LIST OF DIRTY TRICKS, UNETHICAL ACTS, CRIMINAL ACTS, AND OTHER EGREGIOUS CONDUCT BY POLICE OFFICERS, THE PROSECUTOR AND JUDGES AND OTHER STATE AGENTS IN THE STATE’S OBVIOUS AND BLATANT ATTEMPT TO FRAME JOHN STUART FOR MURDER WHEN ALL HE DID WAS SURVIVE A KIDNAPPING AND ATTEMPTED MURDER BY A DRUG CRAZED DRUNKEN MANIAC.
The State is attempting to frame Stuart by having police commit perjury and by destroying all of the evidence that proves Stuart is innocent.
The following is not a complete list of all the crimes police, the prosecutor, the medical examiner and the judges have committed to frame Stuart, but is sufficient to prove to any reasonable person that Stuart is being framed by corrupt State agents.
Most of the acts listed are considered criminal under Arizona law, the rest are violations of ethics and oaths of office.
Some of the claims by the prosecutor during trial were so absurd and such blatant lies one can only conclude the prosecutor is absolutely sure Stuart is innocent but is willing to tell any lie and commit any crime to garner a conviction regardless of facts, evidence and the law.
Prosecution dirty tricks 101:
1. a. If you know the defendant is innocent continue the trial as long as possible and keep re-interviewing the witnesses while reading them the police notes of their previous interviews so you can get them to forget the facts and start remembering what the police tell them to remember.
b. If you know the defendant is guilty, get to trial as soon as possible.
It has been almost 5 years since the kidnapper died while attempting to murder Stuart.
2. a. If you know the defendant is innocent have a lot of cops testify and don’t call any experts; and have cops claim they are experts.
b. If you know the defendant is guilty, call a lot of experts to testify.
The State did not call any experts but called about a dozen cops in this trial.
There is absolutely no doubt the cops, the prosecutor and the judges know Stuart is innocent, they just don’t care. Their careers depend on convictions, the innocence or guilt of a defendant only determines what tricks they use to get the conviction.
A police officer claimed he smelled alcohol in Stuart’s vehicle; a blatant lie since there was no alcohol and Stuart had 1 drink at a restaurant 3 hours earlier.
The police refused to test Stuart’s vehicle for GSR because it would have proven the gun was fired inside the vehicle.
The police refused to search Stuart’s vehicle for DNA, the kidnapper’s tooth or any other evidence of the attack.
The police hid Stuart’s vehicle from the defense for 9 months after the police removed the tarp covering the vehicle and left the vehicle uncovered so all the evidence on the interior and exterior of the vehicle would be destroyed. They did this with help by the prosecutor who lied to the defense by telling the defense Stuart’s vehicle had been given away; all the while the prosecutor knew the police had the vehicle and the prosecutor’s office was suing to confiscate the vehicle.
Someone cleaned the inside of the vehicle while it was being hidden in the police impound yard so well there weren’t even cigarette ashes inside.
The police did such a lousy search of Stuart’s vehicle that over 3 years after their search a defense team’s expert found a plethora of evidence inside the vehicle.
The police did not notice and made no reports of blood around the door of the vehicle that can be seen in pictures of the vehicle.
The police refused to keep Stuart’s clothing as evidence because the clothing had the kidnapper’s blood and DNA on them which would have proven the kidnapper attempted to murder Stuart inside of Stuart’s vehicle.
The police refused to allow Stuart to be given any medical assistance because then the medical personnel could have been called as witnesses and testified about Stuart’s injuries.
The police refused to take samples of Stuart’s blood and urine because the samples would have proven that Stuart was completely sober and did not use drugs.
The medical examiner’s office destroyed all samples of the kidnapper’s hair because it would have proven the kidnapper was a frequent user of L.S.D. and was high on L.S.D. and steroids when he attempted to murder Stuart.
The medical examiner’s office refused to test kidnapper’s blood for L.S.D. because they knew the test would have been positive.
The medical examiner’s office refused to test the kidnapper’s chipped tooth because the testing would have proven it happened while the kidnapper was attempting to murder Stuart.
The police lost the holster strap because it would have proven the gun was ripped out of the holster and not drawn out normally.
The kidnapper’s family had the body cremated so all evidence of the kidnapper’s drug use and injuries during the struggle would be destroyed.
