|
|
|
Update 3/13/06 In May 2001 D.A. Inv. Martin Silva was served with a federal civil rights lawsuit filed by Ms. Stewart, a Complaint for Deprivation of Civil Rights, Constitutional Violations via Unlawful Policies, Customs, or Habits, which alleged that Silva's Affidavit for Search Warrant contained numerous intentional material misstatements of fact, as well as omissions of fact, in order to convince the judge to issue a Search Warrant against Ms. Stewart so that he could harass and dissuade her with a Search and Seizure. In
spite of repeated efforts to intimidate Ms. Stewart into dropping the suit, and
legal efforts in federal court attempting to stay and dismiss
it, those motions were denied
and trial was scheduled
by U.S. Magistrate Judge Stephen Larson
to begin Ms. Stewart appealed Judge Larson's ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. On December 27, 2005, they issued an "unpublished" decision affirming Judge Larson's March 16, 2004 ruling, stating that the 1983 civil rights laws do "not provide a remedy" for Ms. Stewart's injuries, even though she made an adequate showing that Silva "deliberately or recklessly made false statements and omissions" in his affidavit. They, too, failed to address Ms. Stewart's second claim in the lawsuit, that Inv. Silva's search and seizure had been done for the unlawful purpose of intimidation, rather than for investigative reasons. ATTORNEY GENERAL REVIEWS CASE Three years (2002-2005) of Ms. Stewart's repeated pleas to the California State Attorney General's Office to remove Terese's case from Riverside County finally resulted in a face-to-face meeting with officials from that office. In August, 2005, Ms. Stewart and her attorney, Gary Wenkle Smith, were interviewed by Special Assistant Attorney General W. Scott Thorpe and Chief Assistant Attorney General Robert Anderson. Ms. Stewart and Mr. Smith were encouraged that these top officials in Sacramento had obtained evidence from Riverside and carefully reviewed the case. Although they indicated what seemed to Ms. Stewart a sincere interest in Terese's case, and stated their conviction that she was indeed a victim of homicide, they have not allocated resources for further work in behalf of Terese.
DISTRICT ATTORNEY
REPEATEDLY BREAKS THE LAW
In 2002 Shane and Mary Stewart, eligible to be
reimbursed for medical costs associated with Terese's homicide, applied for
victims' services. Terese's violent death, combined with Riverside officials'
re-victimization of the Stewarts, had, for eleven years, caused Shane and Mary Stewart severe stress, resulting in health problems. Upon receiving the Stewarts' application for victims' services, Riverside D.A. officials denied Ms. Stewart's application, claiming she was a suspect. In defiance of California law, they refused to provide evidence against Ms. Stewart to Riverside's Victims' Services Office. Tensions between the D.A.'s Office and Victims' Service advocates escalated over the D.A.'s flaunting of the law, so the Victims' Services Office referred the matter to San Bernardino County for handling. However, Riverside D.A. officials broke the law again, refusing to provide evidence to that Victims' Services Office, too. San Bernardino County then referred the applications to Sacramento. Even with Sacramento, D. A. officials refused to obey the law. Clearly, they had no evidence against Ms. Stewart to provide Victims' Services.
Ultimately, Sacramento Victims' Compensation Board
officials interviewed Ms. Stewart and reviewed her private investigative
package. The Victims' Hearing Officer concluded that "the 'investigation'
conducted by the District Attorney's Office was plebian and shot through with
inconsistencies and inaccuracies. "In summary," he
stated, "Ms. Stewart has had to deal not only with the loss of her daughter,
but also with recalcitrant (and perhaps incompetent) law enforcement agencies
who should have been actively looking for her daughter's murderers." He
found Ms. Stewart's testimony "utterly compelling and credible." After nearly
four years of lawbreaking and interference by D.A. officials,
Sacramento Victim's Compensation Board approved the Stewarts' applications.
What kind of justice exists when officials so blithely
flaunt laws established to protect victims and citizens? Apparently,
Riverside D.A. officials are confident their perjury-committing, lawbreaking
acts will go unscathed.
WINGS OF JUSTICE The work
of Wings of Justice is possible only because of the
generosity of those who believe in our efforts to render support and comfort to
violent crime victims' families, as well as holding elected and appointed
officials accountable for the corruption, misconduct and incompetence in
the criminal justice system. Won't you consider making a tax-deductible
donation today so that we may continue this important work? Every donation is
greatly appreciated!
|
|
|
