Litigation Update—The Cover-up and Conspiracy Continues

On June 14, 2017, I filed an Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Seeking Relief from Final Conviction under Code of Criminal Procedure Article 11.07, Motion for Recusal of Judge, Motion to Transfer Venue, and Sworn Affidavit of Helen Mayfield in Support of Writ of Habeas Corpus. The clerk filed those motions and sent copies to the District Attorney.  The State filed its answer on June 28, 2017. I received it on July 5, 2017. No hearing was held on the Motion to Recuse or the Motion to transfer Venue. My Motion to Recuse was not referred to the judge until after July 10, 2017. On July 13, 2017, my motion to recuse was denied without a hearing and there was no response to my Motion to Transfer Venue. I have not received a notice of hearing for my absolute innocence portion of my motion from the court. This hearing is required when one alleges absolute innocence. Per the Texas Banking Code, I had no criminal liability for any checks when I was prosecuted as I had no liability for endorsement. The checks had not been sent to an article 4 bank or notified of dishonor within thirty days of presentment. Additionally, I have never been accused, tried and convicted of the charge of forgery of a financial instrument by passing forged documents anywhere in the universe. I represented myself. I have never participate in any trial with this charge. I  have learned that a secret trial was conducted. I did not participate. I believe secret trials in criminal cases are unconstitutional. It violates the Texas and United States Constitution. It violates the Sixth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments. Secret criminal trials as being conducted in Texas. This judge has been creating and falsifying court documents.  This is criminal conduct.

The Administrative Judge Underwood ruled that he was not going to conduct a hearing on my motion to recuse because the Judge refused to recuse himself voluntarily and the essence of my motion was that I was unhappy with some rulings of the Judge in the past. He did not believe that I had filed anything since 2007. In point of fact, I filed several Writs of Habeas Corpus and Motions to have the judgment corrected after 2007 along with twenty seven motions and appeals to 10th Court of Apeals, in federal court in 2012, 5th Circuit and the United States Supreme Court.  I filed a sworn affidavit which I am including below:

STATE OF TEXAS

HARRIS COUNTY

SWORN  AFFIDAVIT OF

HELEN MAYFIELD IN SUPPORT OF WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

 

COMES  NOW HELEN MAYFIELD, THE DEFENDANT, who files this affidavit in support of her Writ of Habeas Corpus and states as follows:

