Cleveland Assistant City Prosecutor Lorraine Coyne Admits Impropriety In Trial Before Judge Keough Where Jury Tampering Is Suspected
Posted Friday, October 9, 2009
(Cleveland, Ohio Area News)
A Cleveland area Black journalist was convicted of a misdemeanor charge of resisting arrest when the sole arresting officer did not testified and a prosecutor admitted in closing arguments at trial that such officer was available to testify but was not called to the stand, transcripts of proceedings reveal.
At issue is a resisting arrest conviction against journalist Kathy Wray Coleman where her post trial attorney, Wayne Kerek, confirms that the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution mandates compulsory process to cross examine witnesses against her. Case law makes an exception in some instances, if the charging witness is unavailable.
Cleveland, Oh. Assistant city prosecutor Lorraine Coyne, the lead prosecutor in a criminal case brought by the city of Cleveland against Coleman, who says that she has been subjected to a malicious prosecution for her writings in the Call and Post Newspaper, a Cleveland weekly that targets the Black community, told the jury in closing arguments that the sole arresting deputy sheriff in the case was not needed, transcripts of the proceedings reveal.
“Officer [county deputy sheriff Gerald] Pace was here. He was out in the hallway, but we felt that the officers who testified did a good job and that we didn't need to go on and keep putting everybody on,” said Coyne in closing arguments to the jury, according to two separate transcripts of trial proceedings.
Kerek has asked the judge in the case, Cleveland Municipal Court Judge Kathleen Keough, for a hearing to seek dismissal of the jury verdict on that matter and on other grounds, though Keough has ignored the request. This is in spite of the judge's previous order for such hearing. Coleman was acquitted by a jury of other charges in the case and Kerek says that the judge's refusal to hold a hearing on the resisting arrest verdict is possibly motivated by racial animus and free speech violations since Coleman is a Black journalist who has written numerous articles over a 15 year period for the Call and Post, including more than 36 articles in 2008 alone.
Local grassroots organizations have scheduled a protest against Keough for Oct. 23 claiming that Coleman and other Blacks allegedly subjected to malicious prosecutions by the predominantly Black city of Cleveland and Cuyahoga County, which includes Cleveland, are targets of racial animus.
“If deputy sheriff Pace were available the only reason for not calling him to testify at trial is because his testimony would have exonerated me,” said Coleman. “ If I were White, male and blue eyed this would probably not be happening.”
To date Coleman has not been sentenced due to pending litigation in both the Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals and the Ohio Supreme Court where Kerek has asked those courts in three separate non-monetary lawsuits to order Keough to hold a hearing for potential dismissal of the verdict, though he also seeks Keough's removal from the case because of alleged bias.
Coleman also claims that the criminal trial transcripts certified by Cleveland Municipal Court Reporter Laura Williams are erroneous in various aspects. Williams gave Coleman a certified transcript in May of this year, weeks following the two day trial, only to turn around and demand that she accept an altered and falsified transcript in June with Keough's permission , Coleman contends.
In comparing the two separate transcripts Coleman says that one of many examples of alleged impropriety is where Keough illegally permitted a juror to ask unwritten questions in the middle of trial for the prosecution claiming she was allegedly told that a juror had questions. Specifically, the first transcript denotes that Keough says “I was told,” that a juror had a question, while the subsequent transcript denotes that “ I thought I was told” that a juror had question. A decision by the Ohio Supreme Court in an unrelated case that is applicable to all other cases in Ohio requires that juror questions be in writing and that trial courts follow other procedures to ensure fairness, propriety and compliance with state statutes and case law in both civil and criminal proceedings.
Coleman questions the parameters upon which the judge could have been informed that a juror had a question, whether she was told or thought she was told of the activity and says that the activity is potentially indicative of jury tampering in violation of the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
“ How did Judge Keough become positioned to even entertain the alleged desire of a juror of whom by law must remain neutral and free from disturbances that might taint the propriety of criminal proceedings to advocate for the all White prosecution?” said Coleman. “ We seek a comprehensive investigation of the process by which Cleveland Municipal Court Judges can permit jurors apparently slated to raise matters that the prosecution has failed to address to deliberately taint criminal trial proceedings.”
According to Coleman the Cleveland Clinic juror at issue, who subsequently became the foreman in deliberations, raised the question, with Keough's permission, that the mediocre prosecution inadvertently failed to ask one of its witnesses on direct examination, allegedly in an effort to railroad an illegal conviction.
“One must clearly question an unjust resisting arrest verdict when a juror who lobbies for the prosecution in the middle of trial subsequently becomes a jury foreman with the influence necessary to potentially convince his fellow jurors to railroad an innocent Black defendant with an unjust verdict of resisting arrest,” Coleman said.
Coleman also claims that both trial transcripts certified by Williams were prepared with alleged malice of forethought.
“Both transcripts are full of errors, that we view as deliberate, and indicative of the fact that Blacks and others don't have a chance in seeking vindication on appeal where the Cleveland Municipal Court permits erroneous and falsified trial transcripts designed to ensure malicious prosecutions against Blacks and others,” said Coleman . “The issue is of particular concern in criminal proceedings where a defendant's freedom is at risk as to illegal incarceration due to malfeasance, corruption and in my case racism, sexism and retaliation for free speech on issues of public concern protected per the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.”
(Cleveland, Ohio Area News)
A Cleveland area Black journalist was convicted of a misdemeanor charge of resisting arrest when the sole arresting officer did not testified and a prosecutor admitted in closing arguments at trial that such officer was available to testify but was not called to the stand, transcripts of proceedings reveal.
At issue is a resisting arrest conviction against journalist Kathy Wray Coleman where her post trial attorney, Wayne Kerek, confirms that the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution mandates compulsory process to cross examine witnesses against her. Case law makes an exception in some instances, if the charging witness is unavailable.
Cleveland, Oh. Assistant city prosecutor Lorraine Coyne, the lead prosecutor in a criminal case brought by the city of Cleveland against Coleman, who says that she has been subjected to a malicious prosecution for her writings in the Call and Post Newspaper, a Cleveland weekly that targets the Black community, told the jury in closing arguments that the sole arresting deputy sheriff in the case was not needed, transcripts of the proceedings reveal.
“Officer [county deputy sheriff Gerald] Pace was here. He was out in the hallway, but we felt that the officers who testified did a good job and that we didn't need to go on and keep putting everybody on,” said Coyne in closing arguments to the jury, according to two separate transcripts of trial proceedings.
Kerek has asked the judge in the case, Cleveland Municipal Court Judge Kathleen Keough, for a hearing to seek dismissal of the jury verdict on that matter and on other grounds, though Keough has ignored the request. This is in spite of the judge's previous order for such hearing. Coleman was acquitted by a jury of other charges in the case and Kerek says that the judge's refusal to hold a hearing on the resisting arrest verdict is possibly motivated by racial animus and free speech violations since Coleman is a Black journalist who has written numerous articles over a 15 year period for the Call and Post, including more than 36 articles in 2008 alone.
Local grassroots organizations have scheduled a protest against Keough for Oct. 23 claiming that Coleman and other Blacks allegedly subjected to malicious prosecutions by the predominantly Black city of Cleveland and Cuyahoga County, which includes Cleveland, are targets of racial animus.
“If deputy sheriff Pace were available the only reason for not calling him to testify at trial is because his testimony would have exonerated me,” said Coleman. “ If I were White, male and blue eyed this would probably not be happening.”
To date Coleman has not been sentenced due to pending litigation in both the Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals and the Ohio Supreme Court where Kerek has asked those courts in three separate non-monetary lawsuits to order Keough to hold a hearing for potential dismissal of the verdict, though he also seeks Keough's removal from the case because of alleged bias.
Coleman also claims that the criminal trial transcripts certified by Cleveland Municipal Court Reporter Laura Williams are erroneous in various aspects. Williams gave Coleman a certified transcript in May of this year, weeks following the two day trial, only to turn around and demand that she accept an altered and falsified transcript in June with Keough's permission , Coleman contends.
In comparing the two separate transcripts Coleman says that one of many examples of alleged impropriety is where Keough illegally permitted a juror to ask unwritten questions in the middle of trial for the prosecution claiming she was allegedly told that a juror had questions. Specifically, the first transcript denotes that Keough says “I was told,” that a juror had a question, while the subsequent transcript denotes that “ I thought I was told” that a juror had question. A decision by the Ohio Supreme Court in an unrelated case that is applicable to all other cases in Ohio requires that juror questions be in writing and that trial courts follow other procedures to ensure fairness, propriety and compliance with state statutes and case law in both civil and criminal proceedings.
Coleman questions the parameters upon which the judge could have been informed that a juror had a question, whether she was told or thought she was told of the activity and says that the activity is potentially indicative of jury tampering in violation of the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
“ How did Judge Keough become positioned to even entertain the alleged desire of a juror of whom by law must remain neutral and free from disturbances that might taint the propriety of criminal proceedings to advocate for the all White prosecution?” said Coleman. “ We seek a comprehensive investigation of the process by which Cleveland Municipal Court Judges can permit jurors apparently slated to raise matters that the prosecution has failed to address to deliberately taint criminal trial proceedings.”
According to Coleman the Cleveland Clinic juror at issue, who subsequently became the foreman in deliberations, raised the question, with Keough's permission, that the mediocre prosecution inadvertently failed to ask one of its witnesses on direct examination, allegedly in an effort to railroad an illegal conviction.
“One must clearly question an unjust resisting arrest verdict when a juror who lobbies for the prosecution in the middle of trial subsequently becomes a jury foreman with the influence necessary to potentially convince his fellow jurors to railroad an innocent Black defendant with an unjust verdict of resisting arrest,” Coleman said.
Coleman also claims that both trial transcripts certified by Williams were prepared with alleged malice of forethought.
“Both transcripts are full of errors, that we view as deliberate, and indicative of the fact that Blacks and others don't have a chance in seeking vindication on appeal where the Cleveland Municipal Court permits erroneous and falsified trial transcripts designed to ensure malicious prosecutions against Blacks and others,” said Coleman . “The issue is of particular concern in criminal proceedings where a defendant's freedom is at risk as to illegal incarceration due to malfeasance, corruption and in my case racism, sexism and retaliation for free speech on issues of public concern protected per the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.”
Comments