A Terroristic Divorce

In his Opinion dated March 9, 2016, where the issue of jurisdiction is not addressed, Judge Carpenter suggests, “There is no great injustice caused by the January 27, 2016 order in which this Court rescheduled the call of the trial list in this matter, having determined Healy to be incompetent and having appointed a Public Defender to represent him.”

To allege Ineffective Representation by Counsel regarding the Public Defender would suggest that there had been ANY representation by counsel.

The Public Defender provided NO REPRESENTATION;
failed to challenge the competency decision – no hearing, no evidence, no testimony, no chance to defend;
failed to challenge their assignment;
failed to file briefs and two appeals were dismissed;
secretly attempted to withdraw the third appeal and was denied;
secretly raised the third appeal to the Supreme Court while neglecting the issue of jurisdiction (Failing to use the word jurisdiction.);
failed to appear for several proceedings – leaving the Defendant to fend for himself;
has filed no motions in this matter; has not met with the Defendant to plan a defense;
refuses to communicate with the Defendant;
will not identify the attorney assigned to represent the Defendant;
will not respond to email; will not respond to phone calls;
has conducted no discovery;
has prepared no witness;
has not reviewed the Information;
has made no effort to represent the Defendant at any time;
AND AS OF THIS DATE THE IDENTITY OF THE ASSIGNED PUBLIC DEFENDER REMAINS UNKNOWN.

Judge Carpenter was mistaken. There has been great injustice demonstrated having appointed a Public Defender to represent him.

ADA Lauren McNulty petitioned for the Defendant to be declared incompetent and appointment of a public defender. Her request was granted to the exclusion of the stated intentions of the Defendant. Her request was granted to the exclusion of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, the Rules of Civil Procedure and the Mental Health Act. The decision was based on neither evidence, testimony, law nor experience. It was her’s for the asking.

PARTICIPATION IN THE DEFENSE

The court appointed Public Defender sabotaged documents filed by the Defendant, and further as indicated in hundreds of emails, The Public Defender failed to permit the Defendant to participate in his own defense.

Of course, the Public Defender didn’t participate either.

“There is no great injustice caused by the January 27, 2016 order…” “having appointed a Public Defender to represent him.”

The Defendant strongly disagrees with the Opinion of the Court. [WITH EMPHASIS ADDED]

The negligence and sabotage by the Public Defender for the last two years contradicts the judges opinion WITH EXTREME PREJUDICE and CONTEMPT for his assignment.

Seriously, who is incompetent?