Transcript
Brandon B. Orewrv #96§09. Maine State Prison. 807 Cushing Road. Warren. ME. 04864-4603 (February 11, 2014) Maine v. Drewry I Drewry v. Maine: 'Gtwigttb Jugtice Introduction 9YJ YEARS AGO, on 8/27/2004, a displaced worker at the age of 42 I arrived in Portland, Maine with plans to spend 2-4 years working as a "sternman" on lobster boats toward the ends of stabilizing my personal finances and minor legal affairs following which it was/is my vision to found, co-manage and expand an antirecidivist-social rehabilitation transitional housing program to help them build new and positive foundations, those who struggle with the common causes and outcomes of poverty: AlcohoVdrug abuse, -a too often sorely mistreated affliction by most of the treatment industry- criminal justice complications, mental-health crisis issues and academic/vocational deficiencies; a project myriad experiences on both sides of the fence of the management of low-income transitional housing (Homeless Shelters, Halfway/Boarding houses, Extended Family Group Homes, SRO's etc.) uniquely suit me for better than most who are willing, moreover passionate about doing this work that has never been so desperately needed in U.S. society than in this first half of the 21 rst century. On 8130/04, my third day in town, I worked for 12 hours offshore lobstering. The following day at ten minutes past noon I was illegally arrested in the lobby of a social service agency -the Preble Street Resource Center (PSRC}- by a morally misguided detective who was over-primed by her boss, then Portland Chief of Police "MediaMike," (Michael Chitwood) whose unhealthy lust for the crime news spotlight and his interests connected to the BAYSIDE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT drove him to orchestrate a media frenzy, whereupon, having established that I had no money, family or mainstream support, he and the press proceeded to convict me before anything was known beyond the fact that a woman was physically assaulted, and that she was an area drug addict who was frequently the protagonist in purported, or actual cases of domestic violence assault (At that time seventeen (17) 9-1-1 incidents and at least 5 following her assault in my case, only four of which resulted in convictions, two against her for assaulting men she'd accused of assault. These, among a lot of other facts my jury should have heard were not discussed in my December 2006 trial by court-appointed defense attorneys I was denied the right to fire) The only evidence of this woman's claim of"rape'' that she later changed to "gross sexual assault," was semen recovered from her vagina, regarding which my trial judge grossly misapplied the Rules of Evidence by disallowing into my trial questions relating to its source. More than several professional opinions, including one by a Maine Supreme Court Justice, aver that the trial Court's ruling makes no sense. AFTER 28 months of having my repeated attempts to assert my right to a speedy-trial suppressed by two system loyal court-appointed pre-trail defense lawyers, The Maine Board ofBar Overseers, and a Superior Court Judge; on the first day of my trial (12/13/2006) the two above-mentioned freshly appointed system loyal defense lawyers, in more than several ways as they say "sold me down the river." BECAUSE of the delays I forever lost several testimonies vital to my defense. two ofwhich would have changed the outcome of my trial. On December 21,2006 I was wrongfully convicted and on April3, 2007 condemned to 30 years in prison, a sentence viewed through one tense worse than death. THE BASIS of my wrongful conviction was the victim's selection of my photo from a tampered suspect lineup that was shown to her in a hospital room with no witnesses present 3 hours after my illegal arrest by the case lead detective who arrested me in violation of every standard designed to ensure the integrity of suspect lineup viewing procedure. WHEN viewing the suspect lineup the victim had no vision at all in one eye, "blurrj' through the other, and was under the influence of narcotic pain drugs, tranquilizers and withdrawing from a psychotropic drug. 15 hours earlier when she claims her assault occurred she was impaired by marijuana she said her assailant provided and smoked with her. She waited 26 months after her assault -once she was apprised it was likely to surface in trial- to admit using large amounts of crack-cocaine just prior to meeting with her assailant. It is absurd, the appellate court's reasoning for failing to overturn my conviction regarding this matter; the failure of my defense counsel to present expert testimony regarding the reliability of eyewitness testimony. 3-4 notarized affidavits that have been ignored by my pre-trial, trial and appellate attorneys and/or the Courts, reveal that the victim's assault in my case was caused by a drug deal rip-off or "drug deal gone bad" -the words used to describe the motive of the assault in my 8/31/04 post-arrest interrogation by the detective who illegally arrested me. To date there have been twenty-one (21) grounds-for-relief raised in my appeals. Many were improperly argued and examined. All of them are with merit. If you will read further please contact me at the above listed address. Thank you for your time. Sincerely. -Brandon Boone Drewry
