Pages of the Complaint

this court in opening and closing arguments . . . certain behavior exceeds the bounds of what is acceptable and enters the realm of prejudicial error. The Commonwealth attorney went beyond the evidence presented. And pursued another agenda, quite apart from the legal constraints of the case at hand.

See also Sanborn v. Commonwealth, Ky., 754 S.W.2d 534, 543-545 (1988). In Aaron’s case, the Commonwealth’s deliberate distortions certainly exceeded the bounds of acceptable behavior, serving instead to further its agenda of tainting the jury against young Aaron. Therefore, almost any of Aaron’s motions for a mistrial should have been granted by the trial court. (TAPE No. 078-3; 12/18/00; 11:28:35 - 11:30:01) Moreover, Judge Shake allowed this poison to accumulate.


24. During the trial, Judge Shake compelled to Aaron to hold the gun. This unconstitutional act forced Aaron to again incriminate himself. (TAPE No. 078-3; 12/18/00; 11:32:42 - 11:49:35)


25. Aaron’s trial had an all-caucasian jury of whom were middle aged. They were not
jurors of his peers. In accordance with Mr. Allen, jury selection was typical of selecting an all-caucasian jury for railing against young minority males. Statistics will show how in state criminal trials in Louisville, minorities overwhelmingly receive all-caucasian juries, and that these “set-ups” result in a un-proportionally high conviction rates for minorities.

A. With the preponderance of stated violations and arbitrary acts of the prosecutors and Judge Shake, jury-members observed the manner of court proceedings. They witnessed the many motions and objections from Aaron’s counsel, and how Judge Shake continuously ruled against Aaron.

- 41 -

<<< previous page | next page >>>

| HOME | return to: Index of Issues & Letters |

| How to Participate |

| Disclaimer | Contacts | Related Links |