Saturday, January 16, 2016

Making a Murderer, Encinitas Edition: the Wrongful Conviction of Cheri Lynn Dale



The Netflix documentary Making a Murderer is generating nationwide discussion about the case of Steven Avery, convicted of murder in a troubling case involving a coerced confession from Avery's severely learning disabled nephew and clear indications of evidence tampering by police.

Encinitans may not know that one of our own sits in prison to this day, convicted of murder in a similarly deeply disturbing case. Cheri Lynn Dale was convicted in 1993 of the 1990 murder of Susan Taylor. Despite no physical evidence pointing to Dale and no suspects at the time of the murder, an ambitious Carlsbad detective built a case more than two years later based on vague, inconsistent, and contradictory statements from the hazy memories of druggies. The case has the clear appearance of police and prosecutor misconduct and ineffective defense counsel.

Susan Taylor was staying in a La Costa drug house rented by methamphetamine dealer Lisa Stanton. The house had numerous drug users coming and going all the time, including at least a few visits by Cheri Dale. The police had no leads until two years later, when Cheri's violently angry, estranged husband told a Carlsbad detective to look into Cheri as the killer.

David Scott, who knew Cheri as a teenager, has completed an unpublished book that reviews the evidence and convincingly argues that Cheri is innocent. It is a fascinating and heartbreaking read. That manuscript can be downloaded or read online here (pdf).

Cheri has been a model prisoner, but has twice been denied parole. Because she maintains her innocence, the parole system says she doesn't show "remorse."

For further reading on Cheri's case, see this March 10, 2005 San Diego Reader with a feature story beginning on page 3. And Cheri's brother Fred Caldwell has made a series of short YouTube videos on the case here.

55 comments:

  1. You are no longer innocent until proven guilty, with today's justice system you must prove you are innocent. With a capitol crime only extreme amounts of money can do that....money that Fred and his family do not have.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A jury trial in the US is nothing more than a prelude to a guilty verdict. The lemmings in this country who comprise any "jury of your peers" have been programmed, brainwashed and coddled by a system that sells police and prosecutorial integrity on venal TV programs and through our culture of authority worship. The police state and prison industrial complex are ravenous and need fresh meat to run through the grinder, lest they become unneeded and obsolete.

      Call these assertions conspiracy theories, at least until you get into trouble and find yourself subject to our blind system of "justice" ... there's no morsel more succulent to the grinder than the sacrificial offering of some respectable white boy to equal out the legal obliteration of the poor and weak.

      Delete
    2. Woke up this morning randomly thinking of Cheri...and I found this. She and I are old friends. I had no idea the case was this loose. Fred if you see this please send her my best.

      Delete
  2. Thanks for posting David Scott's book WC. (But beware, my little youtube shorts were pretty long and drawn out - sorry!)

    And 10:24, That's probably true a lot of the time when it comes to money tipping the scale for justice. However, Cheri's first appointed lawyer Steven Wadler was worth his weight in gold, so we was mysteriously "replaced", we figured the next one would only have to tell Cheri's story. Then he didn't.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I meant "so when he was mysteriously replaced"

    ReplyDelete
  4. There is always pressure to resolve outstanding murders, so that the incentive is to set someone up as the patsy, clearing the case-load. Sounds like character assassination was used in this case - her use of drugs being the primary factor..

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yes, 12:36. DA Phingst had the highest conviction rate in CA and his understudies did their best to keep it that way. In her late teens Cheri did drugs and her former lifestyle made it easier for a prosecutor to make her look absolutely evil to 12 strangers on a jury (nevermind that she had no criminal history whatsoever and completely got off drugs 2 years prior to her arrest). Good grounds to tell your kids never to do drugs with that old "guilt by association" tag).

    Character assassination was a big part of it, beginning with the front pager article "Leucadia Home Center of Murder Probe" in which a police detective claimed: "Dale said she left a bag of bloody clothes at a house on Hymettus St. (at the time of the murder.)" Try to unring that bell! Cheri never said anything close to that and no such clothing was ever found, but that didn't stop a prosecutor from wrongly claiming there was an eye-witness to such clothing. When the reporter researched it more, her very next article "Inconsistencies Arise In Case" stated: "Detective Wick misrepresented the case to the Blade Citizen". And how.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I will never stop until Cheri is exonerated. If BROWN would take a hour to read the book backed by evidence of a frame by Wick, he should crawl to Chowchilla, apologize and bring her in front of the Supreme Court and release her as INNOCENT. FRED, I feel helpless because nobody has the balls to GO against MANNING...

      Delete
    2. The legal system is a clique, just like any other social group. You have to have a flow chart to access the 'pliability' of the system - knowing who knows who definitely helps.

      Delete
    3. 10:59, that makes sense. We always got the feeling that the alumni of the Western School of Law can find no fault with anyone inside their walls. The trial judge taught there, the prosecutor schooled there, the Innocence Project is based there, etc. The defense investigator told us that the trial lawyer and prosecutor played poker every Thursday night. Seemed too chumy for us. Could their friendship have anything to do with the reason that lawyer DROPPED the outrageous governmental misconduct charges to dismiss Cheri's case that the former lawyer had raised? Pretty harsh charges to keep alive against a friend. The lawyer also revealed that he and the prosecutor together chose the judge to preside over Cheri's trial. The judge joked: "Flattery will get you nowhere". It also turned out that Cheri's appellate lawyer (who's appeal failed) had worked closely with the trial lawyer in Anchorage years before. Had we known that, as nice as the guy is, we may have had doubts about hiring him to represent Cheri. He did however tell us that he believes Cheri is innocent, and that if he did anything wrong to let him know because he would "fall on the sword" for her.

      -Fred

      Delete
    4. America is more and more like Iran or China....

      Delete
  6. Fred, I hope the long overdue justice for your sister will be forthcoming. That she had been clean for two years should have been a factor for the DA Phingsts' rabid pursuit of a conviction at all costs. He should be held liable for malicious prosecution. Of course, that will never happen, when we have the likes of Bonnie Dumanis sp? running the show. I hope this can be somewhat rewarding for your family now that the public knows that she was a patsy for a prosecutor looking for conviction on an easy target that had little means to defend herself.

    I thought the 'might makes right' was more suited to our neighbors south of the border but that was naive. Best wishes on an equitable resolution to this miscarriage of justice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was Manning who prosecuted the case. PHINGST NEVER WOULD OF SIGNED THE WARRANT...

      Delete
    2. 11:40, Its certain Det. Wick knew the "hair in the victim's hand" evidence was missing on the day he and DDA Manning left for TX to retrieve Cheri's hair for a comparison test with it. He himself swore he had lost it. I highly doubt he told DDA Manning it was missing then or when he requested Pfingst fund their flight. At least I hope the other 2 didn't know. When a judge asked the prosecutor to explain how Cheri's hair could have been compared with lost evidence on June 26,92, he was not satisfied with the answer. DDA Manning responded "I've never even seen the June 92 test before" but he had signed the affidavit swearing the June test was true and correct. So at best I believe he put too much faith into Det. Wick's integrity or at worst as atty Wadler claimed, he was covering up a fraudulent report for Det. Wick by not supplying the June 92 report to the defense when it was requested.
      - Fred

      Delete
    3. Even if DA Paul Pfingst wasn’t culpable in Cheri’s case, he was culpable in David Westerfield’s case in 2002. He was up for re-election, and needed a boost to his chances, so he succeeded in getting Westerfield convicted and sentenced to death for the kidnapping and murder of his 7-year-old neighbor Danielle van Dam, despite overwhelming evidence of innocence. Danielle was kidnapped from her bed, but the police could find no evidence Westerfield was ever in her house; in fact, the failure by the police dogs to detect his scent there proves he wasn’t there. He supposedly took her back to first his house and then his motor home, but the police dogs failed to detect her scent in either place, proving she wasn’t there recently. So the small amount of evidence of her in those places was old, from previous innocent visits. Her body was dumped in a meadow, but again the police could find no evidence Westerfield had been there. Based on the insect evidence, the police’s own expert calculated that Danielle died long after Westerfield was placed under 24-hour surveillance, so he couldn’t have done it. After his conviction, someone else, James Selby, confessed to killing her. Unlike Westerfield, who had no criminal history, Selby had committed similar crimes before, despite which the police weren’t interested. The book on the case can be found here: http://tinyurl.com/6bzzyf4.

      Delete
  7. Thanks for the well wishes, 6:51.

    We campaigned for Bonnie Dumanis who promised to clean house and participated in her commercials (albeit in a crowd!)
    Funding a lawyer was not the problem. We were going to retain Atty James Dicks to represent Cheri. But her 2nd appointed lawyer who we were not satisfied with intervened, telling us "You can't switch lawyers now, its too close to trial and the judge would never allow it." Naïve us didn't know that wasn't so and we figured we were stuck with him and had to turn Atty James Dicks down (who came highly recommended to us). Atty Dicks also later supplied an affidavit saying he had wanted to take the case. Ultimately, one judge disbelieved our reason for not hiring Atty Dicks (along with the even that atty's affidavit too I guess).

    The truth is, Cheri was with us for a 3 day period at the time of the crime. Not "Sleepless for a week with her friends, high on drugs, leading her to a vicious axe murder" as the prosecutor contended. Her trial lawyer privately told the judge her alibi was "just a story her mother put into her head". If that were the case, we would have had to falsify a legal traffic court receipt proving she was with us (among other things). Another big problem was that Cheri actually believed she had overheard Susan's murder. She heard a man and woman arguing loudly from Lisa's front door area. She could see a blood smear on a livingroom wall. What no one told her is that on the Sunday she had gone there, tenant Lee Baum had been vicously attacked and it was that altercation she overheard - and probably Lee's blood she had seen. But the murder didn't happen on a Sunday but the following Thursday. Her trial lawyer knew all this and didn't reveal it to her jury and instead bent over for the prosecutor agreeing Cheri was there the day of the murder. We were all told we'd take the stand for Cheri, but conveniently none of us were called. When the lawyer said "The defense rests" and they hadn't heard one word of her actual whereabouts on the day of the crime, we all flipped out and wrote an emergencly plea to the judge asking to tell jurors her story. I not only notarized it, the case stunk so much I Xeroxed it too in case it "got lost" like so many other exculpatory things did. Sure enough, it got destroyed and wasn't made part of the court record. An appeal stated "No such letter of Dale's discontent with her lawyer exists prior to her guilty verdict". Not true. We submitted it to the court prior to their deliberation. So yeah. My family and I would have never believed something like this could happen to an innocent person in this day and age. Were we ever wrong.

    ReplyDelete

  8. One more thing I'd like to add. Cheri's arrest warrant used a falsified forensic hair test result as the probable cause to arrest her. You'd think that alone would get the whole thing thrown out. It almost did. On 2-22-94, Atty Wadler showed judge Charles Rogers that not only was the hair test conclusion falsified, but the June 1992 hair test itself was impossible! "The hair from the clutched fist of the victim" went missing from the evidence room in Jan 92. They went to interview Cheri and collect her hair for a comparison test (while that evidence was till missing) in June 92. The hair was "discovered" in the arresting officer's car (of all places) in 8-92. The the officer's story changed drastically about that evidence. To the grand jury he swore "I checked out the hair evidence; I drove it to the prosecutor's office in Vista; I lost that evidence in my car". But at trial he swore "I didn't check out that evidence; I didn't drive it to Vista; I didn't lose it in my car and have no idea how it appeared there". WTH?
    Our only glimmer of hope was on 2-22-94 when a judge was furious at the false claims in the arrest and he took the rare step of releasing a murder suspect out on her Own Recognizance. The only such release of his 20 year career. No bail. No bracelet. Cheri had even passed the lie detector test. When they toyed with the idea of giving her a sodium pendithal (truth syrum) test and Cheri eagerly accepted, they reneged. Then her lawyer asked her if she would accept a 7 year sentence if she plead guilty! Yikes. In retrospect - If Cheri had lied and admitted guilt (and what innocent person believing in our system would?), she would have been out of prison 14 years ago. That's another frustrating reality of our criminal justice system here in San Diego.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Innocence project says there's no DNA? HOW did hair cut from Cheri head by Wick #4 end up in #11 & #14? Evidence tampering by a lying nobody cop

      Delete
    2. Cops fabricate the evidence all the time. They write up the reports to fit their preconceived notions. It then is a matter of $$ where the case goes...

      Delete
  9. As I have said to you personally Fred, this miscarriage of justice is so appalling that it is unbelievable and yet it happened. I wish there was something I could do, but since I am not an attorney, I feel so helpless. Hopefully, in the near future, some attorney will go above and beyond and get her released. In the meantime, my love to you and your family. This cannot be easy, as I am sure we would all agree. Lorri Greene

    ReplyDelete
  10. Thanks Lorri! Simply put, my family and I would not fabricate an alibi to protect a murderer. We're not geared that way and I hope that shows! It didn't to a superior court judge who had to choose between the credibility of all or our testimony and one trial lawyer's at Cheri's Motion for a New Trial. But what's a judge to do when a plethora of false information against someone goes unchallenged?

    Judge Gill seemed perplexed that any judge would have released a murder suspect on their Own Recognizance (as Cheri was pre-trial) and asked the prosecutor "Did judge Rogers have Cheri's exonerating DNA hair test information before him on the day he released Miss Dale?" Twice the prosecutor said "Yes". Twice that was wrong. DNA exonerated Cheri from being the source of the "hair in the victim's hand" 3 months after her release. But the last thing I think the prosecutor wanted was for the judge to review were the real reasons for her release, which were: "Material misstatements" in her arrest warrant.

    Fred

    ReplyDelete
  11. Obviously some people would have been in deep trouble if these truths came out. Incarceration was a solution for a few to cover their mistakes. What has happened in San Diego over the years makes many cringe, we have a reputation in the legal community, and you can guess what that is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are many corrupt judges and prosecutors in San Diego County. That's a sad fact of life. Bonnie Dumanis didn't live up to her campaign promises. She consistently chooses loyalty to her hierarchy of injustice over finding the truth, which is what justice is supposed to be. Sad that she was re-elected.

      Our Judicial Council also likes to turn a blind eye to judicial misbehavior and misconduct. And the San Diego Bar Association helped some awful judges get re-elected with its bogus recommendations, found in the voter's pamphlet, and repeated by the Union Tribune, under Manchester.

      Delete
  12. I know I'm wearing some people out here, so I'll close with this note since today is Cheri's 46th birthday. I owe it to her to relate the actual story for her whereabouts at the time of Susan's murder for anyone curious. Events following Cheri's 20th birthday became an integral part of her alibi. Its pretty simple and mundane, but 100% backed up by Cheri, me, Ma n Pa and all of our corroborating evidence (which is still in stark contrast to the fabrications presented against her at trial.).

    Cheri was supposed to come home on her 20th birthday and spend that whole week here. She had a mandatory appearance to address a traffic ticket for 1-24-90. Mom had agreed to take that day off work to drive Cheri to court. Cheri was a no-show on her birthday, partying with her friends. Ultimately, she came home Tues afternoon 1-23-90 the day before her appearance was scheduled. I was adamant on the phone with when she called telling her she could face a Failure to Appear if she flaked out on her court date. She assured me she would come right home and she did. Grandma was visiting from TX so Cheri slept on the living room couch. Mom took off work 1-24-90 to drive Cheri there as Cheri didn't have a car or a license. (We have Mom's timecard corroborating that the 24th she was off).
    Cheri's case didn't come up until after 1:30pm. (We have Cheri's signed legal receipt). Afterward, the two went to an adjacent Beauty College and picked up a brochure. (We have it)
    On their way back to the coast, Cheri asked Mom to stop by a certain house in La Costa. "I got Fred a phone for his birthday and it ended up over there". (Witnesses remember the distinctive red phone shaped like a Porsche being used at that house). Making a pit-stop at home, Cheri dropped off the red phone when I wasn't around. I later saw the phone on the diningroom table as I walked through to the kitchen when no one else was around. The next morning walking through to the kitchen, I saw the phone again, but this time Cheri was at the far end of the livingroom asleep on the couch. That's when I figured Cheri must have brought that phone home. Note: It was that very morning Susan Taylor was brutally killed, 6 miles away.
    Just after noon when Mom got home from work (1-25-90), she and Cheri left to go shopping. (Mom worked half days with Special Ed kids). Before they left though, Cheri brought the phone out to the antique shop and gave it to me as my belated birthday gift (My birthday is Jan 20th).
    (We have a receipt for a purchase they made at Sunshine Gardens at 4:30pm the afternoon of the 25th along with the cancelled check for the purchase. Dad and I were watching the evening news on channel 8 at 5pm on 1-25-90. Three WEIRD things happened all at once.
    1. Dad recognized Richard Castenada on the top story that night. Richard is an old friend who became a Carlsbad PD detective. The top story: a murder in La Costa. (We have a copy of the news report).
    2. I recognized the name of the victim "Susan Taylor" and was hoping it wasn't the same woman I knew from coming into our shop. (Susan had signed our "wish-list" rolodex)
    3. Mom walked in mid-way through the report at 5pm (as she and Cheri were returning home) and Mom recognized the house on the news as the very place where she and Cheri had picked up the red phone the day before!
    Cheri walked in next, missing the report but when she heard someone was killed at Lisa's house, she immediately left to go find out what had happened. She met up with friends at the motel behind "Cinnamons" (now Denny's) on Enc. Blvd. as a small group of people tried to figure out what happened at Lisa's house in La Costa. So that's pretty much the whole story from my perspective. We can't figure out why a defense lawyer didn't present it at trial. Especially when his own investigator swore that there was "no doubt about the trail of the red phone (as per Cheri and her witnesses)"
    - Fred

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Happy birthday, Fred. Many of us are making a birthday wish for you, with you, for Cheri to finally find justice.

      Delete
  13. Is she eligible for parole soon?

    As a young first-time offender in CA, I can't imagine she'd get life with no parole.

    Not making any comment on guilt or innocence, as I don't know enough, and would never form an opinion based on one side.

    ReplyDelete
  14. 7:26 I fully understand the shortcomings of just hearing one side of a story. The jurors only heard the prosecution's side. The trial lawyer secretly took the low road with his "reasonable doubt" approach yet allowed the prosecution to swear "Cheri said she went there on 1-25-90" - which was false. She indicated it was on a weekend when she had overheard a fight and was never asked if she knew the day or date of the murder.

    After the verdict, the prosecutor, defense lawyer and some jurors were huddled right outside the courtroom. As I passed by, the prosecutor asked "Was it the bite mark that swayed you to convict Cheri?" to which a juror said "It wasn't that at all! Its just that she said she was there! She never would have been convicted if she hadn't had said she was there." To which I responded "She wasn't even there that day!" and was chastised by her lawyer who murmured: "Fred!"
    Glad reporter Anne Kruger was right there to hear it all.

    Cheri got 26 to life for 1st degree murder with the special circumstances of burglary (of an empty house). There were no witnesses. Cheri had no criminal history. There was no DNA. No hair. No fingerprints. No motive. No opportunity. No evidence of transportation to or from the scene.

    Cheri had her first parole hearing about 2 years back in which 2 parole judges reviewed her exemplary history at prison and recommended to the governor she be paroled. He denied that because "She says she's innocent and I don't believe her" - a reason that's legally not supposed to be a reason anymore. Of course he's listened to the prosecutor who told him there was "overwhelming evidence against her" and "The bite bruise on the victim was a match to Cheri's teeth". Well, I thought Cheri should have a copy of Dr. Norman Sperber's actual bite mark conclusion for her next round with the parole board - and that just took place a few months ago with two new judges. A prosecutor stood by on Skype with her "bite mark match" claim once again. Cheri however, handed over Sperbers report to both judges. They paused, read its briefness, frowned, looked at the prosecutor and said "This isn't a match!" They then both gave Cheri glowing commendations for her parole to the Gov. Hopefully this time it will work.

    When the guilty verdict was read back in '95, Cheri couldn't breathe and could only uttered one word through tears: "How?" If you could have visited with us around last Thanksgiving, you'd leave asking the same question. She's truly an amazing person, still optimistic for her future and certainly has never been vicious. When Justin Brooks of the Innocence Project visited her, she said at one point "I think you think I'm innocent!" He said: "I wouldn't be here if I didn't think you were innocent".

    But swing on by our shop anytime if you'd like to see documentation or other proof for most
    anything I've said here.

    All that said, Happy MLK Jr. Day everyone!

    Fred

    ReplyDelete
  15. Miscarriage of justice...!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Malicious prosecution.

    ReplyDelete
  17. If you've read the book, the evidence that FRED WAS ABSOLUTELY BRILLIANT AT COPING AND KEEPING FILES OF "WAS NOT BROUGHT INTO COURT" NOT ALLOWING CHERI OR HER FAMILY TO TESTIFY WITH EVIDENCE THAT PROVES WITHOUT A IOTA OF DOUBT THAT CHERI WAS WITH FAMILY BEFORE DURING AND AFTER THE MURDER SHOULD BE ENOUGH TO FILE A MOTION TO KICK OUT THE GUILTY VERDICT AND START THE INVESTIGATION WITH HOMICIDE DETECTIVES WITH BRAINS. I HAVE A FEW I can recommend from the Sheriff's Department.... Too bad Wick crocked, he belongs in prison, but hells a good start..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 10:58,

      Just FYI, credibility on the 'ole interweb series of tubes is generally inversely proportional to the frequency of all caps use.

      In essence: shouty folk are generally ignored.

      Delete
    2. ANONYMOUS... a website TROLL..

      Delete
  18. Sweetie, I've been a Paralegal Investigation Specialist since 1989 AND HAVE BEEN WORKING THE CASE WITH THE CALDWELLS PRO BONO..until you have been what we've been through, kindly STFU. Reb

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And yet, somehow Fred manages to communicate clearly, with passion and dignity without using all caps.

      Not critiqueing the content or looking for a fight. Just offering a little friendly advice.

      Delete
    2. Who cares whether someone types in CAPS? Give it a rest. I don't mind and neither should you.

      Delete
    3. Thanks but it was my fault. The caps, I use a stylus, taped to my finger... Non sensation in fingers, I can't feel the keyboard and it slips..I do recheck letters before sending them out.. This was just a quick post. I really am a nice person ☺

      Delete
  19. I suffer from extreme pain due to four non curable conditions... My apologies... I want more then anything to see Cheri walk out of court EXONERATED, however, Buddha, has decided I'm needed elsewhere.. Again, my DEEPEST APOLOGIES..✌Reb

    ReplyDelete
  20. why would you feel remorse for something you did not do? And if she does say she feels remorse,than would that not make her look guilty? She is in there wrongfully.I know her,and have talked with her,spent time with her,even seen and have read her papers fist hand.Let her go home,and find the real murderer.Enough is enough.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes J.P., "showing remorse" is a real catch 22 still unfortunately. A lady judge in San Diego (who incidentally believes in Cheri's innocence) about 8 years back helped pass a law that parole cannot be denied based on "not showing remorse" for prisoners who've claimed innocence all along. That was the focus of Cheri's last parole denial's appeal, but it wasn't heeded by the judge. Glad you got to know Cheri back in the day. She always loved to have a good time, but got in with the wrong boyfriend. He cooked meth and of course kept her in that lifestyle for a time. We have two letters from former DA Miller offering her help when she was a victim of his violence. She finally broke free from him in Aug of 91, went to TX, immediately put down drugs, got a job, a house, a truck, a new beau, a dog and her life blossomed. Eventually started her own successful house painting biz with her boyfriend and was pregnant with twins. Toward the end of her pregnancy, her doctor ordered her to stay in bed. Then one morning around 4am, she saw shadows of people creeping around outside. The cops broke down her door, arrested her and she miscarried in jail.
      Judge Gus Strauss laughed at the probable cause in her arrest warrant and on her promise alone to return to San Diego to face these charges, he released her. (He refused to extradite her). Cheri returned immediately returned to SD on her own dime where she was reincarcerated for 4 more months. In Feb 94 when a judge (furious about
      "misstatements" in her arrest warrant) released her O.R., we never thought it would go to trial, let alone make sense to any juror when her story was told. But it never was.
      - Fred

      Delete
  21. This is really scary. Hopefully this issue gains momentum and brings about a new trial. I think her refusal to show remorse, knowing that doing so would improve her chances of parole, says a lot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Anon. I think it was especially hard for Cheri being disbelieved when her psych review person suggested she "confess" to this crime prior to her parole hearing. Its doubtful that psych tech ever heard Cheri passed her lie detector test or anything else in Cheri's favor. When Cheri got to prison though, she said "Just about everyone says they're innocent up here! But then you get to know them!"
      -Fred

      Delete
  22. Fred- I hope your sister goes free!

    Love you man. Please separate main points of the story with a paragraph or break line. You are killing my eyes.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Alert Alert. Encinitas Library renamer is racist supporter of apartheid Israel and just paid to have a library built in his name in the illegally occupied Palestinian territories thus further expanding the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians off their own land.
    See the You Tube video https://youtu.be/bYJZS0n6LVk titled
    The Steven & Patricia Mizel Library- dedication

    ReplyDelete
  24. It hit me like a ton of bricks and three elephants after going through all the evidence collected after the book was written. ONLY TWO ATTORNEYS CONTACTED ME OUT OF 50+ I SENT THE BOOK TO with a letter pleading for them to read the book.
    When a attorney receives a book and letter, they run the Attorney and Paralegals background.
    So, after the bricks fell I contacted attorneys who I know that don't do murder cases. He verified my statement of checking attorneys. The author/attorney was disbarred in Florida during the writing of the book. Every one I sent the book to did what I would do if I checked the attorney out. DUMP IT IN THE TRASH, BECAUSE ATTORNEYS AREN'T GOING TO WASTE TIME READING THE BOOK by a Disbarred Attorney. I'm changing my investigation without the book and use evidence the Cadwells supplied and I found. I'm so stupid it took me this long to figure it out and with absolute sadness....

    ReplyDelete
  25. maybe the poor with no education and plenty of time want the revolution? Well I have to be honest. Its been tried. Sometimes bloody failures, others successful. Best of Luck for you and your family.

    ReplyDelete
  26. This thread is about a woman who got screwed by the system. Show some respect.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can't count on every person I know fingers and toes how many people got screwed by the system. It's now guilty until your proved innocent...

      Delete
  27. Fred, so sorry your family has had to go through this. It seems like Dateline or 48hrs would have picked this up. Seems like a lot of corruption going on and an incompetent atty for your sister. I am curious what has happened to some of the people in the case over the years like Hilner, Stanton and Manning ?

    ReplyDelete
  28. 7:12 Thanks. Its been very hard on a lot of people for a long time, but especially Cheri - who manages to remain optimistic, sensible and productive despite her circumstances. A lot of the characters in this story have passed away including Jeff Hilner (the man who got the case in gear against Cheri); Officer Wick who arrested her with a fraudulent affidavit; Defense Investigator Mike Okins - who knew we were telling the truth; Kevin Sturgeon and Paul Barnett - who went fishing instead of report the dead body they found at the house that morning; Annie Arbuckle - who claimed Jeff had called her crying after he "killed Susan and buried the weapon where no one will ever find it".
    Hilner died. Stanton won't talk to me (but I can hardly blame her for not wanting to off put DDA Manning). Manning got Prosecutor of the Year from DA Dumanis a few years back. Kevin Sturgeon and Paul Barnett (the two men who discovered Susan's body, then went fishing) are both dead. On the lighter side, a few tweakers managed to pull themselves completely out of their former lifestyle and are doing very well! But this case is one of the most quiet ones in CA. despite years of our time devoted to exposing it. Just try to Google any news articles on it - and there were plenty. W.C. was the only one to break in the back door of the Reader article "Is Cheri an Axe Murderer?" by Joe Deegan. According to Joe, the defense lawyer told the Reader to forever remove that story from their online archives. Sometimes I have to wonder WHAT did Cheri do in a previous life to go through what she's going through now?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Such a tragic yet fascinating story. I hope your sister gets out and has an amazing second half of her life. I can't imagine the emotions your family has gone through,I get angry reading about the corruption and injustice of your sister's case.

    ReplyDelete
  30. She's finally FREE!

    ReplyDelete
  31. Cheri is FREE and doing GREAT! Cell phone a new wonderful toy. God and Buddha finally got a innocent person released..27 years innocent in prison and she came back A SHINING STAR without angry, just disappointed by our judicial system. Long life my not yet friend..

    ReplyDelete
  32. Just came across this page. I want to thank all the people that supported me & my family through this injustice. Yes I am now FREE! MARRIED , WORKING , and LOVING LIFE ....I still would like to make the system PAY ME for what they put me through.

    ReplyDelete