From Rayelan Allan --

Several days ago, I received a link to a webpage.

http://www.cuadp.org/people/Patrick_Swiney

After several hours of reading, I decided that the information was important enough to share with Rumor Mill Readers.

The webpage is dedicated to exposing the truth about Patrick Swiney, a former police officer who is serving life without possibility of parole for the murder of his wife and her former husband.

When I read the part about the prosecutor being the former boyfriend of the murdered wife, I made up my mind to put the information on the Rumor Mill Forum.

The prosecutor failed to recuse himself from the case. He also refused to allow forensic tests that would have shown Patrick was innocent, to be admitted. The prosecutor also refused to allow DNA tests to be taken. Locals and family members believe this is because the Prosecutor fears the tests will show the DNA is his!!!

There are so many innocent people locked up in our prisons. Amnesty International has just charged the United States of America with being one of the worst abusers of human rights when it comes to prisoners.

In this day and age, anyone -- even you -- or your mother -- could be free one moment and in prison the next. The prison system and the justice system in the United States are broken. The only way people are going to discover this is if they read about it.

Here is the story of one prisoner who should never have been convicted.

###

Wednesday, May 31, 2000

Synopsis of the Case of Patrick Swiney - Alabama, USA

By: Sherry Swiney

SUMMARY

Patrick Swiney was convicted of a double murder on June 12, 1989, by the courts in Shelby County, in the State of Alabama. He was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. He is innocent and we can prove it beyond any doubt.

http://www.cuadp.org/people/Patrick_Swiney

MOTIVE FABRICATED BY THE DA

The DA alleged that Patrick sought, stalked, and tracked down his unfaithful wife Betty Snow Swiney and her ex-husband Ronald Pate, found them while they were in the course of adulterous activities, and on December 10, 1987, he shot and killed them in cold blooded murder in a "white hot jealous rage".

FORENSIC REPORTS

In 1997, I found two forensic reports that had never been admitted into the trial. One was on blood testing. No blood was found on Patrick Swiney's skin or clothing, even though the DA claimed that Patrick shot the male victim at point blank range in the head, execution style. The second forensic report was on the gun powder residue testing. Below are excerpts of that report.

ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF FORENSIC SCIENCES BIRMINGHAM DIVISION

Joseph H.Embry, M.D. Slate Medical Examiner

"Laboratory analyses failed to reveal conclusive evidence that the above named person fired a weapon, handled a fired weapon, or whether the hands were in close proximity to a fire arm when it was discharged."

At the bottom of the forensic report there's a note that says: "It should be noted that certain brands of .22 caliber rim fire ammunition do not contain the elements necessary to make this determination."

Signed:

David L. Higgins

Laboratory Analyst III

Birmingham Laboratory

“FORENSIC SCIENCES INVOLVE THE APPUCATION OF SCIENCE AND MEDICINE TO THE PURPOSES OF JUSTICE.”

This forensic report was NEVER PRESENTED AT TRIAL! It was suppressed by the DA, J. Michael Campbell. Had this report been presented, ballistics experts would have been called to testify. Since finding this report 10 years later, ballistic experts have testified to me. Three of these testimonies are cited verbatim below.

In essence, it is impossible for a person -- any person -- to shoot this model of weapon AR7 .22 semi-automatic rifle and not be *covered* with gun powder residue. Keep in mind that supposedly Patrick fired multiple shots. A third expert actually shot this model of weapon in my presence and I could see the blow-back coming from the rifle as it was being fired. He said if he went to a lab to have his hands and hair tested, he would be covered with microscopic gun powder residue particles. In addition, the autopsy report states that gun powder was found on the bodies of both victims.

PATRICK SWINEY is not the shooter. The DA knew this then and he knows this now. Still, Patrick was sentenced to Life without Parole [first and only offense] and he's been made to suffer greatly for the last 12 years at the hands of Warden Charlie Jones, who absolutely delights in torturing his prisoners.

We've presented this evidence of innocence [and the suppression thereof] to every Alabama court; all petitions and motions have been denied. These denials did not address this evidence at all. Instead, the denials were due to procedural default, preclusions, or being barred from presenting this evidence of innocence. Even the 11th Circuit Court in Atlanta, Georgia, denied, stating Patrick did not show *substantial* constitutional violations.

Now we are in the US Supreme Court, except that the US Supreme Court has denied for "out-of-time" when the petition was actually received by the court 7 DAYS EARLY!

I've written to the US Supreme Court asking how this can be denied when the petition was 7 days early. There's been no response, and I don't expect one because there is NO JUSTICE IN AMERICA!!!!! ###

Dr. Boris deKorczak has 30 years of experience as a CIA agent. He has a Ph.D. in psychology. He was hired by the National Police Defense Foundation as Chief Investigator.

In 1996, he decided to investigate the case of Patrick Swiney. Here is a small portion of his report to the NPDF:

NATIONAL POLICE DEFENSE FOUNDATION OFFICE OF CHIEF INVESTIGATOR - BORIS KORCZAK

P.O.BOX 7153*FAIRFAX STATION*VA 22039

TEL: 703 503-3350, FAX : 703 503-5158,

e-mail:

bkor@erols.com

October 20th, 1997

FINAL REPORT TO NPDF ON PATRICK SWINEY's CASE

After four months and countless hours spent on Patrick Swiney's case, reading the transcripts, going through evidence presented by prosecution and defense, travelling to Holman Prison and interviewing Patrick Swiney, this investigator came to conclusions that in interest of both Patrick Swiney and NPDF a well-planned action should take place to serve justice and meet the criteria of the by-laws of NPDF.

This man does not deserve to be in prison any more, nor do I believe he should be there, though it would be a tough job to prove his innocence due to circumstances and lack of cooperation from original investigative entities.

Patrick Swiney's case is an unusual one. The justice system, being in total disregard in observing the difference between what's right and what's wrong, sent this man to prison for life without the possibility of parole. The lack of evidence in this case, and the harshness of the sentence bestowed upon this man is analogous to hanging an offender of a parking ticket violation.

THIS INVESTIGATOR'S CONCLUSIONS

Patrick Swiney is a sincere man who does not lie. I believe he does not remember what happened the night of the deaths and I do not believe he was responsible. Rather, I view Patrick as a victim of unsubstantiated innuendo and unlawful (inadequate) investigative and court procedures.

It appears to me that the justice system was too quick to convict and I think this was in an effort to appease the general public, rather than taking the time to find out the truth of what occurred in this case.

Though my investigation is not complete as of this date (see items above that need to be sought out), I feel assured that Patrick Swiney is at least innocent of murder and does not belong in prison (if he ever did). If he was responsible for the deaths, intent to harm was never there and I would view this as a "Crime of Passion".

However, he may not be the person responsible for the deaths at all and after 10 years and so much evidence destroyed, it would be very difficult (if not impossible) to prove that he is innocent of Murder.

This new investigation finds many weak points in the process of finding Patrick Swiney guilty of Murder. It is fair to say though, that there are indications that the case should be treated as a "Crime of Passion", which carries with it much lesser sentence than the one given to Patrick Swiney.

###

WHAT BALLISTICS EXPERTS SAY

(1) Taken from ICQ computer-to-computer chat 11-5-99 between Dr. Boris deKorczak Ph.D. weapons expert and Sherry Swiney

Regarding gun powder residue for a .22 rifle

Sherry, How much of residue was there on the stock of the rifle? Do we know or do we don't know?

The report does not indicate that the stock was tested but I'll search the CD for the word residue and see what we can find.

You have ammo 40 grain. 15-16% is being blown away through the firing mechanism into the direction of the shooter. The lab should be able to establish the missing grains, taking to consideration quantity of residue on the stock.

OK.. I'll go look for something to this nature. What about the bullets and primers, does that make any difference at all?

NOPE!

Great! One person I spoke to said that .22's have a different kind of primer that doesn't emit any gun powder and that confused me.

Primer, regardless if it is center primer or side primer like in 22 has nothing to do with residue. It simply is not a gun powder.

I see... so these tests show either that they did a real sloppy job of inspecting the evidence or that PS actually was not the shooter.

Look at this. The exploding in the shell gun powder propels the projectile at same time it gives a recoil - meaning a part of gases go "backward" and leave through the small imperfections in the ammunition chamber and rest of the mechanism. It is directed opposite to the direction of the projectile.

Wonderful! Then we have sufficient information to show that PS is not the shooter - a mystery indeed.

Now. If we take as a constant value the speed of the expanding gases - ca. 1000FT/sec., then the gases going opposite direction go about 3/4 of this speed. Ergo. They have enough power to imbed the particles of burned and unburned powder into the right hand of the shooter, right cheek of the shooter, his hair, etc.

Wow.

Those miniscule particles are usually invisible to the naked eye. They can be " lifted" with help of hot wax or other chemicals.

I wonder, if we ever do get the photos if you can also see from that examination if there was residue on the rifle ?

Pending good quality of pictures - Yes. I can.

If the photos are not good quality, do you think that can be done from the video?

I would have to see what can I do with pics, video, etc.

I hope that after the UN examines the document they will tell the courts to release the photos for examination if they have any doubts.

German Sicherheit Polizei have outstanding record of their crime lab testing. They could be approached and asked for independent opinion.

That would be perfect!

I am so very relieved to here these things, Boris.

I could myself bring it to them and act as the independent observer.

Well, at what point do you think we should approach these people?

After we get some reaction from UN.

Ok...

Remember one thing: 22 does not have a center primer. It is a side primer and it has nothing to do with residues.

Please explain this to me as I'm not sure.

The bottom of an ordinary ammo piece, the round like a coin part has a "center" looking like if there was a little nail head imbedded in it. The .22 does not have it. Primer sits under the surface of the shell's head /coin like/ and is being struck by the firing pin which hits the side of the bottom instead of center.

OK, I see what you are saying. So when Alabama lab

In crazy terms. Any other ammo looks like an eye with a pupil. .22 looks like a blind eye.

OK?

Yes, OK! Tell me this....when Alabama lab says at the bottom of their report that "some" 22's don't reveal residue, they put that there to mislead I think. And then it was never questioned!

It is called in "latin" - bulshittus popularis".

LOL....those thugs!

here is no gun in the world, artillery, revolvers, rifles, etc which do not disperse the residue.

You can't imagine how this makes me feel!

If Patrick fired this gun he MUST have had miniscule particles of the residue imbedded in his skin, clothing, hair, etc.

That is what I thought but no one would listen to one who is not an expert at this like you are.

Grazie tante.

If we do go back to court, we will certainly need your expert testimony.

Go to any shooting place and fire .22. Then go and get your hands tested - you will be surprised how much of this stuff they will find.

You know, some months back when I visited with our Correctional Guard friend, he took out his AR7 .22 rifle and shot it for me so I could actually "see" the blow-by coming out of the mechanism. He said that if he went and had his hands tested there would be residue on them for sure.

Remember - allegedly PS fired multiple shots - ergo - the quantity of the residue would be very impressive.

###

(2) From Ron Plumlee, Sr. Monday April 24, 2000 9:21 am to Larry "Doc" Stansberry, Chaplain

Greetings Doc: Maybe I can help our brother in the .22 residue situation. I will give you the information and you decide. First my credentials in brief:

1. Valedictorian of my gunsmith college class (Journeyman).

2. Trained on most major weapons by their factory instructors.

3. Certified Master-Rangemaster/Chemical agents instructor state of CA.

4. N.R.A./U.S. Marines, State of OR certified range master.

5. Been teaching civilians, law enforcement, and college in firearms since 1974.

6. 30 year law enforcement career. 21 years patrol in all facets, 9 years in corrections. Retired from state of CA in Dec. 95. last few years I was a full-time armoire for the state. I taught, cleaned, and repaired. Also prepared post-shooting reports (fatal & non) and evidence for shooting review boards and court testimony.

Doc a .22 is the most dirty shooting weapon probably in the world. A large portion of its powder is unburned or only partially burned on ignition of the cartridge. Plus most .22 bullets are coated with a very thin wax like substance that also adds to the mix. All .22's have blow-back of residue.

Depending on the style of the weapon, some more than others. Semi-autos blow more out and back than say a bolt action. This is due to the tighter lockup of the firing mechanisms of the bolt action than the semi-auto. The primer is so small and has so few chemicals in it, that it is virtually a non-issue here. The blow-back of the normal powder is more than enough to mark a shooter and the weapon. I have been gunsmithing since approx. 1975.

With rare exception, everytime a person brings in a .22 rifle that does not work, it is because they have not cleaned it in some time, and the .22 cartridge "residue" has caused it to malfunction. And, the semi-auto .22 pistols are no exception. Hope this helped in some way. My web site also gives you an idea of who I am, and what I am about.

Semper Fi, "Top" Ron Plumlee, Sr.

(3) From Dr. Glenn Larkin MD May 26, 2000 9:24 am to Sherry Swiney

Sherry:

At trial, a negative finding of any test has to be considered most favorable to the defense, and if not done, it must be considered negative. This is plain law.

While Nuclear activation does not usually pick up residue from a 0.22 caliber weapon, atomic absorption does. A shotgun blast (or a double shotgun blast) leaves significant residue both on the target (in this case the victim, and on the hands of the shooter.

Does Dr Embry suggest that a 0.22 caliber weapon was used as the murder weapon? If so, it contradicts the state's case.

G M Larkin MD DABFM

SEE NEXT POST FOR DNA EVIDENCE