Stephanie Harris-Hodge lied about her parking at BJs?
In the police report , Stephanie Harris-Hodge stated that she parked correctly.
Stephanie Harris-Hodge testified that the car in the picture I distributed was not hers.
Stephanie Harris-Hodge testified she properly parked her car between
Stephanie Harris-Hodge lied about the damage to her car. He just kept kicking my car, kicking my car, calling me names.... (Page 19, line 16)
He was kicking my car with his feet, with his feet.... just constantly kicking it... (Page 21, line 5)
The complainant Stephanie Harris-Hodge stated
The DA Jessica Hogan asks...(Page 22, line 4)
Did those dents or scratches, were they there before the defendant approached your car?
The complainant Stephanie Harris-Hodge replies No! No!
Now the DA, Jessica Hogan has acknowledged that she discussed the dents and scratches.
Stephanie Harris-Hodge testifies that she has not had her car repaired... (Page 23, line 23)
Stephanie Harris-Hodge testifies that all the damage in the damage assessment report apply to the police report. (Page 25, line 19)
The complainant Stephanie Harris-Hodge testified that I had caused all the damage in the damage assessment report or the Restitution papers as described by one DA, (included) but could not tell me how I managed to damage all fifty-seven (57) items listed in 90 seconds. (Page 25, lines 16-21)
The judge David W. Cunis and the DA, Jessica Hogan did not bother to examine the damage assessment report and neither of them bothered to raise their eyebrows.
Question: Do they not have any legal obligations to ask questions of the complainant and provide exculpatory evidence (Brady vs Maryland) ?
The burden of proof is a strict and heavy burden... blah, blah, blah :-).
Stephanie Harris-Hodge lied about having her cell phone with her.
Stephanie Harris-Hodge testifies that she does not have her cell phone because the court does not allow cellphones (a direct lie)
You're not allowed to bring cell phones into the courthouse. (Page 27, line 6)
The judge David W. Cunis states that the police report is hearsay. (Page 28, line 23).
Stephanie Harris-Hodge testifies that she never talked to Robert F. Tibor except on the day of the incident (Page 33, line 15, Page 34, line 2). This is a blatant lie since Jim Rizoli saw them multiple times across the five times we were in court for this case.
After being shown a picture of her car parked in two parking slots, Stephanie Harris-Hodge testifies that the car in the picture is NOT her car (Page 37, line 11).
The complainant Stephanie Harris-Hodge states that the car in the picture given to the court (photograph was marked Exhibit No. 2, (Page 87, line 10) is not her car (Page 37, line 11). At this point, the court has available to it, this picture of her car with a readable license plate (669-GV6).
Hodge admits that the license plate 669-GV6 is her license plate (Page 38, line 20). This is the license plate of her car in the picture.
The failure of the DA to provide the 911 call on a CD or as part of the evidence is denying me exculpatory evidence (Brady vs Maryland) (Page 41 mostly). Actually, this is more like suppression of evidence.
The 911 call has the complainant Stephanie Harris-Hodge twice saying No! when asked if the male had damaged her car.
The complainant Stephanie Harris-Hodge states to me....
Stephanie Harris-Hodge states that she did not roll down her window (Page 45, line 14). In the police report she states that she rolled down her window.
The DA, Jessica Hogan objects to looking at her car in the parking lot (Page 52, line 12). She actually objects to viewing the evidence of damage.
The complainant, the judge, the DA and myself had inspected the alleged damage on her car door parked in the court parking lot (Page 55, line 8). We were out there for about 4 minutes.
Neither the judge or the DA compared the license plate in the picture provided to the court earlier with the license plate on the car we examined. This point is important because the complainant Stephanie Harris-Hodge testified that the car in the picture was not her car (Page 37, line 11 ), so the car we examined that had the same license plate was in fact not her car. This was another one of the Twilight Zone moments in this trial. (failure to provide exculpatory evidence (Brady vs Maryland) ?)
Neither the judge, David W. Cunis or the DA, Jessica Hogan made any statements of the non-existent damage. Conspiracy? Collective stupidity? Malice?
She testified that she parked properly between two lines. Tibor also testified that she was properly parked.
Hodge testifies that Tibor did not visit her at BJ's ( Page 63, line 9 )
She testified that she had not moved her car between the time I took a picture and the time Tibor arrived
183 Washington St., Unit 1, Norwell, MA 02061
Stephanie: Driver license #: S44919066, DOB: 19630711
Damage assessment: Traveler's Insurance
|Send comments to: firstname.lastname@example.org|