Wednesday, October 03, 2007

John John like Junior John both "confession of error" experts to protect their crimes.......

John John like Junior John both "confession of error" experts to protect their crimes
Posted on September 9, 2007 at 03:14:56 AM by d1

An issue of fairness

The discovery process is central to the American concept of a fair trial.

"Society wins not only when the guilty are convicted but when criminal trials are fair," wrote U.S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas in 1963.

"Our system of the administration of justice suffers when any accused is treated unfairly."

His words were at the core of the Supreme Court's Brady vs. Maryland opinion, which set the standard for discovery rules in this country.

John L. Brady and an accomplice were convicted of murdering a man during a robbery. Both were sentenced to death.

But during Brady's trial, prosecutors withheld a police report that had been requested by defense attorneys, in which Brady's accomplice confessed to pulling the trigger.

The court ruled that by withholding the evidence, the prosecutor violated Brady's rights under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

Even if such information is withheld unintentionally, the court said, a defendant might still be entitled to a new trial or a new hearing on his sentence.

Brady's case was remanded for re-sentencing and he was spared the death penalty and given life in prison.

But as with many Supreme Court rulings, a clear statement of principles can become fuzzy in its application. To rectify discovery violations, the Supreme Court adopted a test that begins and ends with one basic premise: A conviction should be reversed only if the verdict would have been different had the discovery information withheld by prosecutors been known at the trial. Otherwise, the discovery violation is "harmless error" - and the original court verdict should stand.

In its investigation, the Post-Gazette found that the test has evolved into a devious calculation by many federal prosecutors: How much favorable evidence can be withheld without risking a reversal on appeal?

Rather than abide by the Supreme Court's admonition that their goal should be to ensure a fair trial, many prosecutors try to figure just how much they can cheat. Ignoring discovery rules improves the chances of a prosecutor winning a conviction with little risk of penalty.

Bennett L. Gershman, a former New York state prosecutor, wrote a legal textbook focusing on the methods and motivations of prosecutorial misconduct. The prime motivator: "Prosecutors want to win."

"Brady violations account for more miscarriages of justice than any other violation," said Bennett L. Gershman, a former New York state prosecutor and now a Pace University of New York law professor.

Gershman wrote "Prosecutorial Misconduct" in 1997 and has explored discovery violations and the motives behind them.

"Prosecutors want to win," he said. "Some believe the defendant is so guilty that any information that contradicts the guilt can't be trustworthy, so they believe they don't have any obligation to turn over untrustworthy material while telling themselves they are being honest."

The double whammy for defendants, of course, is that there's no guarantee that favorable evidence, once hidden by prosecutors, will ever be revealed.

"People have been sent to prison for many, many years before they find that [prosecutors knew of] exculpatory evidence, but that's the built-in contradiction," Gershman said.

"If the information is hidden, how do you find it?" Gershman asked. "How do you get it to make a claim? Much of this information will never see the light of day, even if it may be critical in proving the defendant's innocence."

That hasn't always been the way federal prosecutors operated.

Replies:

5 comments:

Jay Draiman said...

Nachshon Draiman Conviction for the death of a patient and abuse in his Mill View nursing homes in Niles, Illinois. R1

Nachshon Draiman - Multiut Corp. – Future Associates Fraud
You will note that State and Federal Court records in Illinois and elsewhere are replete with lawsuits, judgments and wrongdoing by Nachshon Draiman and his companies. Causing the death of patients in the Nursing homes and a lawsuit by the State of Illinois with civil and criminal conviction People v. Gurell, Nachshon Draiman (1983), 98 Ill.2d 194, 207, 74 Ill.Dec. 516, 456 N.E.2d 18.). Abusing nursing home patients see State of Illinois records.
See People of the State of Illinois vs. Gurell, Nachshon Draiman et al – 456 N.E.2d 18 there has been numerous patient abuse and deaths due to that abuse. In 127 Ill.App.3d 1165, 483 N.E.2d 731, 91 Ill.Dec. 385 Sonnenberg v. Mill View Associates, Nachshon Draiman where millions of dollars had to be paid as damages for abuse and death of a patient, not to mention numerous patients who died falling down an elevator shaft.


Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian W. Ellis Claims he has DNA forensic evidence that Nachshon Draiman - Multiut forged and modified documents presented to the Court in his lawsuit against his brother Yehuda J. Draiman
The Supposed 1991 IMA Agreement Put Into Evidence by Multiut – Nachshon Draiman Is a Fraud
The evidence overwhelmingly favors Yehuda Draimans' account of events. There are at least eight separate, independent indicators that Nachshon Draiman deceptively modified an IMA Agreement that Yehuda received and signed in 1989, added terms to which Yehuda never agreed, including the incorporation of an unsigned Employee Confidentiality Agreement, and inserted a false date of execution to create the document introduced as Plaintiff's Exhibit 10. First, Defendants' expert forensic ink analyst, Erich Speckin, testified that he found manufacturer date tags in the ink for the disputed writings on Plaintiff's Exhibit 10, and that the sequence of those date tags establishes without question that the ink was manufactured in 1993, two years after Nachshon Draiman said he made the writings. (8/14/02 Tr., at 2214-25) That testimony is undisputed.

It is a known fact that justice in Chicago can be swayed in your favor with proper incentives. The trial judge left the bench after this case when the court ignored overwhelming evidence against Multiut and Nachshon Draiman and other cases were investigated by the government.
Nachshon Draiman’s intimidation of witnesses, blackmail and other scare tactics will not work.

Nachshon Draiman defrauds Israel Discount Bank in Hotel financing to the tune of $45 million dollars.
Utilizing modified and fabricated sales contract of units in the Jerusalem Pearl purchased and totally paid for by 1. Nachshon Draiman, 2. Elitzur Draiman, 3. Irwin Katz a former Federal Judge and part owner of Multiut, 4. Barry Ray, 5. Danny Shabat, 6. Gershon Bassman, 7. Dr. Sam Lipschitz, 8. It seems presenting false and deceptive documents is a way of life for Nachshon Draiman

Nachshon Draiman presented a forged College Diploma to the Illinois Department of Registration in order to receive his Nursing Home Administrator’s license No. 44001323.
For More Information See: www.antidefamationusa.com.

Multiut President said...

Jay Draiman..Drai..AKA Yehuda Jay Draiman..THE REAL FRAUD ..the ADJUDICATED FACTS are that...His claims are malicious, false, meritless,misrepresentations of the REAL FACTS and contrived. These baseless accusations are the fabrications of a disgruntled former employee, Yehuda "Jay" Draiman, a CONVICTED FELON who has been FOUND GUILTY of charges leading to millions of dollars in judgments by the Illinois and federal court system.

Left with no legal or rational alternative, "Jay" has resorted to conjuring up false stories and contrived meritless accusations on the internet and public forums, to attempt to smear his former employee.

These facts can be verified by court records available from a Google search for "Multiut v. Yehuda".

Yehuda Jay Draiman is a former employee who was terminated in 2001 from Multiut Corporation when he was discovered diverting clients and funds of the company. He was subsequently FOUND GUILTY of breaches of fiduciary duty, consumer FRAUD and deceptive trade practices and CONSPIRACY, and a judgment in excess of $1.5 million was entered against him, in addition to several findings of contempt, by the Cook County Circuit Court & upheld by the Appellate court (ruling 1-03-0857).
http://www.state.il.us/court/Opinions/AppellateCourt/2005/1stDistrict/July/Html/1030857.htm

Federal courts have also entered subsequent judgments against Yehuda and his wife Miriam for committing false bankruptcy filings in yet another attempt to defame his former employer. Federal courts declared the judgments to be non-dischargeable due to the fraud involved by Yehuda Draiman, for abusing the court system in a manner similar to the way he now attempts to abuse the internet. These FACTS can be verified by federal court records available from a Google search for "Doyle Draiman".
http://www.ilnb.uscourts.gov/JudgeDoyle/Opinions/Draiman_Yehuda.pdf

Public documents verify that 'Jay' was also CONVICTED OF 10 COUNTS of wire and mail FRAUD during the 1980's. Nachshon, Yehuda’s brother, originally provided Yehuda with a job in the Multiut company subsequent to general assistance he provided to help Yehuda and his family following Yehuda‘s first stint of a FOUR YEARS sentence to the FEDRAL PENITENTIARY for that conviction in the 80's. See United States v. Draiman, 784 F.2d 248 (7th Cir. 1986)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/7th/023922p.pdf

Yehuda Draiman was also the subject of a special investigation conducted by the Illinois Legislative Investigating Commission for the Illinois General Assembly (see:4/22/75 Illinois Nursing Homes: A Report to the Illinois General Assembly). “Jay” was barred from serving in the nursing home field after HE DEFRAUDED A RESIDENT under his care of more than $40,000. The report cites testimony from a resident stating that Yehuda offered to return her money if she took a ride with him to his “bank”, and instead LEFT HER STRANDED in a deserted cornfield in the DEAD OF WINTER in 8 degree weather. Only by luck was she spotted by a passerby who reported the incident to the MCHENRY COUNTY SHERIFF'S Department. When the sheriff’s office interviewed Yehuda, he claimed “when they got out into the country she asked to be let out. He let her out and drove back to Chicago…and found her purse in the back seat.” In these instances, as well as the recent litigation, Yehuda Jay Draiman's tactic has been to invent illegalities to accuse his victims of, in order to shift the focus of attention away from him.
http://multiut.com/responses_to_YJD /IL_Assembly_Report_04_75.pdf


The current posting is just another example of Yehuda Jay Draiman's tactics.

