- Report: #156702
Complaint Review: Superior Court Of Arizona - Phoenix Police - Phoenix Arizona
-
Author Confirmed
Why?
Superior Court Of Arizona - Phoenix Police
100 W. Jefferson Phoenix, 85002 Arizona, U.S.A.
Web:
N/A
Categories:
Business Rating:
(0)
Tell us has your experience with this business or person been good?
Superior Court Of Arizona - Phoenix Police Looking for an attorney with "GUTS" for state law suit perjury by Phoenix police liars Phoenix Arizona
*Consumer Comment: Do you want a lawyer with guts, or a lawyer with brains?
*Consumer Comment: Do you want a lawyer with guts, or a lawyer with brains?
*Consumer Comment: Do you want a lawyer with guts, or a lawyer with brains?
*Consumer Comment: Please read carefully - I need a good attorney
*Consumer Comment: You gambled , you lost
Superior Court Of Arizona ripoff the states prosecution had no evidence fabrication perjury by Phoenix police liars Phoenix Arizona
Company
Superior Court Of Arizona - Phoenix Police
Address:
100 W. Jefferson
Phoenix Arizona 85002
U.S.A.
Phone Number:
Fax:
Phoenix P.D. Commits Perjury
From: Ward J. Cure
Case # CR 2004-009077-001DT
To whom it may concern,
On December 7th, 2004. I was convicted of DUI by a jury of my piers. The circumstances are real and ridiculous. They are fact and can be verified by reviewing court minutes.
The Phoenix P.D. and the states prosecution had no evidence to this charge. The prosecutor and the arresting Officer PHX P.D., while under oath told the jury in my trial, Passing gas is a sign of intoxication.
Yes, I was convicted and given a felony record for flatulence! Yet, that was not the only problem with my trial.
While under oath, the arresting, not only testified passing gas is a sign of intoxication. But also testified that he, himself, has never passed gas in his entire life.
Although this is humanly impossible and is also a lie fabricated by the arresting officer to gain my conviction, while under oath.
During my trial, Officer Toland (a DUI task force member and present during my initial stop and arrest) would not testify to any of the arresting Officer's testimony, stating, I can not testify to this, several times. Even though Officer Toland was riding with the arresting Officer and present during my testing. I believe that Officer Toland did not want to commit trial perjury. Unlike the arresting Officer.
Officer Campbell, although not present at my trial, performed a test on me. Asking the time and date. I was only 3 minutes off. He signed the test as passing (not intoxicated).
During testimony, the arresting Officer and Officer Toland also stated that this was a passing grade.
I feel the arresting Officer falsely testified to gain my conviction.
I'm also dismayed by the fact that the presiding Judge did not dismiss these charges. Simply by hearing the ridiculous testimony given by the arresting Officer. If this arresting Officer's testimony would have been stricken from the record. I would have not been convicted.
Because of the false testimony given by the arresting Officer. I have lost 4 months of my life, my job, my 19-year career, my freedom (3 years probation). I'm in fear of loosing my home and my fianc'.
Perjury is a serious offence. But, when it destroys people's lives, it makes it even worse.
Question; How many times has this Officer done this? How many Phoenix officers do just this to gain an unwarranted conviction? Who can you trust, if you can't trust an officer of the law?
My case is presently being scheduled for appeal. I would like the City, State and the Nation to be aware of the outcome of this.
This is a grave injustice and needs to be investigated and a wrong made right!
Thank you and God bless,
Case # CR 2004-009077-001DT
DOC # 193259
Another injustice is the fact that the court transcriptions were altered by either the court recorder or the courts.
When my attorney asked the arresting officer about "passing gas" the transcriptions were altered to "officer dodged the question" TWICE!
Ward
Glendale, Arizona
U.S.A.
I need an attorney with "guts" to take on the state with a law suit.
Ward
Glendale, Arizona
U.S.A.
Company
Superior Court Of Arizona - Phoenix Police
Address:
100 W. Jefferson
Phoenix Arizona 85002
U.S.A.
Phone Number:
Fax:
Phoenix P.D. Commits Perjury
From: Ward J. Cure
Case # CR 2004-009077-001DT
To whom it may concern,
On December 7th, 2004. I was convicted of DUI by a jury of my piers. The circumstances are real and ridiculous. They are fact and can be verified by reviewing court minutes.
