proof max b was wrongfully convicted
max b was wrongfully convicted in bergen county, for crimes allegedly commited in fort lee, new jersey, max b was indicted by the bergen county grand jury for first degree murder; first degree armed robbery; second degree conspiracy to commit robber; first degree kidnapping and various weapon offenses, along with two other defendants.
Legally, the bergen county prosecutor had no direct evidence against max b. In, fact, the prosecutor knew max b was in new york when these alleged crimes were being committed. So, how is max b able to stand trial for crimes the prosecutor knew he did not commit. Remeber, i told you that the law is designed to incarcerate the nonwhites. In new jeresey criminal justice code, 2c:law. There is a statute called "conspiracy, 2c:5-2." which is defined as:
Definition of conspiracy . A person is guilty of conspiracy with another person or persons to commit a crime if with the purpose of promoting or facilitating its commission he:
1. Agrees with such other person or persons that they or one or more of them will engage in conduct which constitutes such crime or attempt or solicitation to commit such crime; or
2. Agrees to aid such other person or persons in the planning or commission of such crime or of an attempt or solicitation to commit such crime.
According to the prosecutor, this is the bases that brings max b into the charges as a defendant. The prosecutor believes, through a defendant/witness, that max b put this conspiracy together to commit a robbery in new jersey. The question is did the prosecutor provide the facts during trial to prove the elements or the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. The answer is...no.
Briefly, let me give you alittle background, according to the prosecutor's defendant/witness. Defendant/witness is a female who had briefely met the alleged victim and his friend one day. The alleged victim and defendant/witness had a drink at a club where she put her own cell phone number into the alleged victim cell phone. So he knows how to reach her. A day later he call's her to go shopping at a mall. After some shopping they both drive to new jersey from new york were the alleged victim rent a motel room. While waiting she advised him that she had to use the bathroom. Which he gave her one of the room keys and told her the room number. When he got to the room he took a shower while she smokes a ciggerate outside. After the smoke she came back into the room and began to watch a movie on the tv. The alleged victim came out of the bathroom open a backpack and trying to impress her, showed her what appear to be to her about $40,000 to $50,000 dollars inside. According to her, sometime later max b called her cell phone asking where are you at; come to the basket ball court (which is in new york). After attempting to make max b jealous. Defendant/witness informed max b that the alleged victim had a bag full of money in the hotel room, that she had the key and the alleged victim would be out at a club. Subsequently, according to her, max b than put together a plan to steal the bag full of money, using the hotel key, while the victim was out at a club.
Of course, if you believed her statement and trial testimony. The conspiracy only amounted to theft of property. N.j.s.a 2c:20-3a moveable property) ; defined as
a. Movable property. A person is guilty of theft if he unlawfully takes, or exercises unlawful control over, movable property of another with purpose to deprive him thereof.
Now, here is the legal twist, due to the fact this is a murder investigation, in a rich white county. And its learned during the investigation that max b is an a.ssociate of the accused female and a rap music artist. The prosecutor charged max b as an accomplice and co-conspirator to the murder, conspiracy to commit robbery, armed robbery, felony-murder, kidnapping and various weapon offenses.
Keep in mind now, according to defendant/witness, max b put together a plan to steal the money bag, using the hotel key she had, while the alleged victim was out a t club.
The prosecutor knows that max b was not at the hotel in fort lee, new jersey when these alleged crimes were being committed. The investigation support this factor.
So, why do the prosecutor feel the need to charge max b with the substantive charges as an accomplice. Lets review the legal definition of accomplice. N.j.s.a 2c:2-6a (liability for conduct of another; complicity).
Defined as, a person is guilty of an offense if it is commited by his own conduct or by the conduct of another person for which he is legally accountable, or both.
n.j.s.a 2c:2-6b(3) provide that he is an accomplice of such other person in the commission of an offense or
n.j.s.a 2c:2-6b(4) provide he engaged in a conspiracy with such other person.
For those who do not know and understand the criminal law, will be completely confused by its interpretation. And i might add that all prosecutors rely on layperson (citizens) ignorance of the law in order to win their cases.
Now, here is another legal twist to put into the legal mixture. The prosecutor constitution require to prove every element of a charge, including a defendant's culpability, beyond a reasonable doubt. We will look a t that
n.j.s.a 2c:2-2 (general requirements of culpability.)
a. Minimum requirements of culpability. Except as provided in subsection. (3) of this section a person is not guilty of an offense unless he acted purposely, knowingly, recklessly or negligently, as the law may require, with respect to each material element of the offense.
N.j.s.a 2c:2-2b(1); purposely. A person acts purposely with respect to the nature of his conduct or a result thereof if it is his "conscious object" to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result. A person acts purposely with respect to attendant circumstances if he is aware of the existence of such circumstances or he believes or hopes that they exist. "with purpose," "designed," "with design" or equivalent terms have the same meaning.
N.j.s.a 2c:2-2b(2); knowingly. A person acts knowingly with respect to the nature of his conduct or the attendant circumstances if he is aware that his conduct is of that nature, or that such circumstances exist, or he is aware of a highly probability of their existence. A person acts knowingly with respect to a result of his conduct if he is aware that it is practically certain that his conduct will cause such a result. "knowing," "with knowledge" or equivalent terms have the same meaning.
Purposely and knowingly are the culpability elements the prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt to murder, conspiracy to commit robbery, armed robbery, felony murder, kidnapping and various weapon offenses; as it apply to max b as an accomplice. Even though the prosecutor knows max b was not at the scene in new jersey, the prosecutor knew that max b did not physically possess a weapon, the prosecutor knew max b did not pull the trigger that caused this person's death, and the prosecutor knew that max b did not take any items or money from any person at the hotel in fort lee, new jersey.
The prosecutor charging max b as an accomplice would legally mean that max b had the same state of mind set as the persons at the crime scene. Remember, the prosecutor's only witness is the defendant/witness. She testified that max b put together a plan to sneak into the hotel room, using the key she was given, steal the money bag while the alleged victim was out at a club. Therefore, this testimony does not raise to the level of accomplice liability for the substantive crimes mention herein above. If you believed the defendant/witness taped statement and trial testimony; that evidence would only support theft of movable property.
In the alternative, legally, the prosecutor had another legal trick. If accomplice did not work for the prosecutor, the prosecutor asked the trial court to charge the jurors with co-conspirator liability. Yeah, this can be confusing. Co-conspirator liability is legally based of of n.j.s.a 2c:2-6b(5) (he engaged in a conspiracy with such other person). The commentary prove an interpretation of co-conspirator in state v. Bridges, 133 n.j 447, 466-467 (1993), which said
"a person is liable for a crime committed by the conduct of a co-conspirator if the crime was closely connected with the conspiracy, was the natural necessary consequence of conspiracy, was objectively foreseeable or reasonably to be anticipated from attempts to execute the conspiracy, and was not committed in a manner too far removed from the objectives of the conspiracy to form a just basis for the person's (max b) criminal liability" id. At 467.
Even though the prosecutor knew that max b was not physically involved at the crime scene. The prosecutor asked the trial court to charge the jurors with accomplice liability and alternatively, co-conspirator as a backup.
Now, in order for the jurors to convict max b as a co-conspirator to the substantive crimes. The juroros would have to look at the "original conspiracy," that was testified too by defendant/witness: "max b put together a plan to sneak into the hotel room, using the key that was given to her, steal the money bag while the alleged victim was out at a club." compare that testimony of the original conspiracy to the interpretation in bridges.
Noting in the original conspiracy as testified to by defendant/witness, if you believed it, suggest that a weapon was discussed or to be used. Nothing about a murder, nothing about kidnapping, nothing about discussing a robbery, nothing about robbing anyone period. In fact, according to her, nobody is suppose to be in the hotel room at all.
Did the prosecutor prove its case against max b......"no." max b said, "i'm innocent, i wasn't there." would max b be right to say that....."yes."
any second year law student could have freed max b. Hell, i don't have a law degree and i can see that max b was wrongfully convicted. Max b could use your love and support. Not only get the word out to free max b but physically get invovled with your support by contacting your government officials and civil leaders and rap artist to really look deep into max b's case. We have a problem with prosecutors universally in america when it comes to african-americans, latinos, and non whites. Especially, rap artists. Who's next.