Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 23, 2017, 02:36:21 PM
75132 Posts in 1768 Topics by 359 Members
Latest Member: nic4real
Home Help Login Register
TalkLeft Discussion Forums  |  Topics  |  Crimes 'R Us: Crimes in the News  |  Current Cases  |  Thirty Years of Serial Framing:Alabama's Answer to Mikre Nifong 0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Thirty Years of Serial Framing:Alabama's Answer to Mikre Nifong  (Read 10335 times)
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Thirty Years of Serial Framing:Alabama's Answer to Mikre Nifong
« on: March 12, 2008, 04:35:35 PM »

   A deadlocked jury today in the murder retrial of Daniel Wade Moore (An unofficial poll by  the town  paper shows 77% of the locals want the case thrown out) has (yet again )cast further lurid light on the thirty year resistable rise  of  Alabama Assistant Attorney General Don Valeska.
   Harsh critiques of Valeska's work have been coming out of Appelate Courts since 1978,but so far it has been(at county level)the judges that have thre courage to stand up to Valeska who go down.
  Take the current Daniel Moore case.Judge Glen Thompson found himself so inflamed by Valeska's presentation at the first trial that he overrode the jury's recommendation  for mercy and gave Moore a death sentence.Judge Thompson's  fury can be imagined when he found Valeska had lied to both the court and the jury concerning near a dozen pieces of exculpatory evidence  which he was(as is his wont) concealing from the defense.
  When the Judge,irrespective of any embarrassment he might suffer ,had the courage to overturn his previous erroneous verdict, Valeska not only  refused  to remove himself as prosecutor but demanded the appelate court remove the Judge. Which it accordingly did,while allowing Valeska to continue on his long,merry, path of witness tampering,intimidation and suppression of documents.
   This case is particularly outrageous as there are many apparent reasons for believing that Valeska has (twice to date)vouched for  the least improbable suspect as a State's witness  and has,whenever possible, concealed  evidence unfavorable to  this  individual throughout eight years of investigation.(I am not prejudging guilt but, graned that  Moore was logically twice triable on the available evidence, the other prime suspect could equally well be tried on a different interpretation of that same evidence.)
   Valeska is at this game since 1972  and,as noted above,has been receiving harsh reprimends
since 1978 without any effect whatsoever.In 1997 when he and other Alabama prosecutors brought a bogus prosecution against Tieco Inc. at the instigation of a rival  business firm,Judge James Garrett(Jefferson County,Alabama, Circuit Court) found ,"The misconduct[of the prosecutors] in this case far surpasses in both extensiveness and measure the totality of any prosecutorial misconduct ever previously presented or witnessed by this court."
   In 1999 a federal jury found that the Tieco prosecution was "a civil conspiracy with the office of the Attorney General of Alabama to unlawfully use the criminal process against defendant Tieco."
  Nevertheless  Alabama did not see fit to censure its Attorney General nor,certainly,
Assistant Attorney General Valeska,who has served the desires of six successive masters as faithfully as Tallyrand served five successive governments of France.
  In  1990,some brave souls(whom I have been unable to identify) did institute a disciplinary proceeding againt Valeska before the State Bar;but when Valeska immediately counter-sued the Bar the prosecution was quickly dropped without a hearing.
   The site below lists six additional cases since 1985(three of them involving death sentences) where  Pulaski has allegedly  indulged in  equally barbarous behavior to obtain convictions.It is impossible for the present writer to verify all this on the basis currently available on the Web,however,we can certainly say that  the joint murder convictions which Valeska obtained against Eddie Hunt and Grady Gibson in the later eighties give every indication of being as rotten and malignant a prosecution as Nifong launched in Durham.Gibson is still incarcerated and it is not impossible that further affirmative action can be lauched on his behalf.
   His case is certainly deserves  the attention of any reader at this site.
      On the larger issue of defanging  Valeska and giving him the Nifong treatment,we are along way off.Still,for the first time in his career,he is facing a grass roots rebellion in the Moore case.The people are standing by their own Judge and are clearly saying(at least for the day) "Of two possible alternative murderers,you, Valeska have chosen to prosecute the wrong man,squander our meagre funds, and hold our community in a state of perpetual turmoil for eight long years!"
   Will Valeska,for the first time ever, quietly fold  his tent and  slink back to the State House?Or will his pride,like Nifong's, drive him to yet another Moore prosecution in the face of popular wrath.If so,he may,just possibly,at last face a Waterloo.

Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Thirty Years of Serial Framing:Alabama's Answer to Mikre Nifong
« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2008, 05:00:36 PM »

   Here is the link:

   Google "Don Valeska" and you will find dozens of similar allegations.
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Thirty Years of Serial Framing:Alabama's Answer to Mikre Nifong
« Reply #2 on: March 20, 2008, 05:05:55 PM »

  Here is a statement from Juror No.2 in the Moore case which has not otherwise been picked up by the web. It was printed on the little noted  Eyes for Lies.com

I was a juror on the 2nd trial. I'm only responding to the comments in random order as I'm reading all these posts for the first time just now:

The lone paver, Martin Scott Lang, would not identify DWM. Lang was seen alone at the Tipton house just after noon. And his cliam to see a man like him came a long time after the killing. Lang has a history of violence, quit without notice days after the murder, fled to Colorado, was described as a ladies many by the hotel staff, and had a hotel safe full of items.

The DNA statistic is of a RANDOM person belonging to this hair. Were talking NY, CA... People in this area do not move as much and therefore DNA would be more likely to match. DNA does not tell time.

Daniel DID NOT CONFESS to the murder. The fact that she was stabbed in the heart & throat was in the media that week. Daniel also never said he killed her and that the person he was with killed her downstairs. She was killed upstairs, but the media reported downstairs. If Daniel killed her, he would have said upstairs. There is more to this too...

To say only Daniel could have committed this crime is ignorant.

Tipton was angry at his wife, he told her "not just no, but hell no" in response to her spouse swap offer with his best friend Mike Ezell. Mike never took the stand and was ignored by police. Ezell had a scratch on his face at the funeral.

Karen was accessing the gay porn sites Dr Tipton visited the morning of her death.

Daniels DNA matched 5 of the 1600 people in the Reliagene database. Does that mean there are 5 killers?

Daniel was working, going to school and went to AA. He has no history of violence, breaking and entering and was a coward when confronted.

David Tipton was more unemotional than Daniel, and his testimony was very scripted.

The pharmacists phone records were not provided. There are 2 phones in Dr Tiptons office. Only 1 was provided showing a 2 minute call to the pharmacist. The secretary could call in prescriptions. The pharmasist said he had a 15 minute conversation with Dr Tipton. 2 witnesses saw Dr Tipton come home 1 1/2 - 2 hours before he said he was home.

Tiptons partner had not seen Dr Tipton after lunch. Only his assistant says he was there. Dr Tiptons last appointment at 3 was never proved.

I talked to a Juror on the 1st trial today. He said they were 8-4 not guilty, but were sequestered for 3 weeks and wanted to leave = guilty.

Dr Tipton had secrets, we saw some of them.

Dr Tipton was also allowed home (back to the crime scene) that night (early morning). If he killed her, he had plenty of time to take care of evidence.

Dr Tipton could commit this murder. Mothers have drown their own children.

The witness who claimed to see Karen at 3:30 was almost disregarded in our deliberation. She could have been Karens neighbor since their mailboxes were close.

If Daniel was so drug crazed, why would Karen let him in? There is NO sign of breaking and entering. There was also no sign of struggle or pilfering the house for theft. 2 rings and a watch were left on Karen. The jewelry was not reported missing until a week later. Other jewelry that was just lying on tables was not taken.

The security system DWM worked on was in their bedroom, a possible reason his DNA could be there.

We heard the 911 call twice. Tipton was breathing heavily, but calm. He was concerned that his kids were not picked up from school, but never mentioned the possibility of them being taken/kidnapped.

Daniels drug dealer said he would never take a used camcorder.

The murderer made Karen suffer while stabbing her.

DWM had been to 100 homes to install/fix security systems. The Tiptons house is miles out of his way from his apartment to Decatur courthouse where he made a payment that morning. DWN did not have to take the alarm pad off the wall, he knew the code to disable it.

No marijuana was growing. There many bags of it in a larger bag in the 3rd floor closet.

The police were totally on Dr T's side. One said the shower was dry, the other droplets on the floor. All the evidence we wanted to see was destroyed or missing by the police.

The Chances still live next door. They saw the paver Lang go behind the house alone after lunch. They also was Dr T's truck come home earlier than 3:30 when Dr T was supposedly at work.

We only wanted transcripts of Daniels testimony form the 1st trial read by the prosecution in this trial.

I too am most sorry for the Tiptons kids. I had to look them in the eye many times per day. They looked tired and sad. They are the most innocent.
Juror #2 | Email | Homepage | 03.13.08 - 10:37 pm | #
  Jurors from the first trial ,at which Moore was convicted, have now stated that they were also eight to four for acquittal but were worn down by the adament  minority.
  The first judge, who sentenced Moore to death now believes that he is innocent,and has repeatedly charged that he was conned into a death sentence by Prosecutor Valenza's outrageous misrepresentations.
  Vallenza,however,is still ,after nine years,refusing to allow more bail and says he will get a death sentence  no matter how long it takes (or how much it costs the taxpayers).
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Thirty Years of Serial Framing:Alabama's Answer to Mikre Nifong
« Reply #3 on: March 28, 2008, 04:38:48 PM »

   More observations from Daniel Moore's Juror 2.

Hind sight is 20/20 and the police say they would have done some things different now.

In my opinion, the 4 jurors who voted guilty did focus only on the DNA. They say they considered other evidence. But, for example, one chose to believe Dr T office assistant alibi 100% and blew off the 2 witnesses seeing Dr T come home early. And believed DWM was a liar, but told the truth about being in her house that day.

We ranged in age form about just under 40 to late 60's. 2 of the alternates were in their mid 20's.

The social fact that David Tipton was a doctor and Daniel was a drug addict was discussed and the possible weight it carried by the police.

The police said they would not arrest Dr T for his drugs because his wife was just killed. 2 things about that: 1) Dr T was their main suspect (yet was allowed to go home & tamper that night/morning). 2) This is a rumor, but it was said that the lead investigator and Dr T were friends before the murder.

Daniel's mom smiled every time we walked by. But when the mistrial was given, she looked devastated (as well as everyone else, except the reporters). DWM and Dr T never showed emotion until then.

I don't think the judge was leaning toward guilty. He stressed 2 or 3 times during our deliberation not to focus on 1 thing (DNA). Which is pretty much exactly what the guilty jurors did.

This trial is the only one I have ever been on. I was 100% into it. People ask did you enjoy it. It was an amazing experience and privileged to experience it. I am very disappointed we could not end it and feel like it was all for nothing. We did not enjoy it. When the 5 alternates were announced, we all hoped we were an alternate. Before we went home March 12th, many of us jurors cried.
Juror #2 | Email | Homepage | 03.14.08 - 9:42 pm | #


The FBI "notes" stated Karen was having up to 3 affairs: Mike Ezell, Davids ex-girlfriends husband and an ex-college friend or teacher (I cant remember). 1 source may have been from Karens sister. Also, the neighbor across the street saw Mike Ezells truck visit often. Mike emailed Karen about swapping and she asked David about it. Dr T's AOL screen name also suggested he was a swinger.

It was said that no semen found is common in a sexual assault (not rape). Vaginal and anal swabs were taken, but were not tested.

I believe she knew her attacker, therefore did not run out the front door. Instead she went upstairs to clean up the blood from her blunt injuries (punched in the nose/face).

The paver should have seen someone and, in many of our minds, could be the killer himself. Scott Lang was quickly dismissed by police, and all notes on him are gone.

So many thing are not right. How some could conclude guilty is being unreasonable.

Could the police convict someone else at this point? It would make them look real bad and give the city no confidence in them.

The media will take 1 minor item and make it into a big deal.

It was heavily argued about why Daniel would pick this house of the 100's he worked on alarms at, a house that was out of his way home and had people outside working. Woods surround the house and the road has no shoulder. Daniel would have to park in somenoes driveway or walk 1/2 mile through woods (while on drugs).

Unlike Scott Lang, Daniel had no history of violence or braking and entering a home.

The drug dealer said he would only take NEW camcorders, not used.

Too many things dont add up, how could one say guilty?

A number of the people recently involved are now googling down Valeska's past prosecutorial record and find themselves doubly relieved that there was no conviction.
At present it is simply impossible for the blogger to investigate all the conceivable prosecutorial misconduct in which this character has(not implausably ) and (if not heavily censured) will continue to indulge.

PS. Sorry about  the typos for "more" and Valenza in the 2d post. One of those situations where I had to close down the machine in the next thirty seconds.
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Thirty Years of Serial Framing:Alabama's Answer to Mikre Nifong
« Reply #4 on: July 10, 2008, 02:22:05 PM »

   Daniel Moore,after nine years imprisonment,was released on $150,000 bail pending a third trial.It is tentatively set for April 13,2009.The low bail seems a clear indication that presiding Judge Steve Haddock like the first judge and eight out of twelve jury members at the second Moore trial are decidedly under impressed by the prosecutorial methods and,possibly, by the quality of the "exculpatory" alibi evidence offered by the husband,Dr.David Tipton.
   Tipton recently  further damaged his credibility by posting a series of hysterical rants written entirely in capitals to rebut the observations of Juror Number 2 published above.As these communications  contain numerous personal allegations against  the jurors and numerous misrepresentations of points which were already stated correctly by Juror 2, we are not republishing them here but they may be fouund at the above web site.
   Judge Haddock(who actually protected Tipton by excluding from evidence huge amounts of pornography and homosexual material downloaded on his computor) will probably be the subject of similar communications before long.The doctor and the prosecutor seem to be deliberately trying to prejudice their own case before the local judiciary in hopes of forcing the judges to transfer the case to another county.
   Highly unofficial news polls show that over seventy-five per cent of the locals want the case thrown out and only about four per cent are convinced of Moore's guilt.So we have the rare spectacle of a prosecution trying to get itself thrown out of its own county.

  Judge Steve Haddock granted Moore bail of $150,000 and tentatively set the new trial date for April 13, 2009.
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Thirty Years of Serial Framing:Alabama's Answer to Mikre Nifong
« Reply #5 on: February 20, 2009, 04:58:37 PM »

   On February 5th,Daniel Wade Moore,after ten years, was cleared of all charges in the murder of Karen Tipton by the same judge who once opted to send him to his death.The judge specifically cited the deceitful conduct of Prosecutor Don Valeska as among the primary reasons for not trying Moore a third time.
   A second jury had deadlocked 8-4 for acquittal.More recently members of the first jury have revealed that they also were deadlocked 8-4 for acquittal but were pressured by a vehement minority into convicting.They join in congratullating Daniel on his narrow escape:
       SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2005 

Judge's decision sets Moore free
Conduct of prosecutor, officer cited

By Sheryl Marsh
DAILY Staff Writer
smarsh@decaturdaily.com ? 340-2437

Judge Glenn Thompson, saying prosecutors and police defied his orders to share evidence, freed the man he once sentenced to death in the murder of Karen Tipton.

DAILY Photo by Dan Henry
Daniel Wade Moore, center, at the Hanceville Police Department with his stepfather, Gordon Byrd, right. 
Daniel Wade Moore walked out of the Morgan County Jail on Friday evening, clear of capital murder charges in Tipton's March 12, 1999, stabbing death at her home on Chapel Hill Road Southwest in Decatur.

Unless the state can successfully appeal Friday's ruling, Moore will not stand trial again.

But Moore was not free to go right away. From Decatur, he was taken to the Hanceville City Jail to face a misdemeanor charge from 1999.

Hanceville released him about 7 p.m. after his family paid a $355 fine for a worthless check, according to his attorney, Sherman Powell Jr.

Thompson, who presided over Moore's trial in Morgan County Circuit Court, said another trial would place him in "double jeopardy."

Thompson's 17-page ruling criticized Assistant Attorney General Don Valeska, who tried the case, and Decatur police Sgt. Michael Pettey, who assisted in the investigation.

"When Assistant Attorney General Don Valeska and Investigator Mike Pettey willfully defied this court's orders they chose to defy justice," Thompson wrote.

A jury convicted Moore in November 2002 of capital murder, and Thompson sentenced him to death. But he later overturned the conviction and sentence, granting Moore a new trial. Friday's ruling is in response to a year-old motion to dismiss filed by Powell and co-counsel Catherine Halbrooks.

The ruling

"The double jeopardy clause (of the U.S. Constitution) protects a criminal defendant's interest in a single, fair adjudication of his guilt or innocence," Thompson wrote. "When the lack of fairness is intentionally caused by the government's overreaching and misconduct, the defendant is entitled to the protections of the constitutions of the United States and the state of Alabama. . . .

"The prosecution had its opportunity to place Daniel Wade Moore on trial, and they squandered that right."

Thompson said Valeska and Pettey denied the existence of evidence, including FBI documents, that might have cleared Moore — evidence to which the defense was entitled.

Thompson said when he questioned Valeska about an FBI report during a hearing in October 2002, he stated, "There ain't no such thing as an FBI report."

"All of the material in question here passed through the hands of the investigators for the Decatur Police Department or the Assistant Attorney General Don Valeska and should have been provided to the defense as ordered by this court," Thompson continued.

Thompson also mentioned statements from people whom police and prosecutors questioned.

He said DNA evidence did not rule out other potential suspects. "In fact, the trial of the defendant was based almost entirely on circumstantial evidence. There is no direct evidence linking the defendant to the scene of the crime."

Chief backs investigation

Decatur Police Chief Joel Gilliam said he was not aware of the judge's ruling, but stood behind the investigation.

"It was before the court, and we disposed of the case," Gilliam said. ". . . We feel our investigation was based on the evidence. It was up to the court and the district attorney to take it from there."

Gilliam said it would be up to the state to reopen the case.

A spokeswoman for the attorney general's office said no one was available for comment.

Powell said the state could file a petition with the state Court of Criminal Appeals claiming that the judge made a mistake in his ruling and ask for its review.

Moore, who has been in jail for 4? years for Tipton's death, appeared to be happy to leave the county jail Friday.

"I'm glad this is over. The truth is finally out, so it's over with now," Moore told reporters as he got into a Hanceville police vehicle.

Powell said he's elated about Moore's freedom and he knew the judge would make the right decision.

"It's what we said all along: If we had the evidence that was withheld, we would've gotten an acquittal at trial," Powell said. "A lot of work and research went into the judge's ruling. It's something you couldn't do in a jury. I think justice has been done."

Moore's mother, Virginia Byrd, his stepfather, Gordon Byrd, and other relatives took him out to eat after his release from jail in Hanceville.

"This was so sudden that we didn't have anything planned," Virginia Byrd said.

Attempts to reach the victim's husband, Dr. David Tipton, were unsuccessful. An acquaintance of the family said the psychiatrist and his daughters have moved to another state.

     Unfortunately(see above),Daniel is not the only victim of Valeska's overzealous prosecutions.
I fear we shall have occasion ( and perhaps more than once)  to return to this reprehensible attorney's activities on some future occasion(I hope Alabama didn't utilize him in the Tommy Arthur Case.)


Sydney Carton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577

Re: Thirty Years of Serial Framing:Alabama's Answer to Mikre Nifong
« Reply #6 on: February 20, 2009, 05:55:31 PM »

   This is from an Alamama legal site shortly after the reversal. But Valeska is still with us!
Oops.So, Would This Count As Desecrating The Flag? »“A Minister of Justice”
That is how Alabama’s Rules of Professional Conduct describe the office of prosecutor. Here is another high minded description:

The United States Attorney is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape nor innocence suffer. He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor—indeed, he should do so. But, while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one.

Troy King succinctly states:

Prosecutors do not want someone held responsible for the crime; they want the criminal held responsible for the crime.

Now let us turn to the recently decided case State of Alabama v. Moore. (No link, because Alabama decisions are not available on the web, but if you have Westlaw access, the cite is 2006 WL 2035664). In that case, the following occured:

During the discovery phase of this trial, counsel for the Defendant made repeated requests for copies of statements and other documents in the possession of agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Court ordered the prosecutor and the investigators to provide the Defendant’s attorney with copies of all documents in their possession of whatever kind relating to the murder of Karen Croft Tipton. Repeatedly, Investigator Mike Pettey and Prosecutors, Don Valeska and William Dill, denied the very existence of any reports or documents prepared or generated by agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Court believed those representations made by the prosecution and took no further action to require the prosecution to produce the requested documents. This was done over the strenuous objections of counsel for the Defendant.

After the Defendant was tried and convicted, Don Valeska produced to the Court a copy of a five page document that was faxed to him from the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Court then learned that Mr. Valeska had actual knowledge of this document prior to his fervent denial that any such documents or reports existed. . . .

Investigator Mike Pettey told Don Valeska prior to the trial of the case that he had sent questionnaires to various people connected to the case, had them fill out the questionnaires; and sent the information back to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. None of these materials were ever provided to the Defendant. Mr. Valeska did nothing prior to the commencement of the trial on November 4, 2002, to get a copy of this information from the Federal Bureau of Investigation or furnish it to the defense or inform the Court that he had discovered the documents existed.

“On October 30, 2002, the Court had hearings on motions filed by the defense requesting copies of information about an alleged Federal Bureau of Investigation report. On October 30, 2002, when questioned specifically by the Court regarding a Federal Bureau of Investigation report, Assistant Attorney General Don Valeska, said to the Court, ‘There ain’t no such thing as an FBI report.’

So Don Valeska, who is an Assistant Attorney General in Troy King’s office, lied to the court. In addition to the ideals I’ve quoted already, the Rules of Professional Conduct also have this to say:

A lawyer shall not knowingly make a false statement of material fact or law to a tribunal.

We don’t need rules to know lying is wrong, but it is worse when a prosecutor does it, because prosecutors hold peoples lives in their hands. Mr. Moore was on trial for capital murder. The case was entirely circumstantial. The evidence concealed by Don Valeska undercut some of the state’s arguments. By lying to cover it up, Don Valeska tried to conceal the truth. He wanted a conviction, justice be damned.

In response to this despicable conduct, the trial court dismissed the case. The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the dismissal and remanded for a new trial. That is probably the correct result. Don Valeska needs to be punished for his actions. But dismissing the case harms many more people than Don Valeska.

My suggestion? Disbarment. This man ought not to be practicing law.

If that is too much, then at the least Don Valeska ought to lose his current job. His actions have humiliated our profession, his office and the state. Never mind the additional costs of a new trial. If Troy King had any integrity whatsoever, Don Valeska would no longer work for his office, never mind continuing to work in his current position as Chief of the Violent Crimes Division.
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Advertise Here