The night that Rhonda McClean was shot in the face at point blank range and robbed of nearly $65,000.00 dollars has always been a very troubling story. The victim only told cops that her daughter was involved in the crime, and police reports from officers who were primary to the scene that night all indicate at the very minimum, that she didn’t know who attacked her. So, when young Shannon Nyamodi was locked up hours later and charged with the heinous crime on August 16, 2012, suspicion began to surface related to how police were able to connect the dots, concluding that the youth was the actual perpetrator during such an early stage of the investigation. More importantly. forensics (i.e. trace evidence such as DNA, finger prints, ballistics, etc.) nor eyewitness accounts from individuals from the scene that night could have linked Shannon to the crime, because official reports establish that two police agencies had determined that “the suspected shooter was no longer at the scene,” and with the youth not having a criminal past of any kind underscores the lack of probable cause police had to arrest the youth for this crime.

To highlight my argument, the police’ theory that young Shannon and the victim’s daughter had conspired to kill the woman in this robbery tale, was never thoroughly investigated, and must come under serious scrutiny. Shannon Nyamodi was arrested on August 16, 2012 at 3:10 p.m. approximately ten hours after cops had obtained a search warrant to process 109 Shearin Court, which was the actual location of the crime scene. Police weren’t made away of the allege plot and conspiracy until August 17, 2012 at approximately 4:30 p.m., when Youngsville police officer Lt. Little filed his report outlining information provided to him by an allege Confidential Informant (CI) implicating the youth in the crime (a little over 24 hours after Shannon Nyamodi had been arrested and charged with the crime). The allege CI’s hearsay statement to Youngsville police has always been the premise for suspecting Shannon Nyamodi being involved in this crime. The CI also alleges that another man had text from Facebook detailing Shannon and the victim’s daughter plotting to commit the crime. View an excerpt from Lt. Little’s report below:

Please take note that although Lt. Little’s report indicates that he became aware of this information alleging Shannon Nyamodi’s involvement in the crime, the date in which he filed his report (lower right) was actually three days after the crime on August 19, 2012.

Lt. Little’s Entire Report

Despite the peculiarity of the police’ conspiracy theory having been obtained after Shannon was arrested, Lt. Little’s official report detailing the youth’s involvement was submitted on August 19, 2012, and no explanation as to why the report was delayed. TPC has long suspected that Little’s report was problematic because it’s written on a Supplementary Investigation form. The very term “Supplementary” infers that the report was an addition to some previously written report, and the case file is void of any documentation suggesting that the ranking police official had submitted any other report related to the case (view the heading of Lt. Little’s report from the link above).

On August 21, 2012 four days after Youngsville police acquired information pertaining to Shannon Nyamodi’s alleged involvement in the crime, State Bureau of Investigations (SBI) Special Agent J.E. Heinrich, and FCSO deputy Ralph Almkuist conducted an interview with an allege associate of Shannon Nyamodi, Donald James Chalk (D.J. Chalk). Chalk allegedly told the officials that Shannon had contacted him via text on Facebook two days prior to the shooting (August 14, 2012), inquiring whether he (D.J.) still had a shotgun, and d.J. indicated that he did. Shannon was allegedly supposed to have requested to borrow the weapon because “we need it”, according to a search warrant application for seizure of Shannon’s and his allege co defendant’s (victim’s daughter) Facebook accounts. According to the same search warrant application affidavit, D.J. even showed an allege text exchange between him and Shannon Nyamodi to investigators. View an excerpt from the Facebook search warrant application investigators submitted for seizure and discovery of alleged text items evidentiary to the crime below:

Note the highlighted area describing investigator’s claim of having viewed a “snapshot” of the allege text exchange regarding the shotgun between D.J. and Shannon Nyamodi.

The Facebook search warrant document appears to be a measure that investigators took in an effort to build a case linking Shannon Nyamodi to the victim’s daughter, which would substantiate the conspiracy theory cops alleged. However, the document has strangely appeared in the case file at the county clerk’s office, and the file itself still doesn’t include separate reports by Special Agent Heinrich or FCSO deputy Ralph Almkuist detailing their investigative findings (standard procedure) to create probable cause for the Facebook search warrant in the first place. Also, investigators appear to have bought into D.J.’s story without conducting a thorough investigation into his allegations. The Facebook search warrant reveals some troubling aspects of the investigation establishing the allege conspiracy between Shannon and his co defendant:

1. The Facebook search warrant application indicates that Heinrich and Almkuist only viewed a snapshot of the allege text exchange, and states that Heinrich only noted the information without attempting to get the evidence in a more tangible fashion (i.e. obtaining a copy of the image, getting an actual screen shot of the image from D.J.’s Facebook account).

2. Investigators failed to substantiate if D.J. was even an associate of Shannon’s or another potential conspirator involved in the case. The volume of eye witness statements given to police the night of the crime, and specifically accounts of a white male having fled the scene should have made cops more hard pressed to verify D.J.’s story (no reports exist indicating such extensive investigation was ever conducted).

3. No police reports from investigators indicating that D.J.’s Facebook page was ever actually viewed to substantiate his story, and images of D.J. posing with a volume of cash the next day after the crime, and several people having stated that D.J. is actually the person who shot Rhonda McClean in the face that night creates suspicion surrounding why the police failed to delve deeper into D.J.’s conspiracy theory. View what cops indicated in the Facebook search warrant application that was supposed to have been a text exchange between D.J. and Shannon Nyamodi below:

Now view an image of Donald James “DJ” Chalk which he posted on his Facebook wall the very next day. If investigators had been more proactive investigating D.J.’s conspiracy theory, a connection could possibly have been made surrounding the volume of cash he is pictured with, and rumors circulating that he may in fact have been the actual perpetrator of this crime:

Notice the image of a screen capture from D.J.’s Facebook page (circled in yellow to the right) was posted on August 17, 2012, a day after the crime occurred.

It’s ironic that the guy various people within the community are blaming this heinous crime on, is posting pictures of himself with a volume of cash on Facebook, and while he just happens to be the source from which the conspiracy theory between Shannon Nyamodi and the victim’s daughter originated from. It’s also very strange that all of these investigative findings are taking place after Shannon had already been taken into custody. Usually, it works the other way around. The cops conduct investigations into crimes to build sufficient evidence and probable cause to arrest, and charge criminals suspected of committing a crime. Some how it seems that police had extra sensory perception, knowing that all of these allegations against Shannon Nyamodi would be surfacing, and took the kid into custody and charged him before hand. Witnesses also revealed that at the time of the shooting, D,J, Chalk was unemployed, living at home in his parent’s trailer, and had been boasting about having committed the crime.

Even local TV channel 5 (WRAL) reported that the alleged text and Facebook exchanges existed between Shannon Nyamodi and the victim’s teen daughter, plotting to kill her mother for money, according to police reports the media outlet had obtained in the case, and bolstering the conspiracy theory the Franklin County Sheriff’s office had claimed. View an actual channel 5 clip below:

WRAL Coverage of the Crime

The text messages and Facebook exchanges between the two suspects wouldn’t have been the only evidence available for investigators to make a determination as to who committed the crime. Shannon Nyamodi’s attorney Maitry “Mike” Klinkosum filed discovery motions to obtain all evidence against his client. This would have included DNA, fingerprints, clothing items, ballistic testing, and even the alleged weapon used in the crime. None of these requested documents have ever been in the case file at the county clerk’s office, and still are missing. Strangely, in recent days some items have some how found their way back in the file, but critical documents necessary to substantiate charges against Shannon Nyamodi aren’t present. The DNA testing conducted for comparison purposes which could place Shannon at the actual crime scene is missing. Also, the mysterious finger print that investigators lifted off of the sliding glass door, that one account of the victim alleges her assailant came from, also doesn’t have documentation in the file establishing if it matched Shannon’s print profile.

It’s simply unimaginable that such crucial evidence mysteriously isn’t present in either of the two files for the case at the clerk’s office. These missing documents are problematic and directly challenges why prosecutors have been hiding the case within it’s docket system (by taking it off of the docket entirely). However, the file does strangely have a continuance motion submitted by Klinkosum requesting continuance in the case. Klinkosum alleges in the document that Shannon Nyamodi “is in agreement with this Motion to Continue and does not, in anyway, make any request for speedy trial at this time.” See an excerpt from the motion below:

At the same time Klinkosum is alleging that Shannon Nyamodi doesn’t want a speedy trial, the file includes a handwritten request for a speedy trial just a little over a week prior to Klinkosum having allegedly filed for a continuance in the case. More interestingly though, Shannon’s case appeared on the January 21, 2014 docket any way and if the prosecutors were aware that Klinkosum wanted to continue the case, why on earth would prosecutors schedule the case for January 21, 2014. Take a look at Shannon Nyamodi’s handwritten request for a speedy trial with the reception from Klinkosum’s office handwriting indicating the date and time that she received it in the law firm’s office below:

Shannon Nyamodi’s handwritten request for a speedy trial.

The request for a speedy trial was done at the direction of Superior Court Judge Robert Hobgood, who actually drove Shannon’s mother to the Franklin County Jail that day to make sure she got to see her son (jail officials had been denying her access to Shannon). Shannon also signed his Habeas Corpus the same day. These facts establish that he wanted his case resolved in a speedy fashion. Why on earth would he suddenly change his mind only eight days later, on January 14, 2014 the day Klinkosum allegedly filed for a contiuance, and claiming that Shannon didn’t want a speedy trial? The Nyamodi family had long suspected that Klinkosum was working against Shannon, because he has repeatedly been requesting for Shannon to take a plea deal. The Continuance motion that Klinkosum submitted also alleges that the defense and prosecution were working on a non-trial resolution of the case. That statement alone confirms Klinkosum is working against young Shannon Nyamodi because he has never considered taking a deal, continuously maintained his innocence, and exposes Klinkosum’s out right lie presented before the court in this case.

Assistant District Attorney Annette Sellers and attorney Klinkosum’ idea of a non-trial resolution is utilizing pressuring tactics (i.e. housing Shannon in segregation, harassing him in jail, denying him access to his family, etc.) in an effort to wear him down, and get him to agree to a plea deal in the case. The prosecutor has even been to the jail to solicit a plea arrangement from Shannon without his attorney present, or authorization from Shannon Nyamodi himself. Kilnkosum also threatened Shannon and members of his family by stating “if you talk to anyone about this case, your mother, or try to hire another attorney I will help the prosecution convict you, and make sure you get 30 years in prison.” A prosecutor’s office desperate for a plea from a criminal (rarely seen), a threatening defense lawyer, and the bizarre circumstance of Shannon Nyamodi’s case having bee taken off of the docket, and continued for so long underscores serious problems with the case against this young defendant.

The Bombshell

All of these peculiar circumstances in this case seem like a script straight out of a made for T.V. movie, but one document recently discovered in the case file that wasn’t present before, shreds tremendous light on this entire matter, and establishes why Shannon Nyamodi should never have been charged for this crime from the very start. All of the “mumbo jumbo” included in the Facebook search warrant application where D.J. Chalk provides cops with the conspiracy theory, which he successfully convinced Special Agent J.E. Heinrich and FCSO deputy Ralph Almkuist that Shannon Nyamodi requested to borrow a shotgun from him to commit the crime was a “freaking” lie. The document goes as for to describe these investigators as having actually viewed the text exchange between D.J. and Shannon. They apparently bought his story and applied for a search warrant to seize the Facebook Accounts of Shannon Nyamodi and the victim’s daughter, to establish communication between the pair who allegedly conspired to commit the crime.

In the Facebook warrant State Bureau of Investigations Special Agent J.E. Heinrich goes to great length detailing the alleged conspiracy theory, that Shannon Nyamodi had conspired with the victim’s daughter to commit what has been described as a “murder for hire scheme.” Alleging that the youth utilized text messages and Facebook to plot out the crime, Heinrich also attempts to establish that Shannon Nyamodi also communicated with D.J. Chalk (witness) soliciting to borrow a shotgun from him to met out the crime. Heinrich sold the story to Superior Court Judge Donald W. Stephens who authorized the Facebook warrant, without Heinrich conducting extensive investigation into what he claims to have seen on D.J.’s cell phone. Judge Stephens also apparently didn’t verify that substantial probable cause existed for the warrant either. They both were proven to be sorely mistaken, and the information investigators received from D.J. Chalk imploded in their faces.

On August 27, 2012 (only 11 days after the crime) SBI Special Agent J.E. Heinrich applied for a search warrant for the Facebook accounts of Shannon Nyamodi (“Negrito Rockmykrates Fuego”) and his alleged co defendant (victim’s daughter identified as username “Sammi Marie MacClean”) to confirm witness statements alleging communication between the pair while plotting the crime. SBI SA Heinrich concluded his search of the accounts the same day, according to the search warrant affidavit filed with the clerk’s office, and no record was discovered substantiating that Shannon Nyamodi communicate with the victim’s daughter, or D.J. Chalk for that matter as Chalk had told investigators. View the Inventory of Items Seized as Pursuant to Search Order authorized by judge Donald W. Stephens that was submitted to the county clerk’s office by Special Agent J.E. Heinrich below:

Take note of the areas circled in yellow indicating that no records were found (establishing that Shannon Nyamodi hadn’t communicated with D.J. nor the co defendant at all on Facebook) and that Heinrich actually swore to the document before a court official on November 11, 2012, nearly three months after the search was conducting, and findings were revealed to him.

Moreover, the case file doesn’t contain a search warrant for cellphone records revealing evidence that Shannon and his minor co defendant had exchanged text messages as reports of witness accounts had alleged. In fact, there will never be any such evidence presented by investigators or the prosecutor’s office, because Shannon Nyamodi didn’t own a cell at the time the crime was committed, and wasn’t friends with the girl. This document hadn’t previously been in the case file, but it’s sudden emergence establishes the most exculpatory evidence for Shannon Nyamodi so far in this case. It’s also suspected that the highly discussed finger print  from the glass door at the crime scene documentation and findings aren’t in the file because it’s not Shannon Nyamodi’s print, and the DNA comparisons of Shannon for alleged bloody clothing items at the crime scene, paperwork findings aren’t in the file either, and likely for the same reason. The test results more than likely exclude Shannon as the contributor. Why else are these documents missing? Why else would a prosecutor take a criminal case completely off the docket if they had real culpable evidence against this young man?

Upon Special Agent Heinrich’ discovery that no records existed within the searched Facebook accounts linking Shannon Nyamodi to any communication with his allege co defendant or witness D.J.’s “shotgun story”, the entire course of the investigation should have shifted. The case from the very start has always been predicated on a theory that Shannon had been hired by the victim’s daughter to kill her mother, for a $3,000.00 payment in return. Without cellphone records establishing the allege text message communications between the two, the entire conspiracy theory is destroyed because the Facebook warrant completely dismisses any notion that Shannon Nyamodi communicated with the co defendant or D.J. Chalk whatsoever.  Special Agent Heinrich’ delay in submitting his findings to the court (11/20/12 and nearly 3 months later) is not only very concerning, but could be interpreted as suppression of evidence considering the magnitude of what his discovery reveals. The Facebook search warrant findings coupled with all of the other crucial documents, related to DNA testing, fingerprints, and ballistic findings being missing from the case file, all establish serious doubt that the Franklin County sheriff’s Office had probable cause to charge Shannon Nyamodi. The prosecutor’s office was also fully aware of the Facebook warrant findings, and the other missing paperwork.

Now that sufficient evidence exist completely dispelling fabricated stories related to Shannon Nyamodi conspiring with the victim’s daughter to kill her mother, and another man (D.J. Chalk) attempting to acquire a shotgun to use in the crime, a microscope must be placed over the Franklin County Sheriff’s office entire investigation to determine how Shannon was charged. We have already revealed that some unknown person wrote a handwritten addendum on the search warrant application used to obtain Shannon’s DNA, alleging that he had confessed to the crime while admitting to his co defendant’s involvement in the crime plot. The Facebook warrant findings sheds tremendous doubt that Shannon Nyamodi ever confessed to the crime, and the person who wrote the suspicious confession addendum on the affidavit falsified an official court document. No evidence exist anywhere establishing that Shannon Nyamodi even knew this girl or D.J. Chalk. Where did the investigation go once SA Heinrich discovered no Facebook connections between to the alleged suspects?

Instead of doing the right thing by conducting a more thorough investigation into this crime or either simply releasing Shannon Nyamodi, those in control of this entire matter chose to subvert, suppress, and maliciously prosecute this young man without sufficient evidence to support their charges. Let’s face it, the Facebook search warrant application derived from a lie provided to investigators by a witness (D.J. Chalk). When Heinrich made his discoveries related to that warrant, further investigation should have transpired, and primarily determining why D.J. had lied to police. Interestingly though, how did Heinrich see the allege text exchange between D.J. and Shannon on a cellphone as the Facebook warrant application he submitted described. Either D.J. or Heinrich are telling a lie. Who is telling the truth? What’s known for certain is that a lie (regardless of who created it) was utilized to obtain a search warrant, and the warrant’s findings didn’t support investigators’ premise for the obtaining it.

Serious questions arise now, like why didn’t investigators obtain a warrant for D.J.’s Facebook account after determining that he lied to police? Why wasn’t a warrant obtained for the allege shotgun that D.J. said Shannon Nyamodi wanted to borrow for the crime? Hell, that actually could have been the weapon used in the shooting. Why wasn’t a search warrant obtained for D.J.’s cellphone records? If he had an allege text message exchange with Shannon Nyamodi, wouldn’t investigator’s want to know what they actual saw on his cellphone, or what other evidence might be on their? All of these question have strong merit considering D.J. admits to having a discussion with Shannon regarding a weapon to use in a serious violent crime. Investigators had probable cause to pursue these investigations solely on the lie D.J. told them about having exchanged text messages with Shannon. In most jurisdictions in america it’s against the law to lie to police investigators, but for some reason no “bones” were apparently ever made with D.J. by the cops regarding the false information he provided to them. Now it makes since why Special Agent J.E. Heinrich perhaps was delayed in submitting his findings to the court. I personally would feel like an idiot if I presented such a warrant application before a judge, only for the evidence to come back dismissing my entire theory pertaining to my sworn statement before the court. Heinrich probably submitted the findings at a period of time when no one would be asking questions. It was nearly three months after the actual crime, all of the local buzz regarding the case had died down, and by the time it was submitted everyone probably had forgotten about the lie D.J. told the cops.

The Facebook warrant findings document some how showed up in the case file at the clerk’s office, and who ever put it there probably intended for it to get the exposure that will most certainly derive from such a discovery. Investigators knew a little over a week after this crime that a conspiracy between Shannon Nyamodi and the victim’s daughter more than likely never occurred, and the document was suppressed by all involved, solely for the purpose of prosecuting an innocent man. To do this to anyone is a very serious miscarriage of justice, but to snatch the life, liberty, and pursuant of happiness away from a young man willing to die for his country, is simply one of the most saddest commentaries I’ve ever composed. Free  Shannon Nyamodi! An army is forming!!

To Be Continued ..

The People’s Champion

I’m David Adams

The tears have all dried up now, with no more lights from news cameras, and the story of young Phylicia Simone Barnes seems to have been so long ago. The memory of a pretty book smart kid from the rural south lives on through those who knew and loved her, but the story line which tells of her tragic ending is a constant reminder why we must never forget how she came to such a horrific demise. For many, tomorrow’s start of the second trial of Michael Johnson for allegedly killing the Barnes teen, seems insignificant because so many others who the public believes were involved in her death have already walked free. The state’ mishandling of the first trial which resulted in Johnson having been convicted, leaves much skepticism as to whether anyone will ever be brought to justice for killing young Phylicia.

So much appears to have been over looked during the investigation into her killing, and nothing could ever fill the void which now lingers in the hearts and minds of her family and friends, who mourn the lost of such a promising kid now gone forever. Perhaps the greatest tragedy of this case is the trust that her family instilled in state prosecutors, who failed miserably to bring her killer(s) to justice, and little faith is held that they’ll finally get it right the second time around. The loss of the state’ star witness hinders their theory that Michael Johnson alone murdered the child, and makes a case with only circumstantial evidence an even more difficult upheaval to convict Johnson for this crime. The lead investigator of the Barnes murder was removed from the case, subsequently charged with misconduct in an unrelated case involving his own daughter, and the state’ failure to disclose documents which could have been viewed as exculpatory evidence for Johnson have all created serious suspicion regarding the prosecutor’s case against Michael Johnson.

Some believe that the state weighed too heavily upon the testimony of a known petty criminal, and instilled hope that a sex tape which captured Johnson, the Barnes teen, and others completely nude would convince a jury into coming back with a conviction. Those tactics seemingly prevailed until prosecutors failed to disclose that James McCrae (star witness) had lied on the stand about his involvement as a witness for a criminal case in Montgomery County. That revelation almost certainly would have caused Johnson’s conviction to be overturned, and if the state had turned such discovery over in a timely fashion, there would be no lingering thoughts of prosecutors attempting to “railroad” an innocent man. Now potential jurors for the second trial may serve with some form of prejudice, thinking that Johnson is being falsely charged with her killing. It’s an unfortunate reality, but prosecutors should have known better, and especially considering the history of Baltimore juries having suspicion, and anti police sentiments returning questionable verdicts even in cases where the evidence clearly points to guilt of the defendant.

Followers of this case must be mindful that police never produced any forensics which actually linked Johnson to the crime, and although many believe that he was at the very least involved in the disposal of the teen’s body, the cops never followed other leads which potentially implicate others in this crime, and as a result Michael Johnson could actually walk from these charges. As outrageous as my perspective may seem, the story of young Phylicia Barnes’ murder trial is a typical saga played out in Maryland courts when prosecutors attempt to gain a tactical advantage in criminal cases while prosecuting defendants of color. In Baltimore city alone, the issue of failing to turn over discovery evidence continues to plague the criminal justice process, and this unexpected element of the Phylicia Barnes murder case makes her story even more tragic. However, Johnson’s previous attorney has already announced that he will no longer be representing Johnson in his pending trial, because Michael Johnson can no longer afford legal expenses for his defense. Johnson who remains detained at the Baltimore City Detention Center awaiting his retrial will be represented by a public defender.

Also, despite Johnson being the only person on the hook for the Barnes teen murder, others suspected by an outraged public, will play a crucial role in how this case finally plays out. Deena Barnes who is the half sibling of Phylicia was an important element of the state’ case during the first trial. The older Barnes female testified in court that Johnson had attempted to fondle her young sibling in front of her. That testimony coincided with the state’ theory that Johnson had sexual desires for the teen. It’s not certain that Barnes will even testify in this trial considering that she no longer lives in the Baltimore area. Deena is believed to have struck a deal with prosecutors for her testimony, to avoid charges surrounding what many believe amount to child endangerment. Barnes testified in court that she allowed her minor sibling to drink alcohol and smoke pot during Phylicia’s visits to Baltimore. Deena had previously lied on podcast, to the media, and Phylicia’s mother about what was actually occurring at her apartment while the teen stayed there. Drugs, alcohol, and a volume of young men seemed to fuel a party like atmosphere which included a sex game called “joinking.”

It’s that very culture and environment she was exposed to, coupled with the older Barnes’ failure to protect young Phylica that many believe is the actual cause of the child’s demise. Now over three years later, there only appears to be a glimmer of hope that anyone will be held responsible for her killing. Phylicia Barnes was an innocent, naïve, silly, but book smart kid who fell victim to a gang of monsters who manipulated her, cornered her, and meted out sexual desires before discarding of her body in a river. To her mother Janice Mustafa, Phylicia was like a precious flower, and it’s just unfair that her daughter has been taken away from her, while the cowardice monsters who took her life remain free. May justice prevail in this senseless and tragic case. Rest now pretty flower, for you are remembered, and loved.,

To Be Continued ..

The People’s Champion

I’m David Adams

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