Juan Melendez
Filmed Oct 9 in Montreal Canada at the Second World Congress Against the Death Penalty. |
||
| News About Juan's Release From Death Row ! | ||
| Read judge Fleischer`s order - from www.oranous.com | ||
| FADP's page on the release
of Juan Melendez - includes lots of information and links |
||
| Have Juan
speak
at your school, university, event or church -Juan's speaker Bio |
Juan with
his lawyer and investigator; on the evening of his release from
death
row
The Information below was provided by Juan Melendez when he
was still on
death row and
wrote to the CCADP for assistance in getting his case known to
the public and the media...
I'm addressing this summary to you, hoping and praying to the Creator that you be able to assist me in a life or death situation.
My name is Juan Roberto Melendez Colon. But all my friends call me "Puerto Rican Johnny." I was born on the date of 5-24-51 in Brooklyn, N.Y. However, I was raised in Puerto Rico.
I'm entirely innocent of the offense for which I was convicted and sentenced to death. The crime of murder and robbery was committed by others individuals, one named Vernon James, who confessed his involvement in the crime to at least five (5) people. I should noted that I don't know James, I don't know the subjects that were involved with James in the crime and neither know the people who James confessed his involvement in the crime.
To make this a presentable summary, I will divide this odyssey in five (5) portions;
A) The trial
B) B) 1st Rule 3.850
motion
C) 2nd rule 3.850
motions
D) Petition for Writ
of Habeas Corpus and
E) Evidentiary Hearing
A) THE TRIAL :
I was convicted and sentenced to death for the 9-13-'83, murder and robbery of Mr. Delbert L. Baker, alias Mr. Del. The murder occurred at Mr. Del's Beauty School in Auburndale, Florida.
1) The State Case :
The
state case against me was extremely weak. My conviction and
death sentence rest solely on the testimony of two felons, David Falcon
and John Berrien. Mr Falcon testified that I and a friend planned
to rob Mr. Del because he was known to have a lot of money and jewelry
. The other man cut Mr. Del's throat; and he was begging to be
taken to a hospital, I shot him using a pillow with a silencer.
This evidence was presented to the jury, in a hear-say fashion.
Because, the State knew that Falcon was unreliable and unworthy of
belief. They use John to corroborate Falcon's story against
me. Before I was indicted for this offense, John Berrien was
charged with the 1st degree murder and armed robbery of Mr.Del.
John made a negotiation plea with the State and obtain a cash
bond of $250.00, his charge was reduced to accessory after the fact;
and he will not be sentence until the conclusion of my trial.
John testified that he
drove his cousin, George Berrien and me to Mr.Del's beauty school on
9-13-'83.
He testified that he
dropped us off in the late afternoon and picked us up two hours
later.
The next day, he drove George and me to the train station where I gave
George jewelry and a gun before he boarded a train for Wilmington,
Delaware. The only physical evidence supporting John's
story was an Amtrak record indicating that George Berrien had taken a
train to Delaware on 9-14-'83, which of course does not connect
Me to this
offense. No physical evidence was presented at trial that
placed me at the scene of the crime or in any way connected me with the
victim death. In fact most physical evidence found at the scene
of the crime was either destroyed or at least not preserved by the
State, On the basis of this evidence I
was convicted of murder and robbery and sentenced to death.
John pled nolo contendere to being an accessory after the fact and
received
two (2) years probation. George incredible as it may seem "was
never
charged with any offense" even though the State's theory of the case is
that George physically participated in the victims death.
(2) The Defense Strategy;
I had always
maintained ands always will maintain my innocence and that another
individual or group of individuals were responsible for the death of
Mr. Del. The strong probability of my innocence was pointed out
by Justice Barkett of the Florida Supreme Court in her specially
concurring opinion on direct appeal. She wrote," a review of the
evidence in the record leaves on with the fear that an execution would
perhaps be terminating the life of an innocent person, Melendez vs,
State, 498 So2d 1262 (Fla.1986)
The defense theory at
me trial was that I'm innocent that John Berrien and David Falcon were
lying and that another man namely Vernon James had killed
Mr.Del.
In support of this defense my attorney, Mr. Alcott presented me with
alibi
witnesses and one witness to whom Mr. James had confessed.
Also my attorney
presented one witness, Mr.Terry Barber whom saw James and a friend of
James named Harold landrum, alias 'Bobo' at the victims shop near the
time of the murder. In addition, there were four(4) witnesses who
heard Falcon state that he would kill or get rid of me.
Also George Berrien testified…for the 'defense' that he didn't know me,
that he never ridden in a car with me, that he went to Delaware to
visit his children, but he took a ride to the train station with a
white man in a pickup truck, that he had never been arrested or charged
with Mr Del's murder, and that his cousin John told
him if he changed his statement they were going to give him a murder
charge. All together there were more than ten (10) witnesses who
contradicted John and Falcon's trial testimony, which was the key stone
of the State theory.
(B) 1st Rule 3.850
Motion;
On 1-16-89 the above
motion was filed in the Circuit Court and on 7-17-89, erroneously the
mentioned court denied relief 'without' conducting an evidentiary
hearing. On 11-12-92, Florida Supreme Court affirmed the Circuit
Court denial of my Motion to Vacate Judgement And Sentence was
erroneous as a matter of law and fact. The noted courts summarily
denied my claims 'without' conducting any type of hearing, 'without'
adequately discussing whether and why I'm not entitled to relief.
In this motion, I alleged, interalia that due to trial
counsel's ineffectiveness and / or state misconduct, the jury didn't
hear
available evidence challenging the credibility of David Falcon and John
Berrien. John provided several prior statements to the police
that
were markedly inconsistent with his trial testimony, but which the jury
didn't hear. John testified in a deposition less than a week
before
my trial that his statements to the police were mostly false "except
for
the incident at the train station." The jury wasn't told about
this
deposition. The jury was never told that the police coerced John
to
cooperate with them by telling him, 'in turn for helping you can get
off
light, the right will probably get you home free and 'we're going to
protect
you' etc etc…This motion also alleged that trial counsel was similarly
deficient
in probing and presenting substantial evidence impeaching Falcon.
In addition, this motion alleged that the State not only failed to
disclose the truth about Falcon, but it affirmatively used his lies
about his background and role as a police informant to enhance his
credibility. Evidence was readily available proving that Falcon
wasn't an undercover agent in
PR and a paid informant for the FDLE and police as he testified at
trial. In fact, Falcon had been convicted of a P.R. murder and
was released from prison after testifying against his codefendants in a
N,J multiple murders. The FDLE rather than paying Falcon for
information as he testified, they had actually disassociated itself
from Falcon. Also Falcon had been in and out of mental hospital
diagnosed as undifferentiated schizophrenia and drug addiction (heroin
and cocaine.)
(C) 2nd Rule 3.850
Motion
In the above motion my
defense team has discovered witnesses who positively identified Mr
Vernon James as the individual responsible for Mr Del's death.
Ms. Sandra Kay James (Vernon's sister) she is one of them and through
her my counsel learn of two (2) other witnesses, Ms Deborah J Ciotti a
close friend of
Mr James and Ms Janice F Dawson the mother of Mr James child.
(1) Ms. Ciotti;
She
knew about the drug deal/robbery that was planned for the night of
9-13-83, she saw Mr James and a couple of his buddies go inside Mr
Del's place of business on the noted night.
(2) Ms. Sandra, Mr
James sister;
She
know that her brother set up the robbery and that James was present
when Mr. Del was murdered.
(3) Mrs. Dawson
She provided details
that indicated that Mr James had some of Mr Del's jewelry that was
missing
after his murder.
Ms. Ciotti. Ms
Dawson, and Ms Sandra were all very close to Mr James and don't know
me, therefore they had no reason to lie to help me. Their
testimony is consistent with evidence presented at my trial. Mr.
Baber testified that he saw Mr James and his friend Mr Landrum with Mr
Del shortly before the latters death. Mr Mims testified that
James confessed to killing Mr. Del; Detectives testified that Mr
Landrum was questioned that Landrum's sneakers matched the bloody
footprints at the crime scene and that after working hours Mr Del
conducted homosexual parties and had been doing them for a number of
years. In addition, Mr James confessions are corroborated by his
possession
of drugs and money the morning after the crime and his possession of Mr
Del's
jewelry which he later gave to Ms. Dawson. Moreover, John Berrien, whom
is
incarcerated in a N.M prison, but in this motion my defense team was
able
to located him had recanted his trial testimony.
(4) John Berrien's
Predicaments;
The jury was never told that John was threatened by the police and coerced into testifying falsely against me. The police first elicited a self incriminating statement from John by telling him that they had enough evidence to convict him and then threatening him with prosecution if he didn't implicate me in Mr Del's murder. John made numerous and frequently contradictory tape recorded statements that weren't brought to the attention of the jury. In trial, Mr Falcon testified that him and Detective Glimsson from the APD paid a visit to John at the PCJ in Bartow, FL. Mr. John remembered this visit very well it was on 3-17-84, two (2) days after his arrest for the Mr Del's murder. In that visit, Falcon advised John to cooperate with the police, to help himself, that I had already confessed to the murder. Also, on that same date, John made one more of his numerous contradictory statements. On 3-17-84 John implicated his cousin George Berrian in the Mr Del's murder. The discovery of information which was never presented at trial because of state misconduct and / or trial counsels ineffectiveness demonstrates that Mr John Berrien's testimony lacked any credibility or reliability whatsoever. Informations obtained from Mr John Berrien during police interrogations where the result of threats on Mr John Berriens life and the coercions all made by Florida's law enforcement officers.
(D) Petition for
Writ of
Habeaus Corpus;
In the above motion,
the defense team claimed that I was denied the effective assistance of
counsel on direct appeal. My direct appeal was marked by a total
lack of advocacy on the part of direct appeal counsel. The trial
court prevented my defense from presenting evidence in support of my
innocence.
In addition, the trial court prevented my defense from cross examining
key
state witnesses on issues which would have seriously undermined the
state
theory. However, my appellate counsels initial brief presented
only
seven (7) pages of arguments raising only four (4) issues.
After Vernon James confessed his involvement in the Mr Dels murder to Roger Mims his cellmate, Agent Roper of the FDLE had questioned James about this offense. When the defense asked agent Roper whether Mr James acknowledge being present at the murder the state objected and the objections was sustained. Had my defense been permitted to pursue this questioning, Mr. Roper would have testified that James did admit being present at the homicide. The defense also attempted to present evidence attacking the credibility of Falcon's account. The defense contend that Falcon was testifying to curry favour with the government to avoid prosecution from a shooting which occurred at the home of a family named Reagan. When defense counsel attempted to ask Agent Roper about Falcon's involvement in the Reagan shooting the trial court would not allow the question. Additionally, the defense contended that the bullets taken from the Reagan's car matched the bullets from the body of the victim. The trial court refused to allow the defense to present to the jury testimony from a state firearms expert from the FDLE which would have shown that the bullet from the Reagan's car were similar. Moreover, Falcon didn't disclose any inside information known only to the police and the perpetrators and/or police investigators. But trial court prevented my defense from presenting evidence demonstrating that Falcon's knowledge of the offense was readily available to the general public. Although no physical evidence or eyewitness testimony connected me to the offense, apellate counsel failed to raise any issue on direct appeal regarding the sufficiency of evidence to convict me of murder.
The failure of appellate counsel to raise the issue of my innocence and to present the issue that no credible evidence was exhibited to prove my guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to the Florida Supreme Court on Direct Appeal, has prevented the noted court from correcting the miscarriage of justice that occurred at my trial.
(E) Evidentiary
hearing.
In the above hearing
the State only agreed to discuss two (2) issues, a claim of Newly
Discovered Evidence, and a claim of a Brady Rule Violation. To
support the noted claims my defense team presented ten (10)
witnesses. In opposition to the motion the state presented only
two (2) witnesses and both of them were law enforcement officers.
Four (4) defense witnesses, Ms Deborah Ciotti, Ms Janice Dawson, Ms
Sandra Kay James and Mr Dwight Wells, they all testified at the above
hearing that Mr. Vernon James had made incriminating statements to them
about the murder. Also in the above hearing Mr John Berriens
testified that he was threatened and coerced by law enforcement
officers
to make statements inculpating me in the Mr Dels murder. The
officers
had a written outline of the statements they wanted John to make and
coached
him through his statement with frequent references to the outline
of the statements they
wanted John to make and coached him through his statements with
frequent references to the outline. They had a tape recorder, but
they turn it on only after John had mastered portion of their
statements. While the police were coaching and threatening him,
they turned the tape recorder off. In support of Mr. John
Berrien's allegations my defense team
call "Dr Richard J Offshe".
