Brady Evidence

The following withheld exculpatory material Brady, Giles and Giglio evidence and Egregious governmental misconduct was INTENTIONALLY withheld from the 1997 federal grand jury, 1998 Jury Trial and 1999 Jury trial of Marino , as a result of some external governmental and judicial impediment, generating governmental and judicial interference and that there is both a reasonable an actual probability of a different result had the discovery been handed over to Marino , the result of the proceedings would have been different, much more favorable to Marino .Which would have supported egregious gross governmental misconduct and core Brady, Giles and Giglio violations, which may lead to Marino’s actual, factual & legal innocence of the June 16th, 1989, Salemme attempted murder, depicted as predicate racketeering act A-2 in Count One  RICO and Count Two RICO conspiracy against Marino.

  U.S. Department of Justice’s and Assistant United States Attorneys: Jeffrey Auerhahn and Cynthia Ann Young’s INTENTIONAL Brady violations withholding core exculpatory material evidence from the 1997 investigating federal grand jury and the 1998 First trial and 1999 Second Trial without Due process of law:

Also in violations of the Local Rules of the United States District Court District of Massachusetts, provides for automatic discovery at all times relevant to  Marino’s case (United States v. Marino, CR-97-40009-NMG. (District of Massachusetts) within the meaning of Brady and Giles. Local Rule 41(a)(5) 1986 version; Local Rule 116.1(A)(5) 1990 version. In the form FBI TOP ECHELON informants Angelo “Sonny” Mercurio , James “Whitey” Bulger and Stephen “The Rifleman” Flemmi called Salemme, to a location in Saugus, Massachusetts on June 16, 1989 to be assassinated.

  • See United States v. Salemme, 91 F.Supp.2d at 263 (D.Mass.1999) Also see UNDER SEAL Exhibits: 188. 194, 237, 246; FBI agent James Ring’s testimony 6-16-1998 Tr. at 55.

Even though the JURY MARKED NOT PROVEN BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT on the Salemme attempted murder depicted as predicate racketeering act A-2 in Counts 1 and 2, on December 22, 1999, the Court (Judge: Gorton) with the urging of the government: (AUSA’S: Auerhahn and Young) dramatically enhanced Marino sentence and extra 8 Offense Level enhancement from Offense Level 28 Criminal History 5 to Offense level 36, Criminal History 5, from 130 months to 420 months sentence, by the mere preponderance of the evidence, taking away the power of the jury’s NOT PROVEN VERDICT. Marino received an extra 24-25 years enhancement, unlawfully without DUE PROCESS OF LAW.

It appears that the above is of a “Substantial Public Interest” requiring governmental transparency and should be both national and international news for public discussion.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Enlighten Yourself… “Where the willingness is great, the difficulties cannot be great. ” ~Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince

%d bloggers like this: