WHEN NOT GUILTY MEANS PRISON TIME
by
Dortell Williams
(Approximately 1,000 words - Non-Fiction)

Imagine a few sheriff's deputies flanked by Child Protective Custody representatives showing up at your door demanding to take your child for something your ex-spouse may or may not have done. You refuse, having no idea what they are talking about. Now imagine an army of Sheriff's deputies arriving later, suited for what seems like war, guns drawn knocking down your door and forcefully taking your child, and you for something you know nothing about nor
had anything to do with. Still imagine having to endure a weak circumstantial trial for which you are found not quilt of the main charges but guilty of a supporting misdemeanor charge.The judge disagrees and overturns the guilty findings, describing it as incoherent. The prosecutor appeals and the appellate court sides with the prosecutor - you get a life sentence for a misdemeanor. That would be quite a stretch of the imagination for some, but according to a fellow prisoner, "It could happen to anyone".

That is how Anthony Hammonds a lively thirty- four year old sums it up as he enthusiastically volunteered the circumstances of his sentence of twenty five years to life. It was not that Ant, as we call him, was in the wrong place at the wrong time. He was safely tucked away in the warmth of his Victorville CA home attending to his five-year-year old son when the drama went down.

His quiet afternoon peace was abruptly broken by a simple knock on his walnut colored front door: followed by an authoritative "Its's the San Bernardino Sheriffs and C.P.S"! (Child Protective Services). Ant's coffee brown eyes were intense now as he related his story. As he spoke, camly and sure, his naturally contagious smile melted into his light oak-colored round face. "I opened the door and they were demanding my son", he stated in a deflated voice. "I refused and they left", he continued. However, his relief was short lived. They returned in full force riot gear and all. They violently broke through his front door and gave the neighbors a live and- in your -face episode of COPS on scene. This time they not only wanted little Antione, but now they wanted Ant too.

With two prior felonies in the hole already, Ant suddenly found himself subject to Californians notorious Three Strike Law. My eyes widen as I learned that Ant had prior convictions. Ant did't carry himself like a two-time loser. I could not imagine him as a career criminal always polite, decked with mannerisms that indicated a good upbringing alomg with a warm character that invited wholesome trust.

Ant's swift perception keyed in on my surprise and he immediately explained; "It was just two fights", what the state calls assaults. His first assault charge was for defending himself following an unprovoked attack during his high school years. Ant's second assault charge, of which he emitted a bit of a smile upon mentioning, was for beating up his little sisters over aged boyfriend. He didn't take lightly that his fifteen year old sister had been seduced by a twenty six year old man. When Ant confronted the depraved man about the illicit affair, the man already in the wrong got belligerent. Ant commenced to beating the crap out of him right there on the spot. "It could have happened to anyone", he said again.

As a result a result of the raid on his home, Ant found himself facing five counts of manufacturing methamphetmines and one count of child endangering.

According to court records I later perused, Ant's estranged wife, we will call her Ms. Jackson was renting the rear dwelling of a Victorville duplex on Verde Streer. The front of the pecan toned -structure was rented by another couple who used to feud quite frequently according to court documents. The couple were the landlords of the place. Apparently having had enough of the drug life, the landlords wife, (Susan Burch Not her real name) called the police on her husband. An ensuing raid and search of the property yielded a stash of five separate chemical containers used to manfacture meth. The color-coded containers were each housed in a storage shed behind the rear apartments - considered a common area accessible to both sets of occupants. Yet keys fitting the shed was found in possession of the couple residing in the front of the duplex.

Still a dinner plate thought to have traces of meth on its surface, but never tested or confirmed was found on top of the refrigerator in the rear dwelling, where Ms. Jackson and an unnamed five- year- old boy were present.

Ant's attorney David Elder, vigorously argued before the jury that Ant not only had nothing to do with the illegalities happening at the duplex he was not aware of any illicit activities there. He was not, did not live there and had no control over what his ex-wife might have been involved in, stated Elder. Elder also pointed out that Ant had no prior history with drugs, although his ex-wife's landlords did (and the containers behind the storage shed was pratically painted with the landlord's fingerprints.)

Still, the prosecutor, Richard Golden counter argued that Ant "Should have known that the drugs were there". His theory was that Ant visited on weekends, while picking up or dropping off his son, he should have what was going on. The prosecutor also emphaized that the apartment was in Ant's name which was not the truth.

"Did the neighbors know?" I interjected, fury sweeping from my voice. "How are you suppose to know what's going on miles away at your former residence? You were not intimate with your ex anymore, I continued. Ant's bright eyes morphed form their normal conversational gaze to intense golf-ball -sized orbs when I compared the scenario to the recent White House leak scandal: "It would be more likely that President Bush had greater opportunity to know his top advisor Karl Rove, and Rove's aide, Lewis "Scooter" Libby were involved in the outting of CIA operative Valarie Plame." After all, these men worked directly under president Bush.

Ant's case is just one example of the type of expensive, wasteful prosecutions that exposes the Three Strike Law for what it is. The authorities had not initially sought Ant until they learned he had a record. Such prosecutions are also a bulls eye for those circumstantial evidence cases are just down right unreliable. Prosecutors are allowed to use almost completely unfettered theories, inferences and conjecture to make a case. As long as these elements follow the line of actual evidence, they can simply fill in the blanks with good story telling.

President Bush's assertion that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction is an international example of what can go wrong in such cases. The WhiteHouse relied on circumstantial evidence to launch a pre-emptive war that turned out to be totally baseless.

In Ant's case the injutice was exacerbated when the prosecutor failed to mention that the boy found in the home during the raids was not his son, yet that is what the jury went into deliberation believing. To make matters worse, as with any Three Strike case the jury wasn't apprised that Ant was facing a quarter-century behind bars should they find him quilty.

Fortunately the jury refused to buy into the prosecutors theories, or otherwise weak case regarding the drugs. The jury acquitted Ant and Ms. Jackson of the entire array of drug charges. Obivously confused by the prosecutor's failure to clarify which boy was present during the raid, they found the estranged couple quilty of endangering their child.

It was then that Judge Jules Fleuret threw out the groundless verdict, reasoning that it can't rain without clouds. In other words, Judge Fleuret explained that if the estranged couple was not quilty of the manufacturing charges then they couldn't be held liable for the child endangering charge which stemmed directly form the drug charge.

The case was over and Ant was a free man-or so he thought. The prosecutor immediately went over Judge Flueret's head and appealed to the Fourth District Appellate Court. Ant was ordered back to the San Bernardino County Jail where he waited fifteen long months in legal limbo with technically no charges pending against him. Finally, a decision came down: The three judge panel sides with the prosecutor opining that despite their aquittal for the drug charges the estranged pair should have known that the chemicals and manifested dope was potentially dangerous to the child. The misdemeanor child endangerment conviction was reinstated against Ant and Ms. Jackson. The court ignored the fact that Ant was not even there during the bust nor did he live there. Ms. jackson walked! For Ant the misdemeanor was tantamount to a felony and he was given twenty-five years to life due to his "violent" criminal history. Under the onerous Three Strike law misdemeanors can be converted into felonies at the prosecutors whim after two prior felonies.

"Daddy, are you ever comming home, huh?" demanded his now thirteen-year- old Antione during a recent visit. The irony in this story is that the system, and specifically Child Protective Services are supposed to act in the best interest of the child. Like most backward thinking government agencies, it seems the best interest of the child meant breaking the apparent close and loving bond shared between father and son.

Ironically, the night following my conversation with Ant I watched a televised news story that further emphazied the injustice in Ant's case.

Vikki Vargas, of our local KNBC-4 News reported that a large sting operation at a nearby swapment concluded with the arrest of several high-end fashion counterfeiters. Vargas ended her report by stating that buyers who may have purchased some of the counterfeit items need not worry about complicity- unless they knew before hand that the items purchased were fake. After that eerie reminder of Ant's story and the Valerie Plame case, in comparison to Ant's case. I am more confused than ever by what it means TO KNOW.

Sources:

Vikki Vargas, KNBC-4 News, October 13, 2005

People v. Anthony Hammonds, Case No. FVI-09361 (San Bernardino Superior Court)

Anthony Hammonds CDCR #T-52558