The Joal and Sarah Perjury Show, One More Time

[Note]: Eric Echols is scheduled to go on trial on September 13, as a retired judge from Cobb County is supposed to preside. We shall see if he is like other Georgia judges who ignore the law.

Alan Norton is the ADA, so I guess he is anxious to join the ranks of Perjury Central, and since the only way he can present this case is to suborn perjury, a number of people either will be present or blogging on the trial to detail the crimes that Norton will be committing. Because the indictment does not specify how Mr. Echols actually "intimidated" a witness, it clearly does not pass the test given by the Georgia Court of Appeals in Delaby. Beyond that, it is absolutely clear that prosecutions witnesses at some point will have to commit perjury, but, as we have seen already, perjury is perfectly acceptable to prosecutors and judges in the LMJC, as it always goes unpunished whenever the prosecution witnesses commit it.

On another note, please take time to vote for my daughter and son-in-law, Leah and Russell Golden. [End Note]

While I have dealt with Joal and Sara Henke, that couple which demonstrated the miraculous ability to "recover memories" while on the witness stand, I believe that once more I need to lay out just how dishonest they were, how their perjury was obvious, and why they committed it -- at the encouragement of Chris "Alberto-Facebook" Arnt and Len "The Racist, Misogynist, and THE MAN" Gregor. It is hard to know which incidence of perjury committed during the Tonya Craft trial by prosecution witness was most egregious, but I can say that the lies that Joal and Sara told perhaps were the most obvious.

There were three huge whoppers that these dishonorable individuals told while under oath:

• Joal's sudden recollection of Tonya's "lesbian affair" with Jennifer Sullivan. (It should be noted that "judge" Brian Outhouse refused to let Ms. Sullivan testify as to the falsity of Henke's statement, thus demonstrating again that he was nothing but a bootlicker for the prosecutors.);

• Sara's lie that the reason she was showering with Tonya's daughter was that the child was "dirty" and had "matted hair" and smelled bad, which meant she was saying that Tonya severely neglected the girl. (Henke had Tonya's daughter literally hold Sara's labia while she shaved her pubic hairs -- something she denied, but something that Tonya's daughter clearly explained. Oh, I forgot, prosecutors in the LMJC only believe children when the children tell them what prosecutors WANT to hear, not the truth.);

• Sara's other lie that the child would wake up in the middle of the night holding her vagina, and screaming, "It hurts, it hurts!" She also claimed that the child's vagina was "reddened."

The important thing to note with all three of these claims is that the Henkes had not said anything to ANY investigators before the trial began, not to detectives, not to Laurie Evans, not to anyone else at the CAC, no one. Instead, they claimed that they "just remembered" these things, something that the prosecutors AND Outhouse encouraged. Again, when one receives a paycheck from Perjury Central, one is going to employ perjury. It's that simple.

OK, it is time to apply some logic to these "revelations," beginning with the "lesbian" business. (My sense is that Joal and the Dishonest Duo, not to mention Outhouse, hoped that jurors would be shocked by such information.) I doubt seriously that had it happened, Joal would have conveniently forgotten about it until that magic moment on the witness stand. (In reading the transcript, I see that the prosecutor on direct asked Joal about this incident, which means that these people planned that moment before the day's activities began. So, now we not only have deliberate subornation of perjury, but also a conspiracy to commit a felony.)

Furthermore, since Ms. Sullivan was named in trial testimony as Tonya's "friend," the fact that Outhouse would not permit Ms. Sullivan to testify as to the veracity of Joal's statements tells me that neither Outhouse nor the Dishonest Duo believed anything Joal was saying. After all, if Ms. Sullivan were going to lie, then the Masters of Perjury Central could have threatened to charge her with, well, perjury.

Now to Sara's contention that Tonya's daughter, after being in her mother's care, was "dirty, smelly," and had "matted hair." Had this evidence of obvious neglect been true and apparent, I have no doubt that Joal would have run to the courthouse and had his attorney, Chuck Dupree, immediately file for permanent custody. Given the visceral hatred Joal had (and has) for his ex-wife, he would not have missed this opportunity to make a custody grab for the children.

Instead, there were NO allegations of this sort -- not until Sara Henke took the stand. Then, to make matters even worse, Sara then claimed that Tonya's daughter would wake up during the night screaming, and suffering from a "reddened" vagina. Now, if this were my child, I sure as heck would want to know why she was having these problems.

And if that were the case with my child, readers can bet that my wife would be making a doctor's appointment first thing in the morning. Little girls don't just wake up in the night screaming about painful vaginas, and with Sara being a registered nurse, which also makes her a legal "first responder," the woman would have been utterly derelict in her legal duties by doing nothing.

Furthermore, if this really had been the case, I am sure that Joal would have been very interested and would have seized the opportunity to make Tonya's life miserable. We already know what happened when Sandra Lamb presented Joal with the opportunity to make false allegations against his ex-wife in the late spring of 2008.

Trials in the State of Georgia are designed against the "Perry Mason Moments," as both prosecutors and the defense are supposed to have turned in their material by the time the discovery process begins. Prosecutors are supposed to give all of their relevant material to defense counsel, and the defense is supposed to do likewise, and all sides are supposed to have their witness lists. What we saw in the Tonya Craft trial was highly extraordinary, as prosecutors time and again introduced "new" material, ALL of it very suspicious.

Judges are supposed to impose very high standards for accepting "new" material. In the case of Tonya Craft, Outhouse accepted everything the prosecution threw in, but denied the same to the defense (i.e. the resume for Sandra Lamb's daughter that had the child's acting lessons and the infamous Kelly McDonald power bill). This was not because of the veracity of the material. Indeed, a power bill with Kelly McDonald's signature on it and an on-line resume with a child's acting teachers fall into the HARD COPY category, something that is irrefutable.

On the other hand, not one "new" allegation by the prosecution could be verified by anything close to hard evidence. The material was not in the investigative notes, nor were there any independent witnesses that could verify this material. None of this should be surprising, for people who know they can commit perjury without penalty and prosecutors who know they can forge documents and suborn perjury without fear of any sanctions are going to follow their darkest and most base paths. That is something we know about human nature and, if anything, the Tonya Craft trial proved that in spades.