The "Hannah Hill" Murder Conspiracy 12-12-2001

While in Akron I would leave copy of the pamphlet of my awareness of this murder at the Akron Beacon Journal for reporter Ed Meyer.

For years detectives, judges, and editors have ignored my call for justice. Suddenly a Akron Beacon Journal reporter by the name of Keith McKnight would leave me a message that he was interested in what I had to say.

I called, and when we talked I sensed he wanted to know what I knew about the murder. Everything I was aware of as true, he tried to contradict. He tried to find my sources and basically was more concerned with leading me away from the facts. Our conversation was not long.

I would send him a response to his call. They were running an eight-day front-page story on the Hannah Hill murder. They did everything to lead people away from the murderer.

Keith McKnight, 

When we lie, one lie builds another lie. Your articles enforce my indictment of our societies mishandling of justice. From your portrayal of facts, the Akron and Summit county judicial system is out of control. The courts continue to abuse their authority with no repercussions.

1. Ronny Hupps sister still wonders how they placed the body in the trunk.
   
2. The girl I know of sure convinced her uncle of her fear while being threatened by a Vegas attorney. If Denny were innocent, why would threats be necessary?
   
3. You mentioned blood evidence. According to one juror, the device to detect blood was never brought in or used. If Hannah was choked by a necklace, why would there be blood. I’ve heard she was cut.
   
4. I have other views from different sources about bribes, threats, and pay offs.

Just as you hustle to cover up this lie, you only expose more corruption.

The same is true of a man who will use any criminal means to protect a criminal son, he created. Since they are despicable, you guard them, so the same is true of you.

By their own actions they will be judged.

Tom Kiss

12-14-2001

P.S. I’m also in the middle of the Uniontown landfill problems. In 1980 I documented the irresponsibility of Goodyear Tire and Rubber through Jimmy Carter.

The mention in the letter about a girl threatened is a person I have known since she was little. Her uncle is a very good friend of mine, who told me at the time of this trial, the Las Vegas attorney came to her and threatened her life if anything she knew about Denny Ross surfaced.

She has since straightened-out her life, but back then she was a partier. I know Denny Ross was around her, because a close younger male friend of mine once dated this girl. He is a young scrapper, and when he heard Denny was around her, even though they were not dating, he had enough caring for her, that he told me he wanted to drive Denny away from her. I just found this out about three months ago.

I know these people. They are real to me. Why would threats be necessary if Denny Ross is innocent? When I first heard this story I thought why would a high paid seasoned attorney have to resort to threats?

When I talked to Keith McKnight he told me Ronny Hupp took a lie detector and was not part of the murder. He said the girlfriend of Ronny Hupps, who reported the murder, was not even there that night and she made up her story.

Why then did Ronny Hupp go with his father to his aunt’s house totally intimidated by what he awoke to immediately after leaving Denny? He was coerced into taking part in removing a body from an apartment, to the trunk of a car, to a dead end street, about one and one half miles from the scene of the crime.

His life had been threatened by Denny if he did not cooperate. By all the lies of this murder I can see why he was scared for his life. Under duress Ronny acted.

I would follow the series in the Akron Beacon Journal. Of course the power of the press to sway public opinion was used to convince everyone of Denny Ross’ innocence. From my perspective their articles filled in the missing blanks.

They would report about two female joggers who would see two young men basically fitting Ronny and Denny’s description, in front of a plaza, which would be the natural escape route if you dumped Hannah’s car where it was left.

In the articles they would mention a bayonet and a machete, which had never been mentioned in the first trial. If Hannah were just choked, why would there be cutting instruments and blood evidence?

Reporters Keith and Ed had no right to put out all the information they did. It would help to taint a jury of peers in this area. The newspaper was totally out of line with this series. They portrayed Ronny Hupp as a lamb intimidated by the system. He has a small young half brother that has more street jargon than many seasoned players. I believe he is seven. These reporters tried to present Ronny Hupp as a victim of police intimidation. Ronny has dealt with the courts his entire life. He knows how to play the game.

Ronny Hupp was told by an attorney to marry the girl who they reported was his wife. He married her after the murder because a wife can’t testify against her husband. Why was a sixteen-year-old girl running around with him all night? (Now the parents claim she was home) If Ronny and Denny were such tight friends, why did Ronny give false testimony against his best friend? Keith and Ed wrote like these were innocent, young, carefree men. In reality they were unruly and lawless and rebellious. (Liars, cheats, and cons.) That does not mean I do not care about them. I feel sorry because they are products of our hypocrisies. I would hope to bring them to terms with themselves. Not to destroy them as this world would, but to give forgiveness and understanding because we as a nation have allowed a situation where abnormal is now normal. Cruelty is not the way to correct any mistake.

Christmas night, my friend, Ronny Hupps half sister, told me Ronny wanted to talk to me. I was grateful for I felt he was ready to confess himself. Unfortunately a few days later I found out he only wanted to talk because he heard I was talking to a reporter. How did he know that? I have not seen him for several years and I did not mention my conversation with Keith McKnight to anyone connected to Ronny. It convinces me people do not want to face the truth of this issue.

In my heart of hearts I truly believe from everything I know that Denny Ross murdered Hannah Hill. I know people in authority abuse their positions to not face the issues of this murder.

Akron and Summit county government, its mayor, courts, council, and police have been plagued by internal corruption for years. I am not saying they are not typical of what transpires across our nation. We are the reflection of our reality and we are not being good. We expect the world to bow to our ideals, yet we don’t. Hypocrisy will only attract disrespect. We are cheating our children and those of the children of the world because we refuse obedience to consideration.

I would read a new “judge” was appointed to over see this situation. An article Nov.7, 2001 would appear in the local press.

SECOND TRIAL CONSIDERED IN HANNAH HILL MURDER

November 7, 2001

Ed Meyer, Beacon Journal staff writer

Before the year is out, Denny Ross should know if he will go on trial again for the 1999 murder of Hannah Hill. Visiting Judge Joseph E. Cirigliano said yesterday that he expected to make a decision about the controversial case within the next six to eight weeks.

“I have to do some more research,^” Cirigliano said after an unrelated hearing in his chambers at Summit County Courthouse. “This is a very critical issue.^”

After 28 months in jail on the Hill murder charge, Ross was released Sept.13 on a $1 million bond, approved by Cirigliano, after five months of court battles.

Yesterday's hearing was for two other pending criminal cases against Ross - a 1999 burglary charge and another felony charge for allegedly bribing a Summit County sheriffs deputy to bring prescription drugs into the county jail last year while he was being held on the Hill murder charge.

At stake in Cirigliano's decision in the murder case is whether a retrial would place Ross in double jeopardy - the constitutional prohibition against being tried twice for the same crime.

Akron police arrested Ross, 22, on May 27, 1999, only hours after finding Hill's body. He was charged with aggravated murder. Prosecutors later made it a death-penalty case by adding charges of murder, rape and kidnapping.

Ross went on trial in Summit County Common Pleas Court on Oct.17, 2000.

The trial ended 11 days later when Judge Jane Bond, who later was removed from the case by the Ohio Supreme Court, declared a mistrial based on alleged misconduct by one of the jurors.

At that point, the jury already had voted - and signed the verdict forms - to acquit Ross on charges of aggravated murder, murder and rape and was considering a charge of involuntary manslaughter.

Ross attended yesterday^’s hearing with his father and stepmother. The Ross family left the courtroom without comment.

Hannah C. Hill, 18, was last seen alive May 19, 1999.

Her body was found seven days later on Caine Road in the Ellet area of Akron, stuffed in the trunk of her car, after Akron police had failed to respond to repeated calls from Caine Road residents who reported the car was on their street.

The pending cases are a 1.) burglary 2.) bribing a guard for drugs.

I heard of the burglary and also Denny getting caught selling drugs which related my attention to this individual. A friend of mine had a business just doors from where Denny lived and murdered Hannah Hill.

If it wasn’t for the drugs and wildness Hannah may never have met Denny Ross. All these charges are related.

Joe Cirigliano said "I have to do some research  this is a very critical issue."

I would send Joe Cirigliano “the judge” the following letter.

Joe Cirigliano,

By chance the Hannah Hill murder case has fallen into the realm of my awareness. I know of many of the players in this great tragedy and am comfortable that the truth is that Denny Ross murdered her and many have worked to obstruct the truth. The main co defendant was excluded from this case. He was the person that could conclusively prove Denny was present at the scène of the crime.

The inability of the prosecution to place Denny at the scene was the reason the jury could not convict. I get around. People have made me well aware of the underlying dealings in this matter.

Who obstructed justice? I have sent the enclosed pamphlet to judges, editors, and the mayor. Many of the key power players in this town.

Everyone has avoided my call for justice. Many are aware of my efforts. Whether Denny is properly prosecuted or not is being recorded.

I have recorded extensive challenges from years of fighting the tyrants of America.

I’m just writing to let you know the predicament you are in. Ted Schneiderman told me “judges” believe they are good. Jesus lived the most honorable existence of all time said that “none is good but one, the Father which sent me.”  If “judges” feel they are good, they are only fooling themselves.

I do not need to protest your corruption, only to educate the world about my position so we can purge ourselves of our evil through truth and justice.

Sincerely,

Tom  Kiss

Nov. 27, 2001

P.S. We are now into a war on terrorism. I have been warring with tyranny my whole life. Tyranny is the way of our corruption. We need to purge our internal corruption and then everything else will take care of itself. To teach by example is our way out of our evil trap. Your power comes from dictate and abuse. You do not need courage to apply this power. This power comes from fear not respect and is finite.

The power of the truth is eternal and sublime. It comes from an unseen source so it takes courage to apply. This is the only respected power. This comes from the eternal.

DENNY ROSS SENT BACK TO JAIL FOR 2 MORE YEARS

 SENTENCE NOT RELATED TO SLAYING OF HANNAH HILL

Phil Trexler; Beacon Journal staff writer

Denny Ross is back behind bars.

The man accused in the strangulation death of Hannah Hill appeared in court yesterday, noticeably heftier than when he was freed on a $1 million bond four months ago. He was there to plead guilty to receiving stolen property, bribery and aggravated trafficking of drugs - charges unrelated to the slaying of Hill.

He was sentenced to four years in prison. Pending charges of drug trafficking and attempting to bring drugs into a jail were dismissed.

Visiting Judge Joseph E. Cirigliano gave Ross credit for the 896 days he spent in the Summit County Jail awaiting trial following his arrest for Hill's death. That means Ross is scheduled to serve two years and 34 days in state prison.

Ross, 22, had been implicated in a Springfield Township home burglary and, while in jail awaiting trial in Hill's murder, reportedly bribed a deputy to bring him prescription pain killers and anti-depressants.

Neither Ross' attorney, Lawrence Whitney, nor special prosecutor John Mitchell would comment on the sentence or plea.

The parents of Hill, Ezra and Kimberly, and Ross' father, Allen, attended the brief hearing, sitting on opposite sides of the courtroom. Each declined comment.

Cirigliano gave no indication on the record of how close he is to issuing his decision on whether to uphold three jury verdict forms signed after Ross' murder trial 15 months ago.

Ross was freed on bond in September after spending almost two years in jail following his arrest in Hill's slaying. The body of the 18-year-old Akron woman was found in the trunk of a car in Ellet in May of 1999. She had been strangled.

Ross, who could have faced execution, was tried in October 2000 before Summit County Common Pleas Judge Jane Bond. The proceedings ended in a mistrial because of alleged juror misconduct.

But it wasn't until after the mistrial was declared that everyone, including Bond, learned that the jury had voted to acquit Ross on aggravated murder, murder and rape charges.

The jury was deliberating a voluntary manslaughter charge when Bond - informed of concerns of jury misconduct - stopped the trial.

Ross' attorneys want the not guilty verdict forms upheld; prosecutors want the mistrial upheld so they can try Ross again in the homicide.

Cirigliano was assigned to the case after Bond was removed by Ohio Supreme Court Justice Thomas Moyer at the request of Ross' attorneys. His decision will be precedent setting since no other murder trial has ended in such a way.

It is clear from previous interviews with attorneys and prosecutors that the losing side of the decision will appeal to a higher court.

Akron Police detectives say Ross was the last to see Hill alive when she left his Canton Road apartment in Springfield Township the night she disappeared.

When Hill's body was found - several days after she was reported missing - police questioned Ross. He admitted the two had been "kissing and stuff' the day she disappeared.

Hours after that interview, police returned to Ross' home to execute a search warrant. In the process, they discovered a trash bag in shrubs just below a window of his second-story apartment. The bag contained Hill's clothing.

Tests conducted later showed Ross' semen and blood on Hill's underwear and pants.

During the two-week trial in 2000, defense lawyers argued to jurors that the bag of clothes could not be linked to Ross. They said it made no sense that a so-called guilty man could discard a body but leave important evidence such as her clothes behind for more than a week.

Instead, defense lawyers told jurors, Hill's boyfriend, Brad Oborn of Akron, was jealous and abusive and had scratch marks on his body at the time the woman disappeared.

Ross' lawyers also successfully raised doubt in the minds of jurors concerning plaster residue evidence taken from Hill's face. Prosecutors contended the plaster material was consistent with the material used to make an arm cast Ross wore at the time of the slaying. Defense lawyers argued the residue was more consistent with concrete.

They also discounted prosecution expert testimony which said a bite mark found on Hill's body was consistent with Ross' teeth impression. Defense lawyers raised the possibility that the mark was made by a hair clip found under Hill's body.

Prosecutors presented no evidence at trial showing where Hill was murdered or why. Defense lawyers rested without calling a single witness.

Ordinary citizens would spend a great deal of time in jail over all these offenses. Time served is often times difficult to get when it is related to a particular case. They say these cases are unrelated, yet they make special arrangements for a murderer. All I had to do now is let Joe Cirigliano to do his dirty work.

I know Denny is a product of immorality. His family history is tied to organized gambling. The wages of sin is death. Denny Ross murdered Hannah Hill according to Ronny Hupps account to his family. Denny told Ronny she threatened to turn Denny in over drugs so he had to kill her. That is what he told Ronny.

I believe, on reflection, that the real reason he murdered her was that she tried to pressure him because she was pregnant with his baby. Her mother said she was nervous that night. I believe Hannah tried to use her condition to control Denny.

In any event, a family that can use human weakness for personal gain looses connection with their spiritual self to the point where they can destroy their own future. Denny told Ronny he cut a baby out of her because it tied him to her. He forgot it tied him to his own life.  This is the hidden secret related to the blood evidence that was never made public.  I heard of the baby first from Ronny Hupps’ family.  How would they have known of it if Ronny wasn’t there?

Joe Cirigliano has decided to be part of the problem, as I knew he would. There is no double jeopardy in this case because the defense obstructed a fair trial.

Friday, February 15, 2002

Judge rules out new trial for suspect in woman's death

AKRON, Ohio - A man whose trial ended in a mistrial just before the jury's vote to acquit him was announced can't be tried again on the same charges in a woman's death, a judge ruled Friday.

Denny Ross, 22, of Springfield Township, was charged with the 1999 rape and murder of Hannah Hill, 18, of Akron. A week after she disappeared, Hill's body was found in the trunk of her car, which police had ticketed for illegal parking.

In October 2000, the jury was about to announce its verdict when the jury foreman told Summit County Common Pleas Judge Jane Bond that one of the jurors supported the verdict only because he was in a hurry to leave.

Bond, concerned about jury misconduct, dismissed the jury and declared a mistrial.

On Friday, Common Pleas Judge Joseph Cirigliano ruled that Bond erred in declaring a mistrial and that Ross can't be tried again on the murder, kidnapping or rape charges. He said the constitution prohibits against "double jeopardy," which is trying a person twice for the same offense.

Cirigliano said Bond "failed to scrupulously consider and investigate the alternatives to a mistrial."

Bond had only the jury foreman's word that another juror had behaved improperly and without a thorough investigation, "it was not possible to know if the jury was tainted," Cirigliano ruled.

It was the defense that obstructed the truth with bribes, threats and intimidation and possible murder of a key witness and for sure, threats of murder!

It was not the judge or jury that initiated this mistrial so the double jeopardy claim is illegal and socially immoral in this case.

Saturday, Feb. 16, 2002, another article would appear.

Posted on Sat, Feb. 16, 2002

Visiting judge rules against Ross retrial, criticizes Jane Bond

Double jeopardy Decision likely to be appealed by prosecution

By Phil Trexler Beacon Journal staff writer

Denny Ross should never again stand trial for the strangulation death of Hannah Hill, a judge ruled yesterday.

The long-anticipated decision by visiting Judge Joseph H. Cirigliano bars prosecutors from trying Ross a second time and sides with defense arguments that another trial would constitute double jeopardy.

"Thank God for justice," Ross' father, Allen, said yesterday.

The ruling is expected to be appealed by prosecutors.

A lengthy legal battle is likely to continue with Ross in a state prison, where he is currently serving two years for burglary, bribery and drug charges unrelated to Hill's death.

Allen Ross said he spoke to his son by phone yesterday from the Lorain Correctional Institution, after asking prison officials "to pass on the most important message in Denny's life."

"He said in a calm way, 'Dad, it's nice to have closure.' He's happy. What else can he say? It's just awesome," Allen Ross said.

Cirigliano's decision, which took about nine months to form, was highly critical of Summit County Common Pleas Judge Jane Bond and her handling of Ross' trial in October 2000.

Ross, now 22, was accused of aggravated murder, murder, rape, kidnapping and gross abuse of a corpse. Prosecutors intended to ask for the death penalty.

In the midst of jury deliberations, Bond declared a mistrial after receiving allegations of juror misconduct from the panel's foreman.

Cirigliano wrote that Bond "abused (her) discretion" and failed to explore other options aside from ending the trial.

There existed no manifest necessity for declaring a mistrial," Cirigliano wrote. 'Reasonable alternatives existed and the public interest in fair trials designed to end in just judgments was not met by (Bond's) declaration of a mistrial."

Cirigliano ruled that Bond should have done more to explore and question jurors about the alleged misconduct, despite the objections from defense attorneys and prosecutors opposing the move.

The foreman's note claimed that one juror had knowledge that a suspect in Hill's death had passed a polygraph and therefore "Ross had to be guilty."

The note further alleged that the same juror wanted to end the deliberations to attend to family matters and would vote with the majority to hasten the process.

Jurors had already signed three verdict forms acquitting Ross of aggravated murder, murder and rape when the note was passed.

Shortly after declaring the mistrial, Bond learned of the signed verdict forms. She ruled them moot, then ordered Ross to stand trial a second time.

Ross' defense team appealed Bond's decisions and persuaded the Ohio Supreme Court to remove her from the case. In addition to claiming double jeopardy concerns, the defense team wanted the verdict forms upheld.

Double jeopardy is a clause contained in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and is designed to protect a person from being tried more than once for the same crime.

Cirigliano also noted in his decision that the clause has been interpreted to protect a person in cases "in which a judge exercises authority to help the prosecution at a trial in which its case is going badly... " by declaring a mistrial and giving prosecutors a second chance.

Cirigliano did not rule on the admissibility of the verdict forms because of his decision to rule on the double jeopardy issue.

Bond defends decision

In an interview yesterday afternoon, Bond said Cirigliano's ruling is filled with "factual errors" concerning how the mistrial came about.

Bond said she declared the mistrial to protect Ross' right to a fair trial, believing that the note inferred a guilty verdict was imminent.

"I thought they were going to convict. I think any fair reading of that note would lead one to believe that they were going to convict him, " Bond said.

She said it would have been improper for her to override the "strenuous" objections of defense lawyers and prosecutors and unilaterally question the jurors.

"What (Cirigliano's ruling is) saying is that I should have overruled the objections of the prosecution and the defense. Had I done that, then the prosecution and the defense would have both said that anything that happened after that point was legally tainted, Bond said.

"I said I will (question the jury) . I want to do it. This is the time. And they said no. Therefore, I am damned if I do and damned if I don't."

Cirigliano could not be reached for comment.

Bond has sealed the jury list and the juror whose comments sparked the note and mistrial has never been identified nor questioned about deliberations.

Ross' family delighted

Meanwhile, word of Cirigliano's decision was greeted with tearful exuberance from Ross' family and attorneys and silence from prosecutors and Hill's family.

"Wooooooh. Wooooooh, " hollered Las Vegas defense attorney David Z. Chesnoff, who led a team of attorneys and experts hired to defend Ross.

"We've been on pins and needles. We've always known that we were right. Denny was acquitted by a jury and that couldn't be stolen from him. The judge restored faith in everybody that the process works."

Chesnoff said he contacted legal experts "from Harvard to California and there wasn't a single lawyer that didn't think what was done to Denny was an injustice."

John Mitchell and Carmen Marino, Cuyahoga County assistant prosecutors assigned to the case last year, did not return calls.

Hill's parents, Ezra and Kimberly Hill, could not be reached.

Akron Police Maj. Paul Callahan said the department remains convinced of Ross' guilt. He said detectives assigned the case are disappointed in the decision.

"We feel that the person who killed Hannah Hill was Denny Ross and we still feel that way regardless of the decision of the court," Callahan said.

The investigation of Hill's death has been fraught with mishaps from the day the 19-year-old woman disappeared in May 1999.

Almost immediately, Akron police were criticized after it was learned that dispatchers ignored phone calls for several days from Caine Road residents claiming Hill's abandoned car was parked outside.

Ross was arrested the night Hill's body was found in the trunk of her car. Detectives say Ross was the last to see Hill alive when she left his Springfield Township apartment.

In interviews with police, he admitted that he and Hill were friends and that the two had "kissed and stuff" the day she disappeared.

Hours after that interview, police returned to Ross' home to execute a search warrant. In the process, they discovered a trash bag in shrubs just below a window of his second-story apartment.

The bag contained Hill's clothing. Further tests showed Ross' semen and blood on Hill's underwear and pants.

During the trial, defense lawyers argued to jurors that the bag of clothes could not be linked to Ross. They said it made no sense that a so-called guilty man could discard a body but leave important evidence such as her clothes behind for more than a week.

Instead, defense lawyers tried to lay the blame on Hill's boyfriend, claiming he was jealous and abusive.

Two Summit County prosecutors, both trying their first capital murder cases, presented no evidence showing where Hill was murdered or why.

Defense lawyers rested without calling a single witness.

Reasonable doubt

Jurors said they believed Ross may have been involved in some way with Hill's slaying, but that prosecutors failed to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Lawrence Whitney, an Akron attorney helping to defend Ross, said yesterday that it didn't matter that police, prosecutors and Hill's family believe Ross is getting away with murder.

"Well, 12 jurors didn't think that. Twelve jurors said that he was innocent, " he said. "And now a judge has upheld that decision."

In-fighting and name calling and in the end corruption ruled.

David Z. Chesnoff, the Las Vegas attorney, said “Wooooooh. Wooooooh.” Excited that his game had won. Go threaten young girls “Wooooooh Wooooooh!” What a punk.

Akron attorney Lawrence Whitney said” it didn't matter that police ‘prosecutors and Hill's family believe Ross is getting away with murder.

Well, 12 jurors did not think that. Twelve jurors said he was innocent," he said.

12 jurors did not think the state proved their case. They did not convict because they could not place him at the scene of the murder. That's because Michael Callahan eliminated the key witness who could have placed him there. (Ronny Hupp)

The jury did not feel he was innocent because they were considering a lesser charge when Jane Bond called a halt to their deliberation.

Denny is guilty and Lawrence Whitney is a liar. What if Lawrence had a daughter unfairly exterminated? He wouldn’t be so crass.

Cirigliano would release Denny from his criminal actions by declaring double jeopardy. In other words a person cannot be tried for the same crime twice. That is true of a fair trial, but when the defense obstructs justice it is them that taints the proceedings and that nullifies their claim of double jeopardy. Fair for Denny and fair for Hannah and fair for the developing offspring murdered by its own father. Our justice system is for ourselves and our posterity, for the weak and defenseless.

After this proceeding, Allen Ross, Denny’s failed father would say, “Thank God for justice” and in the end God will reveal his true justice to Allen Ross.

When this case first materialized, I considered that possibly Denny left and Ronny Hupp killed her.  But as the facts mounted, and I saw power brokers manipulate the evidence, it became obvious that money and power were used to obstruct the truth.

Ronny Hupps’ family is from the low end of the social spectrum.  They lie, they snitch and work deals to get out of trouble.  These people are limited in influence.

Prosecutor at the time of the trial, Michael Callahan believes he is a tuff guy, a gangster, in public garb.  He released Ronny Hupp because Ronny would have placed Denny Ross at the scene of the crime.

These people did not count on the fact that GOD would use me to expose this lie.  They are devils abusing the truth for personal advantage.  Liars always expose themselves in the end.  The Akron and Summit County Courts are trapped by this lie.

I personally have heard from many sources that the Akron police have no doubt Denny killed Hannah.  Their hands are tied by those in superior positions.

The internet gives me the forum to rise above the corruption of this false reality.  I technically own Akron and Summit County by this case.  Eventually my position will take my arguments to the top of this world.

Denny Ross is tied to money and the abuse of power. Everything is done to obstruct the truth.

In the neighboring city to Akron, is Canton, Ohio. A recent trial grabbed my attention.

ACCUSED WON'T GET NEW ATTORNEY

January 18, 2002
Section: METRO
Page: Dl

Stephen Dyer, Beacon Journal staff writer

After a long day of legal maneuvering and pedestrian testimony, Chad Mayle could contain his frustration no longer.

After Judge John 0. Haas recessed the jury in Mayle's murder complicity trial for the afternoon, Mayle insisted upon making a statement before Haas - an unusual request. ^" I'm not a lawyer or nothing," Mayle, 18, said, "but I'd like to plead ineffectiveness of counsel. (Defense attorney John Mackey) didn't do anything I asked him to do. I^’ve fired him four times already."

Haas wasn't impressed.

"Mr. Mayle, Mr. Mackey gives his heart and soul for his clients," Haas said. "I have seen nothing in this case that indicates he is not aggressively defending you. You're not getting a new counsel."

Then, just as Mayle tried to break in to further explain his dissatisfaction, Haas interrupted.

"That will be all," he said.

It was that kind of day for Mayle.

Mackey was unable to persuade Haas to allow several witnesses to testify. As Mayle's defense started yesterday, only one witness to the fight that led to the death of Jennifer Himes on April 5 took the stand on his behalf

And all Tisha Mayle, now 18, would say is that she saw Chad Mayle - she said they are not related - swing a golf club and break out the windows of a car that she and Himes were riding in that night.

Again yesterday, she recanted a statement she gave to police shortly after the fight. On April 9, she told them she saw Chad Mayle swing a club at Himes. On the stand (and earlier, before the grand jury) she said she never saw that happen.

A driver found in the golf bag of Chad Mayle's stepfather, Glenn Swogger, was found to have Himes' blood on it, according to earlier prosecution testimony. A 5-iron contained Swogger's blood.

The fight was supposed to be between Chad Mayle and Himes' cousin, Matt Daviduk. Jason Wolfe - the only witness to claim to have seen Mayle strike Himes with the golf club - and some other friends were along for the ride in Himes' car, according to testimony.

Daviduk, 19, has said there was a rift between him and Mayle.

Daviduk and his friends arrived outside the 10th Street Southwest home on April 5.

Mayle's mother, Tammy Swogger, rushed out of the house to confront them when Himes got out of the car and started fighting her. In the melee that followed, Himes received fatal blows and died a few days after the attack.

MAYLE CONVICTED

January 19, 2002
Section: METRO
Page: Al

Kymberli Hagelberg and Julie Wallace, Beacon Journal staff writers

Chad Mayle testified for two hours yesterday trying to convince jurors deciding his fate that he wasn¹t to blame for the beating death of a 20-year-old woman in April.

It didn't work. After a little less than three hours of deliberation, a Stark County Common Pleas Court jury found Mayle guilty of complicity to murder in the slaying of Jennifer Himes - a conviction that earned him a sentence of 15 years to life.

A defiant Mayle, tossing the tissues he used to wipe away tears, decided he had heard enough. As Judge John O. Haas read him his appeal rights - and before the judge had handed down the sentence - Mayle shouted an obscenity at him.

"Get me the (expletive) out of here," Mayle said, starting toward an exit. “We're done, right? What else is there to say?”

A collection of Mayle's family and friends who gathered in the courtroom sobbed when the jury's verdict was read. Seven Stark County sheriffs deputies in the courtroom escorted Mayle's family out first to avoid altercations.

Alice Dalberg, Mayle's grandmother, broke up as she waited for her ride by the courthouse door.

Referring to Himes and those with her the night she was beaten, Dalberg said: “I keep thinking that if that carload of kids... if they'd stayed home, my kids wouldn't all be in jail.

They've destroyed my whole family,” Dalberg said, sobbing.

Himes' mother, Paula Scott, said the conviction and sentence don't lessen the pain of losing her daughter.

“I really feel sorry for his family,” she said. “But they have to realize what I lost. They will get to see him. I won't ever get to talk to my daughter again.”

The emotions weren't limited to the two families. The judge polled the jury of six men and six women after the verdict, and one of the women started crying after she affirmed her vote.

Prosecutors alleged that Mayle, now 18, approached Himes from behind and struck her with a golf club while the woman was fighting with his mother and sister on April 5.

MAYLE: STRUCK ONLY CAR

Mayle told jurors yesterday that he used the golf club only to smash car windows in an effort to drive away Himes' cousin, Matt Daviduk, and three teens who had driven to Mayle's house.

The fight grew out of tensions between Mayle and Daviduk that began in November 2000 after a date between Daviduk and Mayle's sister, Nakita Morgan. “Matt had taken my sister to some party,” Mayle testified. “When she refused to have sex with him, he wouldn't take her home.”

According to Mayle, the animosity exploded the night that Daviduk and his friends woke Morgan and Tammy and Glenn "Doug" Swogger, Mayle's mother and stepfather.

“This car pulled up, and there was really loud music,” he said. “When I went outside, Matt threw a full beer at me on the porch.”

Mayle told the jury that his mother went outside to confront Daviduk while he re-entered the house and changed from boxer shorts into pants. Glenn Swogger followed his wife outside, “completely nude, without a stitch on,” holding a golf club.

DESCRIPTION OF FIGHT

The fight was two confrontations, Mayle said: A tussle between his stepfather, who “swung a golf club wildly” at Daviduk near the front of the car, and the battle between his mother and a girl standing outside the car, which had stopped in the middle of a southwest Canton street.

Mayle said he never saw his sister leave the house. He told jurors he used the golf club he wielded only to smash car windows.

"I wasn't that interested to fight at that particular time," Mayle said. "I just wanted them to leave."

He disputed earlier testimony of Daviduk's passenger and friend, Jason Wolfe, who said he saw Mayle strike Himes in the right temple with a golf club and knock her down in the fight between the three women.

Himes, 20, died in Aultman Hospital three days later.

Last week, prosecutors offered Mayle a 10-year sentence in a plea deal that he rejected. In their closing arguments yesterday, they emphasized that Mayle could be found guilty if jurors determined he had acted with others to cause Himes' death.

"You don't have to find he was solely responsible, just that he helped others. That's enough," Assistant Prosecutor Chryssa Hartnett said. "I submit to you that you have more than you need as far as evidence goes."

Last week, Tammy Swogger, 35, pleaded guilty to complicity to commit felonious assault. Glenn Swogger, 34, pleaded guilty to obstructing justice. Both are to be sentenced Feb. 6.

Morgan, 16, appeared in Family Court and entered a plea of denial to complicity to murder. She is to appear Thursday before Judge Jim D. James.

In the first article I realized John G. Haas was not reasonable and he created a mistrial by denying Chad Mayle a reasonable defense. When Chad told him he was discontent, he refused to understand why.

In the second article, it was obvious that the prosecutor left little room for compassion or understanding. “You don’t have to find he was solely responsible, just that he helped others.”

All those that came with Jennifer Himes that night attacking a home in an unlawful manner helped her trap herself and her anger where it should not have been. All those individuals are more responsible than those defending against the attack. For their actions created an unreasonable situation the others felt they had to defend against.

Our nation was attacked and we say it ok to use violence to self defend, yet it is criminal for our citizens to follow their basic instincts. We might say, “why didn’t they call the police?” but when Jerry Allen went to the police, they made his situation worse. Many fear police because they make matters worse.

Chad’s family isn’t tied to money and power, so society will crucify him to satisfy our quest for vengeance.

Shame on John G. Haas. He is not practicing reasonable good behavior. So constitutionally he should be removed from his position.

Chad Mayle I respect because he expressed his feelings and they were justified. What good will fifteen years to life do for Chad or society? This sentence was ill conceived, cruel and unusual punishment since it does not carry a positive end result.

The following letter was sent to John G. Haas:

John G. Haas,

We as a nation are hypocrites. When an invading force attacks us we say it is necessary to retaliate with violence in the name of self-defense.

From what I have read in the newspaper, when a home is attacked by an invading force, and out of self-defense and retaliation, someone is injured or killed, we crucify the defenders.

We have a nation with one constitution with one set of principles with which we are supposed to be governed.

A judge is to retain his judgeship while under good behavior.

A person is entitled counsel for their defense.

A good man or judge wants a fair trial, a just trial.

You denied Chad Mayle his right to proper defense. The prosecutions call is nothing more than cruel and unusual punishment. What redeeming value will this punishment serve to salvage or restore order to our society? It will waste another life so it is not just.

Why do you think a young mans life isn’t worth your time of day? He had an opinion of why he didn’t respect his attorney. You abused your position and dictated your opinion. He had reason for dissatisfaction. He had a right to fair counsel. He tried to defend himself because he knew he was not getting a fair trial.

For thousands of years you and yours have persecuted the masses in the name of justice. Your arrogance allows you to perform in front of the public with no love of fairness or justice. My court. My way. Me, myself, and I.  You are one of the many positions of power that only serves your own interest.

When I read in the press the stories of this trial, I thought what a contrast to the Hannah Hill murder case. You guys will allow a brutal murderer to go unpunished, but you sacrifice a soul to appease your appetite for vengeance.

To me, all of you in power positions are worse than thieves and murderers because your abuse of influence inflicts greater amounts of pain over longer periods of time.

Tom Kiss

Everyone of Chad’s family would be persecuted for defending against an attack on their home. No more than we have done over the 911 incident.

Tom Kiss,
2002