October 27, 2011

Dear Judge Nakahara:

A fair judge does not act in bad faith, he does not intentionally violate constitutional rights and due process of law; he does not abuse his authority; he does not take side; he is impartial and He IS ON THE SIDE OF TRUTH AND JUSTICE.

Since you are an unfair and a bias judge, the trial from the beginning to the end was fundamentally unfair. From the beginning, you allied yourself with the prosecutor in order to unjustly and wrongly convict my brother and me. Knowing that the issue of homosexuality is the main reason for what happened on November 23, 2006, and also knowing that it is the core of my case, you did not allow the defense to cross examine the Meharis about the issue of homosexuality. You did not allow me to present highly probative evidence relevant to my case. You abused your discretion in excluding the evidence that would have proved the Meharis’ motive, and their state of mind at the time of the shooting. Click here 1, 2,3. To the contrary,You allowed the prosecutor to use non probative and unduly prejudicial autopsy photographs to stir the jury’s emotions. You also allowed her to use perjured testimony in order to unjustly and wrongly convict my brother and me. There is no doubt that the jury’s impartiality was affected by the willful and prejudicial misconduct of you and the prosecutor. Click here.

You knew that you abused your authority when you intentionally violated my constitutional rights to a fair trial and due process of law. For instance, you did not allow me to be represented by the counsel of my choice. You abused your discretion in denying my request for continuance.Clike here 1, 2. You violated my constitutional right to compulsory process. You did not allow me to present material witnesses relevant to my defense because you had to go to vacation in the middle of trial. You forced me to testify before presenting any defense witnesses. You also violated my constitutional right to confront witnesses, and you abused your discretion in revoking my self representation status. Click here

You knew that the prosecutor is a chronic liar, and you also knew that she based her case on lies. You even knew that she lied to you when she claimed I said things I did not. You also knew that the prosecutor and her inspector lied when they claimed Angesom was at Roaring 20s strip club at the time of Abraham’s death. They lied to cover up Abraham’s murder in order to obtain a conviction and advance their career. What they did is a crime because covering up murder is a crime. It is a felony.

Knowing that the prosecutor is a chronic liar, knowing that she based her case on lies, and also knowing that she lied to you when she claimed I said things I did not, regardless you allied yourself with her because you are not on the side of truth and justice. If you were on the side of truth and justice, the Meharis would not have gotten away with the crime they committed, and my brother and I would not have been wrongly convicted.

Since you are not on the side of truth and justice, you allowed perjury in your courtroom and you let the prosecutor use perjured testimony in order to unjustly and wrongly convict my brother and me. You knew that Angesom, Inspector Beal and Sgt. Morris committed perjury relevant to the case, and you also knew that you did not bother to correct their perjured testimony. Click here

If you have your own law, yes I don’t know your law. But according to the law that I know, which is Penal Code Section 118, Angesom, Inspector Beal and Sgt. Morris committed perjury because they deliberately testified falsely under oath.

When I brought Angesom’s perjured testimony to your attention and I addressed my concern about it, you ignored me completely as if I had not even raised a concern. Then, when I asked for an explanation, you had me removed from the courtroom because you had no explanation or answer for your wrongdoing. Click here

You knew that you acted in bad faith when you allowed perjury in your courtroom, and you also knew that all perjury pollutes a trial, making it hard for jurors to see the truth. So it is obvious that the reason you did not want to correct Angesom, Inspector Beal and Sgt. Morris’ perjured testimony is because you did not want the jurors to see the truth and you wanted them to decide the case based on perjured testimony, and also based on their emotions and feelings.

What you did is obstruction of justice. There is no doubt that the jury decided the case based on perjured testimony, and also based on their emotions and feelings. Thus, the conviction is a wrongful conviction because full and impartial consideration by the jury was impeded and prevented.

All I know is, the conduct of the trial was grossly unfair, and your prejudicial misconduct has resulted in a miscarriage of justice.

Sincerely,                                                            Asmerom T. Gebreselassie

Cc:   
Commission on Judicial Performance
The State Bar of California
ACLU