Milo's reply to letter from Paul Harvill – July 3 rd 2005-07-12

Dear Paul,

Thank you for your letter of June 29 th 2005. Your concern that I may decide to waive my appeals is truly appreciated. Since it affords me the opportunity to expound on why I have given thought to such an action.

To begin with; I do understand the gravity in the risks I would be taking by waiving my appeals. Naysayers have been reminding me of the dangers long before I ever wrote my first letter to Governor Bush, requesting his assistance to help overcome the travesty of justice I suffer. The problem I had with the Naysayers was that not one of them was able to provide me with a visible alternative that amounted to anything, or was acceptable to me. Their prophetic doomsday scenarios only served to rob me of hope, and left me no better off than before.

Instead of Naysayers, I need people that will help me get the message out that I am innocent of any kind of murder. That due to police / prosecutional / judicial misconduct, that was designed to deny me all presumption of innocence. I was falsely convicted by what they consorted to present as overwhelming evidence as to guilt. Which is a polite way of saying; I was railroaded by vigilantes within the legal community that shared a wanton knowledge that their abuse would more than likely go undetected.

This form of abuse is not unlike any other form of abuse. To begin with the police, prosecuting attorneys, judges and public defenders are the authority figures. They have the moral and ethical duty to protect the integrity of the law. Everyone assumes them to be responsible guardians. Yet few people outside the legal community know that the legal system is not designed to correct itself once abuse / error has been found. This applies even more so to indigent individuals such as myself, who cannot afford to hire private representation and must rely on the courts / state to provide representation. With the only other alternatives being to find Pro Bono (free of charge) representation, or to assert ones constitutional right to self – representation.

When Governor Bush dissolved CCRC North, which was the group of state mandated attorneys assigned to represent me, Judge Susan Schaeffer, whose courtroom I stood and shouted I was being railroaded in, appointed Bjorn E. Brunvard to represent me. Upon Brunvard's appointment, I immediately wrote to him requesting he seek deposition from Bruce Young and Bruce Bartlett, the two prosecuting attorneys who tried my case. I explained how once these depositions were taken, I would be vindicated! Since then I have tried repeatedly without success to get Brunvard to take their depositions, which the record will clearly reflect. Brunvard has also refused to provide me with copies of other information I have requested of him. So on June 7 th 2005, I filed two motions before Judge Schaeffer. One waiving representation by Brunvard and asserting my right to self – representation and the other waiving DNA testing. I am now waiting on Judge Schaeffer's rulings on these motions. How she rules will be a deciding factor on whether I waive my appeals or not.

Few people outside of the legal community understand what is taking place right now. I am bringing charges of prosecutional misconduct against Young and Bartlett. With further implications of bringing charges of police and judicial misconduct as well. Judge Schaeffer understands this, and she knows when the truth does come out, it will be a major blemish that will tarnish her character – since it will reveal a consorted effort on her part to conceal the facts that I was railroaded in her courtroom. So as long as I remain some obscure figure on death row held silent due to being represented by ineffective assistance of counsel – who refuses to challenge the integrity of prominent legal figures guilty of abusing their power and authority in order to achieve convictions by and means. I will continue to suffer abuse at their hands, as their guilt in their grievous crimes against me, will never get challenged. Adding to the farce and mockery in the travesty of justice I suffer.

If I decided the only way I'm going to achieve the desired scrutiny needed to vindicate myself of any kind of murder, is to waive my appeals, and clear the way for Governor Bush to sign my death warrant, it will mean I feel I have been left with no other acceptable alternative, since all my plea's for help to that point will have gone unanswered. So you see Paul, it is not a matter of whether I will be granted a competency hearing, it will be a matter of whether or not the changes I have brought against a few within the legal community receive due attention or not. For once more, I am standing before God and country shouting I was railroaded. If my plea's for help continue to go unanswered, it will be a sad reflection on society and the legal system, as no one will be able to say they didn't hear my cries for help.

No, I haven't heard from Brunvard, he knows he is in the wrong and that it is only a matter of time before the truth of his actions come to light. I do not expect anyone of them involved in this to further incriminate themselves. If they were smart they would show some remorse in their failure to meet their moral and ethical duty of protecting the integrity of the law. But, I believe their arrogance will prevent that from happening as they seal their own fates…

Paul, if I decide to waive my appeals, I hope I will be able to count on you to stand beside me before the law, so the indictments I have made against a corrupt few within the legal community are not simply weighed on the merits of my competency of having waived my appeals. But, instead of the facts that overwhelmingly support the charges of their abuse being the cause of me having to seek resolution through such an extreme remedy, as a last ditch effort to have my cries to end the abuse heard…

Thank you again for your concern, let's pray this doesn't go to the extreme. Take care,

Love to you,

One Eagle