A Commentary Based On My Coverage Into The Shannon Nyamodi Human Rights Case

This article is dedicated to young Shannon Zacharia Nyamodi who is being unlawfully held captive in a Franklin County, North Carolina jail for crimes he didn’t commit. Happy 20th Birthday young lion. Stay strong, an army is forming!

— The People’s Champion

Franklin County North Carolina Sheriff Jerry Jones and Assistant District Attorney Annette Sellers both probably retire to the comforts of their homes every night, while criminal defendants they are charged with bringing to justice live in caged jail cells, without liberties enjoyed by free citizens within the American society. They are tasked with the difficulties that come with a winless, thankless job, and there can be no dispute that their obligation benefits the people in the name of public safety. They are also entrusted with such authority that must be executed with the highest degree of integrity, but when such powerful public officials betray the people’s trust through corruption, conspiracy, and criminal behavior more heinous than for which they have tried and convicted criminal defendants, they must also be dealt a severe swift hand of justice as well.

When I was initially requested to assist young Shannon Nyamodi in his quest to gain his freedom from criminal charges alleging that he shot a woman in the face at point blank range and robbed her of tens of thousands of dollars from her home, I had no idea that I would actually be embarking upon perhaps one of the greatest human rights cases, and miscarriages of justice that I have ever encountered. The official record in the case made public are both shocking, and extremely disturbing as a man’s life has essentially been snatched from under his feet while he languishes in a jail cell for a crime where a volume of evidence exist indicating that he is innocent. In fact, there is sufficient information obtained by TPC establishing that Shannon Nyamodi has actually been framed in this criminal case.

False charges, suppression of exculpatory evidence, and forgery of official court documents all establish as a matter of fact that the Franklin County Sheriff’s Office and the Assistant DA in the case, have extorted, subverted, and covered up the truth to wrongfully convict an innocent man. Rarely do I offer such a perspective on a case which hasn’t been resolved, or hasn’t reached a final disposition, but the case against Shannon Nyamodi is so weak, that I will go on record to disclose details about this criminal case that are very appalling and sickening.

The Frame Up

TPC has already disclosed actual police records and official court documents about the case in previously published articles, but there is more to this story than the police and news media has made the public aware of. The case file has increasingly grown suspicious in the sixteen months since the crime actually occurred. Police reports depicting witness accounts are missing, or never existed, and other material have some how simply vanished from the Franklin County courthouse. For instance, after police secured the scene on Shearin Court the night of the crime, they took several statements from witnesses who described a white male fleeing from the scene. Also, members of the Young family who came to the victim’s aid when she ran to their home after being shot, gave police statements that may exonerate Shannon Nyamodi from being the assailant in the crime. Shannon, the victim’s minor daughter, and other residents on Shearin Court all describe a white man running from the scene.

Police officials from the Youngsville Police Department and the Franklin County Sheriffs Office interviewed several people who were there that night. One resident’s description of what he saw was so detailed that he even showed police the direction and path the assailant actually ran. Assuming that officers from both agencies utilize the common practice of taking notes while conducting field interviews of potential witnesses in a crime, this documentation which supports their actual reports should exist some where, and unfortunately nothing in the case file indicates who the cops talk to during their investigation. In fact, no reports from sheriff deputy Barrett or any other officer from the Franklin County Sheriff’s Office are found in either of the two files created for the Shannon Nyamodi case at the county clerk’s office. More troubling, this strange element of the case raises concern as to how the prosecutor’s office was able to obtain a warrant for Shannon Nyamodi or anyone else for that matter, in this crime without such crucial evidence.

Typically, when police agencies conclude their investigations of a crime, identify a suspect, and seek warrants to bring the individual into custody to face charges they usually provide supporting documentation outlining the evidence compile against the accused (statement of charges). It’s very hard to imagine that any sitting judge would actually issue a warrant for a person’s arrest without compelling or culpable evidence to justify charges against a suspect (that’s just unheard of). Where are these documents? Elizabeth Crudup (Shannon’s mother) has been through both files thoroughly at the county clerk’s office and none of the kind of documentation supporting criminal charges against her son, as I have described are present. Perhaps the strongest indication that something was completely funky in the Shannon Nyamodi case occurred when his mother attempted to obtain the Franklin County sheriff’s office reports related to the case in August of 2012 after her son was taken into custody. The mother was told that the case was an ongoing investigation and no information about the case could be disclosed publicly at that time.

Months later in July of 2013 she made a second inquiry regarding police reports and other documents related to the case, and was simply told she wouldn’t be provided with any records at all. It’s not clear why she was denied the requested documentation considering that such information is public record in the state of North Carolina. We see here, that the wheels of concealment by the sheriff’s office began, and coupled with the mysterious manner by which reports from the FCSO related to this case  apparently having never been made public, signals something is fishy with the agency’s handling of this case. I have even considered that officials were simply being spiteful toward the mother because her son is charged with such a heinous crime, but the reports and supporting documents of the prosecutor’s case aren’t even in the case file at the county clerk’s office. Even more disturbingly though, the clerk’s office doesn’t have a system of accountability which monitors who, when, and why individuals access the clerk’s file system. Anyone with access to the department, like a DA, deputy, or some other unsuspecting court official could have simply worked in, and taken vital records from the file without clerk officials ever even knowing.

Additionally, local news station WRAL broadcasted the bizarre story that Shannon Nyamodi had told a young man “if anything happens, just say I was with you all night.” The funny part about that entire news clip, is that Shannon never hung out with the young man who made those statements on the news, and Sheriff Jones just happened to be standing right next to the young man when he gave the interview to WRAL. This young man also just happens to be the source of of Youngsville police Lt. Little’s CI (confidential informant) report, which allegedly outlined the murder for hire plot.  He is also the brother of the man citizens within the community are saying actually committed the crime. WRAL also broadcast that cops had discovery evidence containing text messages between the victim’s daughter and Shannon Nyamodi discussing their plot to commit the crime. Shannon didn’t own a cell phone, and those alleged text cops say they discovered are also not included in the case file.

Now if the District Attorney’s office has such a strong case against Shannon Nyamodi, why on earth would any one knowingly remove crucial documents from a criminal case file, and all why knowing they could potentially lose their job or be charged with a crime? Did the sheriff’s office ever possess police reports outlining investigative findings sufficiently strong enough to justify criminal charges against this youth? I mean the prosecutor even indicted this young man for the crime. Obviously compelling arguments were made by the prosecutor before a judge during a preliminary hearing or an arraignment on the charges for the case to have reached the heights of an actual indictment before a superior court. How did the prosecutor accomplish this without evidence from the cops? Also, why did sheriff Jerry Jones seek criminal charges against Shannon Nyamodi when no supporting reports, documentation, or even a synopsis of the evidence against him aren’t available anywhere publicly, when such documentation is so rudimentary during a criminal process of this magnitude? It appears that someone associated with this case has gone through great lengths to suppress critical records pertaining to this case, while attempting to create the illusion that Shannon Nyamodi is the guilty party of this crime.

Dirty Sheriff Office

The fact that Sheriff Jerry Jones is even in office is simply incredulous. He was actually voted out of office by the county during the last election. Described by some within Franklin County with adjectives I personally care not to mention in this article, Jones was reinstated on an interim basis by the county commissioners, and for some strange reason the planned special election to name a permanent county sheriff was postponed until this year, an event which hasn’t materialized. Sheriff Jones has been a rather peculiar element of the case against Shannon Nyamodi. Rumors have been circulating that the person who actually shot Rhonda McClean in the face is one of his relatives, and it’s believed that he may have quarter backed a conspiracy against an innocent man to save his on relatives from being pinched for the crime and from facing justice in this horrible case. Whether these accusations are correct or not, an objective observer of this case can’t ignore the rather peculiarity of his department’s missing records from the case file at the county clerk’s office.

Common sense tells us that at some point sheriff Jones was made privy to reports by officers in his agency who actually worked the crime scene. Additionally, Jones would have complete knowledge of what discovery evidence had been obtained in the crime. The findings in any testing of potential forensic evidence such as DNA, fingerprints, etc., would have also been brought to his attention, since he is the agency’s highest ranking official, and would have personally sought or authorized the arrest of Shannon Nyamodi. In short, Jones should reasonably have a complete picture to the extent of what culpable or exculpatory evidence exist pertaining to the case of Shannon Nyamodi. His office obviously compelled the DA to charge the youth, which means that Jones believes that Shannon is in fact guilty. So, where are the records his agency submitted to the DA in this case?

It’s quite possible that evidence and reports obtained by deputy Barrett who was the affiant for the FCSO in this case, and that of other FCSO officers who worked the crime scene and investigation, may have contained a volume of exculpatory evidence pointing to Shannon Nyamodi’s innocence, and the files could have been removed from the county clerk’s office for the purpose of concealing the truth about the case, while explaining why the documentation doesn’t exist in the official record. This may also explain why no FCSO deputy was tasked with the actual arrest of Shannon Nyamodi, and a deputy from several towns over was directed by management to unknowingly swear out a false warrant for the youth’s arrest. This can be the only rationalization why FCSO deputies who actually worked the case didn’t swear to Shannon Nyamodi’s Arrest Warrant Application, because doing so may have completely contradicted established reports already submitted by them, causing the officers to knowingly making false statements before a court official which is an act that could have potentially ruined their entire career in law enforcement, and those who orchestrated this conspiracy to convict an innocent man were more than likely mindful that veteran officers would never have agreed to involvement in such a scheme.

So, how did the FCSO sell Shannon Nyamodi’s allege guilt to the District Attorney’s office? With no documentation supporting charges against the youth, why did the DA even pursue the case? The actual statement of charges that usually accompanies an Arrest Warrant Application is even missing from the case file. I can’t even picture FCSO deputy Ralph Almkuist (the arrest warrant complainant) who actually brought Shannon Nyamodi into custody, standing before a judge or court official without any documentation outlining probable cause for his arrest, and walking away with a warrant. Furthermore, sources tell TPC that sheriff Jerry Jones is so unpopular within the FCSO agency, that he doesn’t have enough power of persuasion to compel veteran deputies who actually worked the crime scene, to alter their investigative findings, fabricate their reports, or lie in court to obtain fictitious warrants for some one’s arrest. It just makes sense that an inexperience officer would be used for this kind of dirty work. Either the prosecutors and the judges practice an ill advised policy of authorizing criminal charges against people by word of mouth alone, without supporting documents, or some law enforcement official has severely manipulated this entire process.

The fact of the matter is that the FCSO would have been the agency who notified the DA of their investigation determining that Shannon Nyamodi was the perpetrator who committed the crime in the first place. The FCSO is ground zero where the plot to convict young Shannon Nyamodi began. Shannon was charged with a violent crime, a shooting, and the cowardice act of shooting a woman in the face none the less. Police officials are usually fanatical about bringing these kinds of criminals to justice, especially when considering the victim was a white woman, and the assailant was a black man in the south. One would hope that police dotted every “I” and crossed every “T” to insure Shannon was taken off the streets of Franklin County. The youth has continuously maintained and professed his innocence to police authorities. Shannon Nyamodi even volunteered to submit to GSR (gun powder residue) testing, and the FCSO declined to take the youth up on the offer. How crazy is that? What more compelling evidence could police obtain to nail the coffin shut on a cowardice criminal who shoots a woman in the face. No GSR testing has ever been done on this youth. Such a process is standard for most police agencies and it’s simply unbelievable that the FCSO didn’t conduct such testing to determine as fact that Shannon Nyamodi fired a gun that night.

Then of course there is the issue of probable cause for Shannon Nyamodi’s arrest for the crime. The kid never left the scene that night. He even directed the cops to the victim’s location upon their arrival. This hardly seems like somebody who had actually just committed a violent felony crime. Once the scene was secured, police from both agencies had determined that the suspected shooter was no longer at the scene. The search warrant for the home where the crime occurred was executed at 5:48 a.m. the morning the crime occurred. The primary officers on the scene all describe the victim as having stated “some one” (indicating that the person was unknown to her) struck her in the head with a pole. When cops began processing the crime scene, any traditional forensic evidence that they may have obtained could never be linked to Shannon Nyamodi by the time deputy Almkuist had taken him into custody at 3:10 p.m. the same day. Shannon had no prior criminal history which means his fingerprint profile wasn’t in a local or national database used to link known criminal defendants to potential recent crimes. He couldn’t have been linked by DNA either, because it’s highly doubtful that the State Bureau of Investigations (SBI) would have been able to produce testing results in such a short turn around by 3:10 p.m.

Besides, the cops wouldn’t have even been able to compare the youth’s finger prints or DNA to any trace evidence that they may have found from the crime scene until after he was actually locked up, booked, and had such testing conducted on him. When they finger printed the kid it would have been his initial profile of any kind, and DNA samples from Shannon Nyamodi was ordered in a warrant after his arrest. With the victim having communicated to police that her assailant was unknown to her, other witness statements identifying a white mail fleeing the scene, and the obvious lack of potential trace evidence linking Shannon Nyamodi to the crime establishes that the FCSO in fact had no probable cause to arrest him at the time he was taken into custody. Some jurisdictions have enacted laws enabling police to detain potential suspects for 48-72 hours as a person of interest in a case, and the argument may be made that police had obtained culpable discovery evidence against the youth in that time frame. If that’s the case, then where on earth is this evidence?

All of these elements I describe in this case are dynamic and kind of elicits thoughts pertaining to rumors circulating about the possible involvement of sheriff Jerry Jones’ relatives, or either the FCSO is compiled of the most bumbling bunch of idiots that the “Key Stone Cops” have ever produced. I personally believe that sheriff Jones himself is the driving force behind this case that has caused Shannon Nyamodi to lose his freedom for a crime he didn’t commit, and I believe that he should sit in a jail cell just like this kid has been made to do unjustly for such a long time.

Grimey Assistant District Attorney

The night I spoke with Ms. Rhonda McClean (the victim) she told me that Shannon Nyamodi had in fact shot her in the face on the night in question. Her comments hit me like a ton of bricks because I had already thoroughly viewed incident reports from police officers of the Youngsville police department, and realized that I was actually getting a third version of what she had described related to the events of the night she was shot. Confused by what she was saying, I began to challenge her on statements that she had previously made to cops that night. For some unknown reason Ms. McClean began to advise me about a conversation she had with Assistant DA, Annette Sellers (prosecutor handling the Shannon Nyamodi criminal case). According to McClean,  ADA Sellers told her that Elizabeth Crudup wasn’t Shannon Nyamodi’s biological mother, that they had different last names, and that Crudup had actually adopted him from a royal family in Africa. McClean went on to say that the royal family was financing Shannon’s legal expenses because the family wanted to preserve the reputation of the family name, and not have their royal name smeared. I could never determine what bearing this information, truthful or otherwise, had on this criminal case. Why should it even matter who is funding his legal fees when his guilt or innocence should be the focus of the case.

Knowing that the Nyamodi family are indigenous to Kenya, Africa, and that the sovereign nation doesn’t have a monarch government, I hesitated to even mention the bizarre statements to Shannon’s mother. When Elizabeth Crudup and I eventually did have that discussion, I learned that ADA Sellers is quite capable of making such fabricated comments, and I’ll get into that in more detail later in the article. The other weird statement that McClean made during our conversation, is implicating Michael Young as an accomplice to the shooting that night. McClean told me that Michael had entered her home and accosted her 13 year old daughter who has down syndrome, in her room while covering her mouth with his hand, and placing a screwdriver/flashlight in her back. When McClean fled her home the night she got shot and ran to 116 Shearin Court where Michael lives with his family, she actually passed several other homes on the way, and it’s simply amazing that she has developed such a detailed memory after all this time.

My dialogue with Rhonda McClean became even more bizarre (if you can even imagine that) as she went on to say that she had forgiven Shannon for what he did, wanted him to be able to go on with his life, and has asked the prosecutor to make a deal with him. That’s when the warning lights came on and allowed me to see through her story. The woman apparently was completely unaware that I had already obtained a volume of information pertaining to her troubled home. The fact that her own daughter was involved in such a violent act against her speaks volumes related to the level of dysfunction within her family. I wasn’t buying the “I am a forgiving christian” song and dance story she had told me. TPC has been advised that police reports once existed (unconfirmed) outlining her statements conveying that Shannon Nyamodi wasn’t the person who shot her. It doesn’t take “rocket science” to conclude that there is probably tremendous credibility in the belief that such reports were written, because the report of YPO Lt. Little, and the search warrant affidavit submitted by FCSO Captain Mitchell both indicate that McClean didn’t know who had shot her that night.

McClean’s ability to remember the events of that night and can now name the perpetrator is very puzzling to say the least. However, I believe there is a method to all of this madness. ADA Sellers probably did pitch the bogus “royal family” story to Rhonda McClean with hopes she would take the bait and go after Shannon Nyamodi also, for monetary gain that she could acquire from a civil suit if the youth was convicted of the crime. McClean’s strange implication of Michael Young also raises suspicion that she may have brokered some kind of deal with the DA’s office as a trade off on her daughter’s (who was allegedly convicted for her role in the shooting crime) case. The psychology of lawyer tactics are a sure bet that Sellers already knows that McClean will draw sympathy from jurors at trial, and if she can be utilized to testify in court implicating Michael Young, then she has created potential credibility issues for Michael at trial. Michael Young and his family support Shannon Nyamodi’s innocence, and McClean may have been manipulated by ADA Sellers to change her story to customize a theory which would negate Shannon Nyamodi and his strongest alli at trial. Why else would McClean go on record with police officers who are professionally trained to observe and report, giving statements of Shannon Nyamodi’s innocence, and then turn around and implicate him later. Also, the police are very familiar with McClean’s home because of the criminal history some of her own children have. Who knows what else the cops found other than what they reported, and ADA Sellers may have used that leverage to scare the bejesus out of her, and threatened her with jail time if she doesn’t cooperate.

Far fetched? I think not, and I’ve only just began to get started with this prosecutor. Why on earth does the District Attorney even have a case file against Shannon Nyamodi when no documents supporting criminal charges against him even exist within the official record at the county clerk’s office? The documents on file only show what has been done to get to this point in the case. No real evidence supporting their case exist in the file, if it does exist where is it or who has it? The documents in the Shannon Nyamodi case file couldn’t convict a person who was guilty as sin, because no evidence is in the file record. I keep saying that over and over again, and it’s just insane that Shannon Nyamodi has been locked up all this time over these trumped up charges. Now we know why ADA Sellers has been relentlessly making certain this defendant’s case doesn’t go to trial. The arrest warrant statement of charges, trace evidence findings, and supporting police investigative reports are all missing from the file allegedly justifying charges against Shannon Nyamodi.

The talk around Franklin County is that ADA Sellers is a cocky, arrogant prosecutor, with strong ambition to move up the ladder in North Carolina’s political arena. Her hanging prosecutor style some say, make her capable of doing anything to achieve her objectives. Her ability to keep a man locked up when she is well aware and knows for a fact that critical documents and other evidence necessary to assist her in successfully prosecuting her case doesn’t exist, in my mind makes her a despicable person, and a heartless sub human being. I am not being cynical or harsh for the purpose of bashing the prosecutors office, but the DA’s office has been in control the entire time. ADA sellers or DA Sam Currin could have demanded the records be turned over, or could have dropped the case altogether. The failure of prosecutors to take any action whatsoever, points to their possible direct complicity in the suppression of evidence in the criminal case against young Shannon Nyamodi. Between the sheriff’s office and the DA, they have had over sixteen months to come up with supporting documentation that indicates they were justified in charging this young defendant. Clearly, what ever evidence that was retrieved from the investigation into this crime, some official between the two agencies has hindered the records from being made public. I believe that the tax paying citizens of Franklin County would agree that they are entitled to more efficient representation than this from their public officials.

The Funny Paperwork In The Case

ADA Sellers has requested continuance after continuance in Shannon Nyamodi’s case. Surprisingly, the court has repeatedly granted these request despite any real authentic cause for the case being classified as exceptional having been placed on the record. Sellers has given frivolous justification for constantly continuing the case, all along while spewing absolute venum about Shannon Nyamodi, calling him “a vagabond on the streets,” and making other off color comments all for the purpose of developing a harsh outlook on the defendant within the legal community,when in fact Shannon Nyamodi has never had any prior brushes with the law. ADA Sellers actions have not gone unnoticed, which brings me to my perspective on some of the rather peculiar paperwork that is available within the case file. I’m no forensic document examiner, but my practical experience of verifying credentials in my professional career makes me qualified to call into question the manner in which official documents were composed. In this case there are two documents in particular that jumps right out at me. Firstly, the “special letter” as it has been dubbed by the legal community in Franklin County, that Judge Hight allegedly signed granting a motion to classify Shannon Nyamodi’s case as exceptional, and allowing it to be taken completely off of the court’s management system docket altogether, “until such time as it is place back on the docket by the District Attorney.” Why a superior court judge would give a prosecutor such broad discretion regarding the expediency of a criminal case with out establishing good cause on the record, is incomprehensible.

The root of my issue with the document is the manner in which it was composed. It contains typed print and handwriting, a characteristic seldomly seen in an official document before the courts. It’s just unprofessional, appear to have been composed in a haste, and I question whether the document is even an authentic order issued by judge Hight, solely because of the abnormality of an official document of this nature for a criminal case containing handwritten and printed composition. Obviously, it appears to be a preprinted form of some kind that was simply filled out by the author of the document. My perspective is supported by the fact that Hight apparently even entered his name in handwriting under his signature. Judges have secretaries and clerical assistants for these task. Maybe Hight did or didn’t compose this motion order, but it’s strange that none of the orders or decisions by other judges associated with this case have submitted official documents which contain such unprofessional composition traits. See for yourself below:

Unless judge Hight just simply had a bad day when he signed this order, he is experienced enough to know he shouldn’t give the prosecutor such leverage or a tactical advantage of this extent to a prosecutor. He should reasonably know that such an order is unfair to a criminal defendant, and at some level his order will almost certainly be overturned on an appeal by a higher court. I doubt that Hight achieved his current position in public service without knowing a continuance of any kind in a criminal case must contain some timetable establishing when the case would be prosecuted, if for no other reason but to protect a defendant’s right to fairness, due process under the law, and their constitutional right to a speedy trial. That’s why there is growing suspicion questioning whether Hight even issued the order taking the case off the docket in the first place. Taking a court case off the docket while the defendant is remanded to custody without pending charges is so irregular and unheard of, that lawyers consulting TPC related to this case have repeatedly asked if the charges were actually dropped against Shannon Nyamodi (hell even the FBI asked Elizabeth Crudup if the charges were dropped), which is typically the disposition when a case is removed from a court docket. It’s just a no brainer that judge Hight more than likely wouldn’t have preprinted forms in his chambers for the purpose of taken criminal cases off the docket. This is a prosecutor’s practice and may lift the cover completely off of a disturbing culture which reveals officials from the DA’s office, habitually attempting to conceal court cases they knowingly are aware of that sufficient evidence doesn’t exist to prosecute a defendant, like in the Shannon Nyamodi case. Why hasn’t the DA resolved this case when no actual evidence against Shannon Nyamodi has been made public.

The other “funny paperwork” that drew my immediate scrutiny is the Search Warrant Affidavit that FCSO Captain Mitchell submitted seeking a warrant to gather evidence from Shannon’s home and his person. Knowing the basic common knowledge cops possess pertaining to this kind of affidavit really creates suspicion that a crime may have actually occurred in Shannon Nyamodi’s case while viewing this particular document. On the search warrant application, Captain Mitchell list 7  Probable Causes to Search Shannon Nyamodis home and to obtain DNA for comparison purposes. Items #5 and #8 are very disturbing to me. Mitchell states in item #5 five that “items of evidentiary value were located and seized. Mitchell also indicates that the items “represent a small sample of the evidence seized which will contain valuable DNA evidence.” This supports my earlier arguments that supporting documents must exist somewhere. Well, where are the DNA testing results, and what did the test disclose? But any way, item #8 is the meat and guts of this entire case.

Item #8 was actually handwritten on the affidavit, and indicates that Shannon Nyamodi has confessed to the crime and admitted to the involvement of his allege codefendant (victim’s daughter). The addendum is also another rare instance seen where an official court document has this kind of composition format (handwriting), and is very problematic for the prosecution for several reasons:

1. Captain Mitchell never included this alteration on the document which indicates that he didn’t have any knowledge that Shannon Nyamodi had confessed to the crime. If Mitchell in fact believed that the youth had admitted to the crime, how is it possible that he omitted such culpable evidence on the affidavit?

2. The author of the handwriting initialed the addendum as what appears to be judge Donald W. Stephens. Why would judge Stephens alter the affidavit when he isn’t seeking the warrant and probably didn’t hear Shannon Nyamodi’s allege confession?

Look at judge Stephens actual signature:

Now look at the handwriting in item #8 as an addendum to the document while noticing the initials to the right:

A very strong argument could be made that the judge’s actual signature and his allege initials are two separate authors, in fact I believe that they are. This would mean that the judge’s initials were forged and cause the entire search warrant, along with evidence acquired, to be thrown out.

3. The handwriting on the application for Shannon Nyamodi’s search warrant and the “strange letter” (motion) ordering the case be taken off the docket, however appear to have been composed by the same author.

4. The addendum with judge Stephens’ allege initials doesn’t have a date imputed on the document and is undetermined when the alteration was actually made. Anyone with access to the file could have simply wrote the addendum on the document after it had already been validated by the clerk’s office.

5. The prosecution’s inability to establish exactly when the addendum was entered, or when the actual confession was made could cause the search warrant obtained to gather DNA from the defendant rendered invalid, and any such evidence acquired as a result of the issuance of the warrant could be thrown out by the courts.

6. The addendum handwriting on the affidavit appears to be composed by the exact same author who composed the motion order removing Shannon Nyamodi’s case off of the docket system.

So what does this all mean as it relate to the funny paperwork? What’s obvious is that we have documents which originated out of two separate judge’s chambers, but appear to have the same handwriting on them, they both are composed in irregular format containing print and written composition, and also critical documents that directly impact the due process rights of the defendant as well as his potential plea to the charges before the court. Very little intelligence is required here to understand that if Shannon Nyamodi has actually confessed to this crime, that the case more than likely would have been resolved and disposed of a long time ago.  When we understand and fully digest the fact that the state has repeatedly conveyed in court that it wants a plea deal, we learn that they are in essence actually showing their hand that they have no confidence in their ability to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Shannon Nyamodi actually committed this crime. The DA’s office has even visited Shannon Nyamodi at the Franklin County jail attempting to elicit a plea deal from him without the presence of his attorney. That’s unheard of and indicates a clear sign of desperation on the DA’s part. So, it makes you wonder who wrote this addendum indicating that he confessed? Where did that information come from? Was it placed on the search warrant application to bolster their case to obtain his DNA samples? If so, where are the testing results from those samples?

Do you see where I’m going here? The prosecutor and the police can say they have this evidence or that evidence all day long, but they will never convict anyone until it’s produced in a court of law by professionals who can testify with certainty what the test results disclose. Captain Mitchell’s entire premise for obtaining the warrant in the first place was for the purpose of comparing the youth’s DNA to what they believe was discovery items evidentiary to the case, and now they want to perpetuate the theory that Shannon Nyamodi committed this crime without any indication that culpable evidence even exist, while court officials were led to believe that evidentiary findings implicating this defendant had been obtained from the crime scene. No one has seen the Franklin County sheriff’s office reports or any other compelling evidence when discovery in the case has already concluded. The handwriting suggesting that a confession had been made in this case compounds the case and is contradictory to the defendant’s consistent position that he hasn’t confess to anything, along with his refusal to admit to something in which he isn’t involved in. The Addendum writing opens a can of worms that underscores some of the shady, illegal, and unlawful tactics that have been utilized by the the DA’s office to wrongfully convict an innocent man. the lack of supporting evidence coupled with the DA’s apparent desperation to acquire a plea deal from this defendant’s, and the handwriting citing the allege confession on an affidavit matching the motion to take the case off the docket points to ADA Sellers being the culprit attempting to manipulate the record in this case.

The funny paperwork with identical handwriting from separate judges, the prosecutor’s strange desire to shelve the case, and the missing supporting documentation justifying probable cause to even arrest this young man, all seemingly establish that covert efforts have been made by those handling the case to obtain a conviction against Shannon Nyamodi at all cost. At the end of the day, ADA Annette Sellers knows what evidence has been obtained, but has refused to met out justice in this case by either taking the case to trial or acknowledging Shannon Nyamodi’s exculpability in this crime. No one is fooled by the missing documents. It’s a clear case of suppression of evidence and I want those responsible sent to prison. Prove me wrong, by giving this young man his day in court, or set him free so he can go on with his life in peace.

To Be Continued ..

The People’s Champion

(Readership objection to the image of Resident Superior Court Judge Hobgood’s image being associated with this article has been taken into consideration by TPC, and has been removed. The image wasn’t intended to draw concern, or challenge this official’s record as a public servant, but rather only to depict his association with the case. Apologies are extended to those whom this matter may have adversely impacted).

His story is reminiscent of the a time when America was at the heights of social discord and civil rights struggles were the greatest challenge to the American people, when states disobeyed established constitutional law by enacting their own set of rules related to the criminal justice system. The life of young Shannon Nyamodi is a clear indication that some states with allegiance to the confederacy remain indignant, defiant, and determined to met out it’s own brand of justice where people of color are concerned, and are simply doing what ever they want pertaining to black defendants in cases of criminal law. The standards in this country dictate that criminal cases should be brought before the courts in the most expedient manner possible, while constitutional law acts as a safeguard holding states accountable through the 6th and 14th amendments, and measuring the manner by which states pay respect to a citizen’s right to due process under the law. The state of North Carolina is a glaring example of a political climate vexed with ideology on government which contrast with the American society from a platform of unfairness and injustice. A more critical observation of the state’s current division from U.S. constitutional allegiance can be seen through it’s pledge, along with other red states, who have threatened to Succeed from the Union over their rejection of the Affordable Health Care Act (“Obama Care”). Many of the arguments publicly offered for such a radical posture appear to stem from the bitterness of some southerners over the country having arrived to the existence of the first sitting black president in the nation’s history. Not to get of topic, but I offer such dissident politics by states like North Carolina to underscore the political climate in old confederate states that willfully circumvent long established constitutional law. Any criminal defendant who is held in detention in this country for over a year without their criminal case having been brought to trial signals a red flag triggering a presumption that the 6th amendment has been violated, and Shannon Nyamodi’s case out of Franklin County, North Carolina is textbook on such a constitutional infringement. Besides a clear violation of federal law in his case, sitting judges have even ignored North Carolina’s own General Statue when making rulings in the Nyamodi case. A “writ of habeas corpus has been filed in superior court twice on the youth’s behalf. On January 6, 2014 his mother Elizabeth Crudup filed the motion before Resident Judge Robert Hobgood, and on February 3, 2014 she filed another habeas at Hobgood’s direction before Honorable Judge R.F. Johnson to challenge the legality of his detention.. Both officials denied the habeas request while citing among other reasons, that the mother doesn’t have any standing to file legal documents on behalf of her son. Their decisions are very perplexing when considering North Carolina’s General Statue which clearly indicates that anyone can legally file such a document on a detained criminal defendant’s behalf. North Carolina General Statue § 17-5.  By whom application is made. Application for the writ may be made either by the party for whose relief it is intended or by any person in his behalf. (1868-9, c. 116, s. 3; Code, s. 1625; Rev., s. 1823; C.S., s. 2207.) Perhaps such a ruling highlighted in both official’s “statements of facts” may simply have been an oversight in one instance, but the law establishes as a matter of fact that the rulings were both inaccurate while interpreting the law when they ruled to dismiss the habeas on separate occasions. NCGS 17-5 even allows for the criminal defendant themselves to file such a document before the courts without the presence of an attorney. So, it’s just rather peculiar that the judges would make the same error interpreting cause for the habeas’ dismissal. The other arguments presented in the decisions are all frivolous on their face, as no statue, case law, or other established legal standing were documented in the dismissals to justify both officials decisions. The officials also cite court dates which Shannon Nyamodi was purportedly suppose to have had, but he was never even transported to the courthouse, and his attorney has never appeared on these dates.  In each instance, at the very least the judges should have raised issue with the premise for such an extended continuance in the case and the absence of the defense counsel. The failure of both judges to pay respect to the defendant’s right to a speedy trial under federal law aids the continuing unlawful detention of Shannon Nyamodi while violating his constitutional rights. NCGS also outlines when a habeas shall be denied, and clearly nothing in the law is applicable in this case prohibiting the mother of the defendant from prosecuting the habeas on Shannon Nyamodi’s behalf: § 17-4.  When application denied. Application to prosecute the writ shall be denied in the following cases: (1)  Where the persons are committed or detained by virtue of process issued by a court of the United States, or a judge thereof, in cases where such courts or judges have exclusive jurisdiction under the laws of the United States, or have acquired exclusive jurisdiction by the commencement of suits in such courts. (2)  Where persons are committed or detained by virtue of the final order, judgment or decree of a competent tribunal of civil or criminal jurisdiction, or by virtue of an execution issued upon such final order, judgment or decree. (3)  Where any person has willfully neglected, for the space of two whole sessions after his imprisonment, to apply for the writ to the superior court of the county in which he may be imprisoned, such person shall not have a habeas corpus in vacation time for his enlargement. (4)  Where no probable ground for relief is shown in the application. (1868-9, c. 116, s. 2; Code, s. 1624; Rev., s. 1822; C.S., s. 2206; 1971, c. 528, s. 1.) Additionally, state law establishes sanctions for court officials who knowingly and willfully deny a writ of habeas corpus without cause. The judge’s “statements of fact” in their decisions notes that the defendant has been indicted by a grand jury, that the courts has legal authority in the mater, and that the motion was being prosecuted without the consent of the defendant’s attorney. All of these factors have no bearing on the legality of Shannon Nyamodi’s detention, when considering the court has failed to prosecute the case within a year prescribed by constitutional law, and the absence of a timetable on record establishing when the case would be prosecuted. Both superior court judges are now each subject to a monetary penalty of $2,500 dollars to the defendant, because they should reasonably have known that the defendant’s constitutional rights were being violated. § 17-10.  Penalty for refusal to grant. If any judge authorized by this Chapter to grant writs of habeas corpus refuses to grant such writ when legally applied for, every such judge shall forfeit to the party aggrieved two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500). (1868-9, c. 116, s. 9; Code, s. 1631; Rev., s. 1828; C.S., s. 2212.) Also, court officials should have been mindful of state law requiring the person for whom the writ application is for, be presented to the courts without delay. Neither judge should have held a hearing or ruled on the habeas without Shannon Nyamodi present before the courts. As a former Corrections Official, I can’t ever recall having witnessed a writ of habeas hearing without the defendant present. It’s just common sense to secure the body of the detainee before the court, if for no other provocation but to determine the actual detention of a criminal defendant. Chapter 17 of North Carolina’s General Statue goes to great length outlining various penalties for non compliance of producing a party entitled in a writ, which even allows for the physical attachment of officers or persons charged with producing the party before the courts. The judges are either incompetent (highly doubtful) or have conveyed a blatant willful disregard for state law, in this case at least, and it’s simply unconscionable that they displayed such ignorance for state law which they are charged to uphold. Furthermore, on January 6, 2014 Judge Robert Hobgood came to the Franklin County courthouse at 8:25 am., filed his decision denying Shannon Nyamodi’s habeas, and left three minutes later at 8:28 a.m. the same day. When the defendant’s mother caught up with him later that morning and met with him in his chambers, he conveyed to her that he agreed with the habeas, encouraged her to have the document brought before another judge on the same matter, and in essence punting the document to one of his colleagues. Hobgood could have reconsidered and changed his ruling. The fact that he didn’t take such course of action demonstrates that he may have been shedding the responsibility because of the controversial nature of the Nyamodi case. Read judge Hobgood’s Habeas Decision below: Please take special note of the allege confession of Shannon Nyamodi that Judge Hobgood refers to in his decision which is indicated on a search warrant affidavit for the home where the crime occurred. The allege confession is listed as the 8th item in a handwritten addendum format, and the initials appear to be that of the judge who granted the warrant. This draws suspicion for the following reasons. 1. The judge’s alteration of the document is improper if he in fact wrote the addendum, and this would have had to mean that he actually heard the confession. Totally improper if a judge with the potential of being assigned to hear the case of a criminal defendant was present during police investigative interviews with the defendant. 2. It would mean that Captain Mitchell actually forgot to include the most compelling evidence establishing guilt of the defendant in his affidavit (highly doubtful), meaning someone decided to include the 8th item after Captain Mitchell had already composed the warrant affidavit. 3. Captain Mitchell wouldn’t have had to list the defendant’s allege confession in The Facts to Support a Search warrant affidavit, because the crime scene, statements from the victim, the victim’s severe injury, and witnesses were already probable cause to establish a serious crime had occurred sufficient to obtain a search warrant. 4. The defendant (Shannon Nyamodi) has always maintained his innocence and denies ever making a confession to police. View the mysterious hand written addendum with the judges allege initials below:

The suspicious handwritten addendum which alleges that Shannon Nyamodi confessed to the crime. The alteration was obviously made after the document was created, and it mistakenly has the judge’s initials listed as the author of the addendum. The document should have actually had Captain Mitchell’s initials because he was the police official seeking the warrant. Something very funky occurred with this document’s alteration.

On February 3, 2014 the habeas was presented before judge R.F. Johnson, another superior court judge, and consistent with judge Hobgood’s direction encouraging the defendant’s mother to have another judge hear the motion. The mother went before judge Johnson with the knowledge of state law not requiring an attorney be present, and attempted once again to have the habeas heard on behalf of her son.. Johnson conducted himself in such a fashion that appeared unfit for him to serve as a court official, let alone a sitting judge. The second denial of the habeas has set the ground work for the matter to be taken to a higher court for adjudication. However, judge Johnson’s antics while refusing to even read the document fuels an advantage for the defense toward obtaining the freedom of Shannon Nyamodi. Read judge Johnson’s Habeas Decision below:   The judges decisions pertaining to Shannon Nyamodi’s habeas request appear to be generic and fail to address serious infringements on the defendant’s constitutional rights. The North Carolina superior courts are not an umbrella of the federal court system, but they are bound by constitutional law just the same. The court’s failure to pay respect to a defendant’s federal speedy trial rights (6th amendment) only heightens earlier discussion in this article related to some state’ judicial practice of ignoring a criminal defendant’s constitutional rights when a clear violation exist, despite the heinous nature of a crime for which a defendant may be charged and subsequently detained, a defendant is entitled to have his day in court as soon as possible. The bizarre ruling which accepted the State’s Attorney motion to have the case of Shannon Nyamodi taken off the court docket system was characterized by the court as being exceptional, but clearly the only exceptionality in this case is the manner in which the North Carolina superior court in Franklin County has handled the case of this young defendant. In addition to the irregular handling of Shannon Nyamodi’s criminal case by court officials, state attorney general Roy Cooper’s office has shown the same degree of disrepute pertaining to fairness, equal justice, and due process under the law for the Nyamodi youth. Weeks ago Elizabeth Crudup contacted the AG’s office soliciting assistance from the top law enforcement official in North Carolina, and on February 7, 2014 she received a call from the agency’s Public Safety Department. According to Crudup, an official identifying himself as Mr. Tom Jones stated to her “I don’t believe that a person has been held for such a long time in this state without a court date. There is nothing I can do for you.” Crudup admits the apathy of the official got the best of her, and she says she rebuffed him stating “Sir be glad that you were born as a white man, because you could never endure the kinds of things that black people suffer in this country everyday.” Mr. Jones’ comment was so off color that TPC contacted his office directly to solicit a statement on the record, but calls went to his voice mail. It’s very difficult to accept that a state official of Mr. Jones’ capacity  could make such a broad generalization concluding that Elizabeth Crudup’s complaint was unfounded solely on his personal belief that such a matter could never occur in the state of North Carolina. Obviously the official never conducted any investigation into Shannon Nyamodi’s case, because if had made an inquiry, he would have discovered that the youth has been detained for over sixteen months in the Franklin County jail. Both superior court judges Hobgood and Johnson list in their “findings of fact” that Shannon Nyamodi had court dates. The dates are described as being on December 16, 2013 and January 21, 2014. On these dates the judge presiding did in fact call the defendant’s case, but on both occasions the state attorney continued the case without the defendant or his lawyer present. That can’t possibly be considered as a court date. The case was taken off of the court’s docket system on February 2o, 2013, which means that the defendant’s purported court date on December 16, 2013 would have been his only appearance before the court in nearly 10 months. There is nothing on record in this case which reveals that judge Hight established a timetable for when the case would be placed back in the system for prosecution, and for nearly a year Shannon Nyamodi was held in custody without any charges against him within the entire court docket system. At some point a judge should have questioned judge Hight’s “strange ruling” and ordered that the case be heard before the court. All of these bizarre rulings by state judicial officials, coupled with the state wanting to continue the case for as long as possible, creates serious suspicion pertaining to the state’s case, and the charges filed against Shannon Nyamodi. Something is drastically wrong with the judicial process in the state of North Carolina and the case of Shannon Nyamodi may have exposed a horrible culture of misconduct by court officials who have knowingly and willfully denied this youth due process under North Carolina state law, and constitutional liberties for which all Americans fall heir. The bottom line is that the state knows the extent of culpable evidence that exist in the case, if any, and has failed the people of the state of North Carolina by not seeking justice prosecuting the case, and the defendant held in custody whose liberty and right to have his day in court taken away. It’s an obvious and blatant display of prejudice for some unknown reason, and every official with the power to take the necessary action to correct this matter should be held accountable criminally and civilly. To Be Continued     The People’s Champion I’m David Adams

There are rulings entered by judges in courts of law throughout the nation everyday in this country. Usually, such judicial authority typically is accompanied by supporting facts derived from evidence, decisions from jurors, and case law previously adjudicated based on similar merits. Rarely are cases resolved based on opinionated rhetoric or frivolous unsupported findings by the court’s highest officials. That’s of course if an official is mindful of established law, while avoiding having their rulings overturned by higher courts. In the state of North Carolina it appears, in it’s Superior Court at least, judges are making rulings in court cases based on personal bias, spontaneous ill advised decisions, and irrelevant  arguments not pertinent to the merits of court cases.

Just weeks ago the mother of Shannon Nyamodi filed a Habeas Corpus on his behalf challenging whether her son’s detention for over a year at a Franklin County jail was in fact lawful, while citing serious infringements upon his 6th and 14th amendment constitutional rights. The judge who ruled on that document (Hobgood) came in at 8:25 that day and left at 8:28 after having denied the habeas. It’s important to note that the official never even granted the mother a hearing, while outlining in his decision that she nor Action for Justice (a criminal justice advocacy group who assisted in developing the habeas) weren’t parties to the case, and expressed his apprehension in even accepting the document from the mother because she wasn’t an attorney. I’m not certain whether the judge is incompetent or whether his actions were nothing more than a smoke screen to dismiss the mother’s efforts, but an attorney isn’t required during a habeas proceeding.

In fact the entire process was designed to prevent unlawful detention of criminal defendants, permitting anyone to present a habeas to the courts, to make certain that states are not violating citizens constitutional rights, and Hobgood (the most senior Superior Court judge) should have known this. Fortunately the mother was resilient, never left the court house that day, and ran into the judge in the hallway. Hobgood was presented with the habeas’ supporting documentation and said he agreed with it, directing the mother to get the habeas back in front of a judge with an attorney. Despite his admission to possible constitutional rights violations, Hobgood didn’t alter his ruling at that time which which was entirely his discretion, rather punting the issue off to another colleague for adjudication. The judge did indicate in writing that she should present the document before another judge again.

Today Ms. Crudup did just late, presenting the habeas before Superior Court judge Johnson. Johnson was completely unprofessional, yelling, refusing to read the document, and even threatened the woman with jail time if she spoke again. All of her arguments were refuted while he continuously talked over her. She repeatedly requested to be heard unsuccessfully, and the only rationalization Johnson gave for his action and ruling was that, “I’m not going to overrule judge Hobgood’s decision.” She implored him to simply read the document for him to take note of Hobgood’s instructions. Johnson continuously refused to read it stating “there is an indictment in here somewhere.” The judge’s belligerent and unprofessional behavior regarding such a critical document during court didn’t go unnoticed. A court official who witnessed the entire incident followed Ms. Crudup outside of the courthouse and encouraged her to find help from an attorney. The official expressed complete outrage in the manner in which the judge spoke to her, and said “what judge Johnson did was wrong.”

Furthermore, Johnson’s actions in my opinion is simply detestable considering he is a sitting judge entrusted with upholding the law for the people of the state. Since the case of Shannon Nyamodi developed, there have been a volume of instances where rulings, motions, and other peculiar movement in the case have originated from nasty, incompetent, and simply despicable officials who more than likely operate from a position of racism. It’s unconscionable that these are the kinds of people that the citizens of North Carolina have elected into public office. Fortunately, this arrogant bastard will more than likely be compelled to revisit this matter again in a civil court of law. State law outlines sanctions for this kind of official misconduct related to a Habeas corpus matter, and it might serve judge Johnson well to read North Carolina General statue on judicial responsibility. Additionally, Johnson’s actions opens the door for the habeas to be presented to the state court of appeals, a separate branch of the state’s judicial process, and a higher court which could rule against the Habeas’ rejection from the state’s kangaroo superior court.

A state appeals court may hear the habeas on the grounds that a judge’s decision to deny the request was based on frivolous reasons or arguments unrelated to the case. It appears that this is exactly what happened when the the habeas was presented to both judge Hobgood and Johnson, as their decisions were void of any supporting facts or case law to justify not granting the habeas. When judge Hight ruled to have the case taken off the court’s management docket system, he erred by not establishing a timetable for which the case’ prosecution would resume, and Shannon Nyamodi still languishes in a county jail with no court date. This is clearly a violation of his constitutional rights, and whether the state of North Carolina courts corrects this injustice, his charges will more than likely be ordered dismissed by a Federal Court down the road.

Moreover, it has always been suspected that Shannon Nyamodi landed in jail because of trumped up charges after the Franklin County Sheriff Office tried to frame the youth. Strange things have happened since the youth was taken into custody, like his having been placed on some sort of Administrative segregation for his protection. Sources familiar with the way things are done in North Carolina, advised TPC that it’s a tactic utilized to wear a detainee down to get him to cop out with a deal (plead guilty for lesser sentence in return). Shannon has been denied access to his family on multiple occasions, and in one instance, Ms. Crudup was told by Captain Gill at the Franklin County jail that her son didn’t want to talk to her or anyone else when she tried to visit him. Today she found out that statement was a complete lie. A law firm working in stealth mode in the background actually notified the sheriff today directly, and advised that the mother was coming to the jail to see her son. She was granted acces to Shannon for the first time in weeks.

Ms. Crudup while visiting her son learned that he never told anyone that he refused to see his mother. Shannon even communicated to his mother that jail officials never even notified him that she had attempted to visit him. These revelations establish as a matter of fact that jail officials are also involved in some of the very bizarre and strange occurrences related to this case. Denying Shannon visitation is at the jail’s discretion, but there must be a valid justification for not allowing him visits when he hasn’t violated any jail rules and other detainees similarly situated are being afforded such privileges. Why did Captain Gill lie to Ms. Crudup when Shannon never conveyed to him that he didn’t want to see his mother? The youth expressed to his mother that they (jail officials) were giving him “a really hard time.” He told his mother that the state prosecutor has been to visit him and has been pressuring him into taking a deal.

The fact that a state counsel prosecuting a criminal case has actually visited a defendant in jail who is a party to a criminal case without the presence of the defendant’s legal counsel is not only unheard of, but completely improper, and may even result in sanctions from the state bar and the Attorney General’s office. That’s taken a hell of a risk, putting a license to practice law on the line, and clearly shows the desperation of the district attorney’s office related to this case. Since day one, Shannon Nyamodi’s own attorney has been pressuring the teen to take a deal, and because he has repeatedly refused to cop out to a crime for which he didn’t commit, his attorney has abandoned him, threatened him, and has been a complete non factor in aiding his defense or securing his release from jail. Now the pressure is coming from both sides, and there is no justification why a state attorney would actually seek a deal from a criminal defendant with out first obtaining consent from his attorney.

If it’s proven that Klinkosum (Shannon’s current lawyer) in fact had knowledge that a prosecutor visited his client, without his client’s consent, he also could be sanctioned by the North Carolina state bar. So, what is really going on here? I have never seen a case where a prosecutor was more bent on obtaining a plea deal from a criminal defendant juxtapose to going to trial and getting a conviction. The state is desperate, don’t have a case, and explains exactly why they wanted this case hidden from the public and taken off the court dockets. When it’s all said in done, I believe there will be some criminal charges filed and they won’t be against young Shannon Nyamodi.

To Be Continued ..

The People’s Champion

I’m David Adams

When young Shannon Nyamodi was charged with larceny and attempted murder on August 16, 2012 his family believed that he would be exonerated from charges they felt were simply a case where police officials had made a rush to judgement by charging the teen who had no prior brushes with the law. Little did they know that Shannon would eventually languish in a Franklin County North Carolina jail for nearly two years, while the man they hired to defend him would take $50,000.00 dollars as a retainer, and then turn to subsequently agree with state prosecutors efforts to conceal the case from the public by having it removed from the court docket system while young Shannon remained in custody. The circumstances surrounding his case has drawn attention from criminal justice advocacy groups, bloggers, and other human rights organizations around the country.

Now that his case has sparked outrage from a concerned public outside of North Carolina, the youth has been housed in segregation, denied access to the outside world, and placed on a gag order probably implemented without consent from state courts. Although a small minority exist who believe in his guilt, none of those pundits can explain nor rationalize the countless peculiar circumstances pertaining to the manner in which the state has handled his case. The state motioned for the case to be taken off the court management docket system back in February of 2013, which is an action rarely, if ever, seen in a criminal case while the defendant remains locked up in a jail cell. Also, the state’s failure to bring his case before the courts for trial within a one year period, triggers the presumption that the defendants 6th amendment constitutional rights have been violated.

In short, young Shannon Nyamodi is being held hostage, unlawfully detained, and held in captivity at the very least, and without any pending charges against him within the state’s court docket system. The youth’s family, advocates, and a growing concerned public, all ponder why the state apparently has no desire to pursue the case in a trial before a court of law. If evidence exist which can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Shannon Nyamodi committed such a horrible crime, then why hasn’t the case gained any momentum in over a year? The combined peculiarity of his hired legal counsel having sided with the state to archive the case file, threats made against Shannon by his attorney prohibiting him from talking to his mother or anyone else about the case with threats of aiding the state in convicting him, the unexplained reasons for his isolation while in jail , and Shannon having been denied access to his family all collectively point to a conspiracy of some kind to wrongfully convict an innocent man.

We now live in a global society where the rights of the people are continuously dissipating, and those of us who care about justice, fairness, and a man’s right to due process under the law can not stand by idle while such atrocities occur. Give Shannon Nyamodi his day in court or set the youth free. This perspective is essentially the basis from which many followers of this case have developed complete outrage. While many cite the premise for such a judicial debacle as having derived from racism widely believed to be indigenous to North Carolina courts, the family of Shannon Nyamodi advocate racism as being a non factor pertaining to the youth’s case, and while continuously articulating that white people have been their strongest supporters aiding their plight to set Shannon free while historical African American Civil Rights groups have turned a blind eye to his case.

Despite the tremendous upheaval the Nyamodi family face obtaining Shannon’s freedom, real help has arrived from attorneys now working behind the scenes developing a plan to fight for the youth. The family have depleted their funds, essentially when they gave Maitry “Mike” Klinkosum $50,000.00 dollars to defend Shannon. Klinkosum’s complete ineptness while responsible for his defense, has turned out to be a nightmare, and efforts are being made to solicit funding through a booster campaign to raise additional funds for the legal representation of Shannon Nyamodi. The law firm working the case has committed to Shannon’s defense, and have conveyed to the family to raise what they can while they will continue to work for the youth’s eventual release. The family and TPC pleads to readers around the world who believe in justice for all people, to support this effort by purchasing a “Free Shannon Nyamodi” T-Shirt to help his legal funding, and show support of this horrible human rights story. The T-Shirts are priced at $25.00 dollars and are for a good cause. An innocent man’s life is in the balance, so please help us set him free. T-Shirts can be purchased at: Free Shannon Nyamodi 

The official supporting T-Shirt for the Shannon Nyamodi Legal Fund.

Additionally, Shannon has been placed on segregated housing at the Franklin County jail, which means he is only allowed out of his jail cell for one hour a day, while being confined for 23 hours. This young man has no prior criminal history and completely unfamiliar with the correctional system what so ever. There is growing concern for his mental health and psychological well being. The confinement of any human being in such a fashion will eventually take it’s toll of a person’s mental state. It’s widely believed by many associated with the case, that officials responsible for Shannon’s incarceration are manipulating his jailers into housing Shannon in such a way, to wear him down in an effort to get him to accept a plea deal in this case for a crime he did not commit. Ms. Elizabeth Crudup (Shannon’s mother) continues to request that the public write letters of encouragement to her son as a measure of support to help him hold on, and not give up hope.

Letters of encouragement can be sent to: Shannon Nyamodi, 285 T. Kemp Road, Louisburg, NC 27549. Also, those who want to send donations of a lesser/greater amount and not interested in purchasing a T-Shirt may offer a monetary donation at: The Shannon Nyamodi Legal Fund. May God be with Shannon Nyamodi during his plight to gain his freedom, and may God bless us all. On behalf of the Nyamodi family The People’s Champion thanks all supporters in advance for their contributions. God speed!

To Be Continued ..

The People’s Champion

I’m David Adams

The case of Shannon Nyamodi is so bizarre and simply an abuse of authority by the North Carolina courts that his mother Elizabeth Crudup has spent countless sleepless nights, while feverishly fighting to have her son freed from a Franklin County jail, that she has single handedly launched a campaign to bring more exposure to her son’s flight, and quest for freedom. With the assistance of a young Washington D.C. based attorney the mother was provided with various contacts, which include a law firm whose attorneys handled the Trayvon Martin case, and the Harlem, New York based National Action Network. A telephone call was facilitated with the mother and a NAN Crisis Manager (Ms. June Moses), who after having been briefed on the particulars of Shannon Nyamodi’s case, promptly directed her to the Charlotte, North Carolina branch of the NAN organization, and documentation and other crucial information was provided to NAN authorities.

Although the contact for the most part is in the very early and preliminary stages, the organization’s potential involvement has the possibility to garner long sought national exposure to a human rights case that has began to gain steam from various advocacy groups outside of the state of North Carolina. Other sources say that the Wake Forest University Law School, the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, and other N.C. state University Law Schools have also shown interest in representing, and playing an active role in the criminal case of Shannon Nyamodi. The young man’s story perhaps was seen by many locals in the Franklin County area as an a typical criminal case pertaining to simply another violent black youth. Official documents in the case point to something entirely different, and as a result of what can only best be described as possible prosecutorial misconduct, has mushroomed into a human rights case which entail serious violations of the teen’s Constitutional Rights.

The involvement of Reverend Al Sharpton’s NAN organization would give the teens case a tremendous legal boost, as the organization is known for it’s legal professionals who could bring further scrutiny on this case, as well as the manner in which the North Carolina courts are handling criminal cases involving people of color. Previous TPC articles have discussed the apparent expediency in which Shannon Nyamodi’s allege codefendant (a white female) had her case disposed of in the state’s juvenile courts, while Shannon’s case hasn’t even hurdled past it’s pretrial stages 16 months later. It’s a great disparity which should be publicized nationally. The fact that state courts have allowed a man to be held in jail with no official charges against him within it’s state court management docket system, spells serious trouble and concern for North Carolina courts who may be purposefully circumventing established federal law.

Additionally, a complaint made to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) citing the youth’s unlawful detention, and an official complaint having been filed with the North Carolina State Bar against Maitry “Mike” Klinkosum for allegedly threatening Shannon Nyamodi (Klinkosum’s own client), are other aspects of this case which demonstrate that peculiar abnormalities exist pertaining to the manner in which the state has handled the prosecution of this defendant. Shannon’s mother has repeatedly refused to play the race card to rationalize the seemingly injustice impacting her son, while holding on to constant belief that his plight is simply being manipulated by evil individuals involved in the case. She continues to hold out hope, praying that justice and the truth will prevail, and believes that there are decent God fearing people within the system who will eventually do the right thing and set her son free.

Moreover, TPC’s investigation into the Shannon Nyamodi case has consistently questioned why state prosecutors sought having the case taken of the docket in the first place. When the criminal complaint was filed with the FBI, federal authorities quiz the mother on whether the case had been dismissed. The removal of a case from a court’s docket typically indicates that the state has no desire to prosecute or a “nulle prosequi” is declared by the court, and meaning that the charges have been dropped. With Shannon continuously being detained in a county jail, the judge, prosecutors, and even the defendants own attorney should all have reasonably known that serious infringements were being imposed upon this defendant’s constitutional rights. If the courts had brought the case to trial in a reasonable manner of time there would be no discussion related to federal statues. Baring complete ignorance or incompetence by state officials, there appears to be some dynamic which predicated the state to take such a posture in this case.

The unexplained destruction of 160 old historical records by the North Carolina state archive department (the biggest story currently in Franklin County) may also factor into this case. Elizabeth Crudup told TPC weeks ago that while she was at the courthouse obtaining documents related to her son’s case, that the county clerk’s office was preparing to place her son’s case files within the court’s archives, and if that is in fact what has occurred than the records  pertaining to the criminal case of Shannon Nyamodi may have been destroyed and lost forever. In a bizarre and unexplained action, Franklin County historical records which were discovered by county clerk officials was mysteriously destroyed, when state archive officials arrived at the county court house with sheriffs under the cover of darkness, confiscated historical records dating back to the Civil War, and took them to the county incinerator  and burnt them. Shannon Nyamodi’s case file which include all of the state’s alleged evidence against him, may have been included in the files which were destroyed.

Some how it seems that officials entrusted with upholding the law of the people in the state of North Carolina may possibly have been left far behind when comparing society’s standards of law and government. It remains to be seen how of all of this plays out, and whether the citizens of the Franklin County community will respond to insure that the people’s trust will be upheld in the bizarre case of young Shannon Nyamodi.

To Be Continued ..

The People’s Champion

I’m David Adams

In the United States every citizen is guaranteed certain Constitutional rights under the law, although states within our union approach the implementation of government legislation in various contrasting ways, the Constitution is often seen as a safeguard toward liberties that the founding fathers intended all Americans to fall heir, and often times cases arrive within our society that stretch the boundaries of justice when state courts in our nation make questionable rulings when people of color encounter the criminal justice system. The disturbing story of Shannon Nyamodi just happens to be such a case. Nyamodi is a black teen held by the Franklin County Deputy’s Office for allegedly shooting a white woman in the face at point blank range. Despite earlier reports that the victim had stated he wasn’t involved, and official police reports on record in the case supporting his non involvement, somehow the youth was subsequently charged for the crime anyway.

The teen has since been held in custody for nearly 16 months in a strange sequence of events in which a Superior Court judge ordered the case taken off of the North Carolina court management docket system until such time that the state prosecutor handling the case decides to bring it back on. The ruling extended tremendous discretion to the state while completely ignoring any speedy trial rights guaranteed a criminal defendant under federal law. Also, the ruling is a direct infringement upon the 6th amendment rights of this defendant as applied to the 14th amendment outlined within the U.S. Constitution. These bizarre elements of Shannon Nyamodi’s plight to regain his freedom perhaps reveals serious violations by North Carolina courts, and establishing one of the greatest human rights struggles of modern time. In essence, the teen is being held in captivity with no pending charges against him in the state’s court dockets, an indication which typically indicate that a case has been dismissed by the court, and highlighting what maybe an unprecedented occurrence of a criminal defendant having his charges dropped while remanded to custody by county jail officials in the state of North Carolina.

Shannon’s story has began to acquire national attention from bloggers, radio broadcast, and other media sources outside of the state. His case is seen by many followers as a human rights case, but other disturbing events have occurred creating serious concerns for the teen’s personal safety and overall well being. The youth’s attorney has been paid a $50,000 dollar retainer to represent him, but has failed to perform his obligations to his client reasonably expected by an attorney related to a criminal case of this nature. In fact, last week attorney Maitry “Mike” Klinkosum (a former North Carolina state prosecutor) who was hired by the Nyamodi family allegedly made threats toward his client, and the Nyamodi family. Klinkosum allegedly told Shannon “if you talk to your mother or anyone else in this case, I’ll make sure you get 30 years in prison.” The attorney cited issue with Shannon’s mother diligent and tenacious involvement in securing her son’s freedom. Additionally, Shannon has been placed on segregation within the confines of the Franklin County jail. A measure that jail administrators have claimed was to protect the youth from other violent offenders also held at the detention center.

Those claims made directly to Ms. Elizabeth Crudup (Shannon’s mother) are believed by many corrections professionals associated with the case, to be a smoke screen to hinder exposure of a possible covert attempt to isolate the teen, making him more prone and vulnerable to agree to some sort of plea deal to gain his freedom. Detainees in correctional settings who are placed on segregation are normally subjected to confinement to their cell for 23 hours a day while being allowed out for only one hour as ordered by federal consent decrees implemented to safeguard prisoners from cruel and unusual punishment. These practices are also normally assigned to the most violent offenders in correctional facilities. There has been no indication that the youth has been in trouble while being detained, and his jailer’s strange housing classification for Shannon Nyamodi may be part of a disturbing culture of misconduct by court, prosecutors, and corrections officials to break the teen’s spirit to obtain a guilty plea from him for criminal charges that many believe were fabricated against him from the very start.

The case of Shannon Nyamodi has also acquired attention from various criminal justice advocacy groups who aided the teen’s mother in composing a Habeas Corpus document to have the state court present a lawful premise for the youth’s continued detention. The Habeas was struct down by the state’s senior superior court judge (Hobgood) without even affording the teen an actual hearing. An occurrence that legal professionals say is a “strange judicial practice” indigenous to North Carolina courts, especially considering the heinous nature in which the defendant’s Constitutional Rights have been violated. In fact, Shannon Nyamodi has only made one court appearance during this entire ordeal, which was during his initial arraignment for the charges he now faces. The Habeas document did afford the mother an impromptu one on one dialogue with judge Hobgood in his chambers.

Since that time her contact with her son has slowly come to a complete hault. She attempted to visit her son on January 21, 2014, and was advised by the jail administration that her son doesn’t wish to speak to her or anyone else. Elizabeth Crudup says it’s simply unconscionable that her son would refuse to speak with her. This suspicious turn of events fuels a growing perspective that Shannon Nyamodi is in fact being purposely cut off from all contact from those who would advocate for fairness related to this case on his behalf. Now that the youth has allegedly been threatened by his own attorney, and seemingly cut off from his family, the stakes have been raised pointing to complete uncertainty of Shannon Nyamodi’s life. His languishment in a county jail for nearly 16 months with no official charges against him on the North Carolina court docket system, and no indication in sight pointing to when the young man will have his day in court has created a sense of urgency and a crisis that should be a concern to every American in our nation.

Countless practicing attorneys have offered their disbelief, and outrage related to the judicial handling of Shannon’s case, and upon the urgence of sources associated with the Nyamodi family, his mother has taken action to have her son’s case investigated by federal authorities. Elizabeth Crudup has filed a criminal complaint with the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) charging that court officials, and law enforcement agencies are holding Shannon Nyamodi hostage at the Franklin County jail in North Carolina. It has always been the position of the Nyamodi family for shannon to  be afforded the same fairness as every American citizen is entitled under state and federal law, by simply having his day in court. For some reason prosecutors have taken ill advised measures to prolong prosecution of Shannon. The strange judicial handling of this young man’s criminal case not only raises continued suspicion as to why the state has hidden this case in the state court archives for so long, but may potentially point to prosecutorial abuse, misconduct, and actually may reveal exculpatory evidence establishing the complete innocence of young Shannon Nyamodi in this crime altogether.

The Nyamodi family is leaning on hope that a federal inquiry into the case of Shannon Nyamodi will bring to bare the obvious Constitutional Rights violations surrounding his case, and act as a measure of accountability while insuring that harm won’t fall upon him while being detained in the Franklin County jail. The family asked for continued prayers for their son from the public, and encourage followers of his story to write him directly to encourage him to be strong, not to give up hope, and not take a plea deal nor accept any responsibility for this crime. Elizabeth Crudup says that young Shannon’s attorney has been pressuring to take a plea deal ever since he received the $50,000 dollar retainer the family paid him, and believes that her son’s detention in segregation is being conducted to break him while ustilizing duress to obtained an admission of guilt. Letters of support for Shannon Nyamodi can be sent to: Shannon Nyamodi, 285 T. Kemp Road, Louisburg, NC 27549.

Also, CALL/EMAIL MIKE KLINKOSUM or any of the partner attorney’s at Cheshire Parker Schneider http://www.cheshireparker.com Phone: (919) 833-3114 Fax: (919) 832-0739. Tell them to do their jobs and stop persecuting Shannon Nyamodi TODAY!

To Be Continued ..

The People’s Champion

I’m David Adams

There is a very large contingency of people in the Franklin County, North Carolina community and it’s surrounding area who believe that Shannon Nyamodi shot Rhonda MacClean in the face at point blank range, and robbed her on August 16, 2012. Despite official police reports establishing that the victim more than likely didn’t indicate who she believed her assailant was in the crime during the initial stages of the investigation, she has now come forward publicly stating that the black youth was in fact the person who shot her. Previous TPC articles have discussed her strange emergence after nearly fifteen months has elaspped since she was severely wounded that fall night, but pundits who support her newly discovered claims actually have created the myth that Nyamodi’s legal counsel is to blame for the case’ delay proceeding to trial.

Any perception which infers Maitry “Mike” Klinkosum (Nyamodi’s current legal counsel) has repeatedly requested continuances is this case, is sorely misguided, and derives from a perspective of complete ignorance related to the official record before the North Carolina Superior Court. Official documentation in the case already has been provided in various articles on this blog pointing to the state’s attorney prosecuting the case, having a suspicious desire to remove the entire record from the court’s Management Docket System altogether, and without any indication from the state or court as to when the case would return to the system for prosecution. The constant outcry from the victim and her public supporters, who make such uninformed claims, are not only disturbing, but may point directly to a culture of judicial misconduct indigenous to North Carolina courts when minorities encounter it’s criminal justice system.

Comparing Nyamodi’s co defendant’s (a minor who is white) case, which has already been disposed of with an alleged disposition convicting the youth (according to her mother) for her role in the crime, to that of Shannon Nyamodi who has been languishing in jail for nearly fifteen months, we see a complete disparity related to the right for a speedy trial which was upheld in one instance, and has been completely violated pertaining to constitutional law in the other case. In fact all of the request before the court for continuance in this case have been requested by the state, and granted by North Carolina’s courts. There is no documentation on the record which would suggest otherwise. There has only been two continuances requested in the case which were requested by the state’s attorney.

On February 20, 2013 the state was granted a motion request in which both the prosecution and the defense had declared the case “Exceptional” (nothing suggested that it was) to have the case removed from the docket system, until such time the state decided to place it back on for prosecution. Although attorney Klinkosum didn’t challenge the motion (another bizarre element of the case), and agreed to have the case taken off, it’s disturbing that the court allowed such prosecutorial discretion while failing to establish a timetable for bringing the case back on the docket. The only other continuance which occurred was on December 16, 2013 in which the state was supposed to get the case moving forward again, and only after Shannon Nyamodi’s mother insisted the cast be tried to avoid her son from languishing in jail. Ms. Crudup (Shannon’s mother) revealed to TPC that she was in court December 16, 2013 when her son’s case was called before the court and continued again at the state’s request. The state’ attorney advised the judge that they would be keeping Shannon’s case open, because they had given attorney Klinkosum a plea deal to present to his client. Klinkosum never spoke to his client that day nor any other time sense the state made such a statement in open court. Shannon Nyamodi has never considered taking a plea deal in the case, and has never had one presented to him. These facts are supported by official documentation, his mother’s eyewitness account of the court proceeding on 12/16, and should dispel all rumors declaring that it’s a “run and hide for as long as you can” posture by the defense in this case. View official court record depicting the state’s request to shelve the case below:

Notice that the February 20, 2013 motion (continuance) was requested by the state.

Writ of Habeas Corpus

Neither the state or the defense attorney in this case have shown interest in expediting the criminal trial of Shannon Nyamodi. The defendant’s mother has been more proactive in freeing her son than his own hired legal counsel. Ms. Crudup solicited help from a criminal justice advocacy group AXJ (Action For Justice of Franklin County) who immediately became disturbed after learning the merits of the case. The agency cited serious constitutional right violations which center squarely around the length of time Shannon Nyamodi has been detained without a trial date. AXJ’s involvement in the case has resulted in a tentative court date of January 21, 2014 being ordered by judge Hobgood, after being presented with a Habeas document pertaining to the youth’s case.  The “writ of habeas corpus” filed on behalf on Shannon Nyamodi can not be ignored, as it brings to bare justification for his continued detention while his case has been removed from the docket system.

The state of North Carolina no longer has a speedy trial statue after it was repealed by legislators in 1989 for some unknown reason. A defendant is still entitled to a speedy trial under the 6th and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. The AXJ Habeas spells out how the initial judge (Hight) erred in granting a motion to have the case taken off the docket without establishing a timetable to put it back on. Although the case has been given “Exceptional” status, the court is still required to move it forward to protect a defendant’s rights under the constitution which appears to have been created by the nation’s founders to prohibit a person’s infinite languishment in prison without knowledge of anticipated prosecution. For example:

Habeas Corpus ad subjiciendum

It is an independent civil action and a form of collateral attack to determine not the guilt or innocence of the person held in custody, but whether the custody is un lawful under the U. S. Constitution. The petition must show that the court ordering the detention or imprisonment made a legal or factual error. The writ of habeas corpus serves as an important check on the manner in which state courts pay respect to federal constitutional rights. The writ is “the fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action.” Harris v Nelsom, 394 U.S. 286, 290-91(1969).

When Superior Court Judge Hight granted the state’s motion, removing the case from it’s court management docket system, he erred by not establishing when the case would appear back in the system, allowing the prosecution tremendous discretion related to the defendant’s right to expedient prosecution guaranteed under federal law, and all while ordering Shannon Nyamodi’s continued incarceration. Perhaps Hight’s unlawful order may be a simple oversight on his part, it happens all the time in a court of law, but the core of these proceedings focusing on why the case was give “Exceptional” status and removed from the docket in the first place. When criminal cases require “Exceptional” consideration, typically a party to the proceedings require an extended period of time for attorneys to develop arguments for trial. A presiding judge is more inclined to grant a postponement for parties to develop their case, but removing the case off of the docket entirely clearly demonstrates almost a year later, that the state had serious reservations regarding it’s prosecution of Shannon Nyamodi from the very start. The court has failed to demonstrate on record as required by law why the case is “Exceptional”, the need for such an extended continuation, and never set a time table reestablishing the speedy trial process.

The Habeas document submitted in this case illustrates how the state has obtained an unfair tactical advantage in the case, while the defendant was denied due process under federal law. The 6th amendment to the United States constitution is the part of the United States Bill of rights that set forth rights related to criminal prosecutions. The Supreme Court has applied the protections of this amendment to the states through Due Process Clause of the 14th amendment. In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy among others, the right to a speedy and public trial and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him. One of the main principles that The Founding Fathers intended the Speedy Trial clause to serve was to ensure a defendant’s right as to a fair trial. The longer the commencement of trial is postponed the more likely it is that witnesses will disappear, memories will fade and evidence will be lost or destroyed. Of course, both the prosecution and the defense are threatened by these dangers, but only the defendant’s life, liberty, and property are at stake in a criminal proceeding.

The right to speedy trial arises only after a person has been arrested, indicted or otherwise formally accused of a crime. Shannon Nyamodi has been in jail since August the 16th 2012 to present day. The last court date of December the 16th, he was not even brought into the court room and was the first court date since February 20, 2013. Shannon is essentially languishing in jail which is contrary to his 6th amendment rights. A delay of at least one year in bringing a defendant to trial will trigger the presumption that the 6th amendment has been violated, with the level of judicial scrutiny increasing in direct proportion of the length of delay.

The prosecution may not excessively delay the trial for its own advantage, but a trial may be delayed to secure the presence of an absent witness or other practical considerations (e.g. change of venue). Legislation permits courts to provide prosecutors with additional time upon showing of exceptional circumstances. Provision should be made for the court to determine on motion of the prosecution or the defense or on its own motion, that a case is of such complexity that the presumptive speedy trial time limit should be extended in order to enable the parties to make adequate preparations for pretrial proceedings or for the trial itself. The court should give substantial weight to the extension of the speedy trial limit on these grounds that is made, with good cause shown, by either the prosecution or the defense. In the event that a determination of complexity is made. Although judge Hight granted a state motion for exceptional status in this case, he failed to establish a revised time limit and didn’t state on the record the reasons for the extended time. (criminal justice standard 12-2.1 (d) ).

The prosecution’s failure to bring the case to trial within 70 days of Shannon’s arrest, despite the granted motion of “Exceptional” status in the case, is a violation of the 6th amendment applied to the states through the 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Any violation of the speedy trial clause of the amendment is cause for dismissal of a criminal case.  Shannon Nyamodi’s case was declared exceptional by the superior court judge on Feb.20th 2013. The judge did not establish a revised time limit or state the reason for extending time. At any time that action is taken that has the effect of extending the time otherwise allowed under the speedy trial rule or statute, the court should set forth its reasons on the record and should confirm, with the prosecution and the defense, the date by which a trail must be held or the case otherwise resolved. The court failed to set forth a reason for its ruling and therefore dismissal of the charges with prejudice is the only recourse and should forever bar prosecution for the offenses charged and any other offense required to be joined to the offense. (criminal justice standard 12-2.6 (c,d)).

These standards are typically applied based on case law research, and now we must see if the North Carolina courts will waste further public resources by continuing to perpetuate the unlawful detention of Shannon Nyamodi, in a case which the state hasn’t demonstrated sufficient grounds to even present a compelling argument that the youth was even involved in this horrible crime. In fact, the state appears to be hiding in this case. Even though judge Hight failed to establish a timetable to resolve the case, it’s very disturbing, suspicious, and completely unfair to the defendant to have the case removed from the docket system for nearly a year. It appears that tactics were used to hide the case within the court’s archives in an attempt to circumvent constitutional speedy trial laws. In essence, it seems that the mindset is, if there is no case officially on record, then any expedient rights due a defendant is neutralized, and not applicable to 6th and 14th amendment statue because technically no pending charges actually exist during the timeframe in which expedient prosecution rights begin. If my perspective bares even a remote possibility of actually having occurred in this case, then perhaps the actions by the state and the North Carolina courts is a crime more heinous for which young Shannon Nyamodi has been charged and subsequently been detained.

To Be Continued ..

The People’s Champion

I’m David Adams

When young Shannon Nyamodi was charged with an awful crime back on August 16, 2012 in which police authorities allege the black youth shot Rhonda MacClean in the face at point blank range and robbed her in the town of Youngsville, North Carolina, his family in the U.S., Africa, and other nations abroad chipped in to raise the youth’s legal expenses. They hired well known North Carolina attorney Maitry “Mike” Klinkosum to defend Shannon in a case many believe the teen was essentially setup and framed as the assailant who perpetrated such a heinous crime.

Klinkosum who is actually a former state prosecutor, has done nothing to aid Shannon Nyamodi in his quest to regain his freedom. From the very start the plight of a young man who had no prior criminal history, and wanted to join the U.S. Armed Forces, was faced with a tremendous upheaval. When his family began shopping around for an attorney to defend him, Klinkosum had been hired as Shannon’s defense counsel, but was even told later on by the Nyamodi family that they were going to go with someone else. The family had sought to get their money back ($30,000.00) before Klinkosum manipulated Shannon into signing paperwork naming him as his attorney. He visited the Nyamodi youth at the county jail on a Sunday and stated that if he signed the documents he would have him out of jail by Monday morning at the latest. The teen’s naivety to the criminal justice process, and his family’s inexperience related to obtaining a hired lawyer is exactly how Klinkosum became the youth’s attorney.

Klinkosum’s actions have been so counterproductive in defending Shannon Nyamodi that his mother is convinced that he is working for the prosecution against her son. The mother’s fears have just taken center stage in recent days. Ms. Elizabeth Crudup (Shannon’s mother) spoke with her son over  the phone this past Tuesday (1/14/2014) and was told by him that he couldn’t speak with her any longer until after his upcoming court date (1/21/2014). She was so alarmed by her son’s bizarre comments, his frame of mind, and began to quiz him. The youth told his mother that attorney Klinkosum had threatened him with jail time. According to Crudup, her son had even told jail officials that he no longer wanted contact with his mother. Extended dialogue between Shannon and his mother revealed that his own attorney had stated, “if you talk to your mother again or anyone else related to his case, I will make certain you get 30 years in prison.” Shannon’s younger sister also received a text message from her Aunt (the family member who wrote the $30,000 check) stating that Klinkosum had threatened to help the state prosecute Shannon also. Klinkosum apparently has taken issue with the National attention Shannon Nyamodi’s story has garnered in recent weeks.

When Ms. Crudup went to Klinkosum’s office to give him a copy of the Habeas Corpus document for her son at the direction of judge Hobgood, a secretary requested that she leave the building immediately because they (Law office) wasn’t taking anything from her. Crudup luckily had an entourage with her on that day, and when she left the  building the Habeas document was accepted by an office secretary from others who had accompanied her there. Klinkosum had been so inept representing Shannon Nyamodi that his mother began investigating why the criminal process in her son’s case was taking so long. She discovered that Klinkosum had agreed to allow the state to take the youth’s case off the North Carolina Superior Court Management Docket System indefinitely. The attorney’s actions related to such a motion granted by the court raised suspicion by the Nyamodi family. Why would any defense attorney ignore his own client’s right to a speedy trial and allow him to languish in jail for an infinite period of time?

The case has been off the docket for nearly a year with no pending charges against Shannon Nyamodi, and his attorney hasn’t made any effort to bring the case into court. In fact, the only reason Shannon will be making a court appearance on the 21st is because Action for Justice (a criminal justice advocacy group) composed a Habeas document outlining the severity of constitutional rights violations related to the case. The day Ms. Crudup presented the Habeas to judge Hobgood, a county court clerk was listening in on a phone call via speaker from Crudup to Klinkosum’s office, advising him of Shannon’s January 21, 2014 court date to address the Habeas. The county clerk overheard Klinosum’s office stating that they wouldn’t be in court on that day because the attorney was too booked. Continued exposure of the case more than likely resulted in a volume of calls to the attorney’s office, and on January 11, 2014 Klinkosum telephoned Ms. Brenda Nyamodi who is Shannon’s Aunt, and advised her that he would be returning the $30,000.00 in it’s entirety and would quit the case on Monday (1/13) because Shannon’s mother had put his name all over the internet and that he has a family which he was afraid some crazy person might attempt to harm.

Monday came and went without the money being returned, and on Tuesday Shannon advised his mother that Klinkosum threatened him by helping the state convict him with a 3o year prison sentence. Klinkosum notified Brenda Nyamodi on Wendsday and made similar threats pertaining to Shannon’s mother involvement in the case. These strange turn of events with Klinkosum backing off on his plans to quit the case are very alarming. I’m certain that the North Carolina Bar will have a serious problem with the manner in which Klinkosum sneakily acquired representation of Shannon Nyamodi, but threatening statements of this nature could possibly result in his disbarment from practicing law in the state altogether. Attorney’s and their clients often have differences in the manner in which cases are being handled, and when parties are unable to resolve differences the appropriate fashion to handle such division is for the attorney to step down, or request from the judge to have their appearance excused from the case.

When a defendant’s life is on the line, having been locked up for over a year with no pending trial date, and facing potentially serious felony charges as in this case a defense attorney must demonstrate diligence on their client’s behalf. It’s an attorney’s obligation to protect his clients rights of expedient prosecution and it’s simply baffling that Klinkosum condoned the state’s motion to place the case on ice for such a long time without having ever appealed to the court for the purpose of having a new timetable stated on record in order to resume his client’s speedy trial rights after such an extended delay in the case’ prosecution. Now that more detailed information pertaining to Shannon’s case has been provided to TPC, perhaps a more clear understanding of Klinkosum’s poor handling of the youth’s case can be formulated. Klinkosum received an additional $20,000.00 dollars from Shannon Nyamodi’s uncle in the United Kingdom making the total amount $50,000.00 dollars of expenses paid to him by the Nyamodi family.

The manner in which he obtained representation of Shannon Nyamodi was illegal. Although Shannon is the adult defendant is this case, he didn’t pay Klinkosum to represent him. The Nyamodis told Klinkosum to his face when it was apparent to them that he wouldn’t be a good fit to represent Shannon that they were going to go with someone else, and his covert tactic of manipulating the youth into signing paperwork is an act which questions his ethics practiced related to this client and he should have known this. Klinkosum took advantage of the limited communication a defendant who is in custody has with the outside world to manipulate him into signing documents. He essential told the youth that his family had hired him as an attorney to get him to sign paperwork. Klinkosum contacted Shannon’s Aunt later and more than likely told her Shannon wants him to represent him, and that’s how he was able to obtain payment for his services (which have been non existent according to the family).

The Aunt of the defendant has postpartum depression and was having difficult stress issues related to a high risk pregnancy at the time she paid him. Her condition has deteriorated even worst since that time which the family believes Klinkosum honed in on to manipulate her into signing checks. Klinkosum refuses to speak with Ms. Crudup regarding her son’s case, in an effort she describes as a “divide and conquer” tactic to isolate her, who is challenged with mental deficiencies, from her and the family. Crudup is an extremely intelligent, articulate Oxford University Alumni, and would be a more suitable person to speak with from the family to assist in gaining Shannon’s freedom.

Young Shannon Zacharia Nyamodi with his younger brother as a recent high school grad just months before his life was turned upside down and was placed in a county jail cell.

Shannon Nyamodi during more happier days. His mom says her son was a well spirited kid who was well mannered, humble, loved people, and could never commit such a heinous act of violence which he is accused of.

The attorney’s refusal to speak with competent family members of his client (who actually paid him), his peculiar posture of allowing the state to archive Shannon’s case for nearly a year without protecting his speedy trial rights, and the recent threats he made to his client and other family members creates suspicion surrounding his integrity, ethics, and responsible duty to his client in this case. Attorneys associated with TPC advise that if Klinkosum had issue with Shannon Nyamodi revealing or divulging sensitive/confidential information in the case, his appropriate course of action should have been to request the presiding judge grant his withdrawal from appearing in the case. Threatening a defense client that he will “make sure he gets 30 years in prison” tends to infer some other dynamic transpiring with attorney Klinkosum that hasn’t fully been exposed. More importantly, Klinkosum directing Shannon not to speak to his mother about the case again is very compelling related to his mother’s earlier fears that Klinkosum was working against her son.

When Klinkosum allowed the state to take the pending criminal case against Shannon Nyamodi off the docket system without offering any kind of rebuttal to force prosecutors hands to present a case against his client, it demonstrated that he may not have had his client’s best interest at hand, and if either party needed extra time to prepare their case the judge could have simply granted a postponement (a common practice). However, removing a criminal case from the docket system altogether is almost never heard of in most jurisdictions around the nation. Cases are often removed from the active docket and placed in a “Stet Docket” (inactive) while prosecutors often lack sufficient evidence to try a case, but such procedural action by prosecutors almost always comes with conditions. Prosecutors come to an agreement with defendants where they promise not to pursue criminal charges for a period of time, as long as the defendant remains out of trouble. Shannon Nyamodi’s case wasn’t even on that docket, but rather in the court’s archive which is typically the destination for cases with a final disposition.

It’s very disturbing that the court was successful in overlooking Shannon’s right to speedy prosecution and simply unconscionable that the state did so with the assistance of the defendant’s own legal counsel. By now Klinkosum should have a good understanding of all of the evidence the state alleges to have against his client, and the state knows what it has, and considering these facts it raises concern and a consistent argument as to why neither side is in no hurry  to prosecute the criminal case against Shannon. Klinkosum has been busy in court the past year working other high profile criminal cases. He has recently started jury selection for another Franklin County case which is in conflict with his January 21. 2014 court date in which he is suppose to be representing Shannon Nyamodi. It makes the inquisitive mind wonder how much he is being paid for those cases, because he was paid $50,000.00 dollars to represent Shannon and hasn’t filed a single motion in the case on behalf of his client. View a News article clip related to a Franklin County criminal that Klinkosum his handling below:

Attorney Mike Klinkosum is handling a high profile murder case which conflicts with his court date of Shannon Nyamodi’

A year later the attorneys in the case haven’t filed any motions to move the case forward and the defense attorney has began to threaten his client and members of his family because of national attention related to Shannon Nyamodi’s human rights case. It may be time for a federal investigation into the state court system to see how many more Shannon Nyamodis are locked up with no pending charges in the court’s docket system. Obviously in North Carolina criminal cases are handled differently down there in comparison to other states, so if you happen upon Franklin County, don’t drink the water. It just might be contagious.

To Be Continued ..

The People’s Champion

I’m Daid Adams

Very compelling information related to the Shannon Nyamodi human rights case continues to be provided to TPC from sources familiar with the case. The latest details are even more disturbing than particulars that have already been outlined in previous articles. Shannon’s arrest has always troubled many followers of this case, especially considering he was taken into custody roughly twelve hours after the actual crime was committed. Police reports which included official documents from a Franklin County Sheriff Commander suggest that the suspected shooter was unknown to authorities when they sought to obtain a search warrant for the residence where the shooting occurred. This would completely dispel any notion that the victim in the case had identified her assailant to police working the crime scene that night. It’s even more doubtful that police had completed their processing of the home and finalized the entire investigation to name a suspect for the crime.

Baring any discovery evidence authorities obtained later, it appears hearsay evidence is the only connection to Shannon Nyamodi that cops would have to even identify the youth as a person of interest. In fact the story Franklin County Sheriffs fed to the media about this case was obtained on August 17, 2012 nearly 39 hours later, by an allege confidential informant (CI) who gave a statement to Lt. M. Little of the Youngsville police. Since official police reports clearly indicate that Shannon had not been identified at the scene as the suspected shooter by the victim, his arrest in such an early stage of the investigation sticks out like a sore thumb when details related to Shannon and his alleged co defendant’s motive for the crime were provided to police hours later the next day. To understand that cops probably didn’t have probable cause to arrest Shannon Nyamodi the night of the crime, we have to analyze other factors which highlight his arrest being even more suspicious.

None of the reports from that night indicate that Deputy Ralph D. Almkuist participated in the investigation or was even at the scene on the night of August 16, 2012 when an assailant shot Rhonda MacClean in the face and robbed her. Documents submitted to the Franklin County Superior Court by Capt. L. Mitchell naming Deputy A. Barrett as the affiant who provided information justifying Search Warrants, establishes this officer as being a crucial witness who could support evidence obtained from witness statements who were at the crime scene during the initial stages of police investigations into the shooting. Shannon was arrested a very short time (as far as investigations of these types of crimes go) after the crime, meaning no extensive investigative work was required to determine a suspect since the youth was charged the same day of the crime.

Perhaps Barrett participated in other investigative aspects of the case to further bolster probable cause to arrest Shannon Nyamodi, but even if he participated in the case in that capacity, there are no reports indicating his conclusions justifying Shannon’s arrest, and his participation in any fashion becomes confusing since he isn’t assigned to the Youngsville area of the county where the crime occurred. Almkuist is in fact assigned to the Bunn, North Carolina area of Franklin County. I’m sure there is no law prohibiting a deputy from obtaining arrest warrants for suspects of crimes outside of their normally assigned area, but when officers do so they typically play a role in either the investigation of the crime or are privileged with pertinent particulars of a suspects involvement in a criminal case which they could testify to in a court of law. Without any documentation establishing Deputy Almkuist’ role in the criminal investigation, considering all police officials with arrest powers must give sworn testimony of their knowledge justifying the summation of charges outlined on any arrest warrant, and would ultimately compel them to appear in court during all criminal proceedings related to a crime for which they have acted as the complainant in the arrest of a suspect, raises concerns questioning whether Deputy Almkuist has even provided sufficient probable cause to the court for an arrest warrant in this case.

At some point I’m sure Deputy Almkuist would be obligated to travel to Louisburg, North Carolina which is the location of the Franklin County Sheriff Department’s headquarters, to process, book, or transport an arrestee at the county jail, but when the rather large stretch of geography he has to travel is considered, his having obtained an arrest warrant, and involvement in the subject shooting case raises a red flag while lacking explanation as to why an officer within the area wasn’t required to perform such a crucial task. It’s just more feasible to have an officer within the Youngsville area to get the warrant. The sheriff deputies in that area would have been in closer proximity of Louis where they’re required to obtained the warrant, and they would have been more acclimated with the case. Deputy A. Barrett would have been the ideal officer to obtain an arrest warrant in this case because he provided crucial preliminary information to command from the crime scene on the night of the shooting. View the distance of Bunn, North Carolina in comparison to the distance of Youngsville, North Carolina below:

Youngsville, North Carolina is where the shooting Shannon Nyamodi is charged with actually occurred (southwest in Franklin County. Deputy Ralph D. Almkuist is assigned to the Bunn, North Carolina area of the county (southeast in Franklin County).

Sources tell TPC deputy Ralph D. Almkuist is a rookie within the Franklin County sheriff department, and this could explain why an arrest warrant was obtained for Shannon Nyamodi in such a short time frame. Given the short time of the youth’s arrest, it appears that deputies working the case may have not been comfortable in obtaining a warrant for Shannon or any other suspect in such an early stage of the investigation. I am even more inclined to believe that Deputy A. Barrett and other police personnel at the scene that night may have not been chosen for the task of obtaining the warrant because their experience as law enforcement officers would have presented opposition and unwanted dialogue regarding such questionable direction from supervision who sought the warrant in the first place.

It’s serious business to obtain an arrest warrant to have a person taken into custody, and when the crime is serious and of a violent nature which has been highly publicized in the media, an experience officer knows that all of the facts in the case must be accurate. So, the most important question is who gave Deputy Almkuist the directive, or asked him to obtain an arrest warrant for Shannon Nyamodi when he more than likely (because of his assigned area) didn’t possess sufficient knowledge about the case to have a suspect brought into custody. Moreover, if he is in fact a “rookie” officer as reported to TPC, he probably was manipulated by a sheriff official who was superior to him. Young officer are more inclined to follow orders, less assuming, and typically anxious to make a good impression to management. Unfortunately, most police agencies have a protocol regarding certain aspects of their work. More importantly. Deputy Ralph D. Almkuist may have falsely sworn before the court regarding probable cause for Shannon Nyamodi’s arrest in this case. Take a look at the arrest warrant in which Deputy Almkuist obtained for Shannon Nyamodi as sworn before the court in this case below:

Shannon Nyamodi arrest Warrant PDF

The suspicion surrounding deputy Ralph D. Almkuist involvement in this case is further illustrated in the actual charges that are outlined on the arrest warrant itself. Shannon wasn’t only chrged with shooting the vitim in this case, but he was also charged with larceny. The complainant named on this arrest warrant (Almkuist) charged the youth with stealing Rhonda MacClean’s .22 caliber rifle on the night he alleged shot her in the face, and the officer actually swore to it before a court official who granted the arrest warrant. View charges filed against Shannon Nyamodi which led to a warrant for his arrest below:

The larceny charge is very disturbing considering MacClean was completely hysterical, severely injured, and couldn’t possibly have known that her rifle had been stolen that night considering she told police that she was struck with a pole when they initially interviewed her. Police even indicated that they believed she never realized that she had been shot (that’s confusing considering the sound of a gunshot blast), and it isn’t clear how cops were even led to believe that a weapon of any kind was stolen from the home. Who communicated that to police? These facts supporting probable cause to believe that Shannon Nyamodi stole a weapon from the home during the crime, as Deputy Almkuist swore to in the arrest warrant document, becomes even more disturbing related to the youth’s being charge with this part of the crime when MacClean’s .22 caliber rifle was actually seized during the search of the home when the crime scene was being processed. View the seizure log of items confiscated from 109 Shearin Court after the crime below:

Clearly the victim’s .22 caliber rifle was in the home at the time police investigators conduct a search of the property where the shooting occurred.

109 Shearin Court Search Warrant PDF (Last page of document)

Additionally, the time in which the warrant to search the residence  where this crime occurred was obtained presents perhaps the most compelling evidence that Deputy Ralph D. Almkuist had very limited knowledge of this case (in which he probably lied under oath before the court), is  demonstrated by comparing the 5:10 a.m. time in which the search warrant was obtained, in comparison to the 3:10 p.m. time of which Shannon Nyamodi was actually taken into custody. I’m sure that the sheriff department were aware and had already confiscated the .22 caliber rifle, and other weapons from the home within a ten hour time frame which is the period between when the warrant was obtained and the alleged suspects arrest. It’s not convincing that an officer actively involved in a criminal investigation of this nature wouldn’t be aware of such detail. Deputy Almkuist should have known that the weapon had already been confiscated, eliminating the probable cause to charge Shannon with larceny in this case. The larceny charge on the arrest warrant coupled with the weapon having been retrieved depicts the officer’s complete ignorance regarding vital aspects of the investigation, and established that he was more than likely simply directed by a superior officer to obtain a warrant and execute an arrest of Shannon Nyamodi. View the time indicating when the 109 Shearin Court search warrant was obtained in comparison to the Return of Service document indicating when Shannon was actually arrested below:

Capt. E. smith obtained a search warrant for 109 shearin Court at 5:10 a.m. a few hours after the crime occurred.

Deputy Ralph D. Almkuist indicated on his Return of Service document for the arrest of Shannon Nyamodi as 3:10 p.m. as the time he actually took him into custody.

The suspicion surrounding why, how, and who actually arrested Shannon Nyamodi related to this horrible crime is extremely perplexing to say the very least. Despite what any of the pundits out there think who believe that this kid is guilty, they should reflect on why Shannon Nyamodi has been locked up for 15 months, and why the state has essentially hidden his case file within the court’s management docket system archives. I’ll continue to cover this very bizarre case as more details develop.

To Be Continued ..

The People’s Champion

I’m David Adams

As the disturbing case of Shannon Nyamodi begins to garner national attention, for many around the country and within the Franklin County community where the shooting incident occurred, the story is a hard sell for most to come to grips with the youth’s possible innocence related to the crime. A story where a woman’s own daughter hired a young black man to kill and rob her is simply a gut wrenching, callous, and such a cowardice act of betrayal that no parent should ever have to endure. The epidemic of violent crimes around the nation constantly played out through media coverage of stories like this, has a tranquilizing effect on an American public frustrated with the seemingly endless violent culture on the streets of our country.

Despite shocking news coverage highlighting heinous crimes of this nature, there have been crimes broadcast on national media that didn’t quite pan out the way media outlets and their producers had anticipated the stories to develop. The story of Shannon Nyamodi’s involvement in this crime perhaps may be a textbook example of a crime in the news which had the bottom fall right out of it as more details related to the case became public. When news stories of violent crimes spark the public’s interest, especially within the confines of small, close knit, and prideful towns like Youngsville, North Carolina where it’s citizens express complete outrage regarding such despicable behavior, news stories related to such crime are initially often times accepted as being credible.

The rarity of criminal behavior within rural southern American towns may be the cause for less scrutiny of media reports in comparison to news reports in big city America, but these towns shouldn’t be immune from the implementation of objectivity and fairness regarding cases like this. Crime is so prevalent in more urbanized settings around the country and in many of these cities, a watchful public is typically more suspicious by nature of an allege criminal’s guilt, and usually reserves judgement on a case, and not allowing the media to cause it to resolve on convicting a subject prior to a trial playing out in a court of law. Also, in places like North Carolina where some say towns are given a bad rap, labeling communities as being racist when crimes involving African Americans appear to be handled unfairly in the state’s penal system, and the stigmatization of it’s historical allegiance to the confederacy dating back to the Civil War may be the reason outraged has developed over the state’s handling of this case.

As I have recently discovered while interacting with citizens from Franklin County North Carolina in the Franklin County News Online Group on Facebook, there appears to be a large contingency of people who are convinced of Shannon Nymodi’s guilt related to criminal charges accusing him of shooting Rhonda MacClean in the face one fall night back in August of 2012. I’m not sure if many of those who I interacted with were friends, family, or acquaintances of the victim in this case, but their stringent opposition to the mere thought of Shannon’s innocence clearly spurned agitation from many within the social media thread. Many recited news reports from print and televised coverage of the case as their premise for determining the young man’s guilt, but what do they really know about this case? While I was accused of making racist statements and labeled a race baiter, clearly those comments came from perspectives unfamiliar with my reputation of being completely outspoken and one of the harshest critics of black on black violence within the African American community, and especially woman of color (the TPC Blog has a plethora of coverage related to these topics).

In the Shannon Nyamodi case I have presented documentation supporting my arguments pointing to what I believe was a conspiracy to convict an innocent man, but when people from Franklin County go on the defensive regarding a story like this without presenting facts to support their position, it creates serious concern that they are in fact coming from a prejudice poster, and fueling the suspicion of racism that many feel is indigenous to the culture of the state of North Carolina. I could sense while interacting in the FCNO social media thread that some prideful North Carolinians were disturbed by sweeping generalizations which label all white people in the community as racist. However, I believe the best way for these communities to combat such characterizations is to allow these kinds of cases to met themselves out in a Court of law while remaining objective and viewing all elements of the case with a common sense approach. Some of the Franklin County citizens inquired as to how I would feel if the shoe were on the other foot, and I’ll go on the record to say if Shannon Nyamodi did in fact shoot this woman and robbed her, then he belongs behind bars for a long time. I don’t believe that evidence exist to reach such a conclusion in this case, which I’ll outline further in this article.

The Frame Up

Fifteen months after she was shot in the face and robbed within her own home, Rhonda MacClean has come forward and publicly stated that Shannon Nyamodi was in fact the assailant who attacked her the night of August 6, 2012. It’s unclear after all this time, and without making statements to any media outlet since the crime occurred, why she has chosen a social media platform to vent her perspective on the case. More importantly, it should be noted that her recent statements contradict what police officials who were primary to the shooting scene that night, have documented in their reports related to the case. MacClean described to TPC in horrific detail the events of the night she was shot in the face, but her story doesn’t match what she told Franklin County Sheriff Deputy Barrett, nor Youngsville police Lt. M. Little. In fact statements she allegedly made to both officers contrasted, and it’s surprising that no mention was ever made of it from either police agency. In short MacClean told deputy Barrett that some unknown subject hit her in the head as she left her bedroom to check on her residence. MacClean told Lt. Little that she “heard the front door to her home open and went downstairs to see who and when she got downstairs she saw a man and she asked her daughter what was she doing and someone hit her in the head with the pole from behind her sliding door.”

Regardless of what anyone says about the case, these are the facts as reported by police officers who were at the scene that night. She describes being hit in the head and never mentioned anything about being shot by anyone (although police say they don’t believe MacClean realized that she had actually been shot,and probably mistakenly thought that she was struck with a pole). The odd part is that she described being hit in the head upstairs to Barrett and then downstairs to Lt. Little. Why isn’t it clear to her where she was attacked? Why wasn’t it clear to her that she had been shot? At some point she would have had to have remembered hearing the gun blast. I am wondering if the Complainant who filed for the arrest warrant for Shannon Nyamodi is aware of these contrasting statements that MacClean gave to police officers from different agencies? Take a look at snap shots from the reports and the contrasting statements below:

Snapshot from Deputy Barrett’s reports showing MacClean’s statement.

Snapshot from Lt. M. Little’s report highlighting MacClean’s statement.

Barrett’s Report PDF (Second Search Warrant Application at bottom of page 2)

Lt. M. Little Report PDF (Second report)

Now that we have established as a matter of fact that MacClean more than likely didn’t identify Shannon as the person who shot her that night,while communicating to police based on their initial reports that the assailant was some unknown person, and her statements to TPC describing having told police “there he is right there” becomes highly suspicious. For followers of this case to believe her now would mean that officers from the Franklin County Sheriff Department and the Youngsville Police were all incompetent, didn’t get it right, and failed to include such crucial information into police reports and  properly comprehend that she had fingered the perpetrator at the scene. It’s apparent that Nyamodi wasn’t identified as the shooter because he wasn’t immediately taken into custody, and an arrest warrant being obtain for him later on. Shannon was questioned at the scene and initially let go.

More disturbingly, when we digest all variations of MacClean’s account of that night (detailed in previous TPC articles) it’s revealed that she is actually saying there were three men invading the home at the time of the crime. The man who struck her in the head upstairs when she came out of her bedroom, the man who struck her in the head from behind the sliding door when she got downstairs (or Allegedly Shannon Nyamodi who the allege victim told TPC suddenly emerged from a bathroom, and shot her in the face “at point blank range”), and the man (allegedly Mike Young) who she says accosted her 13 year old handicapped daughter with a screwdriver while  all of these events played out in the home. Quite Frankly, the math isn’t hard to do here. A thorough investigator would have obtained all available data submitted in the case, including reports from personnel from other agencies who conducted field interviews with the victim and possible witnesses. This would have allowed lead investigators a complete look at how the crime possibly occurred.

It’s simply unimaginable that investigators would have accomplished this, had time to thoroughly examine data, and do so prior to obtaining an arrest warrant for Shannon Nyamodi by 3:10 p.m. which was the time of his arrest that day. Had investigators looked at all of the reports closely, they would have discovered the inconsistencies in the victims statements, and conducted a more thorough investigation to determine a clear picture of what she said occurred. The youth’s arrest within a twelve hour time frame when it was completely impossible to link him to the crime through any forensics evidence obtained from the crime scene such as DNA or fingerprints (Although the arrest, and search warrant for Nyamodi was obtained just hours after the crime, the warrant’s inclusion seeking DNA samples from the suspect couldn’t be obtained until he was actually in custody. How they linked him to any DNA before hand is confusing, and fingerprints potentially obtained from the crime scene couldn’t have linked him either, because he had never been printed before prior to his arrest for this crime.), continues to be problematic for authorities to establish compelling justification for charging Shannon in such a short time frame. To further compound these rather peculiar elements of this case, Deputy Barrett whose agency ultimately filed criminal charges against Shannon Nyamodi, indicated in his report that the “suspected shooter was no longer at the scene” upon police arrival, while he was securing the area of the crime.

We know this to be fact because Capt. William L. Mitchell, Barrett’s supervisor, included this information in his “Facts to Support Issuance of a Warrant” on the Franklin County’s Search Warrant application submitted before Superior Court Judge Hight.  These statements in the officer’s report alone are the most compelling indication that MaClean never identified Shannon Nyamodi as her shooter to police officers who interviewed her that night. This crucial information as outlined in official police documents related to this crime would also establish as a matter of fact, that even the Franklin County Sheriff’s Commander was under the impression that the assailant who shot Rhonda MacClean in the face was unknown to police when authorities sought a warrant to search the home where the crime occured, to obtain potential trace evidence in the crime.  View snapshots of Capt. Mitchell’s  Search Warrant Application highlighting “Facts to Support Issuance of a Warrant” indicating that the ‘suspected shooter was no longer at the crime scene” below:

Snapshot of Capt. William L. Mitchell’s Search Warrant Application indicating police officials believed that the suspect shooter was unknown to police at the time the document was submitted to Superior Court.

Capt. Mitchell’s Search Warrant Application (Page 2, item #3, of second Warrant Application)

The above contained information in this article should raise sufficient suspicion as to how the Franklin County Sheriff’s Office not only arrested Shannon Nyamodi during such early stages of their investigation into the shooting, but why he was even charged with the crime in the first place. Perhaps the apparent  and suspicious alteration of Capt. Mitchell’s Search Warrant application, authorized by Superior Court Judge Donald W. Stephens may spell a starting point where the confusion and potential conspiracy to convict an innocent man began. The document contains a handwritten addendum with the judge’s allege initials indicating his input of an 8th probable cause for a search warrant. It’s unethical for a judge issuing a warrant requested by a police agency to assist in the composition of such a crucial document. The altered document with such compelling content is not only highly suspect, but why on earth would the judge add such content, when it was Capt. Mitchell seeking the warrant. Judge Stephens wouldn’t have knowledge of Shannon’s alleged confession, he more than likely wasn’t there at the time (to do so would be totally inappropriate and unethical), and clearly the person who wrote Judge Stephens’ initials was completely ignorant to the fact that the initials should actually have been Capt. Mitchell’s (the person submitting the Warrant Application).

Though some documents often have such notation included, documents created for legal or criminal purposes that  are used as evidence in a court of law, almost never have handwritten adjustments because it gives the impression of impropriety related to a document’s authenticity, and such altered input on any document typically includes the date in which the alteration transpired. The Search Warrant document to search the residence where the shooting actually occurred and authorized by judge Stephens is void of any indicators establishing when it was altered. View the altered official document below, taking notice of the handwritten initials on the far right in cursive script.

The suspicious handwritten addendum to Capt. Mitchell’s Search Warrant Application authorized by Judge Donald W. Stephens, with Stephens’ allege initials altering the document.

See Capt. Mitchell’s (full Warrant Application above)

A closer look at the addendum reveals that the handwriting on the Search warrant document isn’t consistent with judge Stephens signature. It appears to be a close match, but clearly who ever initialed the document is a different author in comparison to Stephens’ signature.(Note: judge Stephens’ signature is in full cursive script, while the initials appear to be composed with cursive and manuscript.) Compare the initials in the addendum above to the judge’s actual signature below, taking notice of the manner in which both letters S, and D are written.

Judge Stephens’ actual signature.

These findings are completely disturbing especially when we ponder why a Superior Court judge would alter an official court document, which could be construed as unethical on their part. Even if it was communicated to the judge by Capt. Mitchell or any other police official that Shannon Nyamodi had in fact confessed to the crime, how is it possible that police authorities were able to omit such compelling evidence in the Search Warrant Application requiring the addendum in the first place, related to such a serious violent crime? It can easily be established if the judge actually did input the handwritten addendum and if it is determined not to be an authentic alteration by him, it establishes that the document was altered by some official within the Franklin County Clerk’s Office who had access to the case file, and was done so after the document had been created and signed by the judge.

Moreover, since Ms. Elizabeth Crudup has continuously stated that her son has never as a matter fact, confessed to shooting Rhonda MacClean in the face nor robbing her on the night of the crime, only heightens suspicion as to why a County Clerk official with access to the case file would alter an official document indicating that the youth did in fact confess to the crime. All of these strange circumstances pertaining to official documentation in the case file, coupled with the state’s attorney prosecuting the crime strange motion to have the case taken off the court’s Management Docket System indefinitely is simply very troubling at the very least.

TPC has also discovered that the Franklin County Deputy who is listed as the complainant on Shannon Nyamodi’s arrest warrant and his indictment is actually a sheriff deputy assigned to a district in Bunn, North Carolina. It’s certainly not uncharacteristic for law enforcement officials from other jurisdictions to take part in a criminal investigation outside of their assigned area, but Deputy Ralph D. Almkuist’s request for Shannon’s arrest is highly suspect considering no incident reports related to this particular crime is available suggesting his involvement in the investigative process in this case. Deputy Almkuist even expressed doubt regarding Shannon’s guilt when he spoke to Ms. Crudup the day Shannon’s case was being indicted at the Superior Court House. Almkuist was pulled away from his discussion with Shannon’s mother, and after he came back out of the Sheriff’s office, he abruptly told Ms. Crudup that he couldn’t speak to her again.

Furthermore, documents in the case are void of any reports mentioning investigative findings by Almkuist, his participation in any way, nor any conclusions resolved by him to justify arresting Shannon Nyamodi for this crime. Captain Mitchell’s (Commander) Application outlining “Facts to Support Issuance of a Warrant” only indicated Deputy A. Barret as the affiant who contributed investigative data to Command regarding details obtained by The Franklin County Sheriff’s Department from the scene of this crime. Typically, police who actively work crime scenes act as a complainant in arrest warrants for suspects in a crime, because they have first hand knowledge regarding the particulars of the criminal investigation. Deputy Almkuist’s involvement in the arrest process gives the impression that he obtained the warrant under the direction of a superior, heightens suspicion when compiled with other very irregular elements of this case, and especially considering Almkuist’s assigned area is four towns away from Youngsville where the crime occurred. See a copy below of Shannon Nyamodi’s actual arrest warrant with Deputy Ralph D. Almkuist as the complainant seeking his arrest:

Deputy Raplh D. Almkuist’s arrest warrant complaint for Shannon Nyamodi. Deputy Almkuist is assigned to Bunn, North Carolina four towns away from where the crime actually occurred.

Shannon Nyamodi Search and Arrest Warrant PDF

The fact that a sheriff deputy from another jurisdiction so far away actually sought an arrest warrant for Shannon Nyamodi in this case, it leaves the door of suspicion wide open for followers of this story to doubt whether Deputies involved in the actual investigation (like Deputy A. Barrett), and those assigned to the Youngsville area are convinced of the youth’s guilt. Any police official may present an arrest warrant before the courts to have a suspect brought into custody, but when they do so, they are compelled to sworn testimony just like a normal citizen in a court of law. I can’t see how Almkuist could do so when he didn’t actively participate in an active investigation. This leans toward further suspicion that he did so as a direct order. Obviously Capt. Mitchell didn’t direct him, although he out ranks deputy Almkuist, but he isn’t his commanding officer. Clearly someone within management outside uniformed area commands with authority to pull personnel from so far away gave the direction for Almkuist to obtain the warrant.

I further support this argument by highlighting a known fact that police personnel are often consumed with paper work related to cases they be involved in, and even if supervision request personnel to obtain warrants as a favor due to someone’s inability to do so, the request are usually met with opposition. Police named as complainants in arrest warrants must appear before the courts related to any arrest. Most responsible officers would never do so without knowledge of the particulars of a case, and this is why I believe Almkuist was more than likely directed to obtain the warrant without being actively involved in the investigation. I believe his direction probably came from the Sheriff’s office itself.

To Be Continued ..

The People’s Champion

I’m David Adams