Federal Appeal 8
6: THE INTRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE OBTAINED PURSUANT TO AN UNLAWFUL ARREST.
7: THE INTRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE OBTAINED BY AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL SEARCH AND SEIZURE.
The Defense Attorney should have requested a Franks Hearing to challenge the arrest warrant and the search and seizure warrant. A Franks Hearing is necessary not only when false statements are included in the application for the warrant, but also when information is omitted that, if included would result in rejection of the request for the warrant.
The most obvious is Informant 1, who states that Todd Crawford stated, “I killed him, I killed him. This statement was included in the two complaints for the search warrants, but was not in the arrest warrant. This was a very important fact left out of the arrest warrant, Todd Crawford was the state's only eyewitness, and he was also the original suspect.
The complaints were signed by police officers that state that the informants were known to be credible. One example is Detective James (Goggins testified at Mark Price's trial, co-defendant), Goggins said that sometimes information given to him by Joe Berger, and other informants, was sometimes true, but a lot of times just wild accusations. All that the police state is that all the informant's statements were accurate and reliable.
Another right is that the witnesses in the complaints should have been placed under oath; none of the witnesses were place under oath, in violation of the fourteenth amendment.
If the complaint or a portion of its content showing probable cause is based on hearsay information, the complaint or supporting affidavits must show a basis for the reliability of the informant and the information. The name of the informant need not be disclosed, but his reliability must be shown. It is not sufficient for the complaint merely to recite that the informant, is believed to be reliable.
Todd Crawford claims he was an unwilling participant, therefore his statement is not against his penal interest, and therefore it is not sufficient to establish his reliability and credibility as an informant. Todd Crawford was the original suspect, and denied knowing anything about the incident. Todd Crawford's statement was to protect Todd Crawford.
Wisconsin Stats provides that before a warrant can be issued, the complaint must show probable cause that the defendant committed the crime charged. It cannot be provided in a complaint by the mere statement of conclusions. The underlying facts must be stated. Not only does a statute demand a finding of probable cause by a Judge before a warrant can be issued, but this is also required by constitutional mandate.
In the complaint the cause of death is not determined. It states undetermined The death certificate reads also, drowning/hypothermia, not gunshot wound which is what the state is now claiming is the cause of death. For all these errors the arrest warrant should be void.
There are two affidavits. One is dated May 18, 1990, this was to obtain the search warrant for Richard Pease's car. The other affidavit was dated May 22, 1990, this was to obtain the search warrant for the gun. There is also the Criminal Complaint used to obtain the arrest warrant for Richard Pease.
The two affidavits used in the search warrants, included statements made that, Todd Crawford said, We beat and shot him. I killed him, I killed him. During the conversation, Todd Crawford also stated that he took a stick and shoved him under the ice. It is further reported that Todd Crawford kicked Mike Fitzgibbons in the face while he was on the floor in the apartment.
In the Criminal Complaint dated May 25, 1990, it states nothing whatsoever about Todd Crawford's participation. Statements in the arrest warrant, and the two search warrants, were said to be true and accurate. Which did police officers and the District Attorney sign. Yet the information contained in them are not true or reliable.
Detective Goggins testified that most of the information, Joe Berger called with was, when he himself, was in trouble, or he was mad at someone, or he wanted to do someone. Joe Berger's statements were used in the (Affidavits) and the (Criminal Complaint) and again falsely testified to at the Richard Pease trial by Joe Berger.
Following will be examples of the inaccurate and contraÂdicting statements given, which were used in the Search Warrants, and the Arrest Warrant.
The warrants state that Joe Berger said that Richard Pease and Mark Price returned to Joe Pease's apartment. In none of the statements given by Joe Pease and Sue Lawler does it say that Richard Pease and Mark Price returned to Joe Pease's apartÂment.
In the search warrants, Informant 1, which is believed to be Sue Lawler, it states that Todd Crawford came back to the apartment, nothing was said about Richard Pease, or Mark Price returning to the apartment. She further stated that Todd CrawÂford stated I killed him, I killed him. This statement was kept out of the arrest warrant, and replaced with the statement by Todd Crawford.
The statement by Todd Crawford in the arrest warrant, states how he was a forced participant, and all the statements amount to Todd Crawford protecting himself, by telling self-serving lies.
But according to Sue Lawler's statement, Todd Crawford sounded like a willing participant.
Also Informant 2, which is believed to be Joe Pease, he stated in the search warrant that, Todd Crawford and Mark Price were bragging about how crazy they were, and how they were capaÂble of killing people. He further stated that he saw Todd CrawÂford kicked Mike Fitzgibbons. These statements were left out of the criminal complaint filed with the arrest warrant.
The arrest warrant does contain Todd Crawford's statement that he was a forced participant, and that his statement was against his penal interest. But leaves out the deal given to him for his statement, leading to the conviction of Richard Pease and Mark Price.
Todd Crawford was the original suspect, and at his first meeting with Detective Forseth, he denied that he knew anything. At this meeting he was also read his rights. District Attorney Paulus was also at this meeting with, Detective Forseth and Todd Crawford, at Crawford's home.
At the trial Detective Forseth did not mention this, although he did testify that District Attorney Paulus was present during the second interview with Todd Crawford.
Todd Crawford's affidavit given on May 25, 1990, says that he was at the apartment with Joe Pease, then Richie Pease and Mark Price showed up and then Mike Fitzgibbons. In the comÂÂplaint for the arrest warrant, Todd Crawford states that he obÂserved them all in the apartment.
In the Criminal Complaint for the arrest warrant, Joe Berger stated that, Joe Pease and himself were at the apartment, when Mike Fitzgibbons arrived. Then Richie Pease, Mark Price, and Todd Crawford arrived.
Joe Pease stated in the Criminal Complaint that, Todd CrawÂford and Joe Berger were there when Mike Fitzgibbons arrived, then Richie Pease and Mark Price arrived.
