How does a lead detective testify “in error“ about having heard an alleged 15 minutes of live transmission of drug dealing? When was the last time you were mistaken about hearing a 15 minute conversation? Moran obviously lied
[Judicial Brutality]
Esteban
Geronimo
is the victim of a lying detective and he‘s now serving time.
The
key players are New York Police Detective Jefferson Moran and Brooklyn Federal Judge Carol B. Amon. In this case, Geronimo and two others were charged with conspiracy to buy and distribute drugs. There was $30,000 found in the trunk of a car and there were subsequently convictions.
Early
in the case Geronimo asked for a hearing to suppress the evidence contending that there was nothing on the tape that gave police probable cause to have arrested him.
In
the suppression hearing Moran testified that he ordered the arrest of all, based on listening to a live transmission of drug conversations from a wired informant. No evidence or tape of the supposed live transmission was produced, but the evidence was not suppressed.
Then
at the trial itself, Moran testified under oath in trial that there was no live transmission from any wiretap. Geronimo and co. and were convicted on July 28, 2006. Sounds like perjury. Later, on December 12, 2007 a Brooklyn federal prosecutor told Judge Amon that during a previous probable cause hearing, Moran had testified “in error“ when he claimed to have heard a live transmission from a wired informant.
How
does a lead detective testify “in error“ about having heard an alleged 15 minutes of live transmission of drug dealing? When was the last time you were mistaken about hearing a 15 minute conversation? Moran obviously lied.
Had
Moran not “testified in error,“ the case against Geronimo would have ended in January of 2006 with Geronimo going home, although there would still have been a case against the others.
Before
probable cause hearings, prosecutors must ask police what their probable cause was, because a prosecutor must know what the probable cause was in order to establish it.
Before
Moran took the witness stand to establish probable cause, prosecutor Evan Williams had to have known Moran would testify that probable cause was the alleged live transmission.
It
is inconceivable that a prosecutor would allow a cop to get on a witness stand to talk about the existence of a recorded transmission without first having heard at least that portion of the recorded transmission that constituted probable cause.
If
prosecutor Williams asked Moran for the transmission before the probable cause hearing, and if Moran couldn’t produce the transmission, prosecutor Evan should have declined to prosecute the case right then and there. Instead, even after prosecutor Evan realized no transmission existed, he still called Moran to the witness stand, under oath, to testify that a transmission existed.
When
prosecutors call police to witness stands, under oath, to testify that things exist, that in fact do not exist, that is called subornation of perjury and also constitutes what is called fraud on the court.
The
U.S. Supreme Court in Franks v Delaware established that “if the allegation of perjury or reckless disregard is established by the defendant…with the false material set aside, if the [complaint’s] remaining content is insufficient to establish probable cause, the items seized must be excluded to the same extent as if probable cause was lacking on the face of the [complaint].“
In
order to capture Geronimo again, Judge Amon departed from reality and stated that the complaint did not serve as probable cause when the complaint itself says that the limited purpose of the complaint is to provide probable cause.
In
addition, Moran also testified that Geronimo was at a McDonald’s restaurant on Long Island on December 14, 2005 with the two other suspects negotiating a drug deal.
However
, on that same date, Geronimo was in Atlantic City paying a traffic ticket. Apparently Moran testi–lied in error twice in the same case on major issues.
Nonetheless
, Judge Amon, on December 17, 2007 still refused to grant a new trial suppressing the money, which Geronimo maintains he knew nothing about.
It
is no wonder that Judge Amon denied this reporter’s motion and 4th Amendment argument to audio–visually record the proceedings of December 14.
Judge
Amon denied the camera motion without giving a reason for denying this reporter’s motion. Judge Amon didn’t have an intellectually responsible ground upon which to deny this reporter’s argument and did what all judges without integrity do when they can’t intellectually compete; they just say no as if they are God.
She
didn’t want the broadcast of evidence showing her giving force and effect to Moran’s lies about probable cause.
Judge
Amon was supposed to issue a written decision regarding the denial of my motion to bring a camera in the court. As of January 7, there was no written decision entered on the docket sheet.
The
Clerk of the Brooklyn Federal Court hasn’t even docketed this reporter’s motion for the camera in the court, which was filed on December 15, 2007.
We
must begin to analytically look at judicial brutality, not just police brutality, in order to stop the wheels of injustice from continuing to roll over us.
At
10:30 a.m., on January 14th, 2008, at Brooklyn Federal Court, 26 Cadman Plaza East, on the 10th Floor, Judge Carol Amon is scheduled to sentence Geronimo.
Do
you have any stories of egregious miscarriages of justice and other abuses? Contact Posr via
pposrpp@gmail.com
To comment or to subscribe to or advertise in New York’s leading Pan African weekly investigative newspaper, or to send us a news tip, please call (212) 481-7745 or send a note to
Also visit out sister publications Harlem Business News www.harlembusinessnews.com and The Groove music magazine at www.thegroovemag.com
“Speaking Truth To Empower.”
