Washington Loses Fight for New Trial...

Washington Loses Fight for New Trial

By Laura Arenschield
The Winchester Star

Freejeff

A Winchester man’s
decade-long fight to reverse his murder conviction hit another
roadblock on Thursday in Winchester Circuit Court.

Jeffrey Franklin
Washington, 32, who pleaded guilty 10 years ago to killing and robbing
a 22-year-old Winchester man, has spent the time since then trying to
get his trial thrown out.

His most recent
attempt began last December, when he filed a lawsuit charging that a
city prosecutor — now a local defense attorney — and his defense
attorney — now a 26th Circuit Court judge — worked together to trick
him and the court system.

But retired Circuit
Court Judge Herman A. Whisenant Jr. of Manassas said on Thursday that
Washington’s accusations are not true.

He dismissed Washington’s suit, leaving the convicted killer with few options.

“He can appeal the
court’s decision today to the Virginia Supreme Court,” said David B.
Hargett, Washington’s attorney for the suit. “Beyond the Supreme Court,
if we appeal and are denied, it would take additional new evidence for
him to get a new trial.”

Had Washington been
convicted of capital murder 10 years ago, and had a Winchester Circuit
Court jury decided he deserved it, he could have been executed.

Rather than risk that
outcome, Washington, then 23, and his attorney, John R. Prosser, opted
for a plea bargain with then-Winchester Commonwealth’s Attorney Paul H.
Thomson.

Washington pleaded
guilty to eight charges, including first-degree murder, for the
shooting death of Carlos Darnell Marshall, who lived on Woodstock Lane.

He entered Alford
pleas, a legal option that allowed him to admit that prosecutors had
enough evidence to convict him, but to maintain that he did not commit
the crimes.

Circuit Court Judge John E. Wetsel Jr. sentenced him to 70 years in prison, the maximum allowed under the plea bargain.

Because Washington
was convicted and sentenced before Virginia legislators abolished
parole, he could be released before he serves the full prison term.
According to the Virginia Department of Corrections, Washington is
eligible for parole in November 2006.

During Thursday’s
hearing, Haggert argued that Washington agreed to the plea deal because
he was afraid he would be convicted of capital murder.

Haggert said
Washington also pleaded guilty because police and prosecutors
intimidated and threatened witnesses who would have said Washington did
not kill Marshall.

Washington was not in
the Joint Judicial Center courtroom on Thursday, but participated in
the hearing via speaker-phone from Buckingham Correctional Center, near
Dillwyn, where he is being held.

He said prosecutors offered his co-defendants lighter sentences in exchange for their testimony against him.

Five men, including Washington, were arrested and charged in connection with Marshall’s death.

Washington was the only one found guilty of murder.

Washington said on
Thursday that one of the other four men, John Paul Doleman, made a
videotape re-enacting the murder for police investigators, and that the
video “never placed me at the crime scene.”

But Assistant
Winchester Commonwealth’s Attorney Marc H. Abrams said the evidence
showed that Washington killed Marshall. All four of the other men at
Marshall’s home that night said Washington was the killer.

“I think the evidence
was very strong — very, very strong — in this particular case that the
right person was convicted,” Abrams said.

Winchester prosecutors are pleased with Whisenant’s decision, he said.

“Frankly, it’s been
very frustrating to be retrying aspects of cases that took place 10
years ago,” Abrams said. “At some point, there needs to be finality. We
can’t just have somebody make a new allegation years down the road and
then retry old cases.”

********************************************************************

Personally, we were in this courtroom to witness the rhetoric. If there ever were a such thing as the Jursidiction called 'CLOWN COURT'; this proceeding definitely qualified.

Jeff's attorney, Haggart, shows up late. The Judge had no idea that Jeff even had an attorney. The Judge is proceeding under the presumption that this is a pro se allegation until Jeff blurps up from his conference call and asks the judge if his attorney has arrived yet.... Stunned that Jeff even has an attorney, he alots time Haggart to arrive and then proceed.

Haggart makes great arguements that warrant an evidenciery hearing such as:

1. Afidavids filed by witnesses that were coersed and threatened by the prosecutor and police.

2. Blatent fraud committed by the Prosecution committed before the Jury and the court.

3. Missing Transcripts from the Clerks office...

4. Collusive behavior by the state to obtain the plea

I dont know about you, but these sorts of statements would warrant an evidenctiary hearing. Apparently, this judge wanted evidence to warrant the evidenciary hearing?!?!?! What the heck is the evidenciary hearing for... for that matter what was this hearing? LOL...

Clown Court at its best. Go to: Freejeff and check out the case and the evidence. It's sickening to think that our Sovereignty and freedom can be violated by such corrupt actions by those that are suppose to protect them.

Freejeff