January 2008
Judge Seybert's Decision regarding my appeal was
not in our favor. The judge denied our motion for discovery, and sided with the
prosecution regarding timeliness. The final ruling from the judge came down to
her saying my appeal papers were filed 13 days too late. While it was a terrible
defeat by the hand of the Court, there are two things I need to make abundantly
clear:
The first is that at no point in either of the two written decisions from Judge Seybert did she ever indicate that my appeal was without merit, groundless, unfounded, or factually unsupported. Her decisions focused strictly on a technical matter relating to the counting of days on a calendar. You can read her decisions and see how at no time does Judge Seybert dispute any of our factual claims of constitutional violations, or the improper methods of the police investigation.
The second is that with what we've been able to
uncover it is apparent that the children were subjected to dangerous therapeutic
methods. This is not simply a situation regarding one student having been
hypnotized. It appears that nearly all complainants were subjected to
therapeutic practices not limited to hypnosis, but also guided imagery,
suggestive questioning, and treatment for suspected "disassociation disorder",
all of which are now known to induce false memories. This was the evidence we
were hoping to present to the judge, had we been granted the opportunity. Had
Judge Seybert granted our motion for discovery, we believe extensive evidence
would have been uncovered to support our initial indication that hypnosis
therapy was used as a method to illicit testimony from witnesses. If those
involved with my prosecution conducted a fair and untainted investigation, then
what would have been the harm is in disclosing that information?
Again, this ruling on my appeal had no basis on the content of our arguments,
only on "the date on which the factual predicate of the claim presented could
have been uncovered through the exercise of due diligence." Federal Law says,
"The limitations period begins on the date on which petitioner was on notice of
the facts which would support a claim, not from the date on which the petitioner
has in his possession evidence to support his claim." The prosecution argued
that when I saw "Capturing the Friedmans" for the first time, and "learned" that
at least one of the complainants said his recollection of abuse was the result
of hypnosis, was when I should have filed my appeal papers. My lawyers
counter-argument was that seeing an anonymous person cloaked in shadow about
whom there is no identifying information is as much akin to "being on notice of
a fact" as receiving an anonymous letter, with no return address, reading
simply, "I was in the computer classes and it was only after being in therapy
did I remember that I was sexually abused." My appeal was filed once the film
maker had actually shared with my attorney and I his source material for the
film, and contact information for the people in shadows. But federal law says a
defendant has 365 days from the time of discovering new evidence to file an
appeal, and not 366.
October 3, 2007
Today in Central Islip was the first time all parties (meaning the DA, my defense council, and me) appeared in court together before an impartial judge in the twenty years since my arrest. A summary of what happened is at the following page where I will be continuing to post information and updates on courtroom matters.
September 2007
The Nassau County District Attorney's office filed a revised reply to our Habeas petition, arguing that our issue relating to the use of hypnosis was "time barred". Interestingly, Judith Sternberg (the ADA assigned to the case filed these papers over a YEAR LATE herself, and without the permission of Judge Seybert.)
The judge has ordered both parties to appear in court on October 3rd for oral arguments and to settle this "timeliness" matter. Meanwhile our motion for an Order of Discovery is being held in abeyance pending resolution of Sternberg's attempts at trying to oppose our petition after she unexpectedly lost her arguments.
August 2007
A special letter from Elisabeth Friedman
July 2007
I won my appeal! . . . sort of. Please the information on my home page, and at my legal defense fund site.
March 2007
Photos of our honeymoon.
August 2006
It is 100 degrees in Central Park and I have four more months until I'm permitted to leave this rock and go on a well-deserved vacation with Elisabeth.
July 2006
Ron Kuby filed a Habeas Corpus petition with the federal judiciary arguing my federal constitutional rights were violated at the time of my trial, and that the lower court's ruling was contradictory to current federal case-law standards.
June 2006
What a lovely birthday present. The Court of Appeals has declined our request for a review of the lower court's decision.
May 2006
Paperwork filed with the Court of Appeals requesting a hearing before the state's highest court.
April 2006
The Appellate Division declined to review the lower-court's ruling. Now we file with the next higher court, the Court of Appeals.
