For those who helped convict him, they can rest that Patrick will die soon [because the abuse he has endured over the past 10-1/2 years has taken its toll and unless he is removed to a safe place where medical care and attention is available he will die soon] and then their lies will be safe. For those who helped convict him, who wish to recant their lies, they need to contact the courts and tell them the truth. For those who are too scared to tell the truth, may God forgive them for they know not what they have done. 

Below is a *portion* of Patrick's case. He was convicted on hearsay testimony that was not only not allowable, but it was false testimony. In addition, the evidence that would have proved he was not involved was suppressed and the court convicted him with NO evidence to convict. This could happen to you. I hope it never does. 

From Taoss@worldnet.att.net [AKA: Sherry Swiney - wife of a provably innocent man who has been doomed to die a torturous death in prison because the judges, after denying his right to counsel, won't hear his pro se case because it isn't written like counsel would write it - so should I become a widow because the judges can't follow their own rules? I do not think so!!!!] 

Ladies and Gentlemen, 

They say Patrick murdered two people. He did not. We have evidence that shows he was not involved. The Alabama courts have NO evidence to convict but they convicted anyway. How did they do that? Easy. Patrick was an easy target.

1. Patrick did not know his rights at the time but he did refuse to plea bargain because he was not guilty.

2. He was still dazed for many days after the shootings, which was another reason he was unable to defend himself properly. He had been unconscious during the shootings so he doesn't know what happened.

3. He was already on unfriendly terms with some former police officers who disliked the fact that while he had been V.P. of the FOP [fraternal order of police] he was a good cop and did not allow things like discrimination, harassing, prejudice and payoffs, etc., to enter into his fellow officers' conduct. He got on a couple of officers pretty hard. One of them lied in trial, probably to get even.

4. He was already on the blacklist as an enemy of the court. He had been responsible for the arrests of two high officials in Alabama: the DA of Baldwin County and the Chief Investigator for the Sheriff's Department. They'd been telling business people and so forth things like, "You pay me so much money and I'll protect you. [sic]" I call that racketeering, like the Mafia does. You screw with the Mafia and those guys never forget!

5. He had an attorney that was not qualified to stand up to the DA's tricks [his carefully planned conspiracy against Patrick], and who did not protect his client at all. Rather, he began the trial assuming Patrick was guilty as charged, believing the DA's scenario without questioning anything at all. Maybe he was scared.

6. The prosecuting DA had a vendetta against Patrick before the trial and during the trial. Why? [surely the DA still holds bad feelings against Patrick because right after the trial, Patrick's community banned together the kicked the DA and the Coroner out of office... now he's just an ordinary attorney-at-law with his own private practice].

a. The DA, Patrick and the woman sat in classrooms together for years during their childhood. He never liked Patrick even then. We must find out why.

b. Still, the DA visited Patrick and his new wife at their home and the DA went to see Patrick at work where he worked as an investigator for the attorney who was soon to be asked by Patrick's family to defend him in trial.

c. The DA loved the woman who was Patrick's new wife, even though he - the DA - was already married. Now the woman the DA loved and was so close to even in childhood, the woman Patrick loved and had been married to for only 5 months, was dead. She'd been caught committing adultery with her ex-husband. She and her ex-husband were now dead. Was Patrick the only one who saw them through the window, committing adultery? The last thing Patrick remembers is seeing them, then he blacked out. His rifle had been in the truck at that time and he was outside of the house. He'd been away over night. They'd had an argument over her son growing drugs in the house, and he had told her he was going to call it in if the boy didn't get rid of the stuff. The next night Patrick was returning home, and then he saw this. When he came to he was inside the house, sitting cross-legged on the floor, seeing the two bodies lying on the floor and feeling his own rifle lying across the palms of his hands! He didn't know if he shot them because of what he saw, or what happened, but immediately he summoned help. He did not know if they were dead or alive.

1). They had both been shot, supposedly with Patrick's .22 AR7 semi-automatic rifle, first through the window, then from inside the house, at point-blank range, the DA said. The guy had been shot in the head and the woman had been shot 6 times, everywhere, and bullet holes were everywhere inside the place. Three weapons experts have told me that it is impossible to fire away with a semi-automatic rifle such as this one, and NOT have *any* gun powder residue on your hands, neck, shirt, etc. The Forensic report says there was no residue on Patrick's skin or clothing.

2). The DA said that the ex-husband had been shot at point-blank range in the head. Think of the mess such a shooting would cause. Blood would be splattered near and far. The Forensic report says there was no blood on Patrick's skin, clothing or shoes. Apparently there was no blood on the rifle either, or at least no report either way. Oh, and the fingerprint report is conveniently missing. No one can say who fired that weapon, or if that rifle was even fired that night.

3). In testimony the forensic guy says, "I think the rifle was unfolded." Well, was it or wasn't it? Had it been fired before the lab test-fired it or not? These guys who testified weren't real sure about the condition of that rifle when they first got it. All they knew was that they heard that Patrick had that rifle, so he's the one who did this, just like the DA said he did, and that's that. Now, how do they *know* this when they don't even know what condition the rifle was in when they received it? And what's with these guys who take the DA's word for something without any kind of proof?

4). In testimony a woman says she called the house at 9:30 pm and talked to the ex-husband, then another woman says she called a little later and a man with a low voice and southern accent answered and said, "They are gone." But when Patrick saw the two bodies lying on the floor, he drove to his sister's house 6 miles away and told her to call the paramedics, whom he knew would call the police. When the paramedics arrived at 9:36 pm, Patrick's mother and sister had already driven back the 6 miles and were in that house before the paramedics got there. The DA says this was Patrick on the phone [naturally a man living in the Deep South would have a southern accent so that meant it had to be Patrick and no body else - mind you, Patrick doesn't even have that much of a southern accent]. So where are the fingerprints of the phone and how come the fingerprint report is missing? Also, how could all this have happen in less than 6 minutes. Who answered that phone? Or was there even a phone call made?

7. The prosecuting DA misused his power to persecute Patrick, an innocent man. Through the practice of judicial misconduct the DA conspired to destroy Patrick's life. How? 

a. He allowed, promoted and coerced hearsay testimonies that were absolute lies. 

b. He prevented witnesses for the defense to take the stand who would have stated that these hearsay testimonies were lies.

c. He asked the Coroner's Office not to perform two vital DNA tests during autopsy, then told the jury these two tests were inconsequential to the case. The two tests would have proven adultery had taken place. That DNA evidence was purposely destroyed - and destroyed forever! Why would the DA order this? Was the DA afraid his own DNA would be found, making him appear culpable?

d. The DA fabricated a scenerio that was completely and varifiably false. 

e. He "proved" to the jury that Patrick was a cold-blooded murder because one time, Patrick used a pellet gun to drive off some crows from his yard who were bothering a blue bird's nest [blue birds are very rare these days in Alabama and they were rare then too]. The fact that one of Patrick's neighbors saw this was proof enough for the DA. Thus, everyone who has ever shot a pellet gun [a B-B gun] at a crow is a cold-blooded murder, so be careful not to do that in Alabama or they will say you have the M.O. of being a cold-blooded murderer, because - in Alabama - if the DA [or any authority] says you are guilty, then you are guilty, no matter how much evidence you have to the contrary.

f. The DA withheld forensic evidence that shows Patrick was not involved in the shooting. They talked about these reports in trial, but never examined the reports in trial to let the jury see what they actually said. Instead, they said the reports were inconclusive and that meant he was guilty.

g. The crime scene was abandoned for 24 hours - a chain of custody violation - but in Alabama that's okay too. It apparently doesn't matter if the crime scene is abandoned where anyone could add or take away evidence to convict or to free. Well, they said the shots came from the outside through the window, but when they went back the next day to get the window, it was outside lying on the grass with a hole in it the size of a cannon projectile, and not a .22 caliber.

h. There's lots more....these are only a few of the highlights of errors in the court, by the attorney, by the DA, by the judges, and by the police who so-called investigated the incident...Humph! Yea right, we have witnesses to testify that the police lied on their handwritten reports, stating things that no one ever said to them. We have witnesses to testify that the DA admitted to his conspiracy against Patrick, after the appeal was lost. 

i. I wonder: Do DA's pal around with other DA's in neighboring counties? Do Judges entertain with other judges in neighboring districts? Do DA's and attorney make deals behind closed doors? Just curious.

Blessings to All,
Sherry Swiney
www.patrickcrusade.org
Executive Director, PATRICKCRUSADE
ALABAMA HEADQUARTERS

 It is the inability to experience the suffering of another human being
as one's own, that allows gross suffering to continue on planet earth.