|
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The following article has to do with a 1.2 million
judgment against ACMTC in the late 1980's.
All following accusations and persecution came
because of the 1.2 million judgment.
___________________________________________________________________________
CHECK OUT THIS VIDEO ABOUT MAURA SCHMIERER'S SUPPOSED TIME IN THE SHED
AND THE CONTRADIICTIONS ABOUT HOW LONG SHE SAYS SHE WAS IN THERE!!!
Escaped, Locked, Or Unlocked?
___________________________________________________________________________
Finally!
By: Gen. James Green
FINALLY, Maura Schmierer confesses! After 26 years of boo-hooing over her supposed “lock-up” for 10 weeks (other times she claims “6 months!”) by the mean ol’ Generals Jim and Deborah Lila Green, asking 20 million dollars in damages. Now, Maura Schmierer (aka, “Peanut-butter Princess”) claims she was NEVER REALLY LOCKED UP! Well, we’ve been trying to tell you folks out there that she, and her lying lawyer—Robert (Bob) Blasier, made up this tall tale to get rich and to destroy ACMTC, the Generals in particular.
Her latest attempt to set the crooked straight comes from her March 30, 2013, statement on her website. Let me quote her:
“Before I received the 1.2 million judgment against ACMTC in the late 1980's, the judge looked me square in the eyes and he said, “but you were free to leave; you weren’t locked up,” as I’d clearly stated in my deposition! ‘In my mind I was a prisoner; I was afraid to leave,’ is all I had to say. I never claimed I was physically locked inside there, it’s more like I was physically locked out! Under dark clouds of deception I honestly thought I was under god’s judgment, that I was a rebel, not because I immersed myself in sexual sin, as they now claim, but because I really didn’t want to be there. I wanted my life back, my family back, my freedom back.”
Wow! INSANITY!
I won’t even bother commenting on her other babblings, for they are untrustworthy as well.
What does she mean, “I never claimed I was physically locked inside there [the 6x10 “cold, damp, dark, shed”!]?” Need I remind you, dear MS, that your WHOLE lawsuit was launched on the BIG LIE that we (ACMTC/mean ol’ Generals) LOCKED YOU UP in “the shed,” feeding you 6 peanut-butter sandwiches a day, no bath, no water, keeping you isolated from your kids, blah, blah, blah.
We have presented 11 DVD’s exposing Maura Schmierer’s “Peanut-butter Princess” story of HORROR. Note how she starts out with her refutation of our exposure: “My name is Maura Schmierer. Regarding ACMTC / Healing after psychological and spiritual abuse.” Healing? All you’ve done over the last 26 years is boo-hoo, lie and tell BIGGER LIES, getting your daughter to lie for you (against us). Well, we do advise the public to view the Dr. Phil show (Sept. 21, 2006). Dr. Phil opens up with saying, “…Maura says her WORST PUNISHMENT was being locked in a windowless shed for 10 weeks with ONLY stale peanut-butter sandwiches.” On this show, she claimed herself it was for 6 months!
Maura Schmierer, under oath, SWORE that she was locked up for 10 / 24 weeks. She also states the same on National Geographic TV, and the Bio episode (2012 / 2013). She really is disturbed at our Px2 Files (and our Px2 Files Trilogy). She has this to say:
“I am nudged—as if by a very patient voice within—to halt all knee-jerk reactions in response to ACMTC’s Px2 files—before they ignite a negative affect. Truth be, I sometimes peak inside those so-called files, but I rarely read them. GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT, is how I see it. Sick in, sick out. Health in, health out. Life, I think, is that simple.
My lid’s on to aggression and to name calling, and I choose to NOT lie. ‘Liar, liar, pants on fire?’ Really?”
“Liar, Liar” is our exposure of both her and her bleach-blonde daughter, Rebecca, who teamed up the second time (on National Geographic) with “MOMMA MAURA” to hopefully (in their “IMPRISONED” minds!) put an END to us! HA! Actually, that show was a BLESSING for us. Bleechie told the National Geographic audience what we’ve been trying to get across since 1987:
her mother was NOT really “HELD CAPTIVE” (in the shed by the mean ol’ Generals).
Well, “dear daughter” blew the cover off “dear mother.” THANK YOU!
Her latest attack (and self-defense) came when she told her pathetic story ONE MORE TIME of being held captive in the shed—
adding lots of JUICY stuff about “child abuse,” which never was mentioned to the press, nor was it in her original court filings.
Check this out:
“These four—as well as a few other religious diehards behind their doors—are the ones I bring into question. I can’t see inside people’s hearts, as Deborah Green claims to be able to do, but I’m guessing that there are more than a few current ACMTC members who are as miserable as I was when I was in there. They live within a prison, not a literal prison with bars and locks, but a MENTAL PRISON WITH BARS AND LOCKS [my emph.—Ed.], and a prison with few windows to see out of.”
Here she goes again, denying what she has BOLDLY STATED FOR 26 YEARS—that she was PHYSICALLY held captive. Oh, the TV/Newspapers loved this: “they locked me in a shed and never allowed me to see my children” stuff. Now, not a word of the shed. Why, Maura? People finally caught on that you are a BIG FAT LIAR? Yes!
Where have all your “friends” gone? I know of no one (who once was part of the “Mommylon Corps”) standing with you. They know, thank God, that you just fabricated this “HORROR” story out of REVENGE (and a 20 MILLION DOLLAR LAWSUIT helps!!)
Finally! Maura tells at least a half-truth— she was NOT actually LOCKED UP, but only mentally. Good for you. Why not tell the WHOLE TRUTH?—you were asked to leave because of your sexual misconduct. Why not come clean?
Now, ACMTC presents: “FINALLY!” — Px2 Files DVD #12. Let us just see if dear Maura Schmierer “never claimed I was physically locked inside there (the shed).” Let us get her quotes, not ours.
One last quote here: “…I honestly (?) thought I was under God’s judgment … not because I immersed myself in sexual sin, AS THEY NOW CLAIM…” As we NOW claim? HA! This sexual misconduct was CLAIMED AT THE GET GO. Please request our Px2 Files Trilogy—see if the claim was not from the beginning—on TV, in the newspapers (I have most of the articles from those days: back then, she merely CLAIMED “spiritual adultery.”
MS, you may try and fool the ignorant, but your TV appearances / newspaper quotes back up our claims, not yours. EVEN YOUR SON SAYS YOU’RE A BIG LIAR. And, your daughter knows it as well. Please explain now why you’ve changed your 26-year-old lie—being physically locked up—to being ONLY in a mental prison? We’re all waiting.
Confession and Repentance are in order: first to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; and then to the Generals and the two others named in your vicious/fraudulent lawsuit; then to your criminal lawyer Robert Blasier; and then to the judge in Sacramento; to your New Mexico lawyer, Mel O’Reilly; to N. Mexico’s judge, Camille Olguine; to all the TV / newspaper / radio reporters who reported your “shed story”; to all your ex-allies in your “dirty war”; to your 2 sons and three daughters; to Dr. Phil and his TV crew whom you lied to; to both National Geographic and the Biography channel—who aired your lies; to all the people who believed your made-up tale in order to DESTROY US. And, to yourself for being used of the devil. Only when you do this will you experience “healing.”
— Gen. Jim.
When one wades through her Testimony Under Oath (TUO), listens to or watches her TV shows and reads the many newspaper articles purporting her LIES, one will quickly see how she claims to have been physically imprisoned, and at other times only mentally.
For instance, in Letter #5 (written while in the shed), Maura Schmierer wrote: “but I’m behind bars.” On the Dr. Phil TV show she exclaimed: “…There was a shed in the back yard [of Ft. Freedom]. I was ORDERED to move into that shed …No bathroom, shower for 6 months.” The Sacramento Bee Newspaper reported this (1988) also: “…For 6 months, she [Maura] said, she was not allowed to bathe or have any hot water … she did not have access to a bathroom.”
Under oath, Maura writes: “How can I adequately describe the MENTAL TORTURE of what was to my mind SOLITARY CONFINEMENT for 6 months?” Now hear this: “…It was literally like a nightmare…” and: “…I used to spend hours peeking through a crack in the door of the shed watching my children in the yard. I felt like I WAS IN PRISON.”
What are we to make of all this? Now, she denies being locked inside the shed at all. She had to admit, in front of the TV cameras (on the Dr. Phil show), that the shed door was not locked and she could have left at any time!
Now, For the Record
The following numbered excerpts are taken directly from the March 15, 1988, plaintiff’s allegations — COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: a) Intentional infliction of emotional distress; b) Deceit; c) False Imprisonment, and d) Negligence [see our DVD #12] submitted by attorney Robert Blasier.
First off, excerpt (#12) states the following: “After plaintiff’s ‘judgment’ on or about Jan. 10 (1987), defendants (the Generals) ordered plaintiff to move away from her family and into a workshop (in compound) with concrete floors, a toilet, and a sink with cold water only (actually there was a shower with HOT and COLD water in there!)…”
(#16) “At or about the end of Jan. (1987), defendants ordered plaintiff to move from the workshop [the “chop shop” was the real name] into a wooden shed in the back of the compound. The shed was approximately 5x12 ft. in size [see our Px2 Files trilogy for complete details of shed — it was not 5x12!)…the shed was wet and had no windows or toilet facilities.”
(#17) “Defendants ordered Plaintiff to live in the shed for a total of two and one half months (10 weeks, which she sometimes admits to, but she tells the TV audiences 6 months!)…plaintiff and the additional female [something MS never talks about—HAVING A ROOMMATE!] were provided only a tin can to use as a toilet (again, she never even admits to the tin can). On occasion during this period of time, Defendants ordered [note how many times Blasier uses “ORDERED”] plaintiff ‘confined to quarters’ in the shed for up to four days at a time [Maura always made it out that she never left the shed for 6 months—DECEIT? Yes!].”
(#18) “…Plaintiff was not provided with sanitary napkins and had to forage for old rags… [What? Where? She was locked up all this time according to HER version of the story!).”
(#20) “In March, 1987…defendants told plaintiff and two other female members that their husbands were divorcing them for ‘spiritual adultery’ [Ha! this is what she told Bobby boy — she was dismissed from her captainship because of ADULTERY. Leave off the “spiritual” part).”