1. In November 2016, the 10^th Court of Appeals refused to sell me a copy of my original appeal. They reported that it was lost or destroyed.  They were unable to sell me a copy of my appeal. They had an alternative appeal with my name on it that was not my case. I was the lead attorney in my case. I did not know about or participate in this case in any form. This was the first time that I had seen this opinion. I was my appellate attorney. This was a fabricated case by someone. It was not my case.
2. The 10^th Court of Appeals had an appeal for the crime of forgery of a financial instrument by passing forged documents that had a Helen Mayfield defendant. It was not my appeal or case as I have never been charged, tried and convicted of this crime anywhere in the universe. I did not participate in this trial.
3. I am innocent of this crime and have never been convicted of this crime anywhere. You are innocent of a crime until proven guilty in America. I have never been proven guilty of this crime by a jury.
4. I now have evidence of prosecutorial misconduct on the part of the prosecution :
5. I have seen copies of witness statements of Lt. James Arnold, two employees of the 1^st National Bank of Bryan, a letter of an attorney of the Justice Department, Secret Service Agent Steven Byrd, investigations of Schneider cited in the 10^th Court of Appeals opinion which were concealed from the defense and indicate the witnesses committed perjury in the trial and if the witness statements had been presented to the defense prior to the trial or during the trial, the results of the trial might be different as they might have been impeached by their perjury. E-mails were withheld from the defense that would have completely exonerated me from any crime.
6. I now have evidence that the prosecutor of Bryan/College Station police has been burglarizing my apartment which I cannot cite in this memo because of threats and two attempts on my life, robbery of my safety deposit box at Capitol One Bank, robbery of my files stored with the church, and burglaries of my car and apartment on numerous occasions and the total destruction of all court records, refusal to provide copies of those records to me for appeal by the District Clerk Mark Hamlin since 2010. I will be able to present proof in a hearing. I paid $475.00 plus from the District Clerk and was given bogus indictments and files and was told that they have lost or destroyed the original trial transcript and it was no longer available. They no longer have the clerk record or court reporter’s record. The court reporter refuses to give me a free copy of the record per court order or sell me as copy of my trial transcript. I attempted to buy a copy of the record  from Laura Bailey after she told the judicial commission that she would sell me a copy of the record and she sold us a bogus record that that did not have anything to do with my trial. My friend, Attorney Emil Sargent was sent this bogus record that had nothing to do with my trial and I did not participate in this trial. The 10th Court of Appeals reports it has lost or destroyed my original appeal. They refused to sell me a copy of the opinion in my case in November, 2016. No records exist in my case in Texas or all courts refuse to sell me copies of that record. No record or my indictments exist anywhere. My records in my safety deposit box were stolen from Capitol One Bank.
7. There is no statute, rule, code or law that allows a defendant to be tried and convicted of one charge or crime and after conviction and appeal,  another crime for which no charge, trial or conviction is conducted and there is no notice to the defendant and her attorney of this new crime. No trial is ever conducted on the new charge.
8. Prosecutorial Misconduct by the Spoliation of evidence and the record has occurred in my case such that there is no evidence of my original case in existence now in any court in Texas.
9.  I presented my pleadings on appeal to federal court and all of my documents were stolen by someone, destroyed and new documents created.
10. An investigation has revealed that there is no clerk or reporter’s record at this time for my trial except my personal records that I have for my trial. I sent the U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder a copy of my trial which will allow the police and prosecutors and other officials to be prosecuted for abuse of power and prosecutorial misconduct in the altering of court documents.
11. The conspiracy of the part of officials in Brazos County and the state make it dangerous for me to provide copies of my personal documents at this time. The threats on my life and attempts have been real.
12. The record has been spoiled because the State knew at the time of my prosecution that there were no criminal charges that could have been brought against me except the traffic violation. Lt. Arnold’s sworn testimony on the record was that warrantless searches were conducted of my home because I had never been convicted of anything but traffic violations.
13. Absolute innocence of any crime is the reason my home has been burglarized one or twice a week since 2010 when I was released from prison and why my son’s apartment has been burglarized and ransacked on a regular basis. No warrants are ever left after burglaries.
14. Witnesses have informed me that the College Station Police have been seen burglarizing my son’s apartment.
15. I am absolutely innocent of the crime charged as well as the crime currently listed with the court of appeals.
16. Brady violations of concealing exculpatory evidence such as bank records, witness statements, not disclosing perjury of its witnesses, etc. are the reasons for this Writ of Habeas Corpus. For example, in 2011, I sued The Eagle Paper and KTBX TV. They produced a sworn affidavit from Lt. James Arnold in which he lied or committed perjury for a warrant alleging that I had admitted cashing checks for a percentage since 2001.  This was a lie and this probable cause was concealed from me by the prosecution and had it been disclosed could have impeached Lt. Arnold and the result of my trial might have been different. The prosecution reported that no probable cause existed at the trial and never produced a probable cause.
17. I have only learned of this evidence after my appeal as I did not learn of the destruction of all of the records in my case until less than one year ago. All records were withheld from me before, during and after my trial. Copies of these witness statements and probable cause support my writ and motions. They will be provided.

 

More deposant sayeth not.

I am going to include the contents of motion so that you can see the unfairness of the matter.

DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR RECUSAL OF JUDGE

TO THE HONORABLE STEVEN SMITH JUDGE OF SAID COURT,

COMES NOW Helen Mayfield, Defendant, by and through herself, pro se, files this Defendant’s constitutional motion for Recusal of Judge and would show the court as follows:

