COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
Worcester ss Worcester Superior Court
Commonwealth Criminal Action
AMENDED CLAIM #3 TO, DEFENDANT, ELBERY'S, MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL
Who Was that Jury Forman - Rita Downey?
Juror - Rita Downey was a fix. It is not surprising, look at the irrefutable evidence provided in this Defendant's Motion for New Trial, that shows Defendant, Michael Elbery, was framed for a crime called "Attempted Mayhem" causing a sentence of 10 years in State Prison. This after there was found No Probable Cause for that same charge and the two other assault charges resulting from the same underlying incident on 9-29-92.
Did Worcester D.A.'s Office need to rig the jury in order to get a conviction? Not really, the jury had no idea that different and exculpatory evidence had been presented a few months earlier at a Probable Cause Hearing, resulting in a District Judge finding No Probable Cause on the same charges that were before them. The Worcester Superior Court Jury was presented with days of lying witnesses and was prevented from knowing that the cause and extent of the alleged victim's, Tom King's, alleged eye injury was a total fabrication. It was that fabricated eye injury that caused the 10 year sentence on an "Attempted Mayhem" Conviction.
Who is this Rita Downey besides being the forelady on the 12 man Worcester Superior Court Jury of Com. v. Elbery #93-0135 that saw 5 days of phony evidence provided by Worcester D.A.'s Office?
Rita Downey, in July of 1993, was a grainy looking tubby white woman, about 30 years old, who could be relied on, so she could gain favor. At the trial date of June - July 1993, Rita Downey worked with, then, Worcester A. D.A. Morris Mo Bergman's wife, frumpy Dr. Wendy Bonnett, at Fallon Clinic in Worcester, Mass. See the trial transcript Vol. I p. 85 - Rita Downey is seated on the jury as a replacement for one of the original jurors who was excused for work reasons. Downey's empanelment on the jury was, unlike the other jurors, very quiet and she was selected flawlessly as jury foreman. A.D.A. Mo Bergman, had used women to verbally attack Michael Elbery in 1990 in the corridor of the Worcester Courthouse, as well as, recruiting his gawky looking wife, Dr. Wendy Bonnett, causing the "Fallon Clinic Sex Scandal". Michael Elbery would learn that Bergman's family ran the Jewish Anti-Defamation League and that he hated Michael Elbery.
How did Defendant - Michael Elbery learn Jury Foreperson, Rita Downey, worked at Fallon Clinic with Bergman's wife, Wendy Bonnet? Elbery's alleged defense attorney, Louis P. Aloise, went out of his way to make sure Michael Elbery saw the juror questionnaire sheets and Aloise made comment highlighting the point of Downey's employment; Aloise made excited comment that there was a conflict of interest with this juror, Downey, that worked at Fallon Clinic. In fact, Aloise gave his client, Michael Elbery, the juror questionnaire sheets that revealed the names and addresses of the jurors that convicted him. Aloise knew, but, at that date of June 1993, Michael Elbery did not know the relationship between Bergman and his wife, Dr. Wendy Bonnett, who used that French surname. Coincidentally, it was Attorney, Lou Aloise, who gave Michael Elbery the identification of the guy that orchestrated shouting women in the Worcester Courthouse in 1990, as Jewish League Leader - Attorney Morris Mo Bergman.
It wasn't until 15 years later when Michael Elbery campaigned against Bergman's election on the Worcester City Council that Defendant - Michael Elbery learned Dr. Wendy Bonnett of Fallon Clinic was married to Worcester A.D.A. Morris Bergman. That is what Aloise knew back in 1993, but would only say that juror Rita Downey had a conflict of interest because she worked at Fallon Clinic.
