My dear love... I know you’re waiting for me - and I, for you. There IS an end - and then we’ll be together for always. It will be different - but there’ll be no change to our love - after all these years nothing’s going to alter that. I dream of you - usually at night - but sometimes while I’m wide awake. I turn a corner, expecting to find you there - so funny because we’ve never been here together. I believe you know this place as much as I do - maybe because you know all the nooks and crannies of my heart just as I know yours. I’m nearly content, secure in our love - knowing my feelings and sure of yours. I live in the memories - they send me to sleep at night - free to walk the streets with you - and see all the people we grew up with. I’ll always love you - only you - forever. Always and all ways, I am your Jeannie.
The new phone system sounded good...but when I tried to set up an account...I was told that the 6 cents per minute would only go into affect once all the prisons in the state were set up...not before...and they had no idea when it might drop from 12 cents to 6 cents.
Also...the old system charged $3 per transaction and you could put a maximum of $250 on the account per transaction. Now it's $5.95 per transaction and you can only put $100 on at a time. So significantly more processing charges.
Plus when John tried to call last week, it said there was no money on the account....when there is. So still bugs there too.
Considering making phone calls to me is John's main connection to the outside world and his only personal expense other than bare necessities, it's too bad the price has gone up significantly.
Maybe the service will get better and the pricing will drop (as originally quoted) but I'm still disgruntled about the processing fee taking such a huge hike.
Sorry I've been behind on reading your blogs. Thanks for keeping us informed on the changes that have been happening inside the walls at Stanley.
I'm not too happy about the new phone vendor either....another jump in pricing for those wanting to keep in touch with family and friends on the inside of the walls. John doesn't think the service is any better and it costs more to put money on the account. I'm sure they're still working out the bugs...but no price drop for calls placed (as was touted as a reason for the change) and only increase in costs to put money on the account.
Dear Harlan, thank you for your response of July 22. Let me get into it. A bit off topic, but I would welcome it if we could get rid of polls. They also led to politicians doing rather election management than having a sincere point of view. 40% of approval can easily be enough, as only a bit more than 60% voted in 2016. But I guess that's no news to you. Well, who would be the best candidate. I really would appreciate if it will not be Joe Biden. That would be just business as usual, and that business was not good. And if you look at the amount of donations Bernie Sanders knows to accumulate, or rather the amount of people that donate to him. Right now he has 746.000 donors, next is Elizabeth Warren with 421.000 donors. Biden is fifth at 256.000. Have you seen the democratic debates? I thought CNN did a horrible job, looking to set them up one against the other. So what is your favorite candidate? And what about continuing this conversation the next months, I enjoy it, and nice to not have the same opinion. Also, you live in a potentially crucial state, you know some people you can convince to do the right thing? ;) I am also curious what you think of the climate crisis. Is it a topic that is of interest of you? Well, have a good day, I am looking forward to your response, Julia
It's good to see that you are still writing and keeping it together. It has been a long time since I have written you. Sorry things fell apart for me and I didn't write for a while. I saw somewhere that you are going to be getting released within the next couple years. I pray that all goes well for you with the time winding down. Stay strong and I will try to write more often. I am in Jacksonville NC now,back where it all began for me. Relocated in 2014, prayerfully by the time you get out I can visit you. Semper Fi!
Dearest Marteze: I HAVE TO take this "opportunity" to ask for YOUR forgiveness. Not the other way around❤ (believe it or not) I behaved SO inappropriately in my last
Hardcopy letter to u. U R in prison, despite the fact that you are, slowly but SURELY workin your bad ass (lol) OUT the same doors FOR GOOD, U R, in fact, still in prison. U need/DESERVE MORE Positivity from the people, friends, associates, that u choose to surround yourself with. The fact that u R in that place is in and of itself punishment, of course. At THIS point, U don't have ANY say in who u R surrounded by. I'm thinking that's THE MAJOR COMPONENT of the punishment. U did, while in the streets, HAVE that luxury. U were found GUILTY of abusing that freedom. YYet, u have paid ur debt, ALMOST COMPLETELY, & r almost READY to take those first fateful steps OUTSIDE those bars, NOT behind them. U need/DESERVE, to have a loving, SUPPORTIVE, "Support System" awaiting your reentry into society as a whole, Amesbury by bit!! Not a misguided, disrespectful, somewhat NARCISSISTIC, Female Lover wannabe out here waiting for ur Even behind those bars, and u, thank God,have and NOTHING LESS. I TRULY believe that I am guilt!! 😕 MAJORLY DISRESPECTED U. In a purposeful, ,blatant manner. There is was, ABSOLUTELY NO excuse for my BADASS (lol) s behavior. I really AM TRULY sorry for being disrespectful to you, my friend you my friend❤ I hope and I PRAY that u can forgive me and hopefully, out it where it REALLY belongs, in ur rearview ! FOREVER☺ in case u haven't figured it out yet,my HEART STILL belongs to u, Zach and, MOST OF ALL God. Not necessarily in that order!!❤ (PROBABLY ALWAYS WILL!!💗❤) My love for you ALWAYS AND FOREVER
He wrote that the law would require the court to conduct “quasi-appellate review” of a person’s conviction or force the prosecution to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, “in this case, a quarter of a century after the crime was committed and the final judgment entered.”
Furthermore, in a case like Palmer’s involving a plea bargain, there is no trial record for prosecutors to go on, Covello wrote. As such, they can’t prove whether Palmer actually participated in the killing, was the mastermind, supplied the murder weapon or had intent to injure or kill.
“These facts (or lack thereof) illustrate that (the petition process does) not merely touch ‘incidentally’ on the powers of the court,” Covello wrote. “When a legislature mandates a court to set aside a lawful plea bargain, vacate a 27-year-old judgment, re-adjudicate that controversy under an entirely different legal standard, and then further mandates an unconstitutional process for that re-adjudication, they have arrogated unto themselves the core functions of the court, and materially impaired the proper functioning of the judicial branch of government.”
He added: “If this is not a legislative encroachment upon the authority of the judicial branch in violation of the separation of powers clause of the California Constitution, this court can think of no legislative action that would constitute such an encroachment.”
Kraut said Wednesday that Palmer and his family are very disappointed at the denial of Palmer’s petition but they respect the judge’s ruling.
Kraut added that he intended to file Palmer’s appeal Wednesday afternoon.
Hearings for remaining murder petition cases will continue to be heard throughout the coming months.
Date of this piece was JULY 03, 2019 Hope this is of interest, have a good day, Julia
A case list provided by the San Luis Obispo County District Attorney’s Office showed that, as of Wednesday, 18 people had petitioned for re-sentencing in the county, including two men who have already been separately paroled.
In April and May, Superior Court Judges Jacquelyn Duffy and Craig van Rooyen — who, like Covello, are former prosecutors with the local DA’s Office — heard arguments in six cases and were the first to weigh in, finding the law constitutional. In the case of 50-year-old Gerardo Estrada, sentenced to 25 years to life for a 1986 burglary and assault that resulted in the death of an 84-year-old man, van Rooyen called the matter a “complicated issue,” but found that the new law does not prohibit anything authorized by ballot initiatives passed by voters, and that past initiatives did not “freeze” state law related to murder with those initiatives. In addition to those six cases, two petitions were denied because the judge found the men were the actual killers, and Judge Dodie Harman is expected to make a ruling in three other cases July 10.
One of the 18 petitions was received Tuesday, Dobroth said, but the status of the remaining cases were not immediately available Wednesday.
‘LEGISLATIVE ENCROACHMENT’
But Covello had a different take in his ruling in John Palmer’s case. John Louise Palmer was 17 years old when he pleaded guilty to second-degree murder in 1992 for the fatal stabbing of his grandmother, 67-year-old Roxana O’Grady, during a burglary at O’Grady’s Cayucos farmhouse on Toro Creek Road. Palmer and a co-defendant testified that they were burglarizing the house when a third member of their group, 38-year-old transient Frank Krafick, stabbed O’Grady and injured 67-year-old James Negranti, 76, who survived but later died from unrelated health problems.
Palmer, now 44, was sentenced to 15 years to life and was serving time at Mule Creek State Prison in Ione before being transferred to California Men’s Colony to be near local proceedings.
Matthew Kraut, Palmer’s defense attorney who until May 2018 had worked as a prosecutor with the DA’s Office for 20 years, argued in court documents that there was an overwhelming amount of evidence to show that Palmer did not kill his grandmother nor have any reason to believe Krafik would become violent.
Taking on the District Attorney’s argument, Kraut wrote that SB 1437 in no way changes punishments enacted by propositions 7 and 115.
“Simply put, the punishment for murder conviction remains unchanged by the passage of Senate Bill 1437,” Kraut wrote.
But Covello wrote in his ruling that the law does violate the will of the voters in propositions 7 and 115 and the state’s separation of powers by allowing the legislature to interfere with the judiciary.
RSS
I know you’re waiting for me - and I, for you. There IS an end - and then we’ll be together for always. It will be different - but there’ll be no change to our love - after all these years nothing’s going to alter that.
I dream of you - usually at night - but sometimes while I’m wide awake. I turn a corner, expecting to find you there - so funny because we’ve never been here together. I believe you know this place as much as I do - maybe because you know all the nooks and crannies of my heart just as I know yours.
I’m nearly content, secure in our love - knowing my feelings and sure of yours. I live in the memories - they send me to sleep at night - free to walk the streets with you - and see all the people we grew up with.
I’ll always love you - only you - forever. Always and all ways, I am your Jeannie.
The new phone system sounded good...but when I tried to set up an account...I was told that the 6 cents per minute would only go into affect once all the prisons in the state were set up...not before...and they had no idea when it might drop from 12 cents to 6 cents.
Also...the old system charged $3 per transaction and you could put a maximum of $250 on the account per transaction. Now it's $5.95 per transaction and you can only put $100 on at a time. So significantly more processing charges.
Plus when John tried to call last week, it said there was no money on the account....when there is. So still bugs there too.
Considering making phone calls to me is John's main connection to the outside world and his only personal expense other than bare necessities, it's too bad the price has gone up significantly.
Maybe the service will get better and the pricing will drop (as originally quoted) but I'm still disgruntled about the processing fee taking such a huge hike.
Evy
Sorry I've been behind on reading your blogs. Thanks for keeping us informed on the changes that have been happening inside the walls at Stanley.
I'm not too happy about the new phone vendor either....another jump in pricing for those wanting to keep in touch with family and friends on the inside of the walls. John doesn't think the service is any better and it costs more to put money on the account. I'm sure they're still working out the bugs...but no price drop for calls placed (as was touted as a reason for the change) and only increase in costs to put money on the account.
Keep the faith and keep writing.
Evy
thank you for your response of July 22. Let me get into it.
A bit off topic, but I would welcome it if we could get rid of polls. They also led to politicians doing rather election management than having a sincere point of view.
40% of approval can easily be enough, as only a bit more than 60% voted in 2016. But I guess that's no news to you.
Well, who would be the best candidate. I really would appreciate if it will not be Joe Biden. That would be just business as usual, and that business was not good. And if you look at the amount of donations Bernie Sanders knows to accumulate, or rather the amount of people that donate to him. Right now he has 746.000 donors, next is Elizabeth Warren with 421.000 donors. Biden is fifth at 256.000.
Have you seen the democratic debates? I thought CNN did a horrible job, looking to set them up one against the other.
So what is your favorite candidate? And what about continuing this conversation the next months, I enjoy it, and nice to not have the same opinion.
Also, you live in a potentially crucial state, you know some people you can convince to do the right thing? ;)
I am also curious what you think of the climate crisis. Is it a topic that is of interest of you?
Well, have a good day, I am looking forward to your response, Julia
I am in Jacksonville NC now,back where it all began for me. Relocated in 2014, prayerfully by the time you get out I can visit you. Semper Fi!
Hardcopy letter to u. U R in prison, despite the fact that you are, slowly but SURELY workin your bad ass (lol) OUT the same doors FOR GOOD, U R, in fact, still in prison. U need/DESERVE MORE Positivity from the people, friends, associates, that u choose to surround yourself with. The fact that u R in that place is in and of itself punishment, of course. At THIS point, U don't have ANY say in who u R surrounded by. I'm thinking that's THE MAJOR COMPONENT of the punishment. U did, while in the streets, HAVE that luxury. U were found GUILTY of abusing that freedom. YYet, u have paid ur debt, ALMOST COMPLETELY, & r almost READY to take those first fateful steps OUTSIDE those bars, NOT behind them. U need/DESERVE, to have a loving, SUPPORTIVE, "Support System" awaiting your reentry into society as a whole, Amesbury by bit!! Not a misguided, disrespectful, somewhat NARCISSISTIC, Female Lover wannabe out here waiting for ur Even behind those bars, and u, thank God,have and NOTHING LESS. I TRULY believe that I am guilt!! 😕 MAJORLY DISRESPECTED U. In a purposeful, ,blatant manner. There is was, ABSOLUTELY NO excuse for my BADASS (lol) s behavior. I really AM TRULY sorry for being disrespectful to you, my friend you my friend❤ I hope and I PRAY that u can forgive me and hopefully, out it where it REALLY belongs, in ur rearview ! FOREVER☺ in case u haven't figured it out yet,my HEART STILL belongs to u, Zach and, MOST OF ALL God. Not necessarily in that order!!❤ (PROBABLY ALWAYS WILL!!💗❤)
My love for you ALWAYS AND FOREVER
Chris❤
Furthermore, in a case like Palmer’s involving a plea bargain, there is no trial record for prosecutors to go on, Covello wrote. As such, they can’t prove whether Palmer actually participated in the killing, was the mastermind, supplied the murder weapon or had intent to injure or kill.
“These facts (or lack thereof) illustrate that (the petition process does) not merely touch ‘incidentally’ on the powers of the court,” Covello wrote. “When a legislature mandates a court to set aside a lawful plea bargain, vacate a 27-year-old judgment, re-adjudicate that controversy under an entirely different legal standard, and then further mandates an unconstitutional process for that re-adjudication, they have arrogated unto themselves the core functions of the court, and materially impaired the proper functioning of the judicial branch of government.”
He added: “If this is not a legislative encroachment upon the authority of the judicial branch in violation of the separation of powers clause of the California Constitution, this court can think of no legislative action that would constitute such an encroachment.”
Kraut said Wednesday that Palmer and his family are very disappointed at the denial of Palmer’s petition but they respect the judge’s ruling.
Kraut added that he intended to file Palmer’s appeal Wednesday afternoon.
Hearings for remaining murder petition cases will continue to be heard throughout the coming months.
Date of this piece was JULY 03, 2019
Hope this is of interest, have a good day, Julia
In April and May, Superior Court Judges Jacquelyn Duffy and Craig van Rooyen — who, like Covello, are former prosecutors with the local DA’s Office — heard arguments in six cases and were the first to weigh in, finding the law constitutional.
In the case of 50-year-old Gerardo Estrada, sentenced to 25 years to life for a 1986 burglary and assault that resulted in the death of an 84-year-old man, van Rooyen called the matter a “complicated issue,” but found that the new law does not prohibit anything authorized by ballot initiatives passed by voters, and that past initiatives did not “freeze” state law related to murder with those initiatives.
In addition to those six cases, two petitions were denied because the judge found the men were the actual killers, and Judge Dodie Harman is expected to make a ruling in three other cases July 10.
One of the 18 petitions was received Tuesday, Dobroth said, but the status of the remaining cases were not immediately available Wednesday.
‘LEGISLATIVE ENCROACHMENT’
But Covello had a different take in his ruling in John Palmer’s case.
John Louise Palmer was 17 years old when he pleaded guilty to second-degree murder in 1992 for the fatal stabbing of his grandmother, 67-year-old Roxana O’Grady, during a burglary at O’Grady’s Cayucos farmhouse on Toro Creek Road.
Palmer and a co-defendant testified that they were burglarizing the house when a third member of their group, 38-year-old transient Frank Krafick, stabbed O’Grady and injured 67-year-old James Negranti, 76, who survived but later died from unrelated health problems.
Palmer, now 44, was sentenced to 15 years to life and was serving time at Mule Creek State Prison in Ione before being transferred to California Men’s Colony to be near local proceedings.
Matthew Kraut, Palmer’s defense attorney who until May 2018 had worked as a prosecutor with the DA’s Office for 20 years, argued in court documents that there was an overwhelming amount of evidence to show that Palmer did not kill his grandmother nor have any reason to believe Krafik would become violent.
Taking on the District Attorney’s argument, Kraut wrote that SB 1437 in no way changes punishments enacted by propositions 7 and 115.
“Simply put, the punishment for murder conviction remains unchanged by the passage of Senate Bill 1437,” Kraut wrote.
But Covello wrote in his ruling that the law does violate the will of the voters in propositions 7 and 115 and the state’s separation of powers by allowing the legislature to interfere with the judiciary.