To: Senate Judiciary, Committee
cc: Governor John Bel Edwards and
staff
Louisiana House and Senate
Justices Louisiana Supreme
Court
Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry and staff
Louisiana District
Attorneys Assoc.
Louisiana Sheriff's Assoc.
Louisiana State Troopers
Assoc.
All Catholic Diocese, Bishops and staff
Media throughout
Louisiana
Editors, Bureau Chiefs, Directors, Managers and government/crime
reporters
Subject: Guilty: Glenn Ford & Marty Stroud
Re: How
bad? Marty Stroud's Testimony, Senate Judiciary Committee C, SB 142, April 26,
2017
From: Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom
Preface
The committee has an
obligation to make sure that A.M. "Marty" Stroud takes personal responsibility
for his testimony of April 26th. Stroud, proclaimed Glenn Ford an innocent that
he, as a prosecutor, with ill intent in his heart put on death row.
That obligation extends to setting the record straight to show respect
for Isadore Rozeman, the innocent robbery/murder victim, the Rozeman and Glenn
Ford families, as well as for the committee.
In 2015, Marty Stroud
described his 1984 self as "arrogant, judgmental, narcissistic", "full of
myself", "totally wrong", interested more in winning than justice, "I was not a
nice person" (1), "win, don't care about the costs","don't care about the
victim" (2), "I did something that was very, very bad." "It was a train to
injustice, and I was the engineer."(3), particularly, in the context of his
being a prosecutor in securing the 1984 death sentence for Glenn Ford, for the
robbery/murder of Isadore Rozeman.
Unlike the 1983-84 and 1988-2012
Stroud, in "avoiding" a search for the truth, Stroud's 2017 testimony, as well
as his statements, from 2014 through today, had a whole bunch of evidence which
he, intentionally suppressed, in avoidance of that known
evidence.
======
As per the Death Penalty Information Center's normal absurdities, Ford is listed as no. 144 on their "innocent"/"exonerated" from death row list, even though impossible to make that assessment, unless using the new, invented, perverse definitions of those words as does DPIC, equal to redefining lie as truth.
======
What Stroud Left Out of His Testimony -
2017
Stroud: "in the motion to dismiss the case, the prosecutor's office
said "if we had known the evidence that they knew at the time of the prosecution
he probably wouldn't have been arrested." (4)
Sharp: That is very odd.
The evidence in the 1984 trial was overwhelming, with regard to Ford committing
multiple felonies, inclusive of being a principle to the robbery, which led to
the additional circumstantial evidence proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, that
Ford was guilty of capital murder, in the case of innocent murder victim,
Isadore Rozeman.
That same evidence exists, today.
There is,
overwhelming, support for Ford's guilt within both the 2015 (5) and 2016 (5a)
reviews of the case evidence, by six judges, all of which Stroud is aware of
but, intentionally, left out of Stroud's 2015-2017 statements, inclusive of
Stroud's 2017 testimony.
Even though Stroud claims he desires "all of
the story that should have been disclosed" (1), his 2015-2017 examples are
"hiding" all of the story that Stroud should have disclosed.
Take a
look:
Glenn Ford's Guilt
In 2013-14, the Caddo Parish District
Attorney's Office stated that it had obtained credible evidence that Ford "was
neither present at, nor a participant in, the robbery and murder of Isadore
Rozeman," and filed a motion to vacate Ford's conviction and sentence. On March
10, 2014, the trial court granted the state's motion. Ford was released the
following day after spending nearly 30 years on death row. (5a)
The facts are that Ford, by his own admission, was a principal participant
in the robbery/murder, that he was, at the least, guilty of second degree
murder. Ford cannot be excluded from actually murdering Isadore Rozeman, that
murder being a capital, death penalty eligible crime, for which he was found
guilty and sentenced to death.
(2016) Justice C.J. BROWN, "The evidence as presented supports Ford's
guilt of second degree murder and that his connection was certainly not
"tangential." (5a)
The 2013 "credible evidence" for Ford's 2014 release came from a reliable
informant, who remains anonymous.
Reliable informants are known to be unreliable, occasionally. Informants
are only as reliable as their sources, which was, allegedly, Jake Robinson, who,
allegedly, stated, to the informant, that he (Robinson) was the shooter of
Isadore Rozeman and that Glenn Ford was not there. Robinson is a career
criminal, who no one trusts.
Glenn Ford, at his 1984 trial, did not deny being at the scene of the
robbery/murder and he cannot prove that he was not (5a) Nor can he be excluded
from committing the murder.
The record reflects that, at the time of the filing of the 2014 instant
petition (to release Ford), two other individuals, Jake Robinson and Henry
Robinson, were being prosecuted for the robbery and murder of Mr. Rozeman.
(5a)
Those charges, which originated from that informant, have, now, been
dropped, for lack of evidence, in this case, as well as others'.
That doesn't mean the informant was lying, although, such may be the case.
The informant's information could not be confirmed in quite a few cases.
We know that Ford was released, based upon information that could not be
confirmed.
The evidence of Glenn Ford's guilt is overwhelming, yet, he was
released.
The iron solid case is that Ford should have been convicted of second
degree murder, at least, and that with all of the other involved crimes, Ford
would have been sentenced to life in prison and that Ford should never had been
released.
(2016) the five justices, Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit:
"The (informant's) statement of the district attorney is not evidence, nor has
Ford produced any evidence that he was not concerned in the commission of this
crime. We find no manifest error in the trial judge's (2015) conclusion
regarding Ford as a principal to this crime." (5a)
2016: Justice J. DREW: " . . . it is accurate to say that the trial court
(2015) found that Ford committed armed robbery. Even if not present at the
moment of a crime, a person can be convicted of that crime, if otherwise
involved as a principal." (5a) " . . . Ford arguably committed second degree
murder arising out of the facts of this case. Had he actually been convicted of
that crime, in a petit jury trial conducted in accordance with the Sixth
Amendment to the United States Constitution, Ford would have never been released
from prison." (5a)
Justice would be served had Ford remained in jail.
Anti-death penalty folks attack informants, mercilessly (6), when they
report the guilt of murderers, but love them if they report the innocence of
murderers.
Stroud was very aware in 1983/1984 that the Robinson brothers were involved
in the crimes, as well as all of the other facts, detailed, based upon all of
Ford's statements, as well as those of other witnesses.
There wasn't enough evidence to try the Robinsons in 1984, nor was there at
any later date, through today.
One wonders what evidence Stroud avoided, in 1983-84 and 1988-2012, that
the police, the investigators and the lead prosecutor also avoided in
1983-1984. Was there any?
Defense counsel Stroud's prosecutorial self flagellation tour could be
attributable to his ingratiation himself into anti-death penalty circles, where
such "self destruction" is celebrated, as with The Mid-Atlantic Innocence
Project honoring Stroud with its annual Champion of Justice Award in 2016.
Justice redefined.
--- " knew the robbery of jewelry Isadore
Rozeman on Nov. 5, 1983 was going to occur
--- did nothing to stop
it
--- attempted to destroy evidence by selling items taken in the robbery
and
--- attempting to find buyers for the murder weapon used by those he
implicated in the murder." (5, 7).
3) At the very least, Ford knew about the
robbery, in advance, was involved in the conspiracy with the Robinson
brothers, did nothing to stop it, was an accessory to armed robbery, after the
fact, pawned items stolen in the robbery/murder, the day of the
robbery/murder, and had, additional, items, stolen from Isadore,
in Ford's apartment, was trying to acquire a pistol the morning of the murder
and attempted to sell a pistol, the afternoon, after the murder (5, 5a, 8).
Ford admitted to all of that, and more, as Stroud well knows.
Detective Gary Pittman who testified that Ford admitted to him that he and
Henry Robinson had been at Mr. Rozeman's house on the day of the murder
(5a).
Also found were items stolen, the month, before, from Rozeman's
house/shop. Those items were connected
to Glenn Ford. (9)
Who planned the robbery? Ford was the only one involved who knew that
Izadore Rozeman had valuables to steal and who knew of Rozeman's security. How?
Ford worked for Rozeman (8,5,5a).
Not only does Ford have blood on his
hands, figuratively, he, likely, had blood on his hands, at some point,
actually.
Ford cannot be excluded from gaining access to Rozeman's home, to
facilitate the robbery/murder, nor can he be excluded from being the triggerman
(8, 5, 5a).
Ford had gunshot residue on his left hand. The residue was of such small
amount that it could neither be confirmed nor denied that he fired a weapon (8,
5,5a).
There was a partial fingerprint on a paper bag, at the crime scene, which
appeared to be used as a glove, likely to hold the gun, a method to avoid some
gunshot residue and avoid fingerprints on the weapon. That fingerprint did not
exclude Ford, but could not be matched to him (8). That partial fingerprint
excluded the other suspects (8, 5,5a).
4) Isadore Rozeman was the robbery/murder
victim in the Glenn Ford case.
All public quotes from Isadore Rozeman's
family (2015). All their facts are supported by the record
(5,5a).
"We know that Glenn Ford was intimately
involved in this crime that, eventually, led to the death of our uncle. Much of
this was due to the relationship of Uncle Prince (Isadore) with Glenn Ford."
(10,8)
"It is undisputed Mr. Ford was involved,
having sold the clocks and watches obtained from the shop during the robbery. It
is undisputable Mr. Ford was shopping for a gun days before Nov. 5, 1983, and
selling the weapon days after the murder." (11, 8)
"In the compensation hearing (2015), for
Glenn Ford, District Judge Katherine Dorroh found that Mr. Ford "committed many
crimes, including possession of stolen goods, accessory after the fact to armed
robbery, and principal to armed robbery." (11)
The Rozeman family that found that
those charges may resulted in "a sentence of 30 years to life without parole.
Mr. Ford served 30 years in prison." (11)
They are correct, as detailed, above, and here (5a).
"What has been lost in this discussion is
the real innocent victim." (11)
Sharp: Never in his testimony nor in his
apology letter, did Stroud, once, mention the name of Isadore
Rozeman.
"That innocent murder victim was our
uncle, Isadore Rozeman, raised in Shreveport and served our country as a plane
mechanic at Barksdale during World War II." (11) "He had a shop in his home on
Stoner Avenue and spent his adult life repairing and selling antique watches and
clocks. (11).
"On Nov. 5, 1983, (Isadore) opened the
back door and people rushed into (Isadore's) home/shop. They knocked him down,
broke his glasses and then put a gun to the back of his head and pulled the
trigger." (11)
Multiple witnesses had Ford near or on Isadore's property near the time of
the robbery/murder (5,5a,8). Ford had, himself, in Isadore's home/shop.
None of Ford's alleged alibis could be confirmed in court (8).
"Our uncle (Isadore Rozeman) was an
innocent victim. (11, 5, 5a)"
Sharp: Stroud called Ford an "innocent
victim" (1). Such would be an incredible, bizarre declaration, if we were not
aware of Stroud's self confessed ethical problems.
The "innocent" and
"exoneration" deceptions, by anti death penalty folks, are standard, every day
occurrences (12), just as
their making up false confessions are (13).
"It is also undisputable to our family
that my uncle (Isadore) did not open any of the four or five locks on his back
door to anyone he did not know. We all spent the night with our uncle and knew
his habits. At the time of the murder, the door was not broken down."
(11)
"We will never know for sure who got our
uncle to turn the locks and open the door, but the most logical choice was
someone who had a relationship with my uncle and who benefited from the robbery.
" (11)
"Glenn Ford fits both counts while the
people now felt to likely be the shooters did not have a relationship with our
uncle." (11)
Sharp: It is important to note that those other people were seen with Glenn
Ford both, before and after the robbery/murder (7, 5a).
"In February police interviewed Marvella Brown, Jake Robinson's girl
friend. She stated that Ford arrived at her apartment around noon the day of the
offense, and asked the Robinsons, "Is you still going?" The three left, she
said, returning around 3:00 p.m. with a sack containing jewelry. Ford carried a
.22 pistol, and Jake Robinson had a .38 (8,
5a)"
However, she recanted:
Finally, when asked if she had lied to the court, she responded, "I did lie
to the Court.... I lied about all of it." (8)
The issues are that her claims of
involvement fit the time line of the murder, include the stolen items, as we
know was the case, and folks who were well known criminals, all of which suggest
the credibility of her original witness statement.
Brown's recantations is much more suspect, as countless people in the
community were intimidated by the four Robinson brothers, which would explain
the recantation. (14)
Brown's recantation is, additionally, rebutted by the fact that Ford stated
that one of the Robinson brothers asked Ford to sell the gun, which witnesses
stated Ford was trying to sell, the same afternoon as the murder and also gave
stolen goods to Ford to sell, those being stolen goods from Isadore
Rozeman.
Sharp: Glenn Ford has not and cannot be
excluded as a participant in the actual
robbery/murder.
5) From the 2015 hearing (5): " 14) After
being asked to participate in the robbery of Mr. Rozeman by Henry Robinson, Mr.
Ford went to see Mr. Rozeman and asked him if he had any work he could do (p8,
5).
Sharp: I suspect Ford made that up to
explain why he was seen in the vicinity of Rozeman's house, before, after and at
the time of the robbery/murder, which, I believe, was Ford's real job, that
day.
6) with all that evidence, what does
Stroud say?
Stroud: “The audacity of the state’s
effort to deny Mr. Ford any compensation for the horrors he suffered in the name
of Louisiana justice is appalling." (1)
Sharp: Mr. Stroud, the audacity is all
yours. As Stroud must be aware, for the judge to have awarded compensation to
Ford would have required that judge to break the law (5). The judge would have
had to find Ford "actually innocent", a finding which is, actually, impossible
(5,5a).
Mr. Stroud, what of the horror of
Isadore Rozeman's
death? Stroud didn't mention
it.
The foundation of Ford's horror
was, of course, Ford himself. But for Ford, Isadore would, almost certainly,
neither have been robbed nor murdered. All of Ford's confessions, alone, should
have resulted in Ford never being released from prison.
To paraphrase Stroud: "Ford did something that was very, very bad." "It was
a train to horror, and Ford was the engineer."
To paraphrase Stroud, from
his 2015 apology letter (1): "I apologize to the committee in not having been
more diligent in my duty to ensure that the proper disclosures of Ford's
involvement in the robbery/murder was presented to the
committee."
Defense Counsel
Contrary to Stroud, first chair for Ford's defense, Paul Lawrence, had,
previously, taken several civil cases to trial. Lawrence had, also, clerked for
La. Supreme Court Justice Albert Tate, which involves both criminal and civil
cases.
Lawrence states that he "had lots of coaching before and during the (Ford)
trial from experienced members of the criminal defense bar in Shreveport,
including, specifically, Wellborn Jack, Jr. and his partner Rebecca Hudsmith,
who is now the Federal Public Defender for the Middle and Western Districts of
Louisiana."
Lawrence: " I did work very hard to master all the evidence and to draw
every possible inference that could be argued to support a reasonable doubt of
Ford’s guilt and I believe I did a quite respectable job of that, the jury’s
verdict notwithstanding." “It was my job to provide Ford the best defense I
could provide under the circumstances, regardless of his innocence or guilt, and
I believe that I did that to the very best of my ability."
The appellate
courts do not disagree with Lawrence.
Lawrence takes no stand on the death penalty or Ford's guilt. (All from
Sharp's discussion with Lawrence May, 8, 2017).
Most legal folks know that civil law is much more complicated than criminal
law.
While this was Lawrence's first criminal and capital trial, it was also
Stroud's first capital case, for which Stroud was second chair, not lead
counsel, as some misrepresent.
7) Note this very important context, from Stroud's 2015 NPR interview
(15):
Interviewer CORNISH: At what point did you
actually really feel guilt about what happened to Glenn
Ford?
STROUD: I felt within four or five years
of the verdict.
In 1984, Stroud tells us that he could,
hardly, care less. From 1988/1989-2013, Stroud, allegedly, cared and still did
nothing.
Which is worse? Neither could be called .
. . better.
More from the Rozemans
8) All public quotes from Isadore
Rozeman's family (2015):
"We loved our uncle as we did my
daughter's husband, Clint Dobson. One was killed at the age of 54, the other at
28. They were both innocent victims. However, those involved in their violent
deaths are not innocent victims." (11)
"What our family learned from both (of
these innocent murder victims in our family) is that we live in a society where
evil exists. There are people who do not have a moral compass and these events
bear out that truth. Between society and this evil is law enforcement and those
in the criminal justice system. We are thankful they stand in that gap."
(11)
Sharp: What does Stroud think of Louisiana
prosecutors?
Stroud: "out to win, whatever the costs." "They
don't care about the victim. " "They care about their record." "The ends
justified the means". (2)
Sharp: With the exception that prosecutors
MUST care about their record, my guess is that, with about 95% of prosecutors,
reality would condemn Stroud's slanders. And Stroud?
Doesn't it sound like he is
describing himself?
We want prosecutors to care, a lot, about
their record. All taxpayers and all justice loving folks want prosecutors to
make the correct, responsible decisions for cases to go to trial, to plea cases
when appropriate and to know when best to drop charges. Prosecutors want that to
be as close to a 100% accuracy record, as possible, and so do we
all.
The Rozemans continue:
"Without the accountability imposed by law
enforcement and criminal justice, we would live in chaos. Because of this, we
disagree with many who describe law enforcement and criminal justice as a broken
system. We differ with those who wish to lessen personal responsibility,
accountability and punishment for violent criminal behavior." (11)
"Our family believes in God's grace and
mercy but neither of those things negate the multiple Bible stories that
reference personal responsibility and personal consequences for individual
actions." (11)
In
Closing
The Committee should hold Stroud
responsible for his testimony and should shoulder the personal responsibility
that both the committee and Stroud have to Isadore Rozeman, the Rozeman and
Glenn Ford families, in setting the record straight.
Don't forget Isadore Rozeman.
======
As per the Death Penalty Information Center's normal absurdities, Ford is listed as no. 144 on their "innocent"/"exonerated" from death row list, even though impossible to make that assessment, unless using the new, invented, perverse definitions of those words as does DPIC, equal to redefining lie as truth.
======
Research, w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of everyone in a public policy debate and which rebut all anti-death penalty claims.
The media/academic norm is to use anti-death penalty material, refuse to fact check or vet it and avoid all pro-death penalty research and experts. How will you know that is true? You haven't seen this material, prior.
a) The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
b) Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
(7 pro-death penalty experts are included)
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
======
Footnotes
3) 30 Years on Death Row, CBS 60 Minutes,
10/11/2015
4) I used this video because
it isolates Stroud's
testimony:
5a) STATE v. FORD, No. 50,525-CA., 193 So.3d 1242 (2016), STATE of
Louisiana, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Glenn FORD, Defendant-Appellant, Court of
Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit, May 18, 2016.
6) There are countless articles about
distrusting informants. Just do a GOOGLE search.
8) STATE v. FORD, No. 85-KA-1039.489 So.2d 1250 (1986)
STATE of Louisiana v. Glenn FORD.
Supreme Court of
Louisiana.
March 31, 1986. Rehearing Denied May 30, 1986.
9) from
a reliable source, who stated it's "on police reports and either the bond
hearing or preliminary examination testimony." I have not located the
citation.
11)
Rozeman family: 'Glenn Ford is not an innocent victim', by Phillip Rozeman
Shreveport Times, April 8, 2015 | Updated April 10, 2015
and
The 4.1% "Innocent" on Death Row: More
Nonsense
14) CPSO detective committed to solving
cold cases, Vickie Welborn, Shreveport Times, July 21, 2014,
