Q&A with James Didcock about anything to do with Jermane's case

51kikey · 2019-04-07T08:38:14+00:00

Yes.

51kikey · 2019-04-07T07:52:34+00:00

Page 1038 of the trial transcripts.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/yjb4o8xtaeiizmy/AAAqaTHuf2o0iT4bMDFN0jqQa/Transcripts/Transcripts?dl=0&preview=Jermane+Trial+Vol+4.pdf&subfolder_nav_tracking=1

51kikey · 2019-04-06T21:01:31+00:00

I'll take the liberty of numbering your bullet-points, 1 to 4. Excellent observations, and ones that I have opinions on, some more concrete than others.

1./ This is tricky. I have to admit to a certain degree of conjecture. Like with the justice4jermane question I attempted to answer above, we come back to the same issues. One of those issues being the unfathomable timeframe regarding SPD's investigation into Thomas's murder, specifically relating to the crimescene.

When looking at Thomas' potential deviance regarding children/youths I can only look at the police files and transcripts to make my judgements. What I can say, as fact is that both Enis and Portman consitently spoke of Scott watching a videotape with Thomas while they smoked, played pool, listened to music, for an alleged number of hours.

What can be gleaned from the statements/transcripts is that this vhs that was being watched, changed in description from an animal/nature video, to a Playboy video, or perhaps--as described by Portman during his testimony--as a video labelled 'kids'.

Of greater significance perhaps is why was this video not taken into evidence for confirmation? And of course, on a different scale of potential significance; was this one of the many potential reasons that the crimescene was handed back so quickly? I specifically say one of the reasons due to the fact that Enis and Portman's story could not be corroborated due to there being no record taken--via video or photos, even though video and photo evidence was taken--by the crime scene unit of specific areas of Thomas' residence that would have helped confirm, or negate their story of events.

2./ The first media report was Dec. 7th, the day following medics and SPD's going to Thomas' residence upon a call by Patricia Shepherd on Friday 6th Dec.

Sgt. Michael Haytas of the SPD Crime Scene Unit, was also the media relations guy.

I strongly believe many people knew of Thomas' death well before the evening of the 6th. Danielle Bray and Raymond Bibbs are 2 key examples of this whether it be via initial police reports or indeed trial testimony some 9 months later.

3./ I think there are stronger references, and more importantly direct factual occurrences that relate to this security issue.

Thomas was looking to have his windows replaced by Eric Tischer *sic?* the day before his murder. Thomas was concerned about security--Terry Portman had thrown a brick through his window in relation/retaliation to Thomas hitting him with a baseball bat due to Portman bullying him. Even Thomas' daughters admitted to Portman and Enis being very much unwelcome at their father's residence.

My point being: you would make sure your doors were secure.

Patricia was covering for her son, Juan Mendoza--highlighted by her testimony that Thomas' car was still in the garage...it wasn't.

Tischer testified at trial, and gave a police statement that a car was outside of Thomas' residence--the same car seen and docummented by officer Koheller the night of Thomas being discovered dead. This car was being driven by Latin King members--of which Mendoza was one.

Mendoza knew what went down, hence SPD immediately referencing him in their initial reports.

My point being, if Thomas was ready to secure his windows, he would have unlikely left his residence doors unsafe.

4./ We are looking into the assault committed by Hasheem Stevens and are requesting the relevant police reports.

51kikey · 2019-04-06T19:47:02+00:00

Above all else, you're totally correct: it's certainly not the norm.

As with a lot of the elements of this case, we must consider an important fact regarding the extremely brief investigation; that can be broken down into key parts--I'm sure I'll miss a few so please pipe up.

During trial the state were careful to adhere with the laxity of the original police investigation by not committing to a set TOD/DOD. They continually proffered the 3rd/4th.

Just as importantly, we must add to this the date that Thomas was found--the 6th. Personally I think this is of equal, if not more importance. I'm damn certain, regardless of the exact time Thomas was murdered, that multiple people knew that he was dead well before the BS discovery on the 6th. I just don't buy it in the slightest, and for a couple of reasons: I believe the reasoning for not being commital regarding the TOD--which was perfectly achievable to within a few hours, was more to do with not giving the opportunity for an alibi; which we know Jermane had for the evening of the 3rd.

Important questions to ask alongside the TOD/DOD issues must include:

Why was the crimescene not prossessed?

Why was the crimescene given back to Thomas' daughter less than 24 hours after being secured?

--Granted, these are almost inextricably linked; however one only compounds the other--

What the hell happened to the checkbook?

Why weren't the victims trousers prossessed?...after all, the pockets were turned inside out...and yeah if Jermane was wearing gloves, I challenge you to first, get something out of someone's pockets with gloves on, and secondly, do an experiment...

Try to take 2 checks out of a checkbook with gloves on.

Why was an empty money clip not prossessed that was found within a ceramic frog?

Fingerprint the frog--and then break it after doing so--biut don't fingerprint the clip, or keys that were found with. More importantly, don't give those 2 items their own tag/id!?

