Source: https://ift.tt/JB9xiEb Defendant Michael Taylor has been subjected to a falsified PC 730 competency assessment with misdated clerical errors. Bar panel attorney Vernon Patterson provokes anger of Defendant by denying him requested access to a copy of the assessment that he has a constitutional right to have. This upsets the defendant and prevents him from making informed decisions and being well-prepared for court. These due process denials by Vernon Patterson suggests misconduct as the assessment itