The Hardin Family Lawsuit against Commonwealth of KY., et al; filed May 14, 2003; Page 71

Pages of the Complaint

1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
29
31
33
35
37
39
41
43
45
47
49
51
53
55
57
59
61
63
65
67
69
71
73
75

2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
64
66
68
70
72
74

 

colluded together to violate Aaron’s rights when they intervened with the appellate process to offer and secured the 6/4/02 probation agreement. These individuals, together, waited until the day after Aaron’s 18th birthday (May 31, 2002) to offer the probation agreement. Yet, by account of the record, they had no legal motive or goodwill-interest in providing probation; they had fought for- and accomplished their goals of securing the conviction and incarcerating Aaron. However, the prosecutors’ motive for the agreement was Aaron’s appellate brief that intricately evidenced that they subverted the law and conspired to violate his rights at every phase of the case and that Aaron’s conviction would properly be overturned. Hence, not only was the agreement conducted in bad faith, it was an extension of their prior conspiracies, collusions, and wanton neglect during trial.

141. Aaron’s illness meant that he was not mentally capable of making a rational decision at the time of the agreement; he required family assistance in this decision. But in lieu of his disability, the Commonwealth wantonly neglected his need for social support, and proper medical and substance-abuse treatment.

142. Furthermore, the prosecutors neglected to notify the Hardin family, the victims, of the proposed agreement. The family never had time to adequately respond or to talk to Aaron. The prosecutors could not take the chance that the parents would view this as an improper deal. With the 6/4/02 hearing immediately scheduled, Mr. Allen informed Aaron’s attorney that he opposed this deal, because the appeal would exonerate Aaron. Then, James Shake, the presiding judge, colluded with the prosecutors by approving the agreement, where he had always, beforehand, denied Aaron’s freedom in every other hearing of this case.

143. James Shake allowed prosecutors to flagrantly work their will without regard to the rights of Aaron or his family. For three and one-half years, these individuals neglected their responsibilities and recklessly caused the family sustained emotional duress and distress. With Aaron still incarcerated, their acute duress continues, today.

- 71 -

<<< previous page | next page >>>

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

| How to Participate |

| Disclaimer | Contacts | Related Links |