tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post3819972687686964628..comments2023-10-22T09:32:13.417-04:00Comments on Big Trial | Philadelphia Trial Blog: District Attorney: Lead Detective Joe Walsh Was A Rogue CopAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04116104602505815614noreply@blogger.comBlogger30125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-75357047069291696532017-06-21T13:07:31.673-04:002017-06-21T13:07:31.673-04:00Ralph, if as you report Detective Walsh was on the...Ralph, if as you report Detective Walsh was on the witness stand for 19 straight days in the 2012 trial why didn't he bring up the matter of prosecutoral misconduct. It seems very strange that a so called decorated veteran detective would allow himself to be on the witness stand for such a long period of time and not reveal his misgivings concerning the matter in front of the court. Is perjury an issue here? Why did it take 5 years for Walsh to come forward? Have you asked him? Is there any investigation into his past cases where he may have given false testimony to gain convictions for Seth Williams? Or was Walsh a contract employee who was willing to lie as long as he was employed by Seth Williams? Just some thoughts. Which Walsh should be believed?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-89458741083368344722017-06-21T11:04:57.417-04:002017-06-21T11:04:57.417-04:00Any chance the archdiocese folds like the Billy Do...Any chance the archdiocese folds like the Billy Doe case and hands over a blank check? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-78824096389926534262017-06-20T14:57:06.699-04:002017-06-20T14:57:06.699-04:00The Inquirer knows there is a helluva story going ...The Inquirer knows there is a helluva story going on but they are powerless to act, it does not fit into the prosecution's use for them. <br /><br /> Revealing the prosecutions faults no matter how outrageous is not permitted at the Inquirer.Turning a blind eye has resulted in death and the destruction of many, many lives. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-789172737556419492017-06-17T13:50:49.698-04:002017-06-17T13:50:49.698-04:00@anonymous 11:01
I think it's a lot worse tha...@anonymous 11:01<br /><br />I think it's a lot worse that just prosecutorial misconduct. IMHO, it's a very serious criminal matter that contributed to Father Engelhardt's untimely death, Bernie Shero's humiliation / incarceration, and the extortion of 5 million dollars from a (make it go away) Catholic Church.<br /><br />What charges could be applied? Well, for openers not try: Malfeasance, Defamation, Malicious Prosecution, Perjury, Depraved Indifference, Reckless Endangerment (Father Engelhardt). <br /><br />The DA's office needs to be thoroughly investigated with regards to this case. Maybe some brave ADA who really believes in an impartial judicial process where everyone plays by the 'rules' will have the courage to come forward with some incriminating evidence.<br /><br />With the feds so interested in Seth Williams these days, I find it hard to believe that they haven't investigated this particular case.<br /><br />Now, if Snowden worked for Rufus.................Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-28817043255973477922017-06-13T11:01:04.309-04:002017-06-13T11:01:04.309-04:00Ralph, it wasn't coincidence James Gallagher J...Ralph, it wasn't coincidence James Gallagher Jr wasn't in the courtroom during the Engelhardt/Shero trial nor at the sentencing hearing when Ceisler gave those 2 men, Engelhardt and Shero death sentences for crimes that were never committed....in the case of Fr. Engelhardt, it was an actual death sentence .....<br /><br />ADA Mark Cippoletti got away with murder in Ceisler's courtroom repeatedly and now it's public record they used a different calendar year as evidence to deceive that jury into thinking danny gallagher served an early mass with Fr. Engelhardt when he alleged he was assaulted and now it's on the record that they deliberately witheld Joe Walsh's entire set of pre-trial interviews with Danny Gallagher that Sorenson and Cippoletti knew (and Seth Williams knew) would put that case in jeopardy......<br /><br />sure adds up to "Prosecutorial Misconduct" in my book.....<br /><br />balls in Ceisler's court now to do the right thing in the Shero appeal for a new trial.....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-67019609705219173272017-06-13T09:28:47.180-04:002017-06-13T09:28:47.180-04:00@anonymous 10:23PM
This post brings to mind the o...@anonymous 10:23PM<br /><br />This post brings to mind the oversight powers and responsibilities of the President Judge for the Philadelphia Common Pleas Courts. <br /><br />I believe that one of charges is assigning the cases to the respective judges. I remember reading somewhere in the internet that Sarmina lobbied actively her for the Lynn / Avery / Shero / Engelhardt / Brennnan trial as she wanted to add her ‘tough on crime’ position to her judicial resume as a spring board to better judicial jobs – but the President Judge later denied this. <br /><br />Now, if Sarmina wanted to make a name for herself, she certainly accomplished that goal, most especially with the judges in the Superior Court. Karma!<br /><br />All jesting aside, what does the President Judge actually do??<br /><br />Did she intervene when the defense lawyers requested Sarmina’s recusal in the Lynn trial? I don’t think so.<br /><br />Did she chastise Sarmina when she was almost 6 months late sending her ‘opinion’ and trial records on the Lynn conviction to the Superior court? You got me. Check it out for yourself 2171 EDA 2012.<br /><br />Did she step in the Engelhadt / Shero trial when Ceisler adamantly refused to stop the trial so that Doe’s brother (who later admitted that he had received the subpoena when he returned from his out-of-town trip) could testify? Dunno.<br /><br />The judicial system assumes that judges are above reproach and will operate honestly and without prejudice. Isn’t that why they are called ‘honorable’? <br /><br />Inasmuch as trial judges are supposedly subject to the same penalties for perjury as are parties in the cases over which they preside, maybe the judges themselves should be ‘vetted’ before their trials start as are the jurors - - - just to see if they have any prior knowledge of the case in question which could impair their impartiality.<br /><br />Could this be a job for the President Judge? <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-38731857943155026922017-06-12T22:23:06.215-04:002017-06-12T22:23:06.215-04:00Sarmina was part of the prosecution, in my estimat...Sarmina was part of the prosecution, in my estimation all judges or most are part of the prosecution. She should have been forced to step away from that trial, she was not impartial and should not have been on the bench.<br /> Most judges are former prosecutors which is a terrible disadvantage to a defendant. Most people relish when a judge passes discriminator comments from the bench, as the public has been drenched in lies for months and years before a trial, they think a judge is being tough on crime but all they are showing is that they too have been contaminated by the media as well. <br /><br />How do defense attorneys allow the media to condemn their clients, how can a judge condemn a defendant before all the facts are heard. How can the media not see the damage they are doing to defendants.<br /><br />I would love to see trial lawyers ban together to stop the practice of allowing the INKY and all media outlets from printing any derogatory articles about a defendant before trial,whatsoever.<br /><br />Prosecutors that feed articles to the media for the purpose of condemning a defendant do it with criminal intent. <br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-79395203595209441412017-06-12T19:37:20.788-04:002017-06-12T19:37:20.788-04:00@anonymous 2:58.
Good point on corrupted judges. ...@anonymous 2:58.<br /><br />Good point on corrupted judges. But, even if said judges claim impartiality, how does one know that they are telling the unvarnished truth unless - of course - their conduct during the trial proves otherwise - - - after which it’s too late for any timely relief.<br /><br />One case in point would be judge Sarmina, whom lawyers have reportedly dubbed 'Max Mary' based upon how she dishes out punishment. Was she truly impartial with Monsignor Lynn??<br /><br />Anyone remember during the Lynn jury selection process when Sarmina opined “Anybody that doesn’t think there is widespread sexual abuse within the Catholic Church is living on another planet.”? To any person with normal intellectual faculties, this is an unmistakable indication – a big red flag - of obvious prejudice. <br /><br />Allowing Sarmina to officiate at the Lynn trial was tantamount to letting the rabbit carry the lettuce home from the grocery store. I believe Lynn’s lawyers asked her to recuse herself, which – of course – she did not.<br /><br />Sarmina also took it upon herself from the bench to ‘amplify’ an alleged victim statement during Lynn’s trial. Unbiased?<br /><br />Sarmina allowed the introduction of the 21 supplemental cases of sex abuse to be admitted as evidence against Lynn. They dated back to 1948, three years before Lynn was born, and took up at least 25 days of the 32-day trial. Unbiased?<br /><br /><br />Probably mollified by two stinging Superior Court reversals – Sarmina imposed draconian house arrest conditions on Monsignor Lynn when he was released from the slammer. Unbiased?<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-30052408047399671132017-06-12T16:15:41.614-04:002017-06-12T16:15:41.614-04:00Besides fake news about defendants the Inky can be...Besides fake news about defendants the Inky can be accused of "leaking" info from the prosecution to damage a defendant's chances of a fair trial. Words matter, they matter to defendants, to juries and to judges. <br /><br /> Inky ..Be part the solution not the problem, stop printing the prosecution's side only and admit when you got it wrong. No wonder no one has faith in anything anymore, the truth does not seem to matter.<br /><br /> Do research find out how many prosecutors lie to get a conviction and how many innocents are in jail for non-existent crimes. By continually taking the prosecution side you show where your loyalties lie, not with the citizens of our region but with the prosecution. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-48298640137954970602017-06-12T14:58:05.154-04:002017-06-12T14:58:05.154-04:00The trouble with the Inky running with the prosecu...The trouble with the Inky running with the prosecution's lies prior to a trial not only taints the jury pool but it corrupts the judges on the cases. Judges are aware of a media blitz against a defendant , in addition to asking prospective jurors if they could be impartial judges should decide if they could be impartial as well. <br /><br />Nothing should be printed prior to a trial against a defendant, the government does not need any more of an unfair advantage. The prosecution systematically feeds damaging information to the media to help win their case and make trial an easy victory.<br /><br />Without the Inky admitting they are part of the prosecution and stopping the practice of condemning a defendant ,there is not much hope for justice. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-37203912015050799902017-06-12T11:32:04.043-04:002017-06-12T11:32:04.043-04:00She did say that. But if she really believed it, a...She did say that. But if she really believed it, and the jury even asked what happened to the brother, she should have slowed the trial to a halt until they brought the brother in.bigtrial.nethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12188557653424544411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-38103214051305786552017-06-12T11:30:47.234-04:002017-06-12T11:30:47.234-04:00Still winding its way through the courts. Trevan B...Still winding its way through the courts. Trevan Borum is defending Father Andy. And this time, it's all about the money.bigtrial.nethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12188557653424544411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-83010943511553672482017-06-12T11:19:43.196-04:002017-06-12T11:19:43.196-04:00Ralph, didn't Judge Ceisler actually say in co...Ralph, didn't Judge Ceisler actually say in court last week that it was kind of suspicious that James Gallagher, Jr's absence during this entire trial (and he dodged that supoena that was sent to the only address on record, that being his parents home in NE Philadelphia)...he was a lawyer by that time most likely unwilling to take the stand and testify that his brother's stories were absolute lies, his brother's interest in drugs occurred after starting high school, certainly not while attending St. Jerome's school where he participated in sports, etc...<br />he would have had to commit perjury so the DA's made sure he disappeared while the trial <br /><br />now here's the million dollar question, if Ceisler suspected something was done to hide Danny Gallagher's son, why did she rule against the defense attorney who wanted more time to bring James Jr into court? <br /><br />Ceisler sure seems to have opened many doors now, but the biggest one might be Blessington's claim their investigative expert detective's interview was done "rogue", apparently without supervision, nor involvement from Sorenson<br /><br />time to get the entire pack of attorney's, both sides, as well as detecitve Joe Walsh into court on that witness stand and see which one can lie the most...<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-90734371231552137612017-06-12T10:11:14.662-04:002017-06-12T10:11:14.662-04:00Ralph, whatever happened to the civil lawsuit file...Ralph, whatever happened to the civil lawsuit filed against the Archdiocese and Father Andrew McCormick?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-84679680294997881292017-06-11T20:53:20.518-04:002017-06-11T20:53:20.518-04:00@anonymous 6pm
Thanks for your reply. I don’...@anonymous 6pm<br /><br /> Thanks for your reply. I don’t believe that there was any bribe. What appears likely – however – is undue deference to Rufus Williams and his band of (ends justify the means) prosecutors.<br /><br /> Consider Judge Bright who found that there was indeed enough evidence of prosecutorial misconduct to warrant a Lynn mistrial (which the Supreme Court had already afforded him), but somehow just not enough to thoroughly quash a subsequent re-trial. So, Bergstrom has to appeal this to the Supreme Court under the grounds of protection from a double jeopardy situation. <br /> <br /> Delay of game with no penalty - - - except for the Sword of Damocles dangling over Lynn’s neck.<br /><br /> Then, when Judge Ceisler is presented with the very same information and set of circumstances from a peer Common Pleas judge – what does she do aside from appearing incredulous when the court erupts in peals of laughter at Blessington’s totally absurd ‘rogue cop’ fantasy?<br /> <br /> Well, she also punts – requesting those infamous blue backed ‘briefs’ from both parties. IMHO, she had every right (and perhaps even obligation) to ring the curtain down then and there on this protracted miscarriage. But she didn’t.<br /><br /> Another delay of game, this time with a dead priest penalty and the sword over Bernie’s neck.<br /> <br /> You just can’t make this stuff up, can you?<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-10968222880359361342017-06-11T18:00:05.000-04:002017-06-11T18:00:05.000-04:00The problem is that outside of a bribe, nothing a ...The problem is that outside of a bribe, nothing a judge can do with respect to a decision is misconduct. The ones that get booted get booted for conduct outside of their decision making.<br /><br />It does not sound like there's a bribe in this case. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-65920029217545387652017-06-10T13:52:44.306-04:002017-06-10T13:52:44.306-04:00I find Judge Ceisler’s recent comments to be ingen...I find Judge Ceisler’s recent comments to be ingenuous, to say the least. NOW she comes out to say that she thought at the onset that this was going to be a tough case for the prosecution to prove, that Shero’s and Engelhardt’s lawyers didn’t ask that many questions, and so forth. <br /> <br /> WHAT? Judges are supposed to be interested in ‘justice’, are they not? If Ceisler had serious doubts during the trial, why didn’t she herself intervene as did her colleague Sarmina when she questioned Dr. Fisher to ‘amplify’ his testimony at Monsignor Lynn’s trial?<br /><br /> Also, in the interest of ‘justice’, why didn’t she give the defense more time to serve Doe’s brother instead of supposedly saying that her calendar was booked? She told McGovern she was "upset when you did that and it's coming back to bite you now.” Her booked calendar contributed to Father Engelhardt’s untimely death.<br /><br /> Why did she allow the charges to be improperly read at the beginning of the trial saying that she would ‘correct’ this later? No big deal, right? (It apparently was, considering the quality of the jurors).<br /><br /> Why was the late former judge DeFino – a ‘consultant’ paid by Rufus Williams, nattily attired with a flower in his lapel – doing in her courtroom? Was he there to prop up the judge, somehow influence the jury, or what?<br /><br /> Why did not Ceisler simply refuse to accept the guilty verdict? After all, she was there, saw everything that happened, and was also surprised when the jurors announced the guilty verdict.<br /><br /> Isn’t getting to the truth part and parcel of ‘judging’?<br /><br /> I always thought it was.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-83212682915409446612017-06-10T05:41:59.911-04:002017-06-10T05:41:59.911-04:00Memo to Judge Ceisler:
There was no mention in th...Memo to Judge Ceisler:<br /><br />There was no mention in the media about Avery going south before the Engelhardt-Shero trial. <br /><br />The first article ever written about this topic is right here:<br /><br />http://www.bigtrial.net/2013/02/billy-does-junkie-hustle.html<br /><br />bigtrial.nethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12188557653424544411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-67739286819494402272017-06-10T05:10:17.451-04:002017-06-10T05:10:17.451-04:00The Inquirer wasn't even there in the courtroo...The Inquirer wasn't even there in the courtroom. They also ignored Walsh's affidavit. <br /><br />As far as they are concerned, none of this is happening.<br />bigtrial.nethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12188557653424544411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-61022210920461224362017-06-10T05:07:21.229-04:002017-06-10T05:07:21.229-04:00Thanks, Joe. The nonsense never ends. Apparently, ...Thanks, Joe. The nonsense never ends. Apparently, in the criminal justice system you can never say you're sorry. You can never admit you got into bed with a bad witness and perpetrated a fraud on the public.<br /><br />It's much easier to keep lying and come up with more distractions. If one defendant wasn't already dead and another rotting in jail it wouldn't be so painful to watch.bigtrial.nethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12188557653424544411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-8661952749724619692017-06-10T05:05:07.014-04:002017-06-10T05:05:07.014-04:00It is a farce. Jack you are one hundred percent ri...It is a farce. Jack you are one hundred percent right about that.bigtrial.nethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12188557653424544411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-6327262399498101472017-06-09T15:42:37.967-04:002017-06-09T15:42:37.967-04:00@anonymous 2:47 - You could be right. These judges...@anonymous 2:47 - You could be right. These judges and prosecutors are just politicians who want to exploit someone else's misery to help them climb the next rung of (what they perceive as)the success ladder. <br /><br />Ceisler had a golden opportunity to fall back of Bright's prosecutorial misconduct ruling and end this charade then and there. Bam - down with her gavel!<br /><br />Instead, she punts. She asks for more briefs and supposedly gives the prosecution another month to provide theirs. WTF?<br /><br />Philadelphia Jurisprudence = death by a thousand cuts.<br /><br />Inky = deliberately blind, deaf and dumb monkeys.<br /><br />Shero, Englehardt = (expendable)victims, collateral damage.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-12859287833430356362017-06-09T14:47:56.407-04:002017-06-09T14:47:56.407-04:00Sure sounds like prosecutorial misconduct even if ...Sure sounds like prosecutorial misconduct even if Walsh never existed. At best, the prosecution committed prosecutorial misconduct by concealing investigatorial misconduct. It's still misconduct for crying out loud. <br /><br />My money is on Ceisler running out the clock on this one. With her foot in the Commonwealth Court door she is not going to make any decisions that garner media attention. This will bog down in continuances unless/until the Superior Court picks it up, where presumably it will go down in flames. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-86580610881628130852017-06-09T12:48:18.068-04:002017-06-09T12:48:18.068-04:00Not at all surprising on any level.Not at all surprising on any level.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8876661997317409023.post-88772323941317016052017-06-09T11:46:08.423-04:002017-06-09T11:46:08.423-04:00let's see, deliberately withholding Detective ...let's see, deliberately withholding Detective Joe Walsh's interview notes from the defense attorney's prior to trial<br /><br />deliberately inserting the wrong calendar year at trial to the court/Judge Ceisler, probably the handiwork of ADA Mark Cippoletti who was the lead DA in the Shero and Engelhardt case.....he used that wrongful verdict as a springboard to a job with the feds...<br /><br />Walsh has already testified, been deposed, did a lengthy affadavit etc etc..<br /><br />now Blessington labels him just a rogue detective..<br /><br />reminds me of the movie "Philadelphia" where the foreman says to his fellow jurors, why do those men now say he was a subpar lawyer, a bum no less....when at the same time, they gave him control of their most important case to litigate...<br /><br />Joe Walsh I'm sure was an "excellent investigator", a crackerjack detective whose expertise was "sexual abuse cases" like this one...<br /><br />withholding his investigation notes and interview file of Danny Gallagher was done deliberately, was done maliciously, was done criminally by the DA and the assistant DA's so they could wrongfully convict those innocent men in those trials....<br /><br />it's time to right these wrongs Judge Ceisler and grant Bernard Shero a new trial....<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com