Mr. John Tomasino and Ms. Linda McDermott
Attorneys CCRC Northern Region
P.O. Drawer 5498 Tallahassee, FL 32314-5498
FROM: Brother James A. van Koolbergen
Dear Mr. Tomasino and Ms. McDermott:
I am a member of a community of men in the Roman Catholic faith, the Christian Brothers, and a teacher/counselor at Tampa Catholic HS. A year ago October, at a conference on the death penalty in Gainesville, I purchased a colorful painting by Milo Rose, a death row inmate at Union Correctional Institution. I requested his address from the seller, and months later received it. I wrote him to express my appreciation of his work, and to offer to correspond if he so wished.
After the first letter, he gave me his web page address on the Internet, which I gather was prepared by a friend; but at the time I did not have access to the Internet. When that became available to me, I read through Milo's entire "document". (I'm still not very familiar with the use of the Internet, and don't know what to call everything I find.) I have no legal training and only second-hand familiarity with the court system; but I believe I have the ability to reason quite logically, and have many years' experience analyzing literature. Milo's descriptions raised many questions for me. Since this man has now spent more than 16 years in prison and faces the ultimate penalty of death, it seems to me that the issues he raises should be explored with the utmost seriousness and pushed arduously for reconsideration by the judicial system.
I am writing to you because I saw Milo's letter to you in his website and presume that you have been assigned to his case. Should I also presume that you have read the material in his website http://www.zafu.demon.co.uk/milorose/milorose.htm? In the hope that you are open to the possibility of pushing for a re-examination of his case, I include below the issues that concern me:
There seem to be discrepancies in the descriptions of the perpetrator given by eyewitnesses - some making no mention of a beard, when Milo had a full beard; black T-shirt with white design vs long-sleeved red flannel shirt; shoulder length hair vs. pigtail; "white" male vs. "dark complexioned" male.Why were the initial descriptions of eyewitnesses not given to the defense? The first police officer on the scene was not called as witness by Milo's defense attorney; nor was an eyewitness who was questioned separately and whose statements were not recorded nor was her composite drawing preserved as evidence. This behaviour seems a failure of his lawyer to properly defend him.
Page 2, paragraph I, of the pages entitled BLOOD EVIDENCE states: 'The forensic report was withheld from Milo's defense attorneys and never produced at trial/" Paragraph 2 states: ,./the Crime Lab Analyst herself wasn't called to testify... ", Assuming the truth of these statements, and since Detective Peter Fire's account apparently led the jury to believe there was mixing of Milo's and the victim's blood, how can it be believed that Milo was satisfactorily represented or received a fair trial? Further, from the BLOOD EVIDENCE pages: the second forensic report prepared by H. Dale Nute concludes that "No ABO type A blood (the victim's blood type) was found anywhere on Mr. Rose or objects In his possession... 'mixing of blood' is apparently disproven by the physical evidence." How could Judge Susan Schaeffer dismiss the prosecution's apparent manipulation of the evidence as "harmless error," and deny an evidentiary hearing on the trial Issues?
From the pages entitled State's Case# 3 Alibi Witness: There seem to be serious questions raised here: were the alibi witnesses requested by the defendant?; the alibi witnesses' description of Milo when they first picked him up contradicts the description provided by the eyewitnesses at the scene; Detective Fire knew the female alibi witness from a previous murder trial; State Attorney Bruce Young making a deal with this same female witness to testify against Milo (which information was reportedly not available to the defense). When the defense lawyer tried to show the alibi witnesses were lying, the trial judge, Susan Schaeffer stated that they weren't lying. How can a trial judge possibly make such a subjective statement? Is a statement of this type possibly part of grounds for a mistrial?
On page 2 of Defendant's Case #4, Detective Fire accused of misconduct in another murder case, ABC World News (in 1987?) accused Detective Fire of misconduct in another Pinellas County murder case. Was he also guilty of misconduct in Milo Rose's case? Does the suppression of evidence suggest, as Milo asks, that there was collusion between the state's attorney Bruce Young and Detective Fire to cover up a false arrest and reach a conviction?
Mr. Tomasino and Ms. McDermott, I thank you for reading the above which I believe raises serious questions about the fairness of Milo Rose's trial. I have written to you because it certainly seems to me that Milo deserves (after 16 years on death row) and needs help, and I thought I should write to you to encourage your best efforts to arrive at the truth In his case. I respectfully await your response to my thoughts.
Sincerely yours,
Brother James A. van Koolbergen