Douglas J. Carpa, Pro Per
Morgan Street Jail
1301 N. Morgan St.
Tampa, FL 33602
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
Case No. 96-64-CR-T-23E
United States Government
V.
Douglas J. Carpa
SECOND AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION FOR PROTECTION UNDER CERTAIN TREATIES; MOTION FOR MISTRIAL "WITH PREJUDICE" AND RELEASE FROM CUSTODY; MOTION FOR DISMISSAL OF INDICTMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, A NEW TRIAL, PROVING "CONTROLLED JUROR" THAT RISES TO GOVERNMENT JURY TAMPERING.
Comes now Pro Per Defendant Douglas J. Carpa and motions the Court for Protection under certain treaties, motion for mistrial "with prejudice" and release from custody, dismissal of the indictment, or in the alternative, a new trial because it is now proved the prosecution controlled juror #12.
FACTS
1. On November 19, 1997, I made my first motion for protection under certain treaties,.. which dealt with the juror-misconduct identified by defense attorney Thomas Ostrander in his November 04, 1997 letter to the Court.
2. On December 01, 1997, the First Amended and Supplemental Motion for Protection Under Certain Treaties,... which expanded the motion, including mistrial "With Prejudice."
3. On February 25, 1998, I received a copy of the Grass Roots Journal, vol. 8, No 1, Winter 1998. The front page article, "Tampa’s Federal District Court Rampantly Violates Due Process," by Carolyn Fankhanel, editor, has confirmed that juror #12 was in fact a convicted felon on felony probation "during the time he sat on the Ippolito trial. In fact, this juror is still on probation." "This information was confirmed with the Pinellas County Felony Probation Department." p. 8, col.1. See Exhibit 1 attached.
4. All allegations in the initial and first amended motions are reasserted and alleged as fully set forth herein.
5. The issue has changed from a non-qualified juror to a "government controlled" juror, redefining the meaning of prosecutorial misconduct and jury tampering. Juror #12 is now proven to be under the direct supervision and control of the prosecution through the Probation Department.
6. This new evidence proves government/IRS lawlessness, Bad Faith and corruption that has now irrevocably infected the trial process and irretrievably prejudiced me and the codefendants.
7. The prosecution knew or should have known this juror was controlled when it "sanitized" the jury pool from citizens with IRS troubles.
8. The integrity of the judicial process in this case is now proven corrupted.
There is not even the appearance of justice to sustain this Constitutionally in-valid conviction.
9. The Court accepted a higher burden to protect me from "juror-prosecutorial-misconduct" when it granted the government’s motion for any anonymous jury. That act disabled the defense during voir dire and placed the burden on the Court to seat an uncorrupted jury. It is now clear the government abused its relationship with the Court by controlling juror #12 through the Probation Department. The Court failed to meet its higher burden of protecting the Defendants.
Conclusion
For all the reasons above, in the interest of justice and in the maintenance of the integrity of the criminal trial process, this motion should be granted with immediate release from custody.
Respectfully submitted this 2nd day of March 1998.
/s/
Douglas J. Carpa, Pro Per
Return to Tainted Jury
