KRISTI HAGOOD IS NOT QUALIFIED TO BE A JUDGE -- Part 1
This is a product of rippreport.com, produced by Francis Paul Ripp, in conjunction with: Alabama Exposure and Accountability LLC.
We operate as an independent, not for profit consumer organization. No political group, candidate for office or outside source has contributed to this post. We are NOT attorneys and do not give legal council. We are ADVOCATES for justice.
The Duty to Seek Justice
Every other duty a prosecutor performs flows from one foundational obligation: the pursuit of justice rather than victory. The U.S. Supreme Court spelled this out in 1935, stating that a prosecutor “is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all.” The Court emphasized that the government’s interest in a criminal case “is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done.”
The surfacing of this second autopsy and its exclusion from Lawrence’s 2005 trial raises the specter of a “Brady Information” violation in the case that his attorney believes should at least afford him a new trial. Lawrence was convicted in a trial that had no physical evidence identifying him as the killer. Instead, prosecutors leaned heavily on the testimony of Lawrence’s lifelong friend Jarius McNeil, a man who agreed to plead guilty to involvement in Hastings’ murder and testify against his friend in exchange for prosecutors recommending a lighter sentence.
A Brady violation occurs when prosecutors fail to disclose evidence favorable to the defense, violating a defendant’s right to a fair trial.
No crime scene established No incriminating phone call No witnesses No blood No DNA No weapon No ballistics The prosecution, District Attorney David Whetstone, pursued a charge of murder by a firearm which was contrary to the death certificate and autopsy in Mississippi which found cause of death as asphyxiation by suffocation. Anthony Lowery was lead investigator for the District Attorney. He produced ZERO evidence in the case. Now he wants to become Sheriff???? What they did have was Lawrence’s alibi, Five witnesses, who could place him in Baldwin County in the early AM hours, 1 to 3 am. Their testimony was dismissed by the prosecution due to all admitting using recreational drugs. This was A-I generated and fact checked for accuracy. Any inaccuracy pointed out will be corrected.
However, Hagood also said the failure to disclose the autopsy does not constitute a Brady violation because it does not provide any exculpatory evidence.
“The state maintains that the error in not disclosing the second autopsy report was harmless in light of the entire record and that it does not warrant a new trial because it does not constitute newly discovered material facts nor a Brady violation,” she said.
“Witnesses at an apartment complex also testified they had seen Lawrence drive up during the night of the murder and retrieve a pistol from his trunk.”
HAGOOD’S comments are inaccurate and false.
This is misleading, inaccurate and paints a picture that is meant to Incriminate Lawrence. The truth is Mr Lawrence was suspicious of “the real murderer Jarious McNeal.”, who had showed up at his house at 2:30 AM in a sporty Acura, which was not his car. Lawrence did retrieve a gun from his trunk and put it under the seat of his car, unbeknownst to McNeal. Lawrence was scared of what McNeal was up to. This occurred around 5-7 PM, 16 to 18 hours after the murder onthe same day. The murder happened 1 to 3 AM the same day. Lawrence had no knowledge of the murder because the body was found 10 days later in Mississippi.
It is one of many egregious errors by Hagood. that she repeated numerous times. It is an error that would influence anyone reading her comments, and taking them literally.
Please read the 10 errors Attorney Kristi Hagood made and note all corrections use citations to the transcript which can be viewed on the website Justice for Murray Lawrence Jr., which also has the Audio Book.
Haygood is not someone that should be a judge. Did Hagood use A-I and not fact check her accusations or “hallucinated” citations? Or are these errors she made herself?
“Appeal briefs by a Mobile County lawyer containing fake and “hallucinated” citations have sparked calls for overhauling rules and sanctions around abuse of artificial intelligence in the courtroom.”
Be sure to read Part 2 coming next