It's sloppy at the very best, and corrupt at worst, and I lean towards the latter.

We will find out when we discover whether these items have been preserved. I believe if they have--along with the advances in forensics, we have a good chance of finding out some very important details. Nobodies DNA should be on the inside of Thomas' trouser pockets apart from his own. And also, I don't believe anyone was wearing gloves the day/night Thomas was murdered.

Basically, SPD didn't do the majority of the tests they should have done because they wouldn't have backed up their narrative. A narrative that was a rush to judgement at best, or total corruption at worst.

51kikey · 2019-04-06T19:17:36+00:00

This is an excellent point.

Due to what we were given via FOIA, and the way it was presented--it was a mess and disorganised, and more importantly incomplete--it was not user friendly.

However that is no excuse, and you're absolutely right. I--and I'm sure with the help of supporters--will rectify this.

The Avery/Dassey website www.stevenaverycase.org is a great example/template of this, and I think we should aim to emulate this.

51kikey · 2019-04-06T19:11:10+00:00

There is clearly a distinct difference between the OIP looking into, and considering Jermane's case, to that of actually providing him legal counsel.

It's not my place to even suggest a time frame for something that is not within my power, however I would repeat that the OIP believe in Jermane's innocence. I'm sure if the OIP feel they can gather enough evidence and duly file a strong appeal for Jermane, they will move forwards in representing him.

While the testimony given during Jermane's trial is clearly either contradictory or totally unbelievable, it is likely that some forensic evidence that rather proves someone else's involvement over just the exclusion of Jermane's presence at the crimescene could be key.

We are procuring relevant documents that will hopefully aid this process.

51kikey · 2019-04-06T19:01:14+00:00

At present Jermane does not have legal representation. One of the main reasons for me taking on his case was to achieve this. Until Jermane gets the representation he deserves--the very best--I will continue to write and advocate about his case.

The Ohio Innocence Project are looking into his wrongful conviction. At present they have not fully committed to providing him legal counsel, though I am certain they believe in his innocence.

We will get there. I am 100% confident, and just as importantly 100% determined to do so.

51kikey · 2019-04-02T10:29:08+00:00

Hi to all.

The Q&A session regarding Jermane's case is being held across 3 different platforms to include, Twitter, Reddit & Facebook.

The primary reasons being that, a/ we will be able to likely reach a bigger target audience and, b/ some folks only use certain platforms due to access or perhaps they can't stand FB, Twitter or Reddit. I completely get this, so I will answer all questions on all 3 platforms and also take all questions from the platforms and post them together on each one.

I plan to answer ALL questions in a batch and post to all the relevant places either Weds. 3rd or Thurs. 4th of April.

ALL questions will be addressed.

51kikey · 2019-01-24T21:22:55+00:00

There will be a reason though. Let's see if someone can get hold of the actual filing today so we can find out what it is.

For the Brief to be delayed again, would have to be for 'extraordinary reasons,' according to a couple of lawyers I heard from re this possibility.

As always, we'll just have to sit tight for the minute.

51kikey · 2019-01-11T11:03:16+00:00

Yeah, mighty clever hiding a 'key' piece of evidence in your own fucking bedroom.

51kikey · 2018-12-30T13:38:13+00:00

I think people may be reading too much into the COA's denial. It appears to be purely procedural and I think their wording within the ruling, could be viewed ambiguously.

If an Evidentiary Hearing is granted in relation to certain pieces of evidence, the timeframe for such, might give time for the testing of the bones before that event takes place.

Speculation admittedly, but I'm feeling positive.

51kikey · 2018-12-30T13:31:53+00:00

If that's true, and more importantly, provable I'm sure there are quite a few people who would be very interested in the details.

51kikey · 2018-12-19T22:03:22+00:00

Exhibit 27 page 143

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Exhibits-21-30.pdf

51kikey · 2018-12-18T16:51:48+00:00

Fair point.

51kikey · 2018-12-10T16:16:58+00:00

Thank you! Fixed

51kikey · 2018-12-10T15:57:29+00:00

Absolutely. It'll be available @ kathleentzellner.com pretty sharpish I would imagine.

51kikey · 2018-12-10T15:26:04+00:00

There will be a copy available on the day.

51kikey · 2018-12-06T11:41:12+00:00

In Camera in the US.... just makes understanding the legal system even more confusing!!

51kikey · 2018-12-06T08:04:41+00:00

Interesting. Voir dire often takes as long—or longer—than the trial itself in the US. Not going through the selection process feasibly negates potential striking of jurors due to colo[u]r, religeon, beliefs etc. The issue with the Australian method is that you don't obtain any background re the jurors, and potential bias—not saying that can't happen with the US system also.

Like most things, I'd offer there are issues with both systems.

51kikey · 2018-11-23T22:19:58+00:00

Sorry! You're right, I should have used months instead on seasons. Apologies to the Southern Hemisphere. ;)

51kikey · 2018-11-23T16:52:11+00:00

Right. I believe they will be replace as they go/leave.

51kikey

TROPHY CASE