Freedom of Justice

Jason's court appointed trial attorney which was also his appeal attorney failed in his duty to perform an adequate investigation into, and seek a full discover as to prepare a meaningful adversarial challenges to impeach eyewitness for the commonwealth attorney and failed to present evidence for a defense and at bare minimum defense theory. Jason's attorney failed to object prosecution attorney malicious conduct and that included misleading of the facts and testimony of their eyewitness those of which I would like to outline in the following:
The commonwealth attorney eyewitness referred to as AW testified at trial that she did not want to be involved with this case, she told the police that three black men entered her home early in the morning one of them woke her up and dragged her downstairs where she was made to lay down and not look at anyone. Afterwards someone was murdered. At Jason's trial she admitted that she had lied to police about the description of the people and that one person was a light skin or white with corn rows, she admits to this after changing this story and descriptions more than once. But she tells the police during her initial interview that she seen one of them as being light skin(black male) but was unable to actually make any identification because she was hit in the face and made to lay down. she also contacted the locked before trial investigating this case and told one of the detectives that she was being harassed by the victims family to tell more and cooperate (Jason is known to victims family and was identified first by them) this contact came by way of Facebook and was made before she identified Jason and after the initial police interview. There was absolutely no evidence pointing to Jason as being one of the person involved, Jason talked to police for about four hours with nothing to hide and told the police that he knew the victim and was friends with her and etc. but the common wealth attorney cherry picked the interview and twisted it to make Jason look guilty. At trial AW says she seen Jason's codefendant shoot first and when she look back up she seen Jason's codefendant point to her and Starr shooting and "they" were "shooting" during the closing arguments the commonwealth attorney mislead the jury by telling them that she may been mistaken about who shot first but she knew who shooting over and over and that the person was Jason. This was a lie and I don't know why the jury couldn't see this because AW never said anything to this effect even the ballistic/crime scene evidence and autopsy report all say only one gun was fired there was no DNA or finger prints so AW testimony should not be looked at as creditable or have any weight to it with that being said it is impossible to have found Jason guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, unless the lies by the commonwealth attorney is what convinced the jury (during deliberations the jury sent a note to the judge telling him that they now have finger prints on the shell casings, this was never evidence at trial how was this possible) even with this being true, this is not justice and a innocent man was found guilty for something he did not do! If you can provide any help, expertise etc. please do so thank you..
  • #1 fundraising platform

    People have raised more money on GoFundMe than anywhere else. Learn more

  • GoFundMe Guarantee

    In the rare case that something isn’t right, we will refund your donation. Learn more

  • Expert advice, 24/7

    Contact us with your questions and we’ll answer, day or night. Learn more