Since the Web Site - MassInjustice.Org was published in its rudimentary form in 2007, Dr. Wendy Bonnett of the Fallon Clinic uses her aka, Dr. Wendy Bergman, because of her sexual assault conduct that is disclosed on the link of the Web Site, MassInjustice.Org, with her husband, Attorney Morris Bergman. Bergman is a "dime a dozen" attorney and has had a hard time keeping a job, since he got caught lying on the witness stand under oath during a voir dire at the trial that framed Michael Elbery for 10 years in Prison. After being fired by Worcester D.A. John Conte, Bergman was hired by a law firm named Murtha and parted company from that law firm after that Web Site published his article and documented evidence of Bergman's perjury. Bergman now works in a little room on Highland St., Worcester, Mass. doing any sundry legal "paper pushing" that comes through the door. This coincidently is the same location, 39 Highland St., Worcester, Mass., where Attorney Paul Bolton shares a room. See the Grand Jury Minutes, Bolton was the attorney working for Worcester D.A. John Conte that impaired the Grand Jury Process and he fled Conte's employ once he read Elbery's Appeal to the denial of his Motion for New Trial in 2002.
Defendant, Michael Elbery's appellate attorney, Robert Sheketoff, was surprised when Michael Elbery showed him the jury questionnaire sheets in attempt to explain that at least two jurors should not have been on the jury because of the conflict of interest that his trial defense attorney, Louis P. Aloise, had indicated. Sheketoff would not return the questionnaires, after exclaiming that Elbery should not have them. Aloise was hoping that his client would approach one of the jurors in order to cause Elbery to be arrested. Lou knew he was in trouble for helping to frame his own client, so his "Aloise mentality" says that if the guy he helped frame, Michael Elbery, got convicted of something else, then he would be off the hook because two crimes would make Elbery guilty of everything. Tuff Luck Lou.
So what was noted about Rita Downey at the trial of Michael Elbery in 1993? She acted like the jury leader and was heard by Defendant - Michael Elbery rallying the jury to condemn the defendant. This nasty jury forelandy, Rita Downey, did a lot of bad mouthing of the defendant she did not even know to fellow jurors during trial breaks; she was bold about it and didn't care who heard her. It is not supposed to happen in the U.S.A.. During testimony of the 5 day trial, above docketed, Downey was an undertone of commentary that enlarged the prosecution's false evidence. Who knows how bad Downey's prejudicial bias was expressed out of sight in the jury room?
the Neighbor - another rigged juror
The Co-conspirators, Aloise, Bergman, A.D.A. Mike Ball rigged the jury of the trial of Michael Elbery, just to insure their fabricated evidence resulted in a guilty verdict. Rita Downey was part of that jury rigging. There was at least one other juror who was biased and did not belong on that jury of the above docketed trial, according to Aloise; that juror was a neighbor of alleged victim, Tom King, who lived in Shrewsbury. Attorney Lou Aloise pointed out that there were conflicts of interest with the jurors, but declined to do anything about it. Aloise did say that this conflict of interest these two jurors had with Defendant - Michael Elbery should be investigated. Aloise was hoping that his client, Michael Elbery, would contact the jurors, via his own investigation, so Aloise could get out of trouble for framing his own client. Aloise was hoping that his client would initiate his own investigation and contact a juror and get arrested because it is a criminal offense for a defendant to contact a juror. The two jurors that Aloise had directed Elbery to would have immediately contacted the cops and claimed they were threatened, as planned by Aloise and his Co-conspirators.
At a minimum, Attorney Louis P. Aloise was correct, the was a conflict of interest on the jury that convicted Defendant - Michael Elbery in the above docketed action.
It is illegal for the Prosecution to rig a jury and make sure that biased jurors infest the trial and its verdict. As a result, the prosecutor and Defense Attorney Aloise violated Michael Elbery's Due Process of Law and his Right to a Fair Trial, and as above Defense Attorney Louis P. Aloise was Ineffective in his Assistance of Counsel because he aided the jury rigging process, in addition to failing to object to the conflict of interest of the two jurors which he claimed to his client. These are violations of the 5th, and two violations of the 6th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, respectively.
There were two jurors on the jury of the above docketed case that Defense Attorney Aloise knew should not have been seated on the jury because of their conflict of interest with his client - Michael Elbery. Aloise allowed the biased jury and did not even make objection with the Court; this makes defense Attorney Aloise Ineffective in his Assistance of Counsel under the 6th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
A New Trial is required.
See Affidavits Attached
Michael Elbery, Pro se
120 Old Pleasant St., Apt. 7
Lee, Mass. 01238