1. Defendant was originally charged with the offense of forgery of a financial instrument.
2. Such cases were filed in the Justice of the Peace Boyette’s Court and later filed by the prosecutor and assigned to 361 District Court of Brazos County, Texas presided over by Judge Steven Smith.
3. Judge Smith was not a fair and impartial trier of the facts evidenced by the fact that he had a prior bias against the defendant such that at time he refused to be civil or professional in her presence. He and four judges used a check from Wachovia that they knew was obtained illegally in warrantless searches of the defendant’s home on August 7, 2007 that he knew was barred from use by statute in order to “obtain evidence to support a warrant.” He allowed this illegal evidence to be used in the trial despite the criminal code and the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure in violation of defendant’s civil rights. He admitted his conduct in the Hearing to Set an Appeal Bond in 2008.
4. He engaged in official oppression when he allowed the destruction of the record of defendant’s original trial and allowed secret criminal trials in violation of the Texas and United States Constitution as the defendant was never informed of the charges, the trials or allowed to participate in them. He signed documents in this secret Trial.
5. He denied the defendant subpoena power by refusing to conduct pretrial hearings which denied her due process.
6. He had a personal bias against the defendant prior to her trial evidenced by his removing her from the court appointed list without a reason or a hearing. He personally stated and showed animus toward me even in the presence of my clients. He once left the courtroom in anger after I had come down from Dallas for the plea hearing and did refused to talk to me or discuss setting a new hearing.
7. He is an active participant of official oppression against the defendant in the county and would be a party in a civil suit because of possible criminal behavior despite immunity by judges.  Documents in the file contain his signature or have been removed that contained his signature indicating he is altering and falsifying documents.
8. This Motion is brought pursuant to Rule 18(b)(2) of the Texas Rule of Civil Procedure, which states in relevant part that, “ A judge shall recuse himself in any proceeding in which (a) his partiality may reasonably be questioned; (or) (b) he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning the subject matter or a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding: see Gaal v State, No. PDF 0516-01 ( Tex. Crim. App. 2011).
9. Under part (a) of such rule, a judge must be recused which the petitioner demonstrates that the trial court’s “impartiality may reasonably be questioned.” Rule 18(b)(2)(a)T.R.C.P. under the standard, counsel need not prove actual bias or what was actually going through the mind of the trial judge. See. Id.; see also Litkey v. United States, 510, 555 (1994), rather counsel need only prove that a reasonable person might question its impartiality.
10. Additionally, Judges Smith should be recused pursuant to part (b) of Rules 18(b)(2) of the TRCP part (b) of TRCP 18(b)(2) addresses a judge’s impartiality, and, therefore, does hinge on which was in the mind of the judge. Under this section of the statute, recusal in proper where the trial court’s rulings, remarks or actions reveal “such as high degrees of favoritism or antagonism as to make fair judgment impossible. See State v. Gaal citing Likey. Judge Smith has made statements and his actions evidence personal antogonism to make fair judgment impossible and he was an active participant in the actions of the police who were ransacking my home and violating my civil rights prior to the search and seizure and admitted such at the hearing on August, 2008. He signed the subpoena knowing the check was obtained illegally in violation of my civil rights and boldly admitted this at the hearing. The motivation was because of personal amimus and that I was Black and a female in the county. This also evidences bias.
11. This motion is brought under the Fifth Amendment ( Due Process Clause, Sixth Amendment ( Right to Counsel) and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and Article 1 §§ 13,14, and 19 of the Texas Constitution ( Due Process Clause of Law).

WHEREFORE  PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant prays that this court rule in favor of this motion and recuse himself from the case, and reassign this case to another qualified judge and for all other relief both at law and in equity.

The Administrative Judge says my motions do not evidence a need for a hearing in my case. This judge is fair and impartial. I believed his animus toward me was due to my sex and race as he objected to my practicing in Brazos County  before meeting me or reading my resume. He was sometimes unnecessarily rude and disrespectful to me in the presence of my clients. In Texas, Blacks are constantly reminded that the Constitution does not apply to them and the laws will not be equally applied. All of my writs and trial records have been destroyed and the clerk states they no longer have the records or they have been destroyed. The denial of hearings for the Motion to Recuse and the issue of Innocence for the Writ of Habeas Corpus indicate the conspiracy is broadening. People think their actions will not be discovered. I am glad that I did not include evidence with my motions and with the Writ. It would have been destroyed. I now have indisputable evidence that the police and Prosecutors from Brazos County have people burglarizing my apt.  I had to file this motion to publicize their conduct and put a stop to these burglaries.  I have a Constitional Right to a hearing before a fair and impartial trier of the facts. He is not that person. He is biased and not fair or impartial. He is a party to several crimes or could be a witness if he is alleging someone is forging his signature on these documents.