* * * *
* * * *
The William "Bill" Doriss vs. Connecticut saga continues:
Subject: Oral Hearing
Connecticut native, and now Massachusetts resident, William Doriss appeared before a three-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, New York City, April 3, in an oral argument of his appeal of the Harford District Court ruling against him in Doriss v. City of New Haven and State of Connecticut, 2006.
Doriss filed a multimillion dollar lawsuit against the City and State in 2005, where he alleged false targeting, false reporting, multiple false arrests, false seizure of private property, excessive force, and obstruction of justice by the City of New Haven, 1998-2002. Doriss additionally alleges the false testimonies ot two New Haven police officers in Ct. v. Doriss, which went to jury trial in Superior Court, New Haven, Nov. '02.
Doriss repeated his accusations that the State of Connecticut, in co-conspiracy with the Court, gave him a false trial where two misdemeanor convictions were engineered by the trial court, in co-conspiracy with the State, in order to deny him the true exonerations to which he was legally entitled. Doriss claims the State suborned the perjured testimonies of two police officers and five civilians when it hit him with 13 criminal charges--nine felony--and 69 years prison over two separate dog accidents involving Doriss two dogs. He claims to have been falsely convicted of the misdemeanor charges and falsely sentenced by Judge Bernadette Conway at Superior Court, New Haven. He claims the judge misread the law and misinstructed the jury about the law in order to achieve the two convictions in the trial cases. He claims she displayed intemperate judicial demeanor, and violated his 1st and 5th Amendment rights when she shut off his testimony on direct examination two successive days in a row.
Judge Conway instructed the jury that "date and time" [of the dog accidents] were "not elements of the crime that the State has to prove." Doriss has consistently maintained that date and time are elements of every crime which it is incumbent upon the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.
Doriss claims the State gave him false appellate procedure where a hack out-of-state attorney was appointed to file an appeal on his behalf. Doriss never met this attorney before the filing and did not participate in the appeal. The Appellate Court rubber-stamped the trial court without examining the true issues in the case. He now claims that a concatenation of "harmless errors" committed by the State now amount to a serious crimes against him by both City and State. Doriss claims NO crimes were committed by him in the state.
Connecticut was represented by Attorney Maura Murphy Osborne, of the State's Attorney General's Office, and the City of New Haven by Mr. Michael Wolak. Both gave weak performances in reiterating key elements of their respective briefs in response. Ms. Osborne asserted that Doriss's claims were barred by statute of limitations and "absolute sovereign immunity."
Doriss argued in rebuttal that the statute of limitations argument was "bogus," and that his claims had met the requirement of the statutes. He additionally argued that "sovereign immunity" was a limited concept, which prohibition against tort claims should be lowered for pro se litigants where Constitutional issues were in question. Doriss cited John S. Doe v. State of Connecticut, 1998 #4105865, and briefs in that case were submitted to the Appeals Court at the end of argument in an unusual move.
Doriss argued that seven of his Constitutional rights had been violated multiple times by City and State. He further argued that if the district court's decision were not overturned at the appellate level, that that would send a signal back to the City and State they they could charge anyone with any crime, anywhere, any time--without consideration for the facts of the case--and get away with it without true oversight or proper accountability.
Former Chief of Police, Melvin Wearing, a defendant in the federal complaint, was represented by Mr. Rene Martineau of Del Sole and Del Sole, attorneys in Wallingford, Ct. Six police officers, the Chairman of the Civilian Review board and the mayor of New Haven were represented by corporation counsel of the City. The State's attorney, Ms. Osborne, represented two prosecutors, three superior court judges and other current and former officials of the State.
The trial justices in New York were justices Leval, Calabrese, and Wesley. Doriss was accompanied in court by his step-mother, Ct. resident Vivian Pellicano Doriss, widow of Lieutenant Commander William H. Doriss, U.S. Navy, ret., Greenwich, Ct. and Arlington National Cemetary, 1965.
Doriss is the father of two daughters, and he is a grandfather. He was a registered antiques dealer in the state for over twelve years before the State put him out of his own business through these illegal and unlawful prosecutions. He is now retired and lives on Cape Cod, Massachusetts where he is an activist for criminal justice and corrections reform.
Regardless of the outcome of the Appeals Court, Doriss will pursue efforts to clear his name and achieve a true and complete exoneration from the State.
* * * *
* * * *
[click here] for this blogger's videos
This blogger's email: firstname.lastname@example.org