This page will list the people involved and outline a few of the backroom deals that helped the FBI and Utah police hide their mistakes. Names won’t be used initially, even though many of them are public.
1) When the FBI and police ‘higher ups’ realized what their agents had done during the interrogation, they realized the interview could not be shown to any jury. The interview shows that Esar Met knew nothing about the crime, but it also shows that an FBI agent and a local detective had no qualms about extracting an obviously false confession, even carefully feeding details of the crime to their victim, so the confession would be more believable.
Ultimately, the best coverup they could arrange was to stipulate that the interview could not be used ‘except to impeach the testimony of Esar Met’. Their coverup makes no sense whatsoever, since the interview does the opposite of impeaching his claims of innocence, so the big mystery is how they got his defense attorney to agree to that stipulation.
Why would a defense lawyer prevent a jury from seeing evidence that his client is not guilty?
Worse, though, was what the appeal lawyer did.
”He contends that the district court improperly ruled that the State could use a transcript of his police interview for impeachment purposes if he chose to testify.”
There is a big factual relevance which the interview has, it demonstrates that Esar Met knew nothing about the crime and that the interviewers were determined to get a non fact based confession.
That factual relevance is purposely obscured by the appeal lawyer, and in great detail by the appeal judges as well. They are playing a silly game of blowing smoke around the case, creating a lot of circular nonsense, in order to cement the prosecution, The ‘appeal’ was in fact the opposite of an appeal, it was the final nail of the prosecution under guise of defense.
Both lawyers are trying to use the authority of their profession to trick people into nonsense. If you do not understand exactly what they were doing, please ask on the Twitter thread or ask any person who has a vague sense of how the legal system works. Both lawyers, the original defense lawyer and the appeal lawyer, were working for the prosecution.
Because there was literally not one lawyer in the entire state of Utah who publicly pointed out the nonsense of the initial ‘impeachment’ agreement, the appeal lawyer doubled down on it. Again, if you do not understand what they did, please ask somebody to explain or ask on the Twitter thread.
Any defense lawyer in that case should have simply said “What the FBI is trying to pass off as a confession is actually exculpatory. It pretty convincingly shows he was not involved.”
The fact that the defense lawyers created a vast nonsensical ruse to hide the false confession, and the appeal judges facilitated that by adding a lot of utterly ridiculous verbose nonsense to the ploy, is stunning.
2) Sorenson, SMGF and out of control private security firms.
~ In Progress