(#21) “After…one of the other females in the shed ESCAPED [my emphasis]…” HOW DOES ONE “ESCAPE” IF NOT ACTUALLY LOCKED UP? The truth is, she left on her own free will! (Note: Blasier gives detailed accounts of Maura’s other residences she lived in, not just “the shed” for 10 or 24 weeks; see #22 and #23)
(#25) “In July, 1987, defendant Jim Green ordered plaintiff to LEAVE (emphasis mine) the compound permanently…” MS tells everybody that she ESCAPED! The National Geographic TV show was called “How I ESCAPED from a Cult.” Deceit!
(#27) “As a proximate result of the acts of defendants, plaintiff has suffered extreme emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish [all lawyer talk to solicit pity and, of course, $$, lots of $$] and has been injured in mind and body…” What injuries? There is no record of a medical examination, no psychological evaluation by anyone in the whole of Sacramento, CA!!! Not even ONE police report on this event. NOT ONE!
(#28) “The defendant’s conduct was intentional and malicious…in that defendants systematically mistreated plaintiff physically [HOW???], mentally [HOW???], and emotionally [HOW???]… Defendants deprived plaintiff of nutritious food [really?]” See Px2 Trilogy where Maura only wanted peanut-butter sandwiches to eat; she said she was getting FAT and needed to lose weight. She never tells about her and her son eating meals, the same meals ALL ACMTC members ate.
Continued: “Defendants acts were done with a wanton and reckless disregard…therefore plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages in the amount of five million dollars.” Not bad for a made-up story—and Mr. Lawyer gets his BIG share!!
Now, Mr. lawyer goes into his “deceit” rant (#29-35). One good thing he did for us was to describe in detail Maura’s work. But, she claims that she was “locked up” for 6 months. Other times, she admits to working outside “the shed.” Poor Maura, so confused.
(#34) Lawyer makes mention of Maura’s injured body (by working at small jobs?). But she never once made mention of any physical injury all these years. Why? No record!
FALSE IMPRISONMENT
Now we get down to the real issue at hand: was Maura held “captive” for 10/24 weeks, or not?
(#37) “From on, or about Jan. 10, 1987, to on or about July 1987, defendants RESTRAINED [emph. mine] plaintiff against her will by force or threats of force in that defendants compound was locked each evening to prevent anyone from either entering or leaving without permission.” This sounds like Nazi Germany, Bobby boy.
Continued: “Defendants further restrained plaintiff…implied to her that physical harm would come to her…if she left the compound.” Harm? We wanted Maura to leave, not stay, for she was a BURDEN to all of us, especially the Generals.
(#39) “As a proximate result of defendant’s FALSE imprisonment [emph. mine], plaintiff has suffered extreme emotional distress, mental anguish, and has been injured in mind and body…” Hey, produce a psychological / mental / medical report, Bobby boy—we would like to know WHO examined your client, the date, and the results. NOTHING!
(#40) “The defendant’s false imprisonment of plaintiff was intentional and malicious… defendants systematically mistreated plaintiff physically…” This is very interesting, Bobby boy, Maura NEVER, EVER mentions this “physical mistreatment.” If you mean not proper nutritious food, you’d better take it up with Maura herself, she requested to receive less food. But, ACMTC food was not lacking in nutrition. And Bobby boy was ASKING FOR 5 MILLION FOR FALSE IMPRISONMENT—an imprisonment Maura now denies.
FOURTH CAUSE = NEGLIGENCE
From #41 - 46 Mr. Blasier rants about Maura not having a nutritious diet, sanitation facilities, and a suitable place to live. Well, remember, we sent her home to her natural parents before all this; she literally BEGGED to return to Ft. Freedom. She even admits this. So, how do you figure we did her wrong? Even with her choice to live in the shed: she used the shower, sink and toilet in the workshop right next door. Why do the both of you fail to mention this? Oh, 20 million dollars, I forgot!
(#44) “…Plaintiff was not allowed to bathe or have access to hot water for approx. 6 months.” Too bad, Bobby boy, Maura mentions (under oath) that she took baths, washed clothes, ate at mess hall, saw her kids etc. PARADOXICALLY, SHE DENIES THE SAME.
FINALLY…
I want to leave our readers/viewers with excerpts from Maura’s son, Steven, who calls his own mother a LIAR! (Note: check out Steven’s previous letters to us.)
“…just so you know, I am no longer communicating with my mother (Maura) and I’m going to be in a rather hard and threatening situation come April (2013), but this is life…” Compassionate Maura obviously kicked her own son out of the home at last!
Maura SIGNS:
“I declare that: I am the plaintiff in the within entitled cause; I have read the foregoing civil complaint [Since Blasier is a criminal lawyer, why a civil suit? All the complaints are “criminal” in nature. Well, because they have zero proof of their accusations.] for damages and know the contents thereof; based on my information and belief, all matters contained therein are true. I declare UNDER PENALTY of PERJURY that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my information and belief and that this verification was executed on March 10, 1988, at Sacramento, California.”
Read Maura's actual words claiming that she was never locked up HERE. Quote was taken from Maura's website.
Read the follow-up to Maura's confession article HERE. Her new-found CONFESSION vs. her original court documents!
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
WOS
- LIARS LOSE THEIR SOULS
I
speak unto you this day and I say that Liars lose their souls and end
in Hell because they are choosing to be losing by giving themselves
over to the devil and his demons. I do not want people to go to
hell, yet if they are refusing to come under the Mind of My Spirit
and be covered in Truth then they are the ones who are on the fast
train to Hell.
Why
is it that people are choosing to go to Hell when they could be
coming forth in My Way? It is because they prefer to live in lies
then they do not need to be accountable or responsible for their
actions, inasmuch as they believe some how that they won’t go to
Hell in the end. However they are being lied to by the devil and his
demons because liars are rejected by Me. The reason being is that I
AM THE TRUTH AND ALWAYS WILL BE AND ALL WHO COME TO ME AND REMAIN
WITH ME WILL LOVE THE TRUTH. Those who turn back and follow Jesus no
more do so because they are liars. Then many of such ones will spend
their lives attempting to justify themselves and lying about their
experiences when they were walking with Him and His true people.
The
devil has always been a liar and always will be therefore those who
come under the covering of the devil become liars themselves. They
lose sight of Truth and the Reality of Me, My Son, My Spirit, and
True Believers. Rather than admit to themselves and confess their
lies, they prefer to live in lies because they have literally become
as their covering which is the devil, and his demons.
When
you see the liars in action there are some who must lie continually
because they love to lie and one lie leads to another and another.
Pride will motivate people to tell outlandish lies and they will keep
up at the same because they are always out to prove how great they
are. If you stop and think about it, what did the devil appeal to
when he beguiled Eve in the Garden and she took of the forbidden? He
appealed to the factor of pride whereby both she and Adam could
become as gods and literally know what all I know by eating of the
forbidden. However the same proved to be a terrible lie and because
they believed the liar above Me, they went down into the despair
which became their habitation and they were unable to extract
themselves from the consequences.
What
did the devil try to do with Jesus after He had fasted for forty
days? He tempted Him to do all the things which the liar said would
prove He was the Son of God. Jesus did not fall for the devil’s
seductive suggestions. Rather He refused, rebuked, and refuted the
liar and his lies, then the devil took leave of Him because He could
not find any area where Jesus would yield to the temptations put
forth by the wicked one.
So
it is, if anyone is to follow in the steps of Jesus, they must
refuse, reject, and refute the tempter and not become dupes for the
devil and his demons. When people who are sincere stop following the
Holy Spirit commands then they are uncovered and the devil and his
demons come in like hungry buzzards and try to pick the uncovered
person to death. The temptations they use are to get the person or
persons to accept the temptations and act out the same, thus losing
out with Me as their Creator.
Truly,
it is senseless to deviate and allow the enemy to permeate your mind
with darkness and likewise death because you give way to sin. The
best and only way to win against sin, is to refuse to enter in and
instead, run into Me for I am the High Tower of strength and safety.
If you are choosing to remain among the Righteous you will not
hesitate to run into Me and be kept in perfect safety and harmony
with My Will.
The
more you keep in obedience to the Spirit which is given to lead and
guide you into all Truth, the more you will be thankful for the
strength, safety and sanity you have as you remain faithful unto Me.
Unlike the liars, you will not need to be going down the treacherous
trail which causes people to become hardened liars. Be thankful
this day and every day that you have been given the Holy Spirit to
keep you from the demonized liars who want to pull you down with
them.
As I
have said and I will repeat, liars never win, they lose out again and
again because I know their lies and they cannot hide the same from
Me. I want you to be thankful for the Truth I give to you every day
and as you come forth in the Truth, you are kept in the blessed Way.
Do not ever turn from the Truth and take up lies because you think
you can achieve a greater benefit by doing what liars tell you to do.
Remember,
liars are under the control of the devil and his demons. The devil
has been a murderer from the beginning and it is achievement of his
agenda when he gets people to fall into sin, and keep sinking lower
in such. Be glad this day that you do not need to be found in such a
way for the same is a death trap and ends in damnation. Do not
listen to the damned and dirty liars for they love to cause misery
and they have no mercy for they want to cause damage to those who
will receive their lies.
I
have given to you every thing you have need of to come up higher and
higher in the Way I have already for you to walk in. Therefore
choose each day to stay under the Mind of My Spirit and walk in the
Narrow Way.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
TALE OF TWO WOMEN - PART 1 & 2
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
General Jim Released!
May 4, 2023
GOOD NEWS! Recently General Jim was finally released from prison after five years and nine months of being locked up for nothing but nonsense. The enemy had to work hard to come up with enough lies and liars to justify throwing Jim in prison. Yet so it has been throughout history: those who are determined to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit, strive to live in holiness, and work hard to carry out the Great Commission, have always been attacked by the kingdom of darkness. And the scriptures tell us that all who live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution (2 Tim. 3:12). True Christians will always be targeted by the kingdom of darkness in one way or another. Yet let us never forget that it is an honor to be persecuted because we belong to Jesus. Jim is still adjusting to being back with his people, for many things have changed during the five years he was locked up. Thank God that we are still marching together as militant soldiers determined to take Jesus to all the world!
General Deborah
Found NOT GUILTY and RELEASED!
On January 28, 2022, General Deborah Green was released from prison. She is happy to be back with her people and very thankful to the Lord for keeping her safe through that long and arduous test. God is still blessing her (and us) with a steady stream of Prophetic Words of the Spirit. She wants to thank everyone for their prayers. Following is a copy of the request for a new trial which was the tool God used to secure Deborah's release.The enemy will always accuse God's people. And God will stand with them through it all.
In The Interest Of Justice:
MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL BECAUSE OF NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE
Defendant Deborah Green respectfully requests, according to rule 5-614, NMRA, a new trial in this matter because of the discovery of new evidence not previously disclosed by the State. All of this evidence, which the State failed to disclose through discovery before the trial in this matter, constitutes new evidence that can form the basis for a new trial. Because such evidence is exculpatory, and essential to any jury's consideration of the allegations against Mrs. Green, this motion should be granted, the jury verdict and sentence in this matter should be vacated, and Mrs. Green should be awarded a new trial.
Factual Background
Deborah Green was charged, by an amended indictment, with two counts of kidnapping in the First Degree, two counts of Abuse of a Child (Does Not Result in Death or Great Bodily Harm), two counts of Abuse of a Child Resulting in Great Bodily Harm, three counts of Criminal Sexual Penetration in the First Degree (Child Under 13), one count of Abuse of a Child Resulting in Death, two counts of Tampering with Evidence (Capital Crime or First of Second Degree Felony), and one count of Tampering with Evidence (Third or Fourth Degree Felony). The first eight counts allege crimes against alleged victim M.G., while the remaining five counts allege crimes against victim E.M. The Court later severed the charges for the purpose of trial, ordering that the counts related to alleged victim M.G. be tried first. All eight of the counts regarding M.G. Include some allegation connected to the sexual abuse of M.G.
A trial for the Counts related to alleged victim M.G. Was held from September 18, 2018 through September 26, 2018. Following trial, the jury returned a verdict of guilty on all counts. Mrs. Green was then sentenced to seventy-two years of incarceration in the New Mexico Corrections Department. She then pled no contest to three of the remaining charges against her, receiving an additional sentence of ten years to run concurrent with the previously imposed seventy-two year sentence.
Since trial, Counsel for Mrs. Green has uncovered, or been alerted to, the existence of exculpatory evidence not previously disclosed by the State. This previously undisclosed evidence includes:
1. A 2006 psychological assessment of M.G. Performed by Dr. Carol Larroque wherein Dr. Larroque concluded that M.G. Showed no signs psychologically of being traumatized or depressed and denied abuse. While the State had previously disclosed a summary of Dr. Larroque's evaluation, the State failed to seek or actually disclose any records related to the actual exam. The medical records related to this examination are currently undergoing in camera review before Judge Villalobos in State v. Peter Green, No. D-1333-CR-2017-00262.
2. A second SANE exam of M.G. during which M.G. denied abuse. During this exam, M.G. received an examination in her genital area. The SANE exam uncovered no signs of sexual abuse.
3. Medical records related to M.G.'s hospitalization at Children's Psychiatric Hospital when she first began to disclose abuse. This disclosure was made after M.G. Was living with a foster family for several months, which included a primary caretaker that suffered from bi-polar disorder, and who was arrested after threatening to kill himself, unplugging the phone when his wife tried to call 911, battering a police officer, and using his car to block the driveway so his wife and foster children could not leave the residence.
4. A safehouse interview of M.G., conducted on August 25, 2006, during which M.G. Denied abuse after being questioned by Dr. Larroque and undergoing a full SANE exam of her genitals.
Ms. Green now files this motion, seeking a new trial on counts One through Eight of the Amended Indictment because of this new evidence.
Argument
A motion for a new trial under Rule 5-614 must meet six criteria: 1) the new evidence will probably change the result if a new trial is granted; 2) the evidence must have been discovered since the trial; 3) the new evidence could not have been discovered before the trial by the exercise of due diligence; 4) the new evidence must be material; 5) the new evidence must not be merely cumulative; and 6) the new evidence must not be used merely for impeachment or contradiction. See State v. Volpato, 1985-NMSC-017, ¶ 7, 102 N.M. 383, 969 p.2d 471; State v. Fero, 1988-NMSC-053, ¶ 13, 107 N.M. 369, 758 P.2d 783. The evidence discovered since the trial in this matter fulfills every prong of this analysis. Ms. Green's motion should be granted, and the Court should order a new trial for all charges related to M.G.
I. This motion is timely filed.
As a threshold matter, this motion is timely filed under Rule 5-614, NMRA. That rule requires such a motion to be filed before a final judgment or within two years after the entry of a final judgment. Rule 5-614(C), NMRA. Rule 516 does not define when there is a final judgment, and there is a split of authority regarding when a judgment becomes final for the purposes of this rule. Some cases imply that a judgment is final upon sentencing. See State v. Moreland, 2007-NMCA-047, ¶ 13, 141 N.M. 549, 157 P.3d 728 (explaining, the context of reviewing a rule 5-614(C) motion, that "[i]t is well settled that until a sentence for a crime is imposed, there is no final judgment in a criminal case.") (internal citation omitted). In contrast, federal authority counsels, in the context of mtions for new trials under the corresponding Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure, that there is no final judgment until all direct appeals are exhausted. See, e.g., Casias v. United States, 33 F.3d 354, 356 (10th Cir. 1964) (holding that, in context of a motion for a new trial because of newly discovered evidence, a judgment is not final until the time to take an appeal has expired or all appeals are complete). Ms. Green's motion is timely under either test.
Ms. Green was convicted on September 26, 2018 and was sentenced on October 16, 2018. Moreover, Ms. Green's former counsel never filed a notice of appeal or a waiver of appeal for this matter. Therefore, under Moreland, Ms. Green's motion is timely because it is filed within two years of sentencing, and under Casias, the motion is timely because Ms. Green has yet to file an appeal, and still possesses a right to file a direct appeal. Ms. Green's motion is timely and should be considered on its merits.
II. All six Volpato factors are present, mandating that the court exercise its discretion and order a new trial in this matter.
Applying the Volpato factors to the new evidence present through this motion militates in favor of a new trial. First, Ms. Green must establish that the new evidence would probably change the result of the previous trial. In this case, Ms. Green puts forward a motion which details several pieces of new evidence, all of which are exculpatory to the allegations that she sexually abused M.G. Specifically, the new evidence contains one new SANE examination which concluded there was no evidence of abuse, which is clearly exculpatory when the allegation is that Ms. Green sexually abused M.G. by penetrating M.G. with sticks, screwdrivers, and needles. There is simply no possibility that M.G. Could have been penetrated in that matter and there was no evidence of abuse. Moreover, the evidence also includes psychological records establishing that M.G. Showed no symptoms of trauma or sexual abuse. And the evidence also includes safehouse interviews, during which M.G. Stated that she was not sexually abused, or that it was another individual and not Ms. Green that sexually abused her. All of this evidence is exculpatory and supports Ms. Green's defense that she did not sexually abuse M.G. Therefore, there is a probability that the evidence would have changed the result of a trial.
For example,in United States v. Martinez, 388 F. Supp. 3D 225, 232 (E.D.N.Y. 2019), a prison guard was charged with and convicted of sexual abuse. The evidence presented at trial was not “considerable forensic [or] other physical evidence,” but was instead based “primarily on the perceptions” of witnesses. Following trial, the defense uncovered an interview with a witness that did not testify, and which was not turned over during discovery, during which the witness testified that the alleged victim in that case discussed having sex with a prison guard in great detail but never stated that she was assaulted or abused. Explaining that "[c]ontradictory evidence can destroy a jury's confidence in a witness's story," the trial court determined that there was a liklihood of a different outcome at the trial. Id. This conclusion was further bolstered by the fact that the undisclosed, exculpatory statement offered "'independent corroboration of the defense's theory of the case by a neutral and disinterested witness.'" Id. (quoting Boss v. Pierce, 263 F.3d 734,745 (7th Cir. 2001)).
The same is true in this case. The newly discovered evidence presents independent corroboration that Ms. Green did not sexually abuse M.G. and presents that evidence from neutral and disinterested witnesses. The first Volpato factor, therefore, counsels in favor of a new trial. Moreover, because exculpatory information, like the newly discovered evidence in this case, could affect the outcome of the trial, it is material, and meets the materiality requirement of Volpato. See United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667, 678 (1985) (defining "material" exculpatory evidence as evidence that would "undermine the confidence in the outcome of a trial"). See also United States v. Coppa, 267 F.3d 132, 146 (2d Cir. 2001) (holding that "material required to be disclosed by Brady . . . is material, which, if not disclosed, creates a reasonable probability of altering the outcome" of a trial).
The newly discovered evidence also meets the second prong, because the proffered evidence was never disclosed during discovery in this case and was only discovered after Ms. Green was convicted, sentenced, and pled no contest to additional charges. The fifth Volpato factor is also fulfilled in this case because this evidence is not cumulative because it contains a previously undisclosed SANE exam, previously unknown safehouse interviews, and a newly discovered psychological examination concluding that M.G. was not a victim of sexual abuse for the time period that she was in Ms. Green's custody. Finally, the sixth factor is also me because the evidence is not merely impeaching or contradictory but represents new evidence from neutral witnesses that M.G. was not sexually abused as alleged by the State. See Volpato, 1985-NMSC-017, at ¶¶ 9-11 (holding that evidence through the form of new testimony is not merely contradictory when that testimony corroborates the defense's story because a defendant should have the right to have all of the testimony submitted to a jury in order that the jury might then determine guilt or innocence).
This motion also fulfills the Volpato factor requiring that the newly discovered evidence could not have been discovered before the first trial with the exercise of diligence. The New Mexico Courts have applied a relatively lax standard when determining whether defense counsel exercised due diligence. For example, the Supreme Court has held that there was no exercise of due diligence when the newly discovered evidence was related to information which the defendant possessed before the trial. See State v. Mabry, 1981-NMSC-067, ¶ 29, 96 N.M. 317, 630 P.2d 269 (explaining that due diligence requires the investigation of prior knowledge otherwise “a [motion for a] new trial would subject ever criminal trial to the possibility of reopening on the ground that the defendant 'remembered' something after trial”). Here, while there is limited prior knowledge regarding the second SANE exam and the psychological records, the State represented to the defense and to the court that those records were lost or not obtainable. Moreover, all of the examinations detailed in the new evidence were conducted after M.G. was removed by CYFD and was in the custody of a foster family. Therefore, neither the defense nor Ms. Green had any knowledge that such records existed before her initial trial.
Moreover, the Supreme Court has held that due diligence requires a defendant to conduct an investigation "to discover witnesses [or evidence] that would tend to exculpate an accused." State v. Stephens, 1982-NMSC-128, ¶ 12, 99 N.M. 32, 653 P.2d 863. For example, the New Mexico Courts have found that there was not sufficient due diligence when an allegedly exculpatory recantation was referenced in a nolle prosequi that was previously filed in the case. State v. Miera, 2018-NMCA-020, ¶ 28, 413 p.3D 491. Similarly, the Court of Appeals of New Mexico found that new evidence failed the due diligence prong when it was identified and available for copying prior to trial. State v. Armijo, 1997-NMCA-080, ¶ 35, 123 N.M. 690, 944 P2d 919. And, the Supreme Court of New Mexico has held that results of post-trial diagnostic testing were acquired following due diligence during trial when the basis for the testing was not apparent before trial. State v. Moreland, 2008-NMSC-021, at ¶¶ 18-21.
No such circumstance is present in this case. An investigation was conducted in this case, with interviews of dozens of witnesses and thousands of pages of discovery disclosed. None of those interviews or records disclosed available copies of the previous SANE exam, safehouse interviews, or psychological evaluations related to whether M.G. had been sexually abused. Nor did the State identify for the defense that such evidence existed. In fact, no witness list of the State identified the medical professionals involved in the SANE or psychological exams, nor did any witness list identify the individuals that performed the undisclosed safehouse interviews. Therefore, Ms. Green exercised due diligence during the trial. The motion for a new trial because of newly discovered evidence should be granted.
III. Defendant is entitled to a new trial because the failure to disclose the new evidence violates Brady v. Maryland.
Brady v. Maryland imposes upon the State the obligation to reveal evidence within its possession that is material to the guilt of the accused. 373 U.S. 83, 87 (1963). To obtain a new trial based on a Brady claim of newly discovered evidence, the defendant must show that: "(1) the government possessed favorable evidence to the defendant; (2) the defendant does not possess the evidence and could not obtain the evidence with any reasonable diligence; (3) the prosecution suppressed the favorable evidence; and (4) had the evidence been disclosed to the defendant, there is a reasonable probability that the outcome would have been different." United States v. Vallejo, 297 F.3d 1154, 1164 (11th Cir. 2002). A "reasonable probability" is "a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome." United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667, 672 (1985).
The new evidence uncovered in this case meets that test. First, as discussed in greater detail above, Ms. Green did not possess evidence related to the second SANE exam prior to trial. That SANE exam was also mentioned for the first time during trial, therefore, Ms. Green could not have accessed that SANE exam with reasonable diligence. Moreover, the evidence was possessed by the State because it was in the possession of the Cibola County Sheriff's office and produced to counsel for Peter Green in State v. Green by that office. Finally, it was suppressed because it was never disclosed to the defense, and because the State has continuously asserted that any records related to the second SANE exam were lost. That, however, was untrue.
Because the second SANE exam is exculpatory and confirms the defense's theory at the initial trial, then there is a reasonable probability that the evidence would undermine confidence in the outcome of the first trial. Therefore, separate from any analysis of the Volpato factors, the Court should also grant the motion for a new trial because the State failed to meed its obligations under Brady.
IV. The Court should Exercise Its Discretion to Grant a New Trial Because a New Trial is Required in the Interest of Justice.
"Because the trial judge has observed the demeanor of the witnesses and has heard all the evidence, . . . the function of passing on motions for new trial belongs naturally and peculiarly to the trial court." State v. Smith, 1986-NMSC-038, ¶ 17, 104 N.M. 329, 721 P.2d 397. This is especially so when the evidence is reliable and tends to show the actual evidence of a defendant. See Montoya v. Ulibarri, 2007-NMSC-035, ¶ 32, 142 N.M. 89, 163 P.3d 476. Therefore, the Court should exercise such discretion, specifically granted to the court by Rule 5-614, and order a new trial in this case as required in the interest of justice. Rule 5-614 (A) (stating that when a defendant has been found guilty, the court on its own motion may grant a new trial, "if required in the interest of justice"). The newly discovered evidence in this motion is evidence that should have been disclosed by the State during discovery prior to Ms. Green's trial. See Rule 5-501(A)(3), NMRA (requiring the disclosure of any records "which are material to the preparation of the defense") and Rule 5-501 (A)(4), NMRA (requiring the disclosure of “any results or reports of physical or mental examinations . . . made in connection with the particular case”). The failure to disclose such evidence violates the State's Brady obligation to disclose exculpatory evidence. See Copa, 267 F.3d at 146 (holding that Brady requires the disclosure of exculpatory evidence "in time for its effective use at trial or at a plea proceeding"). It is therefore in the interests of justice to order a new trial in this matter. See e.g., United States v. Cestoni, 185 F. Supp. 3D 1184, 1195-96 (holding that the prosecution's Brady violations can be the basis of granting a new trial in the interest of justice).
Conclusion
The Court should grant the motion for a new trial, vacate the jury verdict for this matter, vacate the sentence imposed on Ms. Green, and order a new trial on all charges.
Respectfully submitted,
Carter B. Harrison IV
Nicholas T. Hart
Harrison & Hart, LLC
1001 Luna Circle NW
ABQ, NM 87102
505.295.3261
harrisonhartlaw.com
Counsel for Deborah Green
I'm sure you are all anxious to hear about what is happening at ACMTC
AGAIN!!!!
We have been very busy trying to answer questions and let the truth be told.
We suggest everyone first checks out Kathy Helms' series of articles, beginning tomorrow around noon (Tue, Aug. 22, 2017), published in the Gallup Independent newspaper (www.gallupindependent.com -- you will have to subscribe to their paper for 1 week to get the article). General Jim had a very good, long interview with her at the Cibola County Detention Center this afternoon (August 21).
Also, please study our Px2 Files (see the "Answering our Critics and Friends" link along the left side of our webpage, then click on the "Px2 Files" link at the top of the page). Part 1 is the best, and everything hinges on the information revealed in that part. This will give a foundation to the truth that exposes all these INCREDIBLY FALSE accusations against the Generals and ACMTC members.
In time, we will try to satisfy all those seeking interviews.
The Generals are requesting an audience with the Governor and other state officials.
NOTE: After the shock and all of the tactical sheriffs team raid, after the members (excluding the children) were handcuffed, everything was handled very professionally by all the officers involved. They were professional and courteous. Sheriff Tony Mace and Undersheriff Michael Munk handled the situation very well, as all the members of ACMTC would agree.
[UPDATE: It became apparent, very early on, that the "professional and courteous" manner of the Cibola County Sheriffs was just a show: in fact, they ended up lying, covering up evidence, suppressing the facts and being very "unprofessional and uncourteous" towards all of us.]
Below is an updated response to the first article that appeared in Albuquerque (a KOAT7 news article).
To whom it may concern:
I work with ACMTC and the accusations against the accused are all unbelievable. General Jim was accused in 2006 of the same accusations and they were proven to be totally false. These allegations are totally false again. We don't know who all the accusers are, but the accusations are just re-runs of old lies that have been investigated and shown to be malicious attacks against a legitimate ministry, time and again. Please contact us if you need more information.
Now, concerning Joshua Green. The accusations about him are utterly false. It was his wife who didn't want to register the child because of her legal status in the United States (she is from St. Kitts), and also because when she chose to come to New Mexico, she had cut off contact with her parents (she owed them money -- they had supported her in college), and she didn't want them to know where she was. See all her emails for verification. At ACMTC it is up to each parent to decide how and when they register their children; many ACMTC members and affiliates across the United States have children that were born in hospitals and have birth certificates.
Peter Green and Deborah Green are being accused by the same girl, a crippled girl from Uganda, who was also proven to be lying when she falsely accused General Jim of molesting her in 2006 -- he was not even in the area in 2006, by court order, at the time she falsely claimed the events took place.
Furthermore, Deborah and Jim took this young girl to a surgeon three times for a natural birth defect, desperately hoping this would help her condition. Later on, she broke her already fragile leg while swinging on a swing, and the Generals immediately took her to the closest hospital, which was at Zuni. From there, they went with her to a hospital in Albuquerque to get her even better medical attention.
It is reported that the Generals deprive people, particularly children, of medical attention, but in all horrible irony, this young girl was actually stolen from the Generals by the CYFD in 2006, while getting treatment in a local hospital! This is on record in Albuquerque. Please contact us if you have more questions concerning this issue.
KOAT7 news reported on August 21 the following shocking statement:
“The warrants say Deborah controlled the group’s money and rarely wanted to pay for hospital visits, preaching that those who are sick ‘must repent to be healed.’ She’s now charged with neglect resulting in the death of a child.”
In addition to what has already been shown above, note that since ACMTC’s founding in 1981, it has never been ACMTC policy to withhold medical attention or deprive anyone from going to the hospital. In fact, many people have received hospital care over the years.
The young girl from Uganda spent much of her life with the Generals being wheeled around in a wheelchair, or on crutches, and the Generals were trying to help her learn how to walk after the surgeries (but she was stolen not too long after receiving this medical care). The sickening accusations that certain persons were molesting a young crippled girl in a wheelchair are unheard of! General Deborah's sincere care for the young girl is unquestionable. All allegations relating to Peter Green are absurd considering it was Peter himself who had prudently handed the care of this young girl over to a woman (General Deborah) when his (Peter's) wife was no longer present to care for the girl. He felt in his true Christian morality that this would be best for her. If you want to know more about all this, please contact us.
One more note on medical attention: ACMTC pays for all the eye exams, glasses, dental work, etc., of all its members. (Remember those operations mentioned above – guess how much all that must have cost!) So any allegations about General Deborah being “tight” with money is ABSURD.
All the accusations hurled at this ministry, including unfounded child abuse claims, have been proven false over all these years. We have all the newspaper clippings to show the hype, and the records show everything was proven false. Since 1983, thorough investigations have been done, all accusations proven false, and yet the persistent, one-sided storytelling continues.
Finally: Another of the accused, Stacy Miller, has not been a member of ACMTC for over a year and a half. And for all the horrible reporting about a minor dying here, realize that in all the decades that ACMTC has been a missionary group, among all the hundreds of kids that have come through, only one minor has died, and that of natural causes. (How many minors died that same year in hospitals, and how many poor, innocent, defenceless babies were slaughtered legally in medical clinics the day that one boy died naturally? We heard that 17 people died of that same flu, in a local Albuquerque hospital, receiving the best medical attention available. Look up the statistics for the proof. Now, how come no one is mentioning that fact?)
-- First Sgt. Amos, Communications
-- General James Green
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
DON'T FORGET to go to aggressivechristians.com
for VOLUMES of FACTS
that refute the LIES & LIBEL!!!
Visit all the "PX FILES"!
READ VERY INFORMATIVE MUSLIM ARTICLES, CLICK HERE.
|
