Category Archives: FL

Prosecutors Get Indictments from Grand Juries 95% of Time – Unless They Are Pretending to Attempt to Indict a Cop

In Ferguson, MO, the citizens are nervously and angrily awaiting the decision of a Missouri Grand Jury regarding whether or not the cop who wantonly murdered Michael Brown will be indicted for murder or not.

In Gretna, Florida a similar situation exists: there, members of yet another black family mourning the cop murder of one of their kids await the “verdict” of a Grand Jury decision as to whether or not a local cop will be indicted for the murder of a mentally ill unarmed youth – shot to death in his own home after his mother called the cops to help her handle her son’s refusal to go with her to a local hospital for treatment.

The likely outcome in both cases?  The cops will be acquitted by the Grand Jury and the respective towns will quite justifiably erupt in anger against the grave injustice that has been committed by the police and a justice system in which there is no justice for workers – especially if they “happen to be black”.  It is a fact of the U.S. Criminal Injustice System that even though prosecutors can get Grand Juries to indict 95% of the time, “somehow” they almost always fail to do so when the accused is a cop. “The fix is in” every time when it’s a cop facing a potential murder charge. We fully expect that the Mike Brown case in Ferguson, MO will not be an exception to this rule.

Grand Juries in the United States are notoriously unfair.

There is a famous legal saying that Grand Juries are so biased in favor of the prosecution that they could be expected “to indict a ham sandwich”.  The Wikipedia article on “Grand Juries in the United States” quotes from “Eliminate the Grand Jury” a much-cited 1973 essay by the late William J. Campbell –  a US Attorney and at one time the longest serving Chief Judge in the Northern District Federal Court in Chicago – in which he calls for the complete elimination of the corrupt Federal Grand Jury system: ” “[T]oday, the grand jury is the total captive of the prosecutor who, if he is candid, will concede that he can indict anybody, at any time, for almost anything, before any grand jury.” Campbell cites a famous study of the Grand Jury system by

A couple of months ago, a friend of ours was present at a local “temple” of notoriously racist justice here in Chicago’s Crooked C[r]ook County: the infamous Skokie Courthouse (where the conviction rate is an astoundingly Saddam-Hussein-regime-like 90 percent plus). There, he overheard two cops babbling to each other in the inimitable, timeless manner of all pigs throughout human history.  When they started stupidly yapping about one of their recent experiences as a member of a Grand Jury in Chicago, he opened up his ears real wide and grabbed a notebook and started jotting down their priceless nuggets of pig-wisdom.

The babblers were a METRA cop who was just about to enter a courtroom and casually commit perjury in an extremely minor trespassing case (with the likely cooperation and approval of the crooked Crook County prosecutors seeking to maintain their scandalous .900-plus batting average); his interlocutor was a Crook County Sheriffs cop – the bailiff.  Here is the edited conversation – they were already talking about service on a Grand Jury:

Crook County Bailiff (CCB): “It’s like a reunion – you know everyone there – ‘hey, how’s it going?’ ”

METRA cop (MC):  “We heard 899 cases [over 5 weeks – June 2nd to July 3rd]. Not a bad gig.  I had to testify before the Grand Jury 3 weeks before.”

CCB: [I’ve never been on one but my dad was a Chicago cop and he was on several. He said] it was real good money.”

MC: “Oh, yeah!”

Our friend could not resist asking the METRA cop: “Did you indict any ham sandwiches while you were there?”  The bailiff looked at him and said “what?”

He apparently had never heard that one before.  So our friend repeated the question.  Both cops looked at him uncomprehendingly.  Our friend, not wanting to miss the opportunity to pursue the question rephrased it: “Were there any cases that you did not indict?”

MC: “We can’t discuss anything about what goes on there.”

Our friend replied: “That’s OK: I already know the answer.”

[The cops resumed their conversation on other topics.  This doesn’t relate to the Grand Jury but it’s interesting to see what motivates cops – it ain’t “serving the public”. – IWPCHI]

MC: “One of the drawbacks working as a cop for Chicago is you got to live in the city.”

CCB (agreeing): “Uh huh. You guys [meaning METRA cops] get to live anywhere you want.”

MC: “Yeah we’ve got guys living everywhere.  We’ve got a guy who lives in Indiana, a K9 cop: [he’s got a] take-home car…”

CCB: “Cooool”.

MC: “Union Pacific [Railroad] cops get to take home an unmarked car… they’re considered management so they make in the 80’s to 90’s… [thousands of dollars a year – IWPCHI]. […] Lot of guys getting overtime tonight – Jay-Z/Beyonce concert.  They work for SPI.”  [most likely Security Professionals of Illinois]

Screenshot from SPI Incorporated video: SPI Level 2 Taser Training Final Cut

Screenshot from SPI Incorporated video: SPI Level 2 Taser Training Final Cut

[This is another good example of how nearly every story we research leads right into another seedy scandal that would bear investigating.  Thanks to our limited resources, this one’s going to get a pass for the time being…]

IWPCHI

 

 

 

 

 

EXCLUSIVE: Florida States Attorney’s Report on FBI Murder of Ibragim Todashev Exposed as Tissue of Lies by Its Own Internal Evidence

After a review of both the 161 and over 600-page versions of Florida States Attorney Jeffrey L. Ashton’s report on the FBI murder of Ibragim Todashev, as well as a vitally important Boston magazine article on the Todashev murder, we have concluded that the Ashton Report is part of a massive cover-up and falsification of the events and circumstances which took place before, during and after the FBI interrogation and murder of Todashev.

Our primary concern is with the physical  impossibility of Todashev having been shot seven times at point-blank range by the sole FBI agent on the scene after Todashev allegedly attacked the FBI agent with a flimsy broom handle.  There are two problems with this story that leap out at anyone who has taken the time to review the just-released documents which we published yesterday, March 28th: first of all, THERE WAS ANOTHER FBI AGENT PRESENT AT THE MURDER SCENE – and this second agent’s presence at the scene has been completely “redacted” by all the law enforcement officers present at the time of the shooting as well as States Attorney Ashton’s report!  It is also impossible for us to believe that the FBI agent who was involved in the interrogation of Todashev, and who, according to the Ashton report, was the only officer to fire his weapon during the incident, could have been the only shooter, because Todashev was shot in the back several times – and it would have been physically impossible for those shots to have been fired by the FBI agent from the position he and the others present claim he took up during the shooting.  The Ashton Report concocts a fanciful account of how the FBI agent in the room, who faced Todashev during the shooting, managed to shoot Todashev in the back.  This tall tale of Ashton’s is wholly reminiscent of the “single gunman” and “magic bullet” theories propounded by the Warren Commission in their investigation of the assassination of President Kennedy in 1963.

********

Excerpts from the 161-page version of the Ashton Report (censored): an autopsy report written by the (Florida) District Nine Medical Examiner’s Office’s Dr. Gary Utz (page 19):

The deceased suffered at [sic] total of seven gunshot wounds.  One projectile entered the top of the head, passed through the brain and the base of the skull. It was recovered.  Three projectiles entered the back; one exited and two were recovered in the body.  Two projectiles passed through the left upper arm and re-entered the left chest.  An additional projectile also entered the left chest. All three projectiles were recovered.  There is no evidence of close range firing in any of the gunshot wounds.   The manner of death is homicide.” [emphasis and italics in original – IWPCHI]

 

********

 

The Ashton report claims that there were six people present at the interrogation scene on the night of Todashev’s murder:  Todashev; the two Massachusetts State Police officers; a tactical officer from an unidentified Florida police department, one FBI agent – and a friend of Todashev, a man named Khusen Taramov.  It is singularly suspicious that the FBI agent’s report as well as the other law enforcement officers reports of the incidents the night of the shooting claim that they did not know the last name of Todashev’s friend Taramov: the Florida Tactical Officer and the Ashton Report calls Taramov “Khusen LNU” – “LNU” standing for “last name unknown” – as if they had never met him before.  According to Taramov, he and other friends of Todashev had been repeatedly interviewed by FBI agent “Chris” and other FBI agents based in Florida.  According to an article by Susan Zalkind of Boston magazine, Taramov stated that he spent nearly four hours on the night of the murder talking to the Orlando tactical police officer and a second FBI agent named “Chris” outside Todashev’s apartment, while the other FBI agent and the two Mass. State troopers interrogated and kept their eyes on Todashev.   This second FBI agent named “Chris” was completely erased from the scene in all the sworn statements by all the police and the FBI agent present!

********

Excerpts from Boston magazine article  “The Murders Before the Marathon” by Susan Zalkind (pages 5-6):

“On May 21, the last night of his life, Ibragim was hanging out with friends when the FBI called him again. It was an agent Ibragim’s friends were by now familiar with, but knew only by his first name: Chris” [emphasis added – IWPCHI]

“When Khusen and Ibragim got to the apartment, Chris was with three other officers—an FBI agent from Boston, and two Massachusetts state troopers. Orlando police were on the scene as well [emphasis added – IWPCHI]

“The officers took Ibragim into the apartment and Chris said he needed to interview Khusen outside” [emphasis added – IWPCHI]  It was 7:30 p.m. […]

“Agent Chris asked Khusen a few questions […] Khusen waited outside the house for four hours. Then at 11:30 p.m., he was told to leave”.

 

********

The presence of the second FBI agent is important, because if, as the FBI agent who shot Todashev claims, he shot Todashev as Todashev ran towards him with a cheap wooden or metal kitchen broom handle, it would have been impossible for that FBI agent to have shot Todashev in the back several times.  Therefore, another person had to have shot Todashev in the back – another shooter with the same type of Glock handgun used by FBI agents, because all seven bullets that entered Todashev’s body were identified by FBI ballistics specialists as having come from a Glock 23, as were all the shell casings found at the murder scene  (the FBI agent who allegedly was the “sole shooter” carried a Glock 23 that night).

It appears to us that the most logical explanation for the bullet entry wounds in Todashev’s back is that they would have been fired by someone standing in the hallway behind Todashev as he allegedly moved (with the broom handle held in both his hands in front of him and raised in a menacing attack position) towards the FBI agent inside the apartment.  The fact that all six bullets recovered from the body of Todashev (and one mysterious bullet found later on the carpet in the murder room) were from Glock 23s – which are carried by FBI agents – indicates that the second shooter – presumably the “redacted” FBI agent “Chris” – also fired his weapon, hitting Todashev from behind.  The most straightforward explanation we can surmise is that the second Glock-23-carrying shooter would have been FBI agent “Chris”, who had been chatting outside the apartment with the Florida Tactical officer and Khusen Tamarov while the other three law enforcement officers interrogated Todashev inside the apartment – and who, presumably, rushed to his partner’s assistance when he heard his partner yelling after he was struck in the head by a coffee table that had been supposedly thrown at him by Todashev.

Corroboration of the existence of a second FBI agent having been present at the scene and having also fired his weapon was given by District Nine Medical Examiner Lora Zedick in her written reports and in statements to the Ashton inquiry.  She claimed that when she first arrived at the scene on the night of the murder, she was repeatedly told by officers securing the scene that there had been two FBI agents present and that both of them had fired their weapons.  Investigators from the Ashton inquiry repeatedly attempted to get M.E. Zedick to change her story by repeatedly questioning her about her memory of the involvement of “two” FBI agents.  She stuck to her version of the events at the scene for a long time, but eventually started to modify her earlier statements after probably having finally “got the message” the investigators were sending her about her troublesome insistence that not one but two FBI agents had been present at and had fired their weapons at murder victim Todashev.

********

Excerpts of written statements made by District Nine Medical Examiner Lora Zedick, taken from 161-page version of Ashton Report (pages 101 and 102):

Case Summary

Positively identified 27 y/o male shot multiple times by FBI agents during a case related interview.  […]

FBI agents responded to the decedent’s apartment style residence for an arranged case interview.  At some point during the interview the FBI agents were physically threatened by the decedent.  FBI agents opened fire: decedent sustained multiple gunshot wounds.  

[…]

The FBI agents fired approximately seven times from their glock 23.”

[all emphasis and italics in original – IWPCHI]

********

These are the most glaring flaws in the “official story” being trumpeted by States Attorney Ashton, the FBI and the US Department of Justice – but they are not the only ones.  Why was the Medical Examiner’s office denied access to the crime scene for hours while the FBI and perhaps other agencies pored over the evidence?  How is it that Todashev, who had allegedly been gripping that broom handle with both hands in a menacing manner left NO FINGER OR PALM PRINTS on it, according to the FBI crime lab?  How is it that the ornamental sword, which was hurriedly taken off the wall where it was displayed and placed behind a shoe rack in the entryway of the apartment by one of the Mass. State Police troopers, DID NOT HAVE FINGER OR PALM PRINTS OF THAT OFFICER ON IT when it was examined by the FBI crime lab?  These are some of the most glaring inconsistencies in the Ashton Report.

********

Excerpts from 161-page version of Ashton Report (page 81):

FBI Laboratory Report of Examination, dated October 24, 2013 …

“Date Specimens received:  August 8, 2013

” The specimens listed below were examined in the Latent Print Operations Unit:

“Q24     Sword [next word or several words censored in original IWPCHI]

Q25     Broomstick [next word or several words censored in original – IWPCHI]

This report documents the friction ridge print examinations.

Results of Examinations:

One latent fingerprint of value was detected on Q24.  No latent prints of value were detected on the remaining specimen [Q25]

The latent fingerprint is not a fingerprint of IBRAGIM TODASHEV, … [Trooper Two] [Trooper One] or … [FBI Agent]. …”

[all emphasis and italics in original – IWPCHI]

 

********

 

While it is true that what we propose is our own mere speculation (though it is based on the evidence as presented by the Ashton Report) it is extremely difficult either to believe the government’s “explanation” or to come up with a rational alternative explanation as to how all the bullet wounds to Todashev could have been inflicted by a shooter who was standing inside the apartment face-to-face with Todashev, as the alleged solo FBI shooter claims in his own statements.  We are asked to believe that a volley of bullets striking Todashev in the front of his chest spun him all the way around so that all of the shots that hit him in the back could be explained as coming from the same shooter – and then, those shots in the back somehow caused him to spin around again to face the FBI shooter and to fall face down on the rug in front of the FBI agent.  This simply does not make sense to us at all.

The Ashton Report will go down in history as one of the most deeply suspicious government investigations of a high-profile murder since the Warren Report.  We invite our readers to review the documentary evidence we published yesterday, as well as the Boston magazine article we refer to today and see if you can make sense of the “official story”.  We invite our readers to send in their comments and links to any other evidence you may have in your possession for us to review and publish here.

 

— IWPCHI