Federal Appeal 10

---

9: THE USE OF WHITTY EVIDENCE AND OTHER ACTS DURING TRIAL.


The court allowed as evidence other acts. The state used evidence that Richard Pease was involved in another case with Mark Price(co-defendant), which would have been the alleged beating of Scott Davis.
The police report filed on the Scott Davis case never even mentioned Pease's name in the charges. He was never named as a suspect or even being involved. But District Attorney Paulus did in fact claim Pease was involved He stated that Pease held others at gunpoint while Price beat Scott Davis.
After Pease's trial was over it was finally brought forth that the Scott Davis case never happened. It was a false report filed by Scott Davis and Sabrina Bloechel. Ms. Bloechel was charged with falsifying a police report.
The damage was already done in court; Pease's involvement was never cleared up. The jury heard this and it never happened. DA brought this to the court claiming it was similar to the case Pease was on trial for, yet the DA had no evidence as to Pease's participation in this.
At Mark Price's (Pease's co-defendant) trial the same Judge who presided over Pease's trial also presided over Price's trial. At Price's trial he would not allow this into the trial of Price but allowed it into Pease's trial.
District Attorney Paulus also used the actions of Richard Pease and Joe Pease in the confrontation of an undercover police officer that was investigating Joe Pease for drug dealing. The undercover officer came over to Joe Pease's apartment acting as an upset drug buyer and that Joe Pease had ripped him off in a drug deal. Richard Pease was at the apartment of his younger brother when the undercover cop came over, Richard Pease stood up for his younger brother and confronted the upset drug buyer. At this time the undercover officer removed his shirt to prove he was not wearing a wire (recording device). This was the only time that a person was without clothing while in any sort of confrontation at the apartment of Joe Pease and in the presence of Richard Pease. So if Joe Berger did witness such an act, to which he testified to at Richard Pease's trial stating it was Mike Fitzgibbons, he was wrong. Fitzgibbons was never stripped to his underwear. Joe Berger was present the night of the confrontation of the undercover officer in February of 1990 and this is what he witnessed. This is just another false statement and testimony used in the trial of Richard Pease. This was extremely prejudicial to Pease in receiving any sort of fair trial.

---