Tom Padgett's Child Custody Case

Padgett Litigation Update 36

Appeal case # 00-CA-2693-MR
(appeal of indictment # 98-CR-0067)

An appeal brief was filed in the wrongful conviction of Tom Padgett
without a trial by jury.  Issues on appeal are:

1. Defendant NEVER pleaded guilty to owing one thin dime, only that
there had been a period over 6 months that a payment had not been
submitted (in absence of routine discovery usually afforded in ALL civil
court matters)

2. Defendant did NOT breach any terms of the
Pre-Trial Diversion Agreement - not ever.

3. Defendant did NOT violate any probation terms.

4. Defendant's client-attorney rights were violated on August 22, 2000,
when the Judge
"Ordered" privileged information to be revealed after his private
counsel had to withdraw for stated financial reasons only.

5. Defendant was wrongly imprisoned for 35
days from August 7 to September 12, 2000 based on an administrative
error in the Kentucky Child Support Unit in Lexington
which was even admitted by the Court, but showed NO remorse for their
blunder.

6. A $2500 public defender fee levied was far too excessive in the
absence of discovery of income of the parties.  So excessive it
serves as evidence of "legal harassment."

7. Plaintiff breached the 10/24/98 Pre-Trial
Agreement for failing to transfer probation to Massachusetts as
stipulated in section 9.3 (e)
of said agreement.

8. Plaintiff breached the Supplementary Pre-Trial Agreement of 2/18/99
by failing to allow (if not preventing) the civil court to proceed in
it's duties prescribed in section 2.(A) whereas proof of past and
present income and "OTHER" factors leading to the calculation of child
support of the parties in Civil Action 92-CI-0044 was NEVER
accomplished,

9. Failure of Judge to recuse himself in this
indictment case for:
     a) Being a family friend of the complaining
witness, whereas, the Prosecutor David Massamore is on record on 1/19/99
stating
the complaining witness's mother (Betty Vannoy) "does all the child
support record keeping."  [read not the state or the courts]  This is
the same lady who testified in the same circuit court on 5/6/94 "If it
wasn't for Scientology, Laura would be in an institution [mental]"
     b) That he was the same magistrate in the civil case that gave
birth to this 1998 criminal indictment filed by Scientologist Laura
Vannoy, 
without full discovery required by statutes, that has NOT occured since
1993 reported in that court in 1994

10. Failure of the Commonwealth of Kentucky to produce any evidence of a
"motive" for the Defendant to commit said alleged crime, or a motive
from the complaining witness to file
a said "criminal" complaint.  These motives will
be revealed in due time by cult expert Dr.
Stephen A. Kent, in pending civil litigation.
 ____________________

After the fact of this suspicious conviction, the
following has been found which may not be
admissible in the appeal BUT should be noted for public record:

11. The Prosecutor in this action, Atty David
Massamore, was discovered to be a very close
neighbor of the plaintiff in an affluent subdivision of Madisonville,
KY, thus grounds for conflict of interests which would vastly depart
from his duties as a servant of justice for the Commonwealth of
Kentucky.

12. The KY Court of Appeals ruled on 1/19/01 in subsequent civil action
appeal # 99-CA-001461 that the judge erred by failing to surmise and
include "finality" language, thus making it interlocutory - not
conclusive to convict a citizen of a crime absent of prejudice
and bias.

End>

A.B.U.S.E.
(425) 795-8518

Correction. The Ky. Court of Appeals Order was issued on 10/01/01 and not 1/19/01. See Update #32