* Two Key
Defense Witnesses:
As I pointed out in the
introduction of this summary that Vernon James confessed his
involvement in this crime to at least five (5) people, without counting
Agent Roper from the F.D.L.E. whom was prevented by the State from
testifying that James had admitted being present at the homicide,
Mr.Dwight Wells was the fifth(5th) witness whom Mr.James confessed his
involvement in the Mr. Delbert L. Baker's aliad Mr.Del's homicide case.
* Mr.Dwight Wells
is a criminal defense attorney, whom at the time of my trial was an
assistant public defender (P.D.) appointed by the court to represent
John Berrien for the 1st degree murder and robbery of Mr.Del.
According to Mr.Wells John consistently maintained his innocence.
However, Mr.Wells advised his client to accept the State's plea offer
because he was initially charged with
1st degree murder and pleading to accessory after the fact was in
John's
best interest. Mr. Wells was also familiar with Mr.Vernon
James,
because he had represented him several times as a P.D.
Sometime
before my trial begins, Mr.James requested that Mr.Wells visit him at
the
county jail and during those meetings Mr.James confessed to Mr.Del's
murder;
"He told me that he was involved in the murder of Mr.del. He
described
to me in some detail what had gone on. Mr.James shared with
me
, however reluctantly, that he was Homosexual and that this had started
out
as an attempt to go back to Mr.Del's place and have some drugs and a
party.
That Mr.Del had come on to him in an overly aggressive way, and that's
what
led to the homicide.
Mr.James confessions
are not contradicted by the physical evidence, specially the above
version
told by Mr.Wells. His version of Mr.Del's murder is consistent
with
the other four (4) of james confessions, consistent with the trial
testimony
concerning the manner of death and consistent with the crime
scene
evidence.
* Dr. Richard J.
Ofshe, a social psychologist specializing in false memories, police
interrogations techniques and coerced confessions, testified for the
defense at the noted hearing. He testified that the police used
threats and control to obtain statements from Mr.John Berrien and that
the police intentionally sought
an incriminating statement in order to gain control over John so that
he
would be forced to cooperate in their prosecution of me. Dr.Ofshe
testified
that he had found evidence in the record to support John's testimony in
the
noted hearing that the police did threatened him during their
interrogations. In addition, he noted that even without John's
repudiations of his own
testimony, the unreliability of his testimony was obvious from his
statement
alone "the series of interrogations themselves show so much
variability
that one would have to conclude, as a whole, that the totality of this
is
simply unreliable without independent corroboration" The fact
that
John's statement about the threats and coercion were corroborated
in the transcripts of his interviews led Dr.Ofshe to believe Mr. John
Berrien
rather than the police officers who deny that threats of corcion
were
employed. Dr. Ofshe also testified that during one
interview,
John expressed concern that he might get himself in trouble and was
reassured
that he could avoid this by helping the police.
Dr. Ofshe was asked his
opinion on the interrogation procedures used during the interviews with
Mr.John Berrien; "Well, my opinion is that it not only could have
produced
a false coerced statement, I think the entirety of the record,
including John's
latest testimony, together with his testimony, together with his
testimony
prior, together with the facts that are contained in the record,
supports
the conclusion that this is not only a coerced statement, but it also
is
a statement that is contrary to the facts, could be classified as
grossly
unreliable and to put it in simple English, False.
Moreover, Dr.Ofshe also
testified on cross-examination that Mr.John Berrien's testimony at my
evidentiary hearing is far more likely to be reliable than his trial
testimony.
NOTICE:
(1)Mr. Vernon James was
the original suspect in this case and his suspicion aroused on Mr.Terry
Barber's account, one day after the Del's murder. Mr.James was a
"police informant" for the A.P.D. whom had worked very closely with
Det. John Knapp the leading police investigator or Mr.Del's death,
which leaves to believe that Det.Knapp have been protecting James in
this murder case. Also Mr. James and
the victim had a prostitution, drug connection
and a homosexual lover
relationship. Since Mr. James was the original suspect in
this case my trial counsel interviewed him in regard to the Del's
murder and he agreed to testify for the defense, disclosing what he
know about
the murder. However during my trial James admitted committing the
homicide to Mr.Roger Mims, who reported the confession to the State.
Mr.Mims
testified about James confession, but forced James to take the
5th-Amendment
and trial counsel dod not inform the jury that James had taken
the
5th-Amendment. Moreover, approximately two (2) years after my
conviction
Mr. Vernon James was found dead in a ditch shot several times in the
head
and chest.
(2) Mr.
Harold Landrum, alisa Bobo also was the original suspect in this case
and like James his suspicion aroused on Mr. Terry Barber's
account. Mr.Landrum also was a "police informant" and like James,
he worked closely with Det. John Knapp. Moreover like James
but in a different
event, Mr.Harold Dandrum was a victim of murder shot to death.
(3) Det.
John Knapp from the A.P.D. was the chief investigator officer in this
case
from day one. However, six (6) months after the murder
investigation
and because of police negligence in the Mr.Del's death probe, Knapp was
stripped of his detective rank to a police patrol officer and
replaced
by Det.Gary Glisson. Also, during my trial and for
exculpatory
evidence, defense counsel requested a blood sample believed to belong
to
Mr.Del's killer that was retrieved at the crime scene by Det. Knapp,
but
because of his negligence the noted evidence was not preserved.
In
addition approximately two (2) years after my conviction, Mr. Knapp was
disgracefully fired from the APD for stealing a gun from the evidence
room.
Also, like Mr. James and Mr. Landrum, Mr. John Knapp is now deceased.
(4) Det. Gary Glisson
from the APD took over the Mr. Del's murder investigation.
However, approximately two (2) years after my conviction, Det. Glisson
also was disgracefully fired from the APD for lying to a superior
officer, not following orders, and in connection with Mr. John Knapp's
evidence room theft. Moreover, Det. Glisson lied in my
evidentiary hearing, when he claimed that on 03-17-84 Mr. John Berrien
call him from the PCJ in Bartow, FL.
(5) On 03-06-84, six
(6) months after Mr. Del's murder Mr David Luna Falcon the state
witness
call Agent Tom Roper of the FDLE and on the above date, I became a
suspect
in the Mr Del's homicide case. Also, approximately two (2) years
after my conviction, Mr David Luna Falcon die of a full blown A.I.D.S
complication.
(6) Agent Tom Roper
from the FDLE got involved in the Mr Del's homicide investigation after
Falcons call. But, on 03-17-84 he disassociated himself from the
probe because he did not approves the way Det. Glisson and Sgt. Knapp
of the APD was using Falcon in the Mr Del's homicide investigation.
(7) The Circuit Court
and the Florida Supreme Court were clearly wrong that the jury had
heard about Mr. John Berrien's numerous and frequently contradictory
statements. The noted courts were similarly wrong to believe that
I had an evidentiary hearing on my 1st Rule 3.850 motion.
Finally, the courts again wrongly denied my Motion To Vacate Judgement
And Sentence.
(8) As for myself, I
feel like a Gypsy that had been picked up by State's Law Authorities,
then
later condemned me to death for the murder of a man that I never seen
before
and never have been in his place of business.
Conclusion
It has now been well documented that hundreds of innocent people have been executed or imprisoned in this country for crimes they did not commit. It is now equally well known that in recent years, more than 85 individuals have fortunately been rescued from such injustices, especially 20 of them in the State of Florida. Such cases invariably disclose government misconduct, the use of perjured testimony by questionable informants, ineffectiveness of counsel or counsel rendered ineffective by government tactics. Unfortunately such cases are rare and only brought to light by the capture of the true perpetrator, the recantation of a perjuring witness, the tireless efforts of a dedicated competent attorney or the involvement of news media programming. If ever a case existed that resembled any of the above it is my case. If ever a case bears close scrutiny it is my case. If ever a case bears the benchmark stench of questionable testimony, questionable goverment tactics and questionable effectiveness of counsel, it is the instant case, my case.
Since the courts aren't listening to my crys for justice, I come to you and hope that you are able to assist me by spreading this miscarriage of justice to any news media programs, such as 60 Minutes, 20/20, Dateline, or etc, etc.
This case needs to be publisized, so people in this nation can see how an innocent man can be executed or spend the rest of his life in prison for a crime he did not commit.
I be waiting for your reply. God bless you.
Respectfully yours,
Juan Roberto Melendez
Please note that although Mr. Melendez is a native Spanish speaker, his English is excellent. Most of his presentations and media interviews are in English but he also presents and conducts media interviews in Spanish.
To arrange for Mr.
Melendez to speak at your venue, please contact Ms. Judi Caruso at
505-362-1784
or judi@hotspare.com, director Juan Melendez Voices United for Justice
Project.
Juan Roberto Melendez B046466