Spring 2006
We appealed the lower-court's ruling to the Appellate Division, arguing prejudice and improper legal basis for the denial of my appeal motion.
January 2006
Two years from the time of the initial filing of my appeal a decision was finally handed down by the judge in Nassau County.
The motion was denied in its entirety.
The judge did not request any in-court appearances by myself, or the attorneys for oral arguments.
The judge did not grant discovery of the police and District Attorney files on the case.
The judge did not even review the case-file in camera to review in chambers the police file to determine the manner and method of the police investigation.
The judge merely denied my appeal with a simple four page decision.
How's that for justice?
November 2005
Still no reply from the judge in Nassau County who is deciding on my appeal
motion. No telling when to expect a written decision from him.
My memoir has been edited and I am ready to take the manuscript to the next level. I am a few months behind my earlier self-imposed schedule because I've been working less on the book and more on building a wonderful new romance with a delightful companion -- Elisabeth Walsh.
Most importantly, I want to direct everyone's attention to a magnificent article by Debbie Nathan in the Los Angels Times about the McMartin case. Three cheers for Debbie Nathan.
June 2005
My birthday present to myself has been "There and Back Again - A memoir of prison life and release". I have been working at a feverish pace this spring, but I have achieved my reward. I now have a completed first draft of my book, my memoir. I know it is not "done" or "finished". There are months of editing ahead of me, but I have 405 pages of which I could not be prouder.
I was invited to read from my essay "Sitting in the Backseat of a Sedan" which was published in Swink! Magazine. They had a publication launch party. You may listen to my reading (streaming audio).
April 24, 2005
I want to direct interested individuals to last week's show of "This American Life", "Backed into a Corner". It is about stories of what people do when their options start to run out. I want to specifically turn your attention to the first story, and the last story.
The show opens with a seven minute story about Joe, who found himself convicted of a murder he did not commit, and facing a certain sentence life in prison. Instead, he arranged to assure himself of being sentenced deliberately to death instead. Why? Because he knew "life" would mean he would never get out, but if he were sentenced to "death" he would have a small hope of an advocate attorney taking on his case to try and win him an appeal.
The last story begins at the 42 minute mark. It is about Matt who endured a polygraph exam applying for a job with the National Security Agency. He describes how, while knowing he had no reason to fail the test, after a four hour interrogation, found himself confessing to looking at child pornography. He eloquently demonstrates the fallacy of the polygraph, and one can fail (as there has been conjecture about me) because of personality and the method of the exam.
A description of the whole show at www.thislife.org http://www.thislife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?episode=287
April 10, 2005
A number of people have e-mailed me recently asking how things were with me, noting there have not been any updates on the website in a while.
Things in my life are quiet, and for that I am thankful. I still enjoy hearing from people who have seen the movie, but the hype and publicity of the film seems to have passed.
I am working now as an electrician, mostly construction work. I really do not like my job, and I have to find something else, but I am thankful to have a job at all. If anyone has any leads on a job I'm totally open to suggestions.
All my free time is spent working on my memoir. The first draft is 90% done, and that is an excellent motivator to finish. I plan to finish the first draft before July, then spend the summer getting feedback from people and editing. I can't think of anything in my life I've ever been more proud of than this book. Also, it is the only thing which brings me any sense of fulfillment or purpose in life right now. I am focused on directing my energy toward the one thing which really matters to me right now.
The appeal is being handled by Ron Kuby, and I am thankful I am thankful for that. He is doing what he can to help, but I don't know how much longer the funding is going to last. I am committed to seeing this appeal even though, even though I don't expect to see any justice from the courts.
November 6, 2004
We (finally) received the Opposition Motion from the D.A.'s office. (It only took nine months.) Ron Kuby will be reviewing their counter arguments to our motion and will have time to filed a rebuttal brief. The D.A. basically argued that our motion is frivolous both on matters of law, and on matters of fact, which is standard practice for a District Attorney. Even when faced with overwhelming evidence pointing toward law enforcement, prosecutorial and judicial misconduct and proof clearly exonerating an imprisoned defendant, the District Attorney's office will oppose any rehearing of a closed case. The wheels of justice grind.
October 23, 2004
My judicial conduct complaint against judge Abbey Boklan with the NYS Commission on Judicial Conduct was dismissed.
October 20, 2004
Ron Kuby has filed a supplemental brief to my appeal motion. After reviewing the memorandum of law which was filed in January he felt it necessary to address at least one legal argument which he felt was neglected in the original filing. You may read the supplemental motion (it is rather short).
October 19, 2004
Marty Tankleff's supporters have put forth a public petition. Tankleff family members and supporters have launched a petition drive directed at Governor Pataki, Attorney General Elliot Spitzer, Senators Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton, Congressman Tim Bishop from Suffolk County and Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy.
Please visit www.martytankleff.org to read more, or the following link to go directly to the petition. Marty is a good friend of mine who should not be in prison. I encourage everyone to consider signing the petition.
http://www.martytankleff.org/Gui/PetitionerModify.aspx?Mode=Create
September 15, 2004
Ron Kuby has filed a notice of appearance with the court, and requested five weeks to review the case material, and to file a supplemental memorandum. He wishes to address a few legal issues which my previous attorney, Mark Gimpel, omitted from his legal argument. After that, I imagine the D.A.'s office is going to want at least two months to respond, after which the defense will have the opportunity to submit a rebuttal reply to the D.A.'s Motion in Opposition.
Alas, the wheels of justice do not spin very quickly. I try to be thankful every day that I am not locked in a cage waiting on these appeal efforts to release me from prison.
September 8, 2004
I have been in discussions with famed attorney Ronald L. Kuby today. He is excited about my case. Today the National Center for Reason and Justice has retained Ron Kuby to continue the work on my appeal motion. I am honored that Mr. Kuby has agreed to represent me.
August 22, 2004
Jesse's Last Night has been selected to be shown as part of the Vancouver Jewish Film Festival in October.
July 16, 2004
I have formally dismissed Mark Gimpel and I am searching for alternate council to carry on my appeal. Gimpel was brought in to write the memorandum of law, but was never intended to be trial council. In anticipation of oral arguments before the judge, and hopefully an evidentiary hearing to follow, I am searching for someone with more direct knowledge of mass-hysteria sex-abuse cases, and trail experience.
June 15, 2004
Bernard Baran files motion to vacate conviction; requesting new trial. http://www.freebaran.org/
June 1, 2004
Capturing the Friedmans on HBO.
May 17, 2004
I realized in March that I was going to have to leave school at the end of this semester and seek employment because I am running out of money. Without some income, to offset all the outgo, I will quite literally be unable to pay the rent in a few months. I don't know what I'd like to do career wise. For now I am just looking to earn some money, gain some experience, and have a normal life of getting up in the morning and going to work like everyone else does.
I would sure appreciate any leads on anyone who might be looking for an assistant who is eager and quick to learn, and willing to apply himself towards a job.
May 13, 2004
Suffolk County D.A. withdraws opposition to hearing in Marty Tankleff case. www.martytankleff.org
May 8, 2004
Court procedure permits the D.A. to file an opposition motion, which the defense is permitted refute. Only then does the matter go before the judge. The D.A. first asked for 60 days to reply to my motion. The return date was set for May 5, 2004. However...
The D.A. has requested additional disclosure of interviews conducted by Andrew Jarecki. The judge in Nassau County issued a subpoena in clear violation of Jarecki's journalistic freedoms to protect his sources. The D.A. has now additionally requested, and been granted, an indefinite continuance until the resolution of this subpoena. This means my defense team can not even begin working on our reply to the D.A.'s opposition motion, and any resolution of my case continues to be delayed.
Additionally...
My Change of Venue motion was denied, so the case will be heard in Nassau County. I am trying to remain hopeful that I will be granted a fair hearing, but in Nassau County there is clearly a bias against me.
May 4, 2004
John Stoll released from prison after 20 years -- complainants recant childhood testimony. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-05-08-stoll_x.htm
April 30, 2004
Gerald Amirault released from prison!!
March 9, 2004
Really nice story / interview with Jesse Friedman
January 9, 2004
Filing of 440 Motion: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/movies/2001832621_friedman09.html
Home | Appeal Motion | Affidavits | FAQ | Statement from Attorney | Case Documents | Other Injustices