Dealing with the Corey Lyons production, the Framing of 14 year old Ricardo Juarez and how the Santa Barbara B.O.S. deals with the SBCERS deficit!

I was wondering today if were you all as impressed with the newer looking California Dept of Justice Forensic laboratory as I was after you saw the pictures in yesterdays posting? 

On the corner of Hollister Ave and David Love Place Goleta

Than I have to ask why both the prosecuting attorney Gordon Auchincloss and defense attorney Robert Sanger seem to down play the role of the criminalist who occupy that building in regards to the Corey Lyons murder trial?  Oh It has been brought to my attention that I need to use the word “criminalist and not “criminologist in my postings. A criminalist as it turns out examines the crime scene evidence; and a criminologist would be a person who studies criminal behavior. You see since I do not work for the media here in Santa Barbara I can take responsibility for my actions in every posting I produce and correct my self when ever need be. Oh there I go again making light of the media situation here in Santa Barbara where Journalistic Integrity has come to die.

I wonder do I finally have your attention to the criminal activity we have here in Santa Barbara by those people sworn to protect us from it? Believe me law enforcement is well represented with people like Santa Barbara Police Chief Cam Sanchez or Dept of Justice Criminalist Barbara Burns to Superior Court bench Judge Brian Hill. What really upsets me is the fact that the public even though we no better are allowing these persons in power to literally get away with MURDER! We have been allowing Superior Court Judges and Attorneys to play along with Criminalist and Prosecutors in handing out there kind of justice in any fashion they see fit. They administer there version of justice with no fear of recourse to the usual law enforcement or legal processes. You see since they all represent that area of the criminal system as well.

 The end product is a well rehearsed court production as if Hollywood had produced it themselves. The orchestrated farce is complete with high notes and dramatizations that would hold it’s own against any Hollywood crime drama currently on T.V. None of this really comes at a surprise to me not when you consider the actions of our Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. The current board has for over 18 months now has considered alterative actions to help the Santa Barbara County deal with the unfunded future liabilities with the SBCERS pension fund. In fact it was in October of 2009 that a staff meeting was held and 4 possible twenty year alternatives in dealing with the half Billion dollar deficit was presented. So than I ask you this; just when does that Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors plan on telling the county residents which plan they chose? Because to date the Board of Supervisors seems content with rolling out a year to year plan while privately having had to chose a 20 year course of action, and they think I am crazy.

Let’s put this in another way; today the Judge declared the Misses and I legally divorced and he will free up our assets year to year for the next 20 years. Yeah that’s what I thought know one is buying that garbage either.

I have never shied away from the fact that Ricardo Juarez was framed for murder by the Santa Barbara Criminal system. What I have not shared is the fact that it was my friends in Law Enforcement who insisted that I go public with that fact. The court room trials are nothing more that fictional writing directed by the Santa Barbara District attorney’s office sharing production credits with the California Superior Courts.

I feel the framing of Ricardo Juarez warrants a second look at my findings that Barbara Burns criminalist helped frame a 14 year old boy for Murder. An defense attorney Karen Adkins, Superior Court Judge Brian Hill or anyone from the Santa Barbara District Attorneys office did anything to stop it.

Larry “Magic” Mendoza

www.santabarbaracriminlcourtcorruption.blogspot.com

Below is media story’s dealing with the Ricardo Juarez trial including the location from which I pulled my copies.

This media report was from the murder trial I challenged this report and Burns testimony from the beginning;
http://www.independent.com/news/2008/aug/27/forensics-expert-testifies-juarez-case/
"Immediately following Anthony’s testimony, Tuesday’s next expert witness was criminologist Diane Burns, who inspected all of the submitted evidence for biological materials - most specifically, blood.

Burns described how she processed the evidence, carefully examining it visually and then with the aid of several different microscope instruments. Having detected stains that looked like potential blood samples, Burns explained that she used a test that determined the presence of hemoglobin, a component of blood, and if the test had positive results, she collected samples to send to the DNA lab. Of all of the evidence, two pairs and one single glove tested positive for blood, along with a white pair of tennis shoes belonging to the defendant, and other articles of clothing collected from the suspects. While Burns could not determine whose DNA was on which objects, the court will most likely have another scientist from the DNA lab testify on this matter in the future to elucidate the unanswered questions."

This media report was from one of the preliminary hearings and makes one of these two testimony's falsified.
http://www.independent.com/news/2008/sep/12/final-witness-cross-examined-thursday-juarez-murde/  Of particular note was “item #22,” a knife with a seven-inch blade that investigators found in a trash can near the scene of the crime. The weapon was introduced during testimony from Dianne Burns, a forensics scientist who claimed she positively identified DNA found on the handle as belonging to Juarez.

So did the California Department of Justice criminologist commit perjury based on her two contradicting statements you just read?


http://www.independent.com/news/2008/sep/15/defense-begins-calling-witnesses-juarez-trial/#c8459 2007, she said Romero used a blue bandana to wipe the blood off of his hands, and then said something along the lines of “Don’t worry, I don’t think it’s my blood.” According to testimony in the trial last week, both Romero’s and Linares’s DNA were found on the gloves-which were confiscated from the witness from a dresser drawer in her Eastside home by police a few days after the stabbing incident.( so how did the gloves make it home)( Stomper also testified he found the knife(murder weapon) on the ground than picked it up and threw it in the trash can where it was later found)
  
http://www.independent.com/news/2008/sep/25/stomper-testimony-recreated-juarez-trial/ The several-hours-long reenactment contradicted both accounts given recently by witnesses - sometimes even seemed to contradict itself - about Stomper’s actions right after the State Street fight, including information about a knife found with Stomper’s DNA on it, which he said he had picked up near the scene of the crime and thrown into a trash can.( So why did D.O.J. criminologist Barbara Burns not testify to that fact earlier?)


 I did not switch between murder case's because I am satisfied with my coverage of the Lyons case. In fact there is so much that still bothers me. However what bothers me more is that complete lack of professionalism in most any case here in our Santa Barbara criminal court system. An it is because of my exploration of events or circumstances that my following has grown to the heights that it has. I will admit to this in closing. That because of my time away from the Juarez case I was able to IDENTIFY new concerns with D.O.J. criminologist  Barbara Burns testimonies between 2 preliminary hearings and 1 trial.


We cannot move forward until we hold those to answer for there past criminal behavior even if they wear a Badge.