More Testimony Comes to Light in Post-trial Motion for Patrick Thompson

Witnesses Appear in Post-trial Motion for Patrick Thompson By Brian Dolinar A motion for a retrial filed by attorney Robert Kirchner on behalf of Patrick Thompson was heard Thursday, January 5, 2007. Nearly 50 of Thompson’s supporters were in the courtroom. In July 2006, Thompson was found guilty of home invasion and sexual abuse. Thompson is facing 6-30 years for what his supporters believe is retribution for his political activism. Patrick Thompson is one of the videographers that created the controversial documentary Citizen’s Watch in 2004 that exposed the unfair treatment of the black community by local police. The post-trial motion was turned into a trial-within-a-trial by attorney Robert Kirchner and assistant Ruth Wyman. Ineffective counsel was the underlying theme of Kirchner’s lengthy motion for a retrial. In the July 2006 trial, attorney Harvey Welch had called only one witness for the defense. On Thursday, Kirchner called a total of six witnesses: Thomas Tarr, correctional officer; Susan Frick, jail nurse; Terrence Ware, accuser’s co-worker at Provena; Michael Hediger, Urbana officer; Maria Thompson, Patrick’s wife; and Dawn Miller, accuser’s former friend. The testimony of these witnesses, in addition to legal arguments, builds the case that a jury has not heard all the evidence and Thompson has not received a fair trial. Thomas Tarr was the correctional officer that processed Thompson when he was taken to jail on August 24, 2004. Tarr testified to filling out a medical intake form at 2:56 p.m. and indicated that Susan Frick had also checked Thompson. Susan Frick was the staff nurse who examined Thompson. She testified that she had indicated on her form that Thompson had said he had hit his hand on a metal object and that she had taped his fingers. We find out later from Maria Thompson that Patrick had been wearing a splint on the index finger of his right hand, which was never identified by the accuser. Terrence Ware worked with the accuser. What was a bombshell to many in the courtroom, Ware testified that the accuser was on time to work at 7 a.m. on August 24, 2006 (contrary to her testimony she was late) and that she acted like nothing was wrong. Ware worked at Provena for four years and said he knew the accuser because he bought bootleg DVDs from her. When he heard that the police had arrived that day because the accuser said she had been raped, his response was, “She’s at it again.” Ware said that in 2003 the accuser had made allegations that he had showed her his private parts. Ware, an African American, said that he was aware of other incidents where the accuser had made sexual allegations against other men of color. When this white woman accused Ware, he was suspended from his job and nearly fired. Like the entire Thompson trial, Ware’s story is further evidence of how the charges of rape by a white woman can destroy the life of a black man in America. Urbana officer Hediger was the first cop who was on the scene, filled out a police report, and arrested Thompson. Kirchner questioned Hediger’s report which states that the accuser was “yelling” and “screaming” when she was allegedly attacked and testified that these were her words. Kirchner highlighted the accuser’s inconsistent statements that she was “not a yeller” and had spoken just above a talking voice. Kirchner also verified that the accuser made no mention of a finger splint. When Maria Thompson took the stand, she was calm, confident, and brave. Ruth Wyman questioned her about the morning of August 24, 2004. Maria said she awoke at 6:10 a.m. and her husband was in the shower. Between that time and approximately 7:30 a.m. when Patrick left to attend the first day of class at Parkland College, she was with him the entire time. Maria also testified that Patrick had been wearing a splint on the index finger of his right hand. She said they had gone to Osco the previous Sunday because Patrick’s finger had become so painful. The splint had a metal backing, blue foam, and was wrapped with tape. He had worn it all week and did not take it off in the shower. This splint has never been identified by the accuser. Ruth Wyman asked Maria if she had ever been interviewed by Harvey Welch. Maria said no and that she had told Welch during the trial that she wanted to testify. Welch told her it was not a good idea and that her testimony would not help. Of course, Maria’s testimony is Patrick Thompson’s sole alibi. Lastly, Dawn Miller was a fellow resident at Sunny Crest 2 Apartments and testified that she was with the accuser the night of the alleged incident. Miller had known the accuser for about three weeks. Nearly every night between 8 p.m. and midnight she was at the accuser’s apartment drinking and playing cards. On August 24, 2004, they were once again at the accuser’s apartment. Miller said the accuser acted like her normal self and there were no signs that she had been assaulted. Miller said she was also discouraged by Special Prosecutor Michael Vujovich to speak with Patrick Thompson. Vujovich had subpoenaed Miller in the first trial when Patrick Thompson defended himself. Miller said when Vujovich spoke with her the day of the trial, he told her not to talk to Patrick Thompson. He then did not call her to testify. According to Miller, it was because, “If I took the stand, I’d hurt her [the accuser’s] case.” Miller also said she was never contacted by attorney Harvey Welch in the second trial. Time had run out before Kirchner had the chance to call all the witnesses he had subpoenaed. A continuance was granted until February 7 at 9 a.m in courtroom A to hear the other witnesses. Others on the witness list include: Anthony Bates, the former boyfriend of the accuser; Harvey Welch, Thompson’s attorney in the second trial; as well as the accuser. C-U Citizens for Peace and Justice and Community Court Watch would like to thank all who attended Thursday’s hearing and we hope to see you again on February 7 - 9am in Courtroom A.

I would like to thank and

I would like to thank and encourage continued community support for Patrick Thompson. We deeply believe in his innocence and his right to a fair/ new trial. Attorney Ruth Wyman has taken the lead in the preparation and presentation of the current proceedings and I am pleased to assist her efforts. . Sam Anderson, a 3rd year law student, has contributed her legal skills and efforts, including in the preparation of todays proceeding, and I hope she will be joining my office upon her graduation and passage of the bar. Our remaining staff - Nia and Kirsten - have also devoted substantial time and effort in developing the case. A private investigator - Tony Matens - has donated substantial time in interviewing witnesses . Our efforts, and those made by community members have maximized our opportunity to undo this injustice and I thank all of you. PLEASE remember however there can be NO communications by ANYONE to Judge Clem outside of the court proceedings. Bob Kirchner

coverage

WILL-580 covered the story on the radio this morning. They did a good job as usual. But were are the TV stations? BD

What is the result? Did he get retrial or not?

What is the result? Did he get retrial or not?

FYI

For the troll with limited reading comprehension.... No, Patrick Thompson has not yet been granted a retrial. More testimony is to come before the judge acts on the motion for a new trial, which is why the hearing will continue on Feb. 7.

News-Gazoo at it again

In the Friday, January 5, 2007 edition of the News-Gazoo, the editors include the wrong photograph of Patrick Thompson. Under the article my Mary Schenk titled, "Attorneys try to win new trial for local activist," appears a photo of Martel Miller with the name Thompson underneath it. This reveals how subconsciously in the mind of local authorities the charges of sexual abuse are linked to the multi-million dollar civil law suit Patrick Thompson and Martel Miller have against the local police departments. The incompetence of the NG makes the need for independent media so clear. BD

Post new comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer