I’m afraid. More so then I’ve ever been in my life. I feel like walls are closing in on me, it’s suffocating. I went to court last week and I was told I could get 35 plus years. That’s the rest of my life. I’m not a criminal, or a bad person. I’m a 34-year-old African American who suffers with mental illness, ADHD, Bi-Polar/Manic Depressive, and medical conditions, scoliosis, and spinal stenosis. Because of these conditions, I’ve been on medications that are addictive and habit forming. My current medications are, Methamphetamine HCL, Oxycodone, Alprazolam, in Arizona I had a medical marijuana card. I need to raise money to pay for my expert witnesses, trial attorney and travel from Virginia to Arizona.
On April 8th 2013 I was driving into work to pick up some extra invoices. I owned my own franchise at Anytime Auto Glass, out of Mesa Arizona, where I sold auto glass with a few employees underneath me. Admittedly driving slightly distracted, I was trying to control a hyper puppy who was trying to jump in my lap. I was still in complete control of my vehicle. Then my right tire blew with a loud pop and my car veered to the right. The frightened puppy jumped out the window, my car collided with another vehicle their car rolled over twice. The driver went to the hospital under her own care and her passenger did also. I was found with clear baggie crushed methamphetamine pill and residue weighing 3/10th of a gram, a marijuana grinder with 1.5 grams of marijuana, and alprazolam tablet in another small baggie.
I have documentation for all the prescriptions, but the Methamphetamine I had gotten filled in Mexico because it cost 1400 for a month supply in America. I did not have health insurance then but I do now, so I do not have to pay that. Mexico is an hour away from where I used to live.
Recently the day after I was told I was facing 35 plus years, the state told the judge that they never had their accident experts look at the evidence. My counsel has retained a former police offer accident investigator who determined it was my blown tire that caused the accident. This is consistent with two witness statements and my position. The state is considering dropping those charges but now tell me that if I take the possession of Methamphetamine to trial I will get 11 years. I have been arrested twice before for possession of small amounts. I have a problem and since I lost my health insurance that was my solution. I was given a mental health probation officer, assigned a doctor who prescribed me the medications I am currently on and have been since a child.
I have many problems in my life and I am struggling to do the right thing. I have been back in school for over a year to get my degree. Staying sober is very hard when doctors prescribe you expensive, addictive medications, and then expect you to not seek them when you are cut off. That is why I have priors; that is the only reason. I need help. Please. I am very sorry and my insurance company paid the victim $99,000 dollars. I did not mean to hurt anyone and I think the state knows that, but they are determined to send someone to prison. I need counseling, and therapy, not prison. If anybody is listening please help. I just want to run but that will ruin my life and everyone else around me. I’m not sure what anybody can do, I just want to be heard.
Aftermath Systems, L.L.C.
Jack V. Broadhurst
Forensic Collision Investigation, Expert Witness,
Commercial Vehicle Safety and Inspection
3324 East Ray Road NUMBER 1212 - Higley, Arizona 85236
Phone: (480)-570-8123 - aftermathsystems@yahoo.com
EXPERT'S PRELIMINARY
OPINIONS REPORT
State of Arizona
v.
Bishop L. Walker
Prepared by:
Jack V Broadhurst
Expert Witness
Date:010815
1. EXPERT’S CREDENTIALS AND EXPERIENCE
My name is Jack V. Broadhurst. I have recently retired from Law Enforcement after 36 years of continued service. I recently opened Aftermath Systems LLC offering my skills as an expert witness. I began my Law Enforcement career by enlisting in the United States Air Force. Upon completion of basic training I was enrolled in the United States Air Force Police Academy. I graduated and was transferred to Carswell Air Force Base in Fort Worth Texas. While stationed at Carswell I completed several College courses and was then sent to a 30 day school at Lackland Air Force Base. The school was sponsored by Northwestern University’s Traffic Institute. The course was focused on Collision Reconstruction and Traffic Management. I returned to Carswell Air Force Base where I began to hone my skills as a traffic crash investigator.
I was then sent to serve at Lajes Field in the Azores. I was promoted to Staff Sergeant ahead of my peers and was assigned as the Non-Commissioned Officer in Charge of the Security Police Investigations Unit. I developed training programs to train Police, Fire and Medical Personnel in the art of Collision Scene Management. I was awarded the United States Air Force Commendation for my work. I separated with an Honorable Discharge in January of 1983.
I was then hired by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office in January of 1983 as a Deputy Sheriff. I worked the west side of Phoenix Arizona on patrol. The patrol function provided me with many more collisions to investigate and when needed prosecute in Superior and Justice Courts in Maricopa County. I remained employed as a road Deputy until December of 1985.
In December of 1985 I was hired by the Laurel Montana Police Department. As a Patrol Officer I investigated both Criminal and Traffic Crimes. I was considered the Department’s Expert regarding Collision Investigation and instructed other Officers as well as Reserve Officers in the area of Traffic Crash Investigations and Crime Scene Processing. I remained a Police Officer with the Laurel Police Department until March of 1987.
I applied to and was hired by the Mesa Police Department in Arizona in March of 1987. During my career at the Mesa Police Department I worked as a Patrol Officer, Crime Scene Officer, Field Training Officer and as a Detective with the Vehicular Crimes Unit.
My duties as a Detective in the Vehicular Crimes Unit were specialized. I was trained as a Traffic Crash Reconstructionist and Hit and Run Investigator. I was tasked with a heavy case load and was assigned as Case Agent on many high profile Manslaughter and Homicide cases. The assignment included case preparation for Superior Court. Preparation included at-scene investigation, evidence identification and preservation. Those cases that required presentation at trial included testimony, juror selection, demonstrative evidence and ‘right chair’ assistance to the prosecutor. Of the cases I filed that went to trial in Maricopa County Superior Court I logged a 100% conviction rate.
I was also afforded the opportunity to obtain certification as a United States Department of Transportation Level One Commercial Vehicle Inspector. I traveled around Arizona working inspection details identifying unsafe Commercial Vehicles. I have testified numerous times in Justice Court and Municipal Courts regarding my training, experience and abilities as a Commercial Vehicle inspector.
I concluded my career as a Senior Officer assigned to the patrol division where I once again investigated traffic collisions and processed crimes scenes for photographic, biological and physical evidence.
My career with the Mesa Police Department concluded in September of 2013. I retired from the Mesa Police Department and immediately accepted employment with the Arizona Department of Transportation/Enforcement and Compliance Division.
While working for the Department of Transportation I decided to retire completely from sworn police work and open Aftermath Systems LLC.
1. Qualifications in Forensic Collision Analysis
I am qualified to testify as a forensic collision expert. I have the background, education, experience, and qualifications to opine with regard to industry customs and practices regarding safety, care to the observed relative thereto. Opinions offered are non-scientific in nature and/or stated on a more probable than not basis.
2. Qualifications in Commercial Vehicle Safety and Collision Analysis
I have been trained and employed as a Commercial Vehicle Inspector as well as a Commercial Vehicle Crash Investigator for several years. . I have the background, education, experience, and qualifications to opine with regard to industry customs and practices regarding safety, care to the observed relative thereto. Opinions offered are non-scientific in nature and/or stated on a more probable than not basis.
3. Expert's Engagement
On 120314 I was contacted by Attorney David Black regarding retention as an Expert Witness for this case. On 120414 I received a signed Retention Agreement for services.
7. Expert's Scope of Review
The scope of engagement in this case required me to provide opinions regarding the adequacy or inadequacy of the charges filed against Bishop Walker by the Arizona Department of Public Safety resulting from an incident which is alleged to have happened on April 8th, 2013.
In providing my opinions, I relied on a two-part analysis.
- First: My background, education, training, and experience
- Second: The analysis of the incident from Police Reports, Photos, Recordings and Statements gathered by the Highway Patrol and the Arizona Revised Statutes alleged to be in violation.
I have also reviewed numerous documents, interviews, and other materials provided during Discovery, which in part are the basis of my opinions. Forensic collision experts and consultants generally do not offer scientific opinions but offer opinions based on experience, training, education, and the industry standards of care. Should scientific opinions be offered, the basis for the results will be documented
8. Date and Details of Incident
It is alleged that on April 8th, 2013 at about 1315hrs (1:15pm) Mr. Bishop Walker was operating a motor vehicle on State Route 101 at Mile Post 53 and according to the DPS Walker suddenly moved across all lanes of traffic and struck another motor vehicle. The collision caused the second vehicle to roll and injure the occupants. Officers investigating the collision concluded that Mr. Walker was impaired and in possession of illegal substances.
9. Nature of Incident
Two vehicle motor vehicle traffic collision involving injuries during the day on a public highway.
10. Reference to Defendants
Bishop L Walker is referred to as the Defendant in this matter.
11. Industry Standards of Care
In forming my opinions and reaching my conclusions, I have relied on well-established published standards, guidelines, and publications that have been subjected to peer review, are widely accepted as authoritative and reliable in the collision investigation and law enforcement community, and widely accepted industry practices implementing these published materials. The following standards are each of a type reasonably relied upon by experts in my field, in forming opinions or inferences, for the subjects at issue in this case.
12. Industry Standards of Care Regarding Research of Prior Collisions and Incidents
The industry standards of care for research, to include prior collisions and or equivalent-type law-enforcement reports, including relevant and corresponding law-enforcement reports, are three to five years.
13. Previous Experience in the Investigation of Traffic Collisions
I have worked my adult life with the investigation and enforcement requirements for collision and traffic investigation. 1977-2014
14. Documents Provided by Attorneys for Expert’s Review
Documents prepared by the Department of Public Safety/Highway Patrol
Incident Report
Collision Report
Photographs of the collision scene
Medical Records
Grand Jury Documents
MVD Driver License History
16. Investigation by the Highway Patrol
Officers assigned to the Highway Patrol Division investigated the incident. According to the report authored by these Officers the following happened:
- Mr. Walker was seen driving a motor vehicle on State Route 101 where he was traveling in the inside lane and suddenly veered to the right, crossing all lanes of traffic and his vehicle then struck a second vehicle.
- The impact between the two vehicles caused the second vehicle to roll and injure the occupants.
- Mr. Walker was observed showing signs and symptoms of impairment and was then arrested for Driving while Impaired.
- Mr. Walker was processed for the DUI and illegal drugs were found in his possession
- The vehicles involved were towed from the scene by a private tow company and were not placed into evidence.
- Mr. Walker was booked into the County Jail for Drug Charges.
17. Expert’s Preliminary Opinions
OPINION 1: The Highway Patrol Report is incomplete.
BASIS FOR OPINION 1:
Examination of the photos taken by the Officers do not show any approach views of the collision. Approach photos may have revealed the possibility that the right front tire of the Defendant’s vehicle may have blown prior to the collision. DPS Officers were aware of this possibility as two witnesses indicated the tire may have had a malfunction.
1. Witness Hillary Lim related that she thought the right front tire may have had a blow- out.
2. Witness Taylor Larson stated she saw smoke come from the Defendant’s car prior to the collision The Officers did not indicate in their report if they had actually inspected the tire in question for a blow-out.
A flat tire traveling across the pavement would have left a mark or a scalloped tire print. As the tire deflates it leaves a wavering pattern that would be visible. The lack of approach photos or any photos taken from where the Defendant’s vehicle suddenly swerved certainly would have been needed. A tire malfunction is a significant contributing factor to this investigation.
DPS Officer state that two witnesses (Mike Tropea and Rodney Smith) related to them that the Defendant was erratic or reckless with his driving prior to the collision. DPS did not ask any follow up questions as to what they meant by erratic or reckless.
The Diagram is not to scale and there are no notes or supplemental reports showing any measured points.
The speeds involved as indicated on the face sheet of the Collision Report were not substantiated by any scientific means. No mathematical calculations were provided or mentioned. There is no mention in the report that the electronic data systems on either vehicle were analyzed to show speed, braking, or seat belt use.
OPINION 2: The Highway Patrol failed to retain evidence.
BASIS FOR OPINION:
The Officers investigating this incident suspected Walker was impaired. They were also aware that the occupants of the second vehicle sustained injuries and that they were possibly serious in nature. Aggravated Assault charges would be assumed with the combination of Impairment and Serious Physical Injury.
The vehicles involved in this collision were not seized for evidence. The most significant evidence being the Defendant’s vehicle and the right front tire. Witnesses told DPS that there was a possible tire malfunction, nevertheless this pre-impact contributing factor was not addressed. The car nor the tire were kept as evidence.
The Defendant’s car was towed from the scene by United Road Service to their own private yard. Two days later the car was then moved to Gerber Collision for repair.
Failure to secure the aforementioned evidence has not prevented inspection of the car and the tire to verify if there had been a blow-out which would have been a significant contributing factor in this investigation.
DPS did impound drug and blood evidence, nevertheless they failed to impound physical evidence referring to the Defendant’s vehicle.
OPINION 3: DPS may have violated Mr. Walker’s 5th Amendment Rights (Miranda Warnings)
BASIS FOR OPINION 3:
The Defendant was transported, under arrest; to the Knutson Sub Station operated by the Highway Patrol. While being processed for the DUI charge, the Defendant was advised of his Miranda Warnings by the Arresting Officer at 1433hrs.
The Defendant requested to speak to an attorney and was able to speak to one on the phone. The Defendant then told the Arresting Officer that he didn’t want to answer questions for perform any tests. The defendant then asked to speak to the Officer’s Sergeant.
Sergeant Simon then asked the Defendant if he had been read his Miranda Rights and the Defendant said no and began laughing.
Simon then read the Miranda Rights to the Defendant. The Defendant then began to answer questions.
It is my understanding, especially dealing with a Drug Recognition Evaluation that no DRE exam is to be conducted once the Defendant has invoked his rights to remain silent.
It is not stated in the DPS report if the Defendant wanted to speak to the Sergeant about any other matters or not. The DPS Sergeant just started his contact with the Defendant by reading the Miranda Warnings.
OPINION 4: The Defendant Violated:
ARS 28-1381a3 Driving while Impaired by Drugs
ARS 13-3408a1 Possesion of a Narcotic Drug
ARS 13-3415a Possession of Drug Paraphernalia
ARS 13-3405a1 Possession of Marijuana
BASIS FOR OPINION 4;
The Drug Recognition Examination prepared by Sergeant Simon clearly shows that the Defendant shows signs and symptoms of drug impairment. There was no evidence to show that alcohol was involved.
One point needs to be addressed regarding drug consumption. The DPS report stated that the Defendant was left alone in his vehicle after the collision. The Defendant was upset from the incident and from his dog being killed by a passing vehicle. It is NOT known if the Defendant had ingested any illegal substance while he was left alone in the vehicle after the collision had happened.
The DRE report is well written and addresses the issues required to show impairment by drugs.
Narcotic Drugs were located during a search incident to arrest. These drugs were tested by the DPS Lab.
Drug Paraphernalia was located by DPS and placed into evidence.
Marijuana was located lawfully and placed into evidence.
GOD BLESS YOU FOR READING THIS. YOU PRAY FOR ME AND I'LL PRAY FOR YOU!
For more information please click here or visit www.FundedJustice.com
No comments:
Post a Comment