Liberty In Peril

... Formerly

The Llano Ledger

NET Case Loss        ©2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999  All Rights Reserved

An extremely interesting case was recently lost by the exceptionally corrupt and abusive 33rd Judicial District Narcotics Enforcement Team (NET) and its shills in the District Attorney's Office.  … Sadly, a case not reported by local media.  ... A story of unfathomable abuse, incredible betrayal, and government thuggery at its very worst.

Tim Chorney, Publisher
Liberty In Peril

Got guts? Tired of being lied to? Like an alternative source of information truly independent and free of government propaganda? Want this publication to continue? Send a financial donation to P.O. Box 997, Buchanan Dam, Tx. 78609.

                                       State Of Texas v. Joe Albert Crouch

In the middle of July 2003, this writer received a five-page handprinted letter from Joe Albert Crouch.  At the time, Mr. Crouch had been languishing eight months in the Llano County Jail on a fraudulently-obtained blue warrant instigated by the 33rd Judicial District Narcotics Enforcement Team (NET).

In the United States, particularly in this jurisdiction, there is no redemption for ex-cons, and certainly, no due process.  Apparently, once a criminal, always a criminal in the bigoted, narrow-minded view of local officials.  ... Especially, when the ex-con truly goes straight and refuses to play ball with corrupt NET thugs.

Crouch was on parole for an earlier drug-manufacturing conviction.  Had managed to straighten out his life, however, and is an exceptionally gifted plumber.  ... Talented, motivated, and certainly determined enough to establish a lucrative business after release from prison.  Practiced his profession throughout this area, including Horseshoe Bay.

Quality of work was apparently excellent.  Had certainly been accepted in the community, and was well on his way to earning substantial wealth.  Lawfully and legitimately pursuing the American Dream.  ... Until NET goons got their fangs into him.

At time of receipt of his letter, Crouch had spent the better part of a year in jail, denied due process and access to the courts.  ... Courtesy, of an alcoholic local court-appointed lawyer as counsel, who had done absolutely nothing to expedite matters.  -- Not surprising in Nazi America, is it?

Was summarily fired by Crouch's wife, Cheryl, and replaced with a crack, highly-gifted, aggressive defense attorney, formerly employed as a prosecutor in the District Attorney's Office.  -- Tim Inman of the Inman Law Firm located in Austin.

This case is extremely complicated, highly convoluted.   -- Exacerbated by prosecutorial malfeasance, extraordinary NET deception, and grossly inconsistent perjured testimony by NET-coached confidential informants.

Originally, this publication had intended to present an exceptionally detailed account of the trial and surrounding issues.  Not at this time, however, for several reasons.  First, although NET indeed lost the case, Crouch was unjustly returned to the Texas Department of Corrections to finish his sentence.

-- As a result of additional perjured testimony by the same NET informants at a subsequent kangaroo parole board revocation hearing.  One way or the other, prosecutorial goons and NET thugs intended to railroad this man.  ... Despite the best efforts of Tim Inman.  Despite testimony inconsistent and in direct contradiction to that given at trial.

Second, Nazi prosecutors in District Attorney Sam "The Sham" Oatman's office had earlier obtained a fraudulent indictment of Crouch's wife, Cheryl.  ... As insurance.  These outrageously corrupt and abusive bastards were determined to falsely nail Crouch no matter what, -- either directly or through his wife.  With their concocted case in a shambles and increasingly desperate shortly before trial, they subpoenaed Cheryl Crouch as a prosecution witness.

Kindly, understand the significance, readers.  Did these "prosecutors" really think they'd be able to turn wife against husband?  -- Highly unlikely Oatman, Cloudt, and Simmons were that stupid.  Regardless, wives cannot be forced to testify against their husbands.  Nazi prosecutors certainly understood this.  Rather, it was a blatant attempt to ensure Cheryl Crouch would not be in the courtroom.  Why should this matter?

Not only would it deny Joe Albert Crouch the support and assistance of his wife at trial, more importantly, it would make it far more difficult for her to defend herself during her coming fraudulent prosecution.  ... Reading a transcript of a trial at a later date is not the same as being present during testimony.

Since Cheryl may be maliciously prosecuted in the near future, information posted in this article must be very carefully considered.  Certainly, this writer will not give Oatman's "prosecutors" convenient information regarding confidential informant inconsistencies in earlier perjured testimony both at trial and the parole revocation hearing.

Although this falsely accused couple had promised access to all documentation, unlimited cooperation, and in-depth interviews in return for posting their story, they apparently were subsequently intimidated by thugs in the District Attorney's Office as well as NET.  Contact was broken when Crouch was returned to TDC and his wife, outrageously intimidated by local goons, suddenly left for Lockhart.  Sad, isn't it?  Nazi America.

While a substantial amount of documentation had indeed been provided this writer both before and after trial, not all of it.  No comprehensive interviews were granted.  Through limited conversations with Ms. Crouch and more extensive ones with others close to the couple, however, there is no question the couple had been successfully intimidated by government thugs.

Both should indeed be aware by now through friends, however, this writer intends to publish this story with or without further cooperation, or their consent.  Readers should understand this writer spent four days in court, August 25-28, 2003, attending this outrageous charade of a trial and travesty of justice.  Prosecutors and NET goons must be exposed for the outrageous tyrants they truly are.

The third reason this article will not be as detailed as originally intended is the dire complexity and convoluted nature of this entire fiasco.  Readers' eyes might quickly glaze over, -- as did those of this writer, -- having gone through all documentation and notes taken during court proceedings.

In the interest of clarity, the following is a brief synopsis of all principals and basic facts of the case:

Joe Albert Crouch, defendant, and his wife, Cheryl, are friends of Penny Brown and her fiancé, Stacey Arnold.  At the time of the alleged "crime", November 17, 2002, Brown and Arnold resided in Kingsland at 1235 Steen Street.

NET confidential informant Jerod Fincher and his wife Brandi lived at the Brown & Arnold residence.  -- Brandi is Ms. Brown's niece.  -- Jerod had been briefly employed at the time by the defendant, Joe Albert Crouch, in his plumbing business.

NET confidential informant Paula Marie Mays, code-named "Cody", was a friend of Ms. Brown and her niece, Brandi Fincher.  Mays spent time at the Brown residence and did some babysitting for Brandi's baby.

At the time of the alleged "crime", a van belonging to the Crouch couple had been parked on the Brown & Arnold property with permission of Ms. Brown.  Despite the fact the van was not street-legal, Cheryl Crouch had given NET confidential informant Jerod Fincher permission to use the vehicle to visit Arnold who was hospitalized at the time in Llano.

After the van had been returned to the property, however, a black bag was discovered in the vehicle by the Crouch couple.  Believing it to belong to the Fincher couple, it was placed on the porch of the Brown residence.

Turns out, the bag contained a meth lab and product.  -- A bag, that had apparently been planted by one of the confidential informants.  On the stand during trial, NET confidential informant Jerod Fincher admitted the bag and its contents belonged to him.  In a sworn affidavit dated 2-19-03, interestingly, Penny Brown claimed:

"... Paula [Mays] had come over and said she had a fight with Danny [O'Leary], her boyfriend.  She is there and gripes about Danny, and she had a bag with her.  This was a black traveling bag.  Next thing I know, she asks if she can borrow my truck to go to her house.  I let her.  When she comes back over and now no longer has the bag, she tells me and Brandy that we are being watched by the NET team, that there is something on our property that they (NET) needs to get.  That we needed to lock all our doors and windows, and call Jerod at the hospital to come and get the van and drive it to where it belongs.  So Brandy [Fincher] locked up the van.  I didn't know she locked the van, so I went out there to lock the van, and the two doors were locked, but not the sliding door.  I told Brandy you didn't lock the van, and I saw a bag and picked it up from inside the van and brought it into the house.  I presumed it was my nephew's diaper bag.  It was a black traveling bag.  When I get in the house with it, Paula said get the bag back in the van and do what I said.  You are being watched, we have to get out of here, we need to leave.  She kept telling us we need to call Jerod and he needs to come and get the van.  So Brandy especially was saying no, we can call Cheryl and Joe [Crouch], and tell them that we are going to dig bottles, and left the keys in the seat of the van.  At this point we didn't realize what it was (the bag).  After we had left, Paula told me what was in the black bag.  It was a Meth lab.  Now, from the night before, when Jerod drove the van home, there was no bag in the van.  This is what he told me.  When my niece, Brandy, went to lock the van, there was no black bag.  Between the time Brandy checked the van and I did the same, there was a meth lab in the van.  I cannot say I saw her (Paula) put it in there, but to me since Paula was the one who knew what was in it, it must have belong[ed] to her, and it looked like the bag she had.  I know it could not have belonged to Cheryl and Joe [Crouch], because they had never seen it.  One of them set it on my back porch thinking it was one of our bags.  Then they were pulled over in the van and were charged."

Both NET confidential informants clearly had access to the bag.  The Crouch couple later that day was stopped driving the van.  Officers were quite surprised and profoundly chagrined the bag was no longer in the vehicle, and were consequently forced to release the couple.  Interesting, isn't it?  Both, however, were later falsely indicted for Possession of Controlled Substance and Manufacture of Controlled Substance.  Nothing quite like Nazi America, no?

For much of the four-day trial, the jury was not present in the courtroom.  -- Nearly constant legal wrangling brought about by glaring problems in the case for the prosecution.  ... The greatest of which were admissibility of evidence and the testimony of Crouch family friend and prosecution witness, Penny Brown.

Regarding the first issue, NET goons had the Brown & Arnold residence under surveillance for quite some time as both NET confidential informants did their dirty work prior to the Crouch arrest.

As in most, if not all, NET cases, NET Sgt. Inv. Rick Carter, however, had no search warrant for the premises when he illegally trespassed and "recovered" the black bag on the porch.  -- The bag that had earlier been planted in the van.  On the stand, Mr. Carter perjured himself in front of the jury, falsely claiming he had permission from Penny Brown to be on the property.

Ms. Brown had never given NET goons or any other "officers" permission to be on the premises.  Not only has she repeatedly publicly denied doing so, but also signed a sworn affidavit, dated 8-13-03, emphasizing NET should have had a search warrant:  "Therefore Mr. Carter should have waited to obtain a search warrant."  Adding insult to injury and without the jury present, First Assistant District Attorney Tom Cloudt deliberately lied to the Judge, falsely claiming Brown had indeed given Carter permission.

During a break soon after his knowingly and outrageously false claim, Cloudt made the mistake of approaching this writer, and introduced himself.  Presented with an unexpected golden opportunity, I immediately challenged the prosecutor on his statement and asked for substantiation.  He produced none, lamely pointing to the fact the Judge had obviously accepted his assertion by denying the defense motion to throw out the "evidence."  ... Nothing quite like a circular argument, is there?  ... Or the cowardly employment of sophistry.  ... If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with BS, right, Counselor?

Joking aside, retired "Judge" Doug Schaeffer of Horseshoe Bay, sitting in for Guilford Jones III, deliberately abrogated the defendant's Fourth Amendment rights.  Mr. Schaeffer, although otherwise reasonably balanced in his conduct of the trial, egregiously violated his oath of office in his refusal to throw out illegally-seized "evidence".  "Evidence" that had obviously been planted earlier by one of the NET confidential informants and "recovered" by a NET goon with no search warrant.  ... Perversely, in Nazi America, day is night, night is day, and manure smells sweet.

More disturbingly, the "Judge" made his ruling regarding admissibility of the "evidence" based on false hearsay testimony from both NET Sgt. Inv. Rick Carter and First Assistant District Attorney Tom Cloudt.  ... Both, falsely claiming Brown had supposedly given Carter permission to trespass on her property.

No question, an amusingly relevant Catch-22 conundrum was brought to the attention of this writer by an attorney during trial.  Regarding the often incorrect, outrageously prevalent, perversely biased, inexplicably slanted judicial view, and consequent blind unquestioned acceptance of the truthfulness of law enforcement:   "Police don't lie.  If they did, they wouldn't be officers of the court."  Precisely, why hearsay from police is not only tolerated but encouraged in our courts, and judicial sanction of a lying officer or prosecutor is nearly impossible to obtain. Again, Nazi America, -- where day is night, night is day, and manure smells sweet.

The "Judge's" failure to do his duty regarding inadmissibility of tainted "evidence", however, was in reality a perverse blessing.  Had the "Judge" done so, the prosecution would likely have been forced to immediately drop all charges.  The jury would not have had the opportunity to return a verdict, and goons in the District Attorney's Office and NET would have rightfully argued Crouch had indeed gotten off on a mere "technicality."

In fairness to the Judge but certainly no excuse, however,  Schaeffer was clearly irritated with the prosecution throughout the trial.  -- Possibly, why he may have deliberately forced the case to be decided by the jury.  ... So the prosecution would not be able to later claim Crouch had indeed been exonerated on a technicality.  Only the Judge knows the truth.  Regardless and fortunately, the trial proceeded and wound up going to the jury.

The Judge should also be commended for stopping the trial when it became evident NET confidential informant Jerod Fincher, despite a plea bargain, had no counsel present at the time he was about to start giving self-incriminating testimony.  ... The deal was apparently in.  So much so, attorney Angela Dowd apparently saw no need for her presence during her client's testimony.  Interesting, isn't it?  To his credit, the Judge was incensed.  -- Dowd, sheepishly showed up the next morning, well before the onset of festivities.

The prosecution "case" was centered on what turned out to be two NET confidential informants who had enormous credibility problems, --  Jerod Fincher and Paula Marie Mays.  Fincher was easily flustered on the stand during skillful cross examination by defense counsel.  Inman deftly poked and prodded, jabbing at the young, highly criminally proficient former meth "cook."  Rattled the confidential informant's cage, forcing him to display his true colors, -- that of a punk-ass, snot-nosed kid.

The jury couldn't have missed the point.  Inman was easier on Mays during cross, yet poked holes in her story.  Interestingly, there were numerous inconsistencies and contradictions in both confidential informants' testimony.  Defense counsel wisely did not overplay his hand, however, since the prosecution had no corroboration of either confidential informant's testimony.  -- Absolutely required by law for conviction.

Precisely, why the jury acquitted Mr. Crouch of all charges.  The legislators who wrote the statute clearly and wisely understood how easily it could be abused by corrupt and abusive police.  -- Especially, by Nazi NET goons adept at figuratively but firmly grabbing a drug user by the gonads, giving them a good hard twist.  ... Disingenuously, then telling the captive bastard he will "cooperate."  -- Or else.  Precisely, why NET confidential informants lie like hell.  More than capable of falsely turning in their own mother, father, friend, etc. to get off the hook.

... Before proceeding with the Brown issue, readers should clearly understand the true purpose of criminal trials is not the search for truth.  Not at all.  Not, by a longshot.  It is conviction of the defendant.  ... Despite disingenuous statements to the contrary by drug prosecutor Assistant District Attorney Ricky Simmons during opening statements.  Worse, the prosecution lies with impunity when it suits its purposes.

Conversely, defense counsel is only interested in exoneration of the defendant.  Will only present whatever evidence deemed necessary to obtain an acquittal.  Similarly to the prosecution, does not care if the entire truth regarding the case sees the light of day.  ... Quite unlike this writer and most of the public.  The practice of law is clearly both a business and a game, usually played very skillfully by lawyers who want to win, -- at any cost.

On the prosecution side of this case, that was especially true.  ... Winning at any cost, that is, -- certainly and glaringly not the level of skill displayed.  There was none.  Amusingly, NET and the prosecution couldn't even get the quantity of meth, earlier planted, correctly weighed after no-warrant "recovery" by illegally trespassing NET goon Sgt. Inv. Rick Carter.  There was substantially less product than claimed in the indictment.

Worse, there was no search conducted at either the Crouch residence, or the Brown & Arnold residence. This, despite the fact NET confidential informant Jerod Fincher falsely testified on the stand that Joe Albert Crouch owned and operated a large meth lab, -- and Stacey Arnold taught him all he knew about the manufacture of methamphetamine.

Worst of all?  "Prosecutors" Simmons and Cloudt railroaded a man they knew was innocent. Stuck it to Crouch, despite the fact their case was severely tainted and hopelessly flawed right from the beginning.  Sadly, their oaths of office mean absolutely nothing to either.

Returning to the Brown issue, the prosecution indeed had a second enormous problem.  Crouch family friend Penny Brown had been called as a witness for the prosecution.  To provide "corroboration" to both lying NET confidential informants.  Sadly, she had earlier been coerced into providing false allegations in a 12-3-02 sworn statement to NET goons, supporting NET's not-so-creatively invented version of the falsely alleged "crime."

... Clearly terrorized, Brown had earlier succumbed to fear deliberately instilled by NET thugs and NET confidential informant Paula Marie Mays.  Finally realizing the enormity of her egregious mistake, though, she did all she could to rectify it by calling NET, informing them of the problem.  NET wanted her to come to headquarters soon after the call.  Still terrorized, she did not.

She did, however, correct the earlier coerced false statement of 12-3-02 by providing updated information in a sworn affidavit, dated 2-19-03.   -- To her credit, at great personal legal risk and jeopardy to her liberty.  Her earlier incorrect sworn statement to NET of 12-3-02, however, was apparently  tampered with by NET thugs, including forgery of her signature and inclusion of additional false information not on the original document.

Defense counsel repeatedly tried to prod District Attorney Sam Oatman into releasing the original unaltered version.  -- This document, placed in juxtaposition to the tampered one, would indeed be highly exculpatory to the defense.  Ole' Sam "The Sham" Oatman would not provide the unaltered document.  Nor did the "Judge" force the issue before or during trial.  ... Hey, Sam? How do you sleep nights?

Brown was called to the stand by the prosecution, however, but spent very little time in front of the jury.  The Judge rightfully stopped proceedings when the witness courageously gave testimony, indicating she had indeed made misstatements to NET in her earlier sworn statement.  The Judge immediately correctly surmised there was a glaring constitutional issue of self-incrimination.  She was subsequently provided a local court-appointed attorney, Tim Cowart.  He immediately legally advised her to invoke her Fifth Amendment rights, and not testify.

Brown had done the right thing prior to trial, however, in correcting her earlier false coerced statement.  She did so at great personal expense, again, placing herself in considerable legal jeopardy.  Was certainly prepared to go to prison to rectify the wrong, -- instigated by glaringly corrupt and abusive NET goons.

All this, however, threw quite a monkey wrench into the prosecution's case.  Stunningly, the District Attorney, Cloudt, and Simmons failed to properly and ethically resolve the Brown issue prior to trial.  Must have foolishly thought she would just cave.  ... Would be damned comical, -- if four innocent people had not been so severely affected by these lying glaringly unprincipled bastards.

Dear readers, do you understand? Oatman, Cloudt, Simmons, and NET goons had no corroborating witnesses as clearly required by law.  None.  Can be no more than an issue of gross prosecutorial incompetence, however, and the fact they clearly had to have known the original sworn statement had been coerced by NET thugs.  ... Nothing quite like "justice" in Nazi America, no?

When it was clear to Nazi prosecutors they had no corroborating witnesses, their oaths of office required them to drop all charges.  They did not.   -- Despite being aware of the Brown problem, clearly known to NET goons since December 3, 2002.  ... Brought to their (prosecutors') attention yet a second time in the Brown affidavit, dated 2-13-03.

In a recent conversation with this writer, Brown interestingly thinks prosecutors may not have taken the time to review all documents before trial.  Equally intriguing, Arnold claims the District Attorney severely limited distribution of the criminally altered Brown statement of 12-3-02 to one attorney to benefit the prosecution.  Since this writer was not privy to all documents in the case, no further commentary regarding this issue can be made at this time.  If true, however, it is certainly indicative of serious prosecutorial malfeasance.

Again, readers should clearly understand how NET recruits confidential informants.  NET thugs shake down offenders caught with drugs, forcing them to turn on others.  ... In return for dismissal of charges.  Consequently, people caught in their grotesquely evil web have strong incentive to egregiously lie, turning in others, including friends and family members, innocent of any criminal activity.  Nazi America.

Precisely, why NET confidential informant Jerod Fincher betrayed not only his wife's aunt, Penny Brown, but his employer, Joe Albert Crouch, and Crouch's wife.  Fincher has quite a colorful criminal history, is a heavy methamphetamine user, and a master meth "cook."  Was facing far more charges than those falsely brought against the Crouch couple.  -- Punishment, which could have landed him in the penitentiary for many years.  Instead, he cowardly chose to betray the people closest to him, -- family and his employer.

Similarly, NET confidential informer Paula Marie "Cody" Mays has an equally colorful criminal history.  No question, is a heavy methamphetamine user, "double-dealing" NET for years.  Yet, she remains useful to them and has received blood money.  Certainly, she is of immense use in bogus NET cases.  Sadly, in return for NET goons looking the other way regarding ongoing drug use, she egregiously and falsely betrayed the Crouch couple and Penny Brown.  ... Hey, Paula?  How many times have you done exactly the same to others?  How do you sleep nights?

Mays was living with Danny O'Leary, a NET confidential informant, himself.  (Long-term readers will recall O'Leary was formerly married to Carolyn Alsobrook, a former writer for this publication.  An update on Carolyn will be posted, shortly. (... Seems even the speeding ticket wound up being thrown out.)  According to Ms. Brown, Paula Mays admitted involvement in Carolyn Alsobrook's false prosecution by NET.

Mays had contacted this writer late in 2002 by email.  ... Interestingly, just after Crouch was incarcerated on phony charges.  She was desperately afraid for her safety and was considering providing useful information to this writer regarding NET.  A meeting was arranged, some startling charges privately made.  Nothing came of it.  Contact was broken.  Apparently, she got cold feet, -- or was threatened.  Chose instead to figuratively remain in bed with the devil.

Precisely, why this writer challenged her when given an opportunity after her testimony at trial.  ... Amusingly, in earshot of NET goon Sgt. Inv. Rick Carter, she coyly remarked: "Things are not what they appear to be."  No kidding, Paula. No kidding.

A webpage has been created in this publication for NET Confidential Informants.  As asserted in an earlier edition, readers are strongly urged to send this writer the identity of all NET informants.  An investigation will be conducted to determine the veracity of the information.  If true, they will be added to the list.  Sadly, this is the only way to protect innocent citizens against false incrimination by these sad sick souls.  ... No more than a reincarnation of Judas.

The most damning indication of NET duplicity is contained in a sworn affidavit, dated 2-19-03, signed by Brandi Fincher, wife of NET confidential informant Jerod Fincher:

... "After Jerod had left, he had asked me to lock the van and put the key in the house.  At that time, there was no bag, nothing, in the van.  Penny went outside later on that morning, not knowing that I had locked it.  The sliding door does not lock--it was open--we did not know the sliding door did not lock.  So Penny reached in the front seat and grabbed the black bag.  This looked identical to the one Paula Mays had before.  She thought it was my son's diaper bag because my son's diaper bag is black.

"At that time, Paula had told her to put that bag back, without us knowing what for, so Penny asked, 'Why'?  She said, 'Just put it back!'  So, Penny put the bag back.  Behind my back she told my aunt, this was for Jerod.  I guess she thought it would be best she said [it] to her.  Then Paula asked to use my aunt's truck to go to her house and I do not know what for.  We had called Paula asking when she was coming home.  It had been a good 45 minutes maybe an hour.  She said she was on the other line with her doctor and was on her way.  When Paula came back she startled me by saying we needed to get Jerod back and get that van out of there!  I said, No, I am not driving all the way back to Llano for him to drive back to Cheryl's van.  Which at that time I still did not know what was in the bag.

"Paula asked my aunt to borrow my aunt's truck to go get Jerod from the hospital, because she needed Jerod to drive it so that they could do their job.  Well I told her I will get the owner and have the owner come get the van later.  At that time aunt Penny had told me that Paula said the Net Team is watching.  We need to leave and that if we did not cooperate, we would be in trouble.  Scared out of our mind, not knowing really what was going on, then Cheryl had called to see when Jerod was going to bring the van back or if they could come get it.  Because it was illegal, I think it had no inspection sticker, no insurance and Cheryl did not want anyone driving it.  The night he did drive it she wrote a note in case he was to get pulled over because she knew it was illegal.

"I told her she could come get it.  I wanted to warn them, but Paula told me and Penny that if we were to warn them, we would be in trouble.  Penny and Paula went to the store to get a coke, came back, and told us to lock the house up and let's go.  We left and went to the dollar store, drove around, and Paula wanted us to drive back by the house to see if the van was gone. Which at that time, the van was gone.  Then, we went hunting for bottles, antique bottles, came back about three hours later and went into the house, checked the machine, and Stacey called stating he was released from the hospital.  So he and Jerod sat at the hospital the whole afternoon until, I guess 5:00 p.m..  We (me and Penny) went to Llano and got them and brought them back.

"About that time we had heard from Cheryl and Joe saying as they left they got pulled over in their van.  She said, there was a bag in the front seat that was not there when she gave Jerod the van.  When she got in she seen the bag thought maybe it was Tristian's my son.  So Cheryl said she set it on the porch under the cooler so the dog would not drag it away.  When she got pulled over she said they had brought the bag up to her and opened it up.  They let her go because it was not her bag and in the time of Paula being there, I believe Paula had time to place that bag, I mean I don't believe, I know, because Paula said she was going to get rid of Jerod.  Paula set him up."

Nazi "prosecutors" had to have been aware of the above sworn affidavit by the wife of a NET confidential informant, yet maliciously proceeded with the Crouch prosecution.  Readers should clearly understand the irrational ferocity of NET goons, -- more than likely in most instances not only due to the giddy intoxication of nearly unlimited power.  ... But to substance abuse.  The problem goes right to the top as demonstrated by the body of Stacey Arnold's 8-13-03 sworn affidavit:

"It was July 18, 2003 and I took it upon myself to go to the NET Office in Marble Falls to gain access to the statement of my fiancé, Penny Brown.  Penny had made a statement to the NET Officer who I believe goes by RAMBO.  We had not received a copy and we wanted a copy to review.  Brent Nichols, another NET officer asked my name and I told him what I wanted and he asked, 'What is your relation to Penny?'  I responded that she is my fiancé and I would like a copy of the statement she had made.

"He told me just a minute and let me look through my files to see if her name was on file.  He went through two file cabinets and then told me that Penny Brown was not on file in their office.  I told him that I know for a fact that she did make a statement in this office.  Brent told me he thought he remembered something to that effect, but was not sure.

"Then Brent asked me, 'Does this have anything to do with the Crouch case?'  I said I never mentioned anything about Crouch, why would he ask me that?  He stated, 'Joe Crouch would spend the rest of his natural born days behind bars.'  I was surprised at the statement and asked why he would say that?  Brent then told me that Joe Crouch was a methamphetamine cook and that he belonged behind bars.  About that time a gentleman stepped out from an office that was behind me in the corner and I thought it was Dwight Hardin, but I may be mistaken.  He was wearing a white shirt with a tie and told me, 'If I am not a defendant in this case that I need to leave this office immediately or I would be handcuffed and taken out of this office.'  My response was, 'Just for requesting a copy of a statement?'  His answer was, 'Again I will tell you, if you are not a defendant in the case you need to leave my office.'  At that point, I asked, and your name is?  He responded, 'That is not important.'  I responded, 'Okay that is fine.'  So I proceeded to leave the office.  On my way out, I chuckled and responded, 'Let the games begin.'"

Indeed, Mr. Arnold, indeed.  Joking aside, the goon threatening arrest might also have been Floyd Goodwin, then NET Assistant Commander, now NET Commander.  ... Clearly, reverse Darwinism.  -- Survival of the unfittest.

Regardless, Goodwin believes NET headquarters is hallowed ground, where "officers" and brass are exempt from pointed questioning as reported earlier in this publication after an encounter during the Mirelez fiasco.  Not one of these thugs, however, including Goodwin, is fit for duty.  Precisely, why they're NET "officers."  ... Amusingly, apparently sworn to protect and serve, -- themselves.

The Arnold affidavit is highly indicative of the way NET does business.  Worse, and unknown until after the fact, drug prosecutor Assistant District Attorney Ricky Simmons privately warned Mr. Arnold in the courthouse he would have him immediately arrested if he (Arnold) ever showed up drunk again at NET headquarters.  Would certainly have immediately challenged the "prosecutor" had I known at the time.

... Hey, Ricky?  If Stacey Arnold was indeed "drunk", why the hell didn't your goons immediately arrest and haul his sorry gluteus maximus to jail?  Had Arnold in fact been intoxicated, there is no question NET thugs would have taken advantage of a golden unexpected opportunity to nail him, thus conveniently destroying any credibility as a witness prior to your malicious prosecution of Crouch.  ... Right, Counselor?  How do you sleep nights, Ricky?  -- Or were you, indeed, afraid any arrest of Arnold would have prevented Brown from caving?

At the end of the trial, Simmons falsely and disingenuously congratulated Mr. Crouch, hypocritically urging him "to sin no more."  -- Knowing full well, both NET confidential informants would soon egregiously lie before the Parole Board, ensuring the defendant would be falsely returned to prison.  ... After being found not guilty of the prosecutor's trumped-up phony charges.  -- A glaring example of "justice" in Nazi America.  Courtesy of the corrupt and abusive thugs in both the District Attorney's Office as well as NET.

Apparently, District Attorney Sam "The Sham" Oatman and his fellow goons do not easily suffer defeat in court.  Defeat, more than soundly deserved.  Kangaroo justice at its very worst.  Shamelessly, extended at a closed parole board revocation hearing.  A hearing, where testimony given by NET witnesses was even more profoundly convoluted than, and in striking disagreement with, earlier testimony given at trial.

Defense counsel risked contempt of court in another case to valiantly defend Crouch at the kangaroo revocation hearing.  -- The result of which is conveniently unreviewable by any court.  Glaringly and outrageously unconstitutional, devoid of due process.   The outrageously corrupt and abusive Board unjustly returned Crouch to prison to finish serving his sentence. Despite being exonerated by the jury of phony charges.

Why would NET and the District Attorney's Office falsely imprison an innocent man?  Simple.  First, to "justify" the existence of the hopelessly corrupt and abusive 33rd Judicial District Narcotics Enforcement Team.  According to scores of credible sources too cowardly to allow publication of their identity, NET directs and controls a multi-million dollar methamphetamine manufacturing and distribution enterprise.

To "justify" its criminal existence and ensure continued generous funding from local government entities, however, it continues to arrest and prosecute small-time drug users.  Quantities of drugs confiscated are usually always minuscule.  The same people are arrested over and over again.

The second reason NET and the District Attorney's Office falsely imprisoned an innocent man is the fact Crouch wouldn't play ball with NET goons, and apparently has much on these corrupt and abusive Nazi bastards.

Sadly, the public still does not fully understand this outrageously criminal, exceptionally evil cancer, alive and well in our community, -- NET.  Former NET Co-Commander Brent Nichols was demoted to Sergeant several years ago.  Why?  Three times, he failed a drug urinalysis.  In addition, he got caught having sex with another female NET "officer", -- who was subsequently fired.

He, however, conveniently got a demotion.  ... Must have had too much on his equally corrupt and abusive fellow "officers."  ... Right, Brent?  Dwight Hardin became Commander.  Nichols' extracurricular activity took place on duty and shortly before his wife was to give birth.  Stories of NET malfeasance can go on and on.  Take the time to read earlier editions of this publication.

Mason County grew wise to this insidious cancer, called NET, however.  Wisely, gave them the boot years ago. When will this community finally wake up?  ... Illustrating the immense, nearly impossible difficulty of convincing an outrageously gullible public is the brief interaction between this writer and one of the jurors after the Crouch trial.

I thanked this man and several other former jurors in the parking lot, for their service and the just verdict.  Further remarked, "NET is the most corrupt and abusive police organization in this area."

Despite honorably and honestly voting not-guilty, one former juror responded:  "I don't believe this is true.  In fact I know this is not true."  ... This, after spending four days and many hours in the courtroom.

Of course, he didn't see all the legal wrangling during the jury's absence, due to a hopelessly flawed and falsely concocted case, presented by NET and outrageously accepted by the corrupt and abusive District Attorney's Office.  ... May also not have been quite as honest and candid as he could have been during jury selection.

Regardless, an outrageous atrocity occurred subsequently to the conclusion of this trial at the parole revocation hearing.  At enormous taxpayer expense, an innocent man, Joe Albert Crouch,  had his parole revoked, and was sent back to the Texas Department of Corrections.  Falsely imprisoned.  Clearly, under false pretenses.   Seriously beaten by guards shortly after return.  Thirty days, conveniently and falsely tacked on for supposedly "assaulting" a guard.  ... Clearly, a result of the long tentacles of criminal thugs in both the District Attorney's Office and the 33rd Judicial District Narcotics Enforcement Team.  Sadly, in a fascist police-state.

Although not having had an opportunity to speak at length with Mr. Crouch, it seems he has significant information on NET thugs and has been viciously persecuted by these bastards due to his refusal to continue playing ball with them.  Without question, there is a desperate need for the U.S. Attorney and Justice Department to immediately and thoroughly investigate this case, the District Attorney's Office, and NET.

Don't hold your breath, dear readers.  Justice no longer exists in our formerly great country.  ... Not with bona fide fascists occupying the Oval Office and the "Justice" Department.  -- Right, Mr. "President"?  Mr. Ashcroft?

Nazi America.  Where day is night, night is day, and manure smells sweet.  Sieg Heil, Mein Fuhrer.  America Uber Alles.

Tim Chorney, Publisher
Liberty In Peril

Back To Home Page
Tim Chorney, Publisher
P.O. Box 997
Buchanan Dam, Tx. 78609