Friends of Michael Goodwin - Blog

Walter wrote:

My experience has been that this is true in many cases, but certainly not all... Many who are very guilty pursue every legal avenue to get...

My experience has been that this is true in many cases, but certainly not all...

Many who are very guilty pursue every legal avenue to get out, to reduce time, or to gain a new trial which they believe will result in a better plea agreement or other end result.

I have had folks who entered guilty pleas continue a vigorous fight from prison.

FastEddy wrote:

Walter,let me ask you this.... How critical is jury selection in a circumstantial evidence case for the prosecution,in larger cases like this involving double homicides? Do...

Walter,let me ask you this....

How critical is jury selection in a circumstantial evidence case for the prosecution,in larger cases like this involving double homicides? Do you think that jury selection plays more of a larger role then the actual circumstantial evidence in the case does,in terms of getting a conviction?

john.j.bradley wrote:

Prosecutors hinted at a plea deal when considering whether or not to go for the death penalty. Goodwin, with no real evidence to tie him to...

Prosecutors hinted at a plea deal when considering whether or not to go for the death penalty. Goodwin, with no real evidence to tie him to the murders and having been essentially cleared in November of 1988 with another suspect having confessed to two people, flunked 3 polygraph tests specifically on the Thompson murders, knew facts about the case that had never been made public, knew Thompson, among other incriminating things----Det. Griggs had developed this strong suspect and dropped Goodwin----Goodwin said he'd never plead guilty to something he didn't do. This suspect is one of the two scenarios that Saris attempted to introduce but the court would not allow it. The jury foreman, following the conviction, having seen this evidence in one of the many stories about the case, said the verdict would have been far different had the jury been presented with either scenariou/suspects.

FastEddy wrote:

Walter,let me ask you this.... How critical is jury selection in a circumstantial evidence case for the prosecution,in larger cases like this involving double homicides? Do...

Walter,let me ask you this....

How critical is jury selection in a circumstantial evidence case for the prosecution,in larger cases like this involving double homicides? Do you think that jury selection plays more of a larger role then the actual circumstantial evidence in the case does,in terms of getting a conviction?

john.j.bradley wrote:

Prosecutors hinted at a plea deal when considering whether or not to go for the death penalty. Goodwin, with no real evidence to tie him to...

Prosecutors hinted at a plea deal when considering whether or not to go for the death penalty. Goodwin, with no real evidence to tie him to the murders and having been essentially cleared in November of 1988 with another suspect having confessed to two people, flunked 3 polygraph tests specifically on the Thompson murders, knew facts about the case that had never been made public, knew Thompson, among other incriminating things----Det. Griggs had developed this strong suspect and dropped Goodwin----Goodwin said he'd never plead guilty to something he didn't do. This suspect is one of the two scenarios that Saris attempted to introduce but the court would not allow it. The jury foreman, following the conviction, having seen this evidence in one of the many stories about the case, said the verdict would have been far different had the jury been presented with either scenariou/suspects.

john.j.bradley wrote:

It isn't the media's fault. They assume that what the D.A. give them is true and supported by evidence. This is not always the case as...

It isn't the media's fault. They assume that what the D.A. give them is true and supported by evidence. This is not always the case as is evidenced by the program on NBC last night, Sunday, "Conviction" where media was given information that turned out to be wrong. Then there's the 289 who have been exonerated, mostly due to bad witness statements and freed due to DNA testing. I'm not on a soap box proclaiming Goodwin's innocence since only he and the killers can be sure of that. I'm saying he was wrongfully convicted. If his appeal gets him a new trial, perhaps there will be evidence that will tie him to the murders and we'll be done, or not. In any event, it was not a fair trial and that will come out, in one form or another, I feel confident, if an appeal is ever filed. That it has taken 5 years is criminal.

Sherwood wrote:

Birds of a feather...

Sparkalounger wrote:

if you have something to say why don't you just fucking say it....
yeah, i get it, your so cool you don't have to...

john.j.bradley wrote:

I've written several lengthy responses to address some of the questions asked and issues presented on this forum, posted them, they appeared here but are now...

I've written several lengthy responses to address some of the questions asked and issues presented on this forum, posted them, they appeared here but are now gone. Does anyone know why?

Sherwood wrote:

Birds of a feather...

Sparkalounger wrote:

if you have something to say why don't you just fucking say it....
yeah, i get it, your so cool you don't have to...

Sherwood wrote:

Birds of a feather flock together.

Didn't think I needed to spell it out for you.

john.j.bradley wrote:

You could not be more correct about a conspiracy!! There's ample evidence of that but the players are so powerful in Los Angeles that Goodwin will...

You could not be more correct about a conspiracy!! There's ample evidence of that but the players are so powerful in Los Angeles that Goodwin will be extremely lucky to ever get out, let alone do anything about the conspiracy.

john.j.bradley wrote:

Prosecutors hinted at a plea deal when considering whether or not to go for the death penalty. Goodwin, with no real evidence to tie him to...

Prosecutors hinted at a plea deal when considering whether or not to go for the death penalty. Goodwin, with no real evidence to tie him to the murders and having been essentially cleared in November of 1988 with another suspect having confessed to two people, flunked 3 polygraph tests specifically on the Thompson murders, knew facts about the case that had never been made public, knew Thompson, among other incriminating things----Det. Griggs had developed this strong suspect and dropped Goodwin----Goodwin said he'd never plead guilty to something he didn't do. This suspect is one of the two scenarios that Saris attempted to introduce but the court would not allow it. The jury foreman, following the conviction, having seen this evidence in one of the many stories about the case, said the verdict would have been far different had the jury been presented with either scenariou/suspects.

john.j.bradley wrote:

It isn't the media's fault. They assume that what the D.A. give them is true and supported by evidence. This is not always the case as...

It isn't the media's fault. They assume that what the D.A. give them is true and supported by evidence. This is not always the case as is evidenced by the program on NBC last night, Sunday, "Conviction" where media was given information that turned out to be wrong. Then there's the 289 who have been exonerated, mostly due to bad witness statements and freed due to DNA testing. I'm not on a soap box proclaiming Goodwin's innocence since only he and the killers can be sure of that. I'm saying he was wrongfully convicted. If his appeal gets him a new trial, perhaps there will be evidence that will tie him to the murders and we'll be done, or not. In any event, it was not a fair trial and that will come out, in one form or another, I feel confident, if an appeal is ever filed. That it has taken 5 years is criminal.

agency399 wrote:

I have a huge amount of respect for what you are doing.

john.j.bradley wrote:

You could not be more correct about a conspiracy!! There's ample evidence of that but the players are so powerful in Los Angeles that Goodwin will...

You could not be more correct about a conspiracy!! There's ample evidence of that but the players are so powerful in Los Angeles that Goodwin will be extremely lucky to ever get out, let alone do anything about the conspiracy.

Sherwood wrote:

A man was framed for hiring someone to kill someone, they managed to convince an entire jury he did it, he can't get a single appeal...

A man was framed for hiring someone to kill someone, they managed to convince an entire jury he did it, he can't get a single appeal and yet not a single news organization wants anything to do with such an amazing story and not a single politican/up and comer lawyer wants to make a name for himself?

john.j.bradley wrote:

You could not be more correct about a conspiracy!! There's ample evidence of that but the players are so powerful in Los Angeles that Goodwin will...

You could not be more correct about a conspiracy!! There's ample evidence of that but the players are so powerful in Los Angeles that Goodwin will be extremely lucky to ever get out, let alone do anything about the conspiracy.

john.j.bradley wrote:

You are very niave. You should avail yourself of the facts before making such cynical comments. There are legions of cases like Goodwin's. Estimates run in...

You are very niave. You should avail yourself of the facts before making such cynical comments.

There are legions of cases like Goodwin's. Estimates run in the hundreds of thousands, out of a jail population of 2.2 million in the U.S., the country that imprisons more, per 100,000 population, than any other country on earth, where records are kept. Look at www.InnocenceProject. org. A "corner" attorney who "wants to make a name for himself" could not possibly handle this case. It would require a staff of investigators, paralegals and virtually all the attorney's time. Even law firms, who dedicate a portion of their case load to pro bono work, have shied away from this case because of its massive complexity, spanning more than twenty years, many lawsuits, many, many thousands of pages of discovery, exhibits, witness statements, dozens of attorneys who have been involved in the past.

The reason cited for no appeal, thus far? The state stop paying the court appointed attorney who had to make a living, notwithstanding the 4 years of work done on the appeal and the extreme complexity of the case, far, far above the level of 99% of such cases.

He's only entitled to one appeal on this convicton without extenuating circumstances.

The only politician involved in this case is the man who prosecuted Goodwin, Alan Jackson, who is running for D.A. of Los Angeles. No other politican would touch this case, given the prominence of those others oppossed to Goodwin. What politician would align himself with a convicted double-murderer?

CBS' "48 Hours" did cover this case with two one-hour programs. They taped the trial and continue to run segments every few months, more than a dozen airings since 2004. They'll be airing another update soon.

It isn't necessary for you to continue including the inappropriate Brian Katz quote. I'm not inclinded to live by the tenents of a basketball coach, especially in these circumstances. This is not a game.

john.j.bradley wrote:

You are very niave. You should avail yourself of the facts before making such cynical comments. There are legions of cases like Goodwin's. Estimates run in...

You are very niave. You should avail yourself of the facts before making such cynical comments.

There are legions of cases like Goodwin's. Estimates run in the hundreds of thousands, out of a jail population of 2.2 million in the U.S., the country that imprisons more, per 100,000 population, than any other country on earth, where records are kept. Look at www.InnocenceProject. org. A "corner" attorney who "wants to make a name for himself" could not possibly handle this case. It would require a staff of investigators, paralegals and virtually all the attorney's time. Even law firms, who dedicate a portion of their case load to pro bono work, have shied away from this case because of its massive complexity, spanning more than twenty years, many lawsuits, many, many thousands of pages of discovery, exhibits, witness statements, dozens of attorneys who have been involved in the past.

The reason cited for no appeal, thus far? The state stop paying the court appointed attorney who had to make a living, notwithstanding the 4 years of work done on the appeal and the extreme complexity of the case, far, far above the level of 99% of such cases.

He's only entitled to one appeal on this convicton without extenuating circumstances.

The only politician involved in this case is the man who prosecuted Goodwin, Alan Jackson, who is running for D.A. of Los Angeles. No other politican would touch this case, given the prominence of those others oppossed to Goodwin. What politician would align himself with a convicted double-murderer?

CBS' "48 Hours" did cover this case with two one-hour programs. They taped the trial and continue to run segments every few months, more than a dozen airings since 2004. They'll be airing another update soon.

It isn't necessary for you to continue including the inappropriate Brian Katz quote. I'm not inclinded to live by the tenents of a basketball coach, especially in these circumstances. This is not a game.

Sherwood wrote:

The Brian Katz quote is my signature. It appears at the bottom of every post of mine and has nothing to do with this thread or...

The Brian Katz quote is my signature. It appears at the bottom of every post of mine and has nothing to do with this thread or anyone involved in it.

You seem like a nice guy. How'd you find this place?

FanMan wrote:

Mr. Bradley keep in mind you may be the only person in this thread that knows or has even spoken to Mike Goodwin. Since asking Mike...

Mr. Bradley keep in mind you may be the only person in this thread that knows or has even spoken to Mike Goodwin. Since asking Mike is out of the question, what happened to Lynn Saunders? His title in the 70s was probably president of Stadium Motorsports. Also what happened with Mike's lawsuit against the Janis Joplin estate? Thanks.

john.j.bradley wrote:

You could not be more correct about a conspiracy!! There's ample evidence of that but the players are so powerful in Los Angeles that Goodwin will...

You could not be more correct about a conspiracy!! There's ample evidence of that but the players are so powerful in Los Angeles that Goodwin will be extremely lucky to ever get out, let alone do anything about the conspiracy.

GuyB wrote:

I meant a conspiracy about those "missing" posts.

CraCKerJacK wrote:

It just sucks to know that in our corrupt system if 12 people "think" you did it...You did it. The lesson learned here is never "threaten"...

It just sucks to know that in our corrupt system if 12 people "think" you did it...You did it.

The lesson learned here is never "threaten" to kill someone. Just wack 'em on the D.L.

exsarg wrote:

the most interesting and intelligent thread ever on vital !!