Saturday, April 26, 2014

The state of Connecticut is trying an innocent man again! Jury selection began on Wednesday April 30th, a year after the state failed to convict Jewu Richardson of any crime in the first trial. Jewu should not have to defend his freedom and his innocence a second time! Watch and share the video! Sign & Share the petition!


The state of Connecticut is trying an innocent man again! Jury selection began on Wednesday April 30th, a year after the state failed to convict Jewu Richardson of any crime in the first trial. Richardson, who courageously defended his freedom against false charges used to justify New Haven police officers nearly killing him unarmed and surrendered, will have to defend his freedom and his innocence a second time!  

According to Lawyer Norm Pattis, this case should be over.

“The state failed to meet its burden of proof; it failed to overcome the presumption of innocence, right? But Jewu Richardson will almost certainly be tried again.” The state will get a second chance to convict Jewu of crimes that he did not commit, and to cover up the misconduct and outright criminal activity of the police using taxpayer resources.              Retrials and the Presumption of Innocence

According to reporter Melinda Tuhus 
"A man took his case to trial rather than plea bargain the charges against him, and on April 12 a judge declared a mistrial after the jury said they couldn't convict the defendant because the police in the case had also broken the law. Since 98 percent of court cases are settled by plea bargaining, with no trial, the case of Jewu Richardson stands out." - Melinda Tuhus 

Get involved& support Justice for Jewu!



Background on Jewu's Case

In April 2013, Jewu Richardson endured an unjust criminal trial, facing charges of assault on a police officer, resisting arrest, and a slew of felony and misdemeanor motor vehicle charges stemming from an incident on January 16, 2010. 
On January 16, Mr. Richardson was illegally chased, shot, beaten, and jailed by NHPD officers. His passengers were also assaulted but never arrested or charged with any crimes. The NHPD destroyed Mr. Richardson’s vehicle shortly after the incident, thus eliminating this key piece of evidence from the trial. Prior to this incident, he had been experiencing constant harassment by the NHPD following his high-profile lawsuit against the Police Department, City of New Haven and several officers and detectives for over 13 years of abuse and wrongful arrest.

The final note from the jury to the judge at the first trial

One fundamental issue dominates EVERY discussion of every element of every charge. The guilt or innocence of the police. Not all jurors can exclude this topic from any element of any charge. Juror quote: ‘They [the police] broke the law. How can you convict anyone of anything in such a case?’ 

Facts from the first trial

• Officer Dupont pulled Mr. Richardson over for a broken headlight, but with his gun already drawn. Mr. Richardson fled out of legitimate fear for his life, based on a decade-long history of NHPD harassment. 
• Multiple NHPD officers violated “no-chase” policy by engaging Mr. Richardson in pursuit. The same officers ignored orders on 3 occasions to terminate pursuit, for which they were later reprimanded. 
• One officer involved in the chase admitted to using overly aggressive military tactics that he had learned during his 8 years as a guard at Guantanamo Bay.
 • None of the 10 officers involved could later identify any other officers at the scene, and none could explain the numerous documented injuries suffered by Mr. Richardson and his passengers.
 • No civilian witnesses, including those called by the prosecution, corroborated the officers’ account of Mr. Richardson being the aggressor.
 • Of the two civilian witnesses called by the prosecution, one said Mr. Richardson’s vehicle never touched the officer who shot him and the other said that Mr. Richardson’s car was stopped when Officer Van Nostrand leapt onto the hood and shot Mr. Richardson. 
• An accident reconstruction expert testified that Mr. Richardson’s vehicle likely could not have moved or struck Officer Van Nostrand. He also testified that the angle at which the bullet entered the windshield required Officer Van Nostrand to be standing above the windshield pointing his gun down towards Mr. Richardson. 
• Mr. Richardson’s jacket, with a bullet hole and a large blood stain, was not allowed into the trial as evidence. However, Officer Van Nostrand’s uniform was admitted and shown to the jury several times. 
• Mr. Richardson’s vehicle, the alleged assault weapon, was destroyed while in police custody. No accident reconstruction was done, no fingerprints were obtained, and no ballistics analysis was done prior to its unexplained destruction. • Two officers who were suing Mr. Richardson for damages prior to the trial later withdrew their lawsuits, presumably due to information that came out during the trial.

News from 2013 Trial 

Monday, April 21, 2014

Jewu Richardson harassed by NHPD after applauded public commentary on racial profiling at the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities meeting.


Jewu Richardson, survivor of police brutality, recently filed a racial profiling and internal affairs complaint against the NHPD in response to continued harassment by police officers the day following his critical commentary at a racial profiling meeting hosted the Connecticut Commission of Human Rights.

Richardosn, who was on call with his attorney, Donald Weisman, during the police harassment  is demanding retribution from city and state officials. Weisman, serving as a witness, submitted an affidavit stating the harassment Richardson underwent while on call.

Amidst ongoing NHPD harassment Jewu faces a retrial after receiving a mistrial, courageously defending his freedom against false charges the NHPD used to "justify" deadly force nearly killing Jewu unarmed and surrendered.

Jewu Richardson press conference 3/21/2014 outside police headquarters in New Haven, CT.


Thursday, March 13, 2014

Press Conference Friday, March 21st 2014 @ 4pm

People against Police Brutality
Press Conference

When: Friday, March 21st 2014 @ 4 pm
    Where: 1 Union Ave New Haven, CT            
Come out in support of Justice for Jewu! Jewu will speak out against ongoing harassment he has encountered from NHPD officers post trial.  Jewu received a mistrial after the state failed to convict him of false charges which were made to justify the NHPD’s brutal shooting of Jewu, who was unarmed and surrendering.


www.justiceforjewu.com

Sunday, November 10, 2013

The State is preparing to try Mr. Richardson again for the same charges they failed to convict him of in the first trial!

Sign the new petition to stop the state from getting a second chance to put an innocent man in jail:

http://www.change.org/petitions/the-state-failed-to-convict-mr-richardson-of-any-crime-in-the-first-trial-don-t-waste-taxpayer-resorces-to-try-an-innocent-man-again-drop-the-criminal-case-against-jewu-richardson
New Haven area lawyer Norm Pattis writes about the mistrial and the likelihood of a second trial

http://www.pattisblog.com/index.php?article=Retrials_and_the_Presumption_of_Innocence_6348

"The state failed to persuade all six of the jurors in Mr. Richardson’s case that he was guilty as charged... But here’s what I will never understand: The state failed to prove its case in the first trial. Why isn’t the presumption of innocence enough to acquit Mr. Richardson altogether and to end this criminal prosecution once and for all?"

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Mistrial declared in Jewu Richardson's case. Jurors state they couldn’t bring themselves to convict Richardson after the actions police took.

A mistrial has been declared in Jewu Richardson's case on Friday, April 12 2013. 

Jurors state they couldn’t bring themselves to convict Richardson after the actions police took!

 
video
 
After two days of deliberation the Jury could not come to a unanimous decison any of the charges. The Jury's note to Judge Mullins stated:

"We are not making progress,we have less consensus today than yesterday. One fundamental issue dominates EVERY discussion of every element of every charge. The guilt or innocence of the police. Not all jurors can exclude this topic from any element of any charge.“Juror quote: ‘They broke the law. How can you convict anyone of anything in such a case?’