The prosecutor filed motions to prevent the jury from being informed the kidnappers was a drug addict and often used illicit drugs, including without limits: L.S.D., acid, magic mushrooms, etc.
The court unlawfully refused to allow Stuart to represent himself for over 2 years and forced him to accept public defenders or be put in jail for contempt of court if he did not accept the public defenders.
The public defenders unlawfully continued the trial against Stuart’s wishes; to benefit the prosecution and eviscerate Stuart’s speedy trial rights.
The prosecution interviewed a defense team’s paralegal and made a deal to help her in her own cases if she would testify and commit perjury to help them frame Stuart.
The prosecution assisted the paralegal in filing false charges against Stuart and in threatening the paralegal’s own daughter into not testifying that her mother is insane and a pathological liar.
The police and the prosecutor lied to the Grand Juries to obtain the indictment.
The prosecutor withheld information concerning Arizona’s castle doctrine from the Grand Juries.
The prosecutor unlawfully petitioned to have Stuart’s bond raised without cause and without right; and the court unlawfully raised Stuart’s bond without cause and without right.
The prosecutor lied to a judge and claimed the I.R.S. confiscated Stuart’s bond when they did not, to obtain a warrant under false pretenses and have Stuart arrested under false pretenses and wrongfully imprisoned.
The prosecutor claimed Stuart was a “political radical” because Stuart had anti-government, human rights and religious fanatic material in his vehicle when arrested. The documents were, respectively: Copies from the National Archives of the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution, and a King James Bible.
The defense found evidence of blood on the holster but sometime while the holster was in police custody waiting to be delivered to the lab for testing of the blood the holster was cleaned and all the blood disappeared.
The prosecutor has refused to charge the kidnapper’s wife as a co-kidnapper, which Arizona law requires she be charged as, so the kidnapper’s wife can be considered a “victim” and cannot be deposed by the defense.
The police lied by claiming the holster showed signs the strap was cut off and claimed the tearing was caused by a jagged edged knife.
The police lied by claiming police do not have to confiscate and/or keep evidence a search warrant commands them to collect and keep.
The prosecutor lied to the jury and claimed the kidnapper fell and bled on the kidnapper’s vehicle when in fact the kidnapper slid out of Stuart’s vehicle and down the side of Stuart’s vehicle; and the kidnapper never touched the kidnapper’s vehicle after he was shot inside of Stuart’s vehicle.
The prosecutor suborned perjury from kidnapper’s wife by having her claim the kidnapper fell and bled on their vehicle.
The prosecutor lied to the jury and claimed the shell casing had not been moved when in fact the fire department personnel had informed her they moved the shell casing.
The prosecutor lied to the jury and claimed the kidnapper’s body had not been moved when in fact the fire department personnel had informed her they moved the kidnapper’s body.
The police lied and claimed Glock’s only eject to the right rear when in fact the police knew that Glock’s eject forward when fired in the sideways position as is what happens during a struggle for possession of a weapon.
The court refused to order that the evidence discovered inside of Stuart’s vehicle by the defense be tested because the evidence would prove the kidnapper was shot while inside of Stuart’s vehicle and while he was trying to murder Stuart.
The court would not allow pictures of Stuart to be printed on photo paper and ordered only pictures printed on copy paper be used during trial because pictures printed on copy paper would conceal the coloration that showed Stuart’s strangulation injuries.
The police lied and claimed Stuart had no injuries even though the pictures of Stuart’s neck show signs of strangulation and Stuart’s eye shows signs of injury.
The prosecutor claimed the kidnapper was not drunk even though he had a B.A.C. of .19 and 600ml of liquid in his stomach, which would have caused his B.A.C. to be over .32 had he survived, because the kidnapper was a large man and B.A.C. is different for larger men.
The prosecutor told the jury they must convict Stuart if Stuart cannot prove he is innocent.
The prosecutor told the jury that the defense had investigated the kidnapper and found nothing bad in his past when in fact the defense did find several issues about the kidnapper’s past that the court ruled to prevent the jury from being informed of.
The prosecutor had Stuart’s primary witness falsely arrested to scare her into not testifying in the next trial.
The State has repeatedly attempted to not pay for several defense experts.
The State is still refusing to pay to have the evidence discovered in Stuart’s vehicle tested.