The Phoenix P.D. and the states prosecution had no evidence to this charge. The prosecutor and the arresting Officer PHX P.D., while under oath told the jury in my trial, Passing gas is a sign of intoxication.
Yes, I was convicted and given a felony record for flatulence! Yet, that was not the only problem with my trial.
While under oath, the arresting, not only testified passing gas is a sign of intoxication. But also testified that he, himself, has never passed gas in his entire life.
Although this is humanly impossible and is also a lie fabricated by the arresting officer to gain my conviction, while under oath.
During my trial, Officer Toland (a DUI task force member and present during my initial stop and arrest) would not testify to any of the arresting Officer's testimony, stating, I can not testify to this, several times. Even though Officer Toland was riding with the arresting Officer and present during my testing. I believe that Officer Toland did not want to commit trial perjury. Unlike the arresting Officer.
Officer Campbell, although not present at my trial, performed a test on me. Asking the time and date. I was only 3 minutes off. He signed the test as passing (not intoxicated).
During testimony, the arresting Officer and Officer Toland also stated that this was a passing grade.
I feel the arresting Officer falsely testified to gain my conviction.
I'm also dismayed by the fact that the presiding Judge did not dismiss these charges. Simply by hearing the ridiculous testimony given by the arresting Officer. If this arresting Officer's testimony would have been stricken from the record. I would have not been convicted.
Because of the false testimony given by the arresting Officer. I have lost 4 months of my life, my job, my 19-year career, my freedom (3 years probation). I'm in fear of loosing my home and my fianc'.
Perjury is a serious offence. But, when it destroys people's lives, it makes it even worse.
Question; How many times has this Officer done this? How many Phoenix officers do just this to gain an unwarranted conviction? Who can you trust, if you can't trust an officer of the law?
My case is presently being scheduled for appeal. I would like the City, State and the Nation to be aware of the outcome of this.
This is a grave injustice and needs to be investigated and a wrong made right!
Thank you and God bless,
Case # CR 2004-009077-001DT
DOC # 193259
Another injustice is the fact that the court transcriptions were altered by either the court recorder or the courts.
When my attorney asked the arresting officer about "passing gas" the transcriptions were altered to "officer dodged the question" TWICE!
Ward
Glendale, Arizona
U.S.A.
I need an attorney with "guts" to take on the state with a law suit.
Ward
Glendale, Arizona
U.S.A.
5 Updates & Rebuttals
Armando
Phoenix,Arizona,
U.S.A.
You gambled , you lost
#2Consumer Comment
Tue, September 20, 2005
You should have a taken a plea offer.
Ward
Glendale,Arizona,
U.S.A.
Please read carefully - I need a good attorney
#3Consumer Comment
Tue, September 20, 2005
Tim, Please read carefully. All the facts are in the report. Two other officers testified "Not Intoxicated". One being a DUI ask forces member. Refused to testify to the arresting officers testamony. This showing that he did not want to perjur himself. I did have a DUI 5 years prior, but everything was resolved. There was no wreck or misconduct....AND THERE WERE NO BREATH OR BLOOD TEST TAKEN!!! It's sad that that, with out eveidence, police can lie to achive a conviction. It's even more sad that a jury belives that lie, simply becouse he wears a badge. YES! I need an attorney with both brains and guts to take on the state of Arizona. An attorney, unlike the others involved in this case, that basically took my $$$ and left me hung out to dry.
Timothy
Valparaiso,Indiana,
U.S.A.
Do you want a lawyer with guts, or a lawyer with brains?
#4Consumer Comment
Tue, September 13, 2005
I have a three issues with your report. First, you were convicted by a jury of your "piers." Not by a judge, not by the cop, not by any individual, but a body of several (probably 12) people that came to a unanimous decision that, beyond a reasonable doubt, you were guilty of felony DUI. Unless you put on ABSOLUTELY NO defense, then there is no way that you were convicted solely because of one officer's fart science. Second, you make no mention of a breathylizer score. I'm pretty sure you were given a breath test, and maybe even a blood test. There are two, and only two, elements to a DUI charge: 1) you were driving; 2) you had a blood alcohol level greater than that allowed by state law (usually .08). You can pass all the sobriety tests in the world, but if your B/A is greater than .08 (or whatever it is in your state), and you were behind the wheel of a car, then you are guilty of the offense. Third, you were convicted of a felony. DUI is usually a misdemeanor, unless you've had a prior conviction or caused an accident. Would you care to tell us why you were convicted of FELONY DUI? If a witness bends the truth on the stand, or even if the record is altered, your conviction still stands unless the decision of the jury was seriously affected by the transgression. The bottom line is that a JURY was convinced, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you were driving a car with an illegally high blood/alcohol content. Was the prosecution able to prove that you were driving a car? Was the prosecution able to prove that you had a high b/a level? Unless you have some suppression of evidence concerns, or some other constitutional violation was at work in the investigation, the above questions are all that matters. Take the advice of the lawyers who tell you that you have no case. It's not that they lack guts, it's that you lack a valid argument.
Timothy
Valparaiso,Indiana,
U.S.A.
Do you want a lawyer with guts, or a lawyer with brains?
#5Consumer Comment
Tue, September 13, 2005
I have a three issues with your report. First, you were convicted by a jury of your "piers." Not by a judge, not by the cop, not by any individual, but a body of several (probably 12) people that came to a unanimous decision that, beyond a reasonable doubt, you were guilty of felony DUI. Unless you put on ABSOLUTELY NO defense, then there is no way that you were convicted solely because of one officer's fart science. Second, you make no mention of a breathylizer score. I'm pretty sure you were given a breath test, and maybe even a blood test. There are two, and only two, elements to a DUI charge: 1) you were driving; 2) you had a blood alcohol level greater than that allowed by state law (usually .08). You can pass all the sobriety tests in the world, but if your B/A is greater than .08 (or whatever it is in your state), and you were behind the wheel of a car, then you are guilty of the offense. Third, you were convicted of a felony. DUI is usually a misdemeanor, unless you've had a prior conviction or caused an accident. Would you care to tell us why you were convicted of FELONY DUI? If a witness bends the truth on the stand, or even if the record is altered, your conviction still stands unless the decision of the jury was seriously affected by the transgression. The bottom line is that a JURY was convinced, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you were driving a car with an illegally high blood/alcohol content. Was the prosecution able to prove that you were driving a car? Was the prosecution able to prove that you had a high b/a level? Unless you have some suppression of evidence concerns, or some other constitutional violation was at work in the investigation, the above questions are all that matters. Take the advice of the lawyers who tell you that you have no case. It's not that they lack guts, it's that you lack a valid argument.
Timothy
Valparaiso,Indiana,
U.S.A.
Do you want a lawyer with guts, or a lawyer with brains?
#6Consumer Comment
Tue, September 13, 2005
I have a three issues with your report. First, you were convicted by a jury of your "piers." Not by a judge, not by the cop, not by any individual, but a body of several (probably 12) people that came to a unanimous decision that, beyond a reasonable doubt, you were guilty of felony DUI. Unless you put on ABSOLUTELY NO defense, then there is no way that you were convicted solely because of one officer's fart science. Second, you make no mention of a breathylizer score. I'm pretty sure you were given a breath test, and maybe even a blood test. There are two, and only two, elements to a DUI charge: 1) you were driving; 2) you had a blood alcohol level greater than that allowed by state law (usually .08). You can pass all the sobriety tests in the world, but if your B/A is greater than .08 (or whatever it is in your state), and you were behind the wheel of a car, then you are guilty of the offense. Third, you were convicted of a felony. DUI is usually a misdemeanor, unless you've had a prior conviction or caused an accident. Would you care to tell us why you were convicted of FELONY DUI? If a witness bends the truth on the stand, or even if the record is altered, your conviction still stands unless the decision of the jury was seriously affected by the transgression. The bottom line is that a JURY was convinced, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you were driving a car with an illegally high blood/alcohol content. Was the prosecution able to prove that you were driving a car? Was the prosecution able to prove that you had a high b/a level? Unless you have some suppression of evidence concerns, or some other constitutional violation was at work in the investigation, the above questions are all that matters. Take the advice of the lawyers who tell you that you have no case. It's not that they lack guts, it's that you lack a valid argument.
