskan attorney Dale Dolifka, after he studied evidence the public petitioners are now trying to get to the grand jury:
“Never has there been a case in history that cries out more for outside intervention because you have been to all the major players. Other than just an outright payoff of a judge or jury it is hard to imagine anyone being sold down the river more. The judge riding around with the Trooper and commandeering vehicles. I mean that smelled to high heaven. Your case has shades of Selma in the 60’s, where judges, sheriffs, & even assigned lawyers were all in cahoots together. The reason why you have still not resolved your legal problems is corruption. I can tell you exactly what happened. In the early stages you were one of the first that I realized it was corruption. At first I thought it was ineptness. Over time in this journey with you here’s a corrupt case, here’s a corrupt case, and here’s a corrupt case. Now here’s what happens when they come up on appeal. You have a [Appeals] Court sitting there looking at a pile of dung & if they do right by you & reveal you know you have the attorneys going down, you have the judges going down, you have the troopers going down. Everyone in your case has had a political price to pay if they did right by you. You had a series of situations which everyone was doing things to protect everyone rather than you because there was a price to pay. If they did right by you the DA would take it out on them in other cases. I walked over here & lawyer A says my God they’re violating every appeal rule ever. How can it be like this? I think almost everyone goes back to that original seminal issue that how the hell did this case go on when it appears to lay people & to me a lot of it was built on a lie in a sworn affidavit? You’re just one of many. It’s absolute unadulterated self-bred corruption. It will get worse until the sleeping giant [public] wakes up. Everyone is scared & afraid. [R.00523-3105]
Some of the Department of Law corruption to be investigated was also confirmed by long-time Alaskan attorney Arthur “Chuck” Robinson during recent tape-recorded meetings:
“Since I was not provided a map copy, so I could check it for accuracy, I cannot be blamed for the jury’s use of this map to convict Mr. Haeg and I cannot be blamed for Judge Murphy’s use of the map’s falsified GMU 19-C/19-D boundaries to sentence Mr. Haeg. Since I was not provided a tape-recording copy prior to trial or during trial, I did not know there was evidence of an intent to falsify the location of where the wolves were taken. Because of Mr. Leaders failure to abide by my discovery request this evidence was withheld and I only found out about it many years after trial.”
When asked what he would have done had he been provided the required discovery:
“I would have argued you didn’t get a fair trial because they [Department of Law and Troopers]were using were false evidence to convict you. I could have proved they [Department of Law and Troopers] were intentionally lying at trial. And you would have had evidence of their[Department of Law and Troopers] motive to do so.”
In light of the above we, the public petitioners, respectfully ask that Presiding Judge William F. Morse reconsider his decision giving the public petition to the Department of Law, and instead give it to a grand jury with instructions they investigate as petitioned by the public.
Declaration Under Penalty of Perjury
I, David S. Haeg, declare under penalty of perjury that the above is true & correct.
_______________________________.
Executed at _____________________________ on _____________________________.
David S. Haeg
PO Box 123
Soldotna, Alaska 99669
(907) 262-9249 home; (907) 398-6403 cell; & ha...@alaska.net
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: ALASKA COURT SYSTEM DISTRIBUTION: 3AN-18-00002GC /*#DistID:462073#*/
Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 15:26:36 -0800
From: <No-R...@akcourts.us>
To: Undisclosed recipients:;
In the Matter of: D.S.H.
The contents of this message are solely intended for parties to the above-referenced court case. If you are not a party to this case and you think you have received this message in error, please notify your local clerk of court, delete this message and do not disclose its contents to anyone. Alaska Court System Directory