For more information about defamation attempts by Yehuda Jay Draiman, see www.Illinoisantidefamation.com or www.IllinoisDefamationProtection.com

Yehuda Draiman said...

Nachshon Draiman, Chicago – nursing home administrator license (044001323) revoked and fined
Illinois Department of Financial and
Professional Regulation NEWS
IDFPR
Disciplinary Actions for January 2008 SPRINGFIELD
The Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (IDFPR)
announced today that the Directors of the Division of Professional Regulation, Daniel E. Bluthardt, and Insurance, Michael T. McRaith, signed the following disciplinary orders in January. Orders for the Division of Banking were authorized by Director Jorge Solis.

NURSING HOME ADMINISTRATOR

Nachshon Draiman, Chicago – nursing home administrator license (044001323)
revoked and fined $2,000 for misrepresenting information in his application concerning postgraduate education degree, to obtain nursing home administrator licensure from the Department.

Jay Draiman said...

Nachshon Draiman, Chicago – a disgruntled owner and operator of
On June 26th, 2008 Jay Draiman says:
Nachshon Draiman, Chicago – a disgruntled owner and operator of a Natural Gas Supply company and Nursing Homes – who was caught by his brother Yehuda Jay Draiman and others was stealing from employees, customers, suppliers, banks and his partners including his own blind elderly mother. Initiated a campaign of smear and fraud with the presentation of fraudulent documents (a common practice) to the courts. State and Federal court records are replete with lawsuit and litigations against Nachshon Draiman and his businesses, Multiut, Future Associates and various Nursing Homes operated by Nachshon Draiman.
The revocation of the Nursing Home license which was issued in 1975 initiated Nachshon Draiman’s involvement in syndicating the purchase of numerous Nursing Homes in the Chicago metro area – the whole pyramid was based on fraud and deception by obtaining his license through fraud. (Some of the nursing homes were closed down and or forced by State officials to be sold). Lawsuits for patient’s abuse and causing the death of a patient are common, including bank fraud confirmed by former Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Ellis. A major lawsuit by Dynegy vs Nachshon Draiman, Multiut, Future Associates Case No. 02 C 7446 for $22 million – numerous contempt of court orders and a $45 million by Israel Discount Bank for fraud, just to name a few, Utility billing fraud Gore vs. Multiut No. 01 CH 19688.
Buying a Whistleblower case from the courts in order to solidify his cover-up of the fraud.
Nachshon Draiman, Chicago – nursing home administrator license (044001323) revoked and fined
Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation
NEWS
IDFPR
Disciplinary Actions for January 2008 SPRINGFIELD
The Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (IDFPR)
announced today that the Directors of the Division of Professional Regulation, Daniel E. Bluthardt, and Insurance, Michael T. McRaith, signed the following disciplinary orders in January. Orders for the Division of Banking were authorized by Director Jorge Solis.
NURSING HOME ADMINISTRATOR
Nachshon Draiman, Chicago – nursing home administrator license (044001323)
revoked and fined $2,000 for misrepresenting information in his application concerning postgraduate education degree, to obtain nursing home administrator licensure from the Department.
For additional information see: www.nachshondraiman.net

Jay Draiman said...

Nachshon Draiman and Multiut charged $15 million judgment
Honorable John A. Nordberg: Enter Memorandum Opinion and Order.
For the reasons set forth above, defendants motion for summary judgment is granted, and judgment is granted to plaintiff, and against defendants Multiut and Nachshon Draiman
Case 1:02-cv-07446 Document 228 Filed 06/11/2008 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.1
Eastern Division
Dynegy Marketing and Trade
Plaintiff,
v. Case No.: 1:02−cv−07446
Hon. John A. Nordberg
Multiut Corporation, Nachshon Draiman, et al.
Defendant.
NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY
This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Wednesday, June 11, 2008:
MINUTE entry before the Honorable John A. Nordberg:Enter Memorandum
Opinion and Order. For the reasons set forth above, defendants motion for summary judgment is granted, and judgment is granted to plaintiff, and against defendants Multiut and Nachshon Draiman, on Counts I and II of plaintiffs amended complaint, in the amount of
$15,348,244.72 plus interest accruing from October 1, 2004. Judgment is granted for plaintiff and against defendants on Counts I through VI of defendants
counterclaims.Status hearing set for 10/2/2008 at 2:30 PM. [183],[196]Mailed notice(tlp, )
ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please refer to it for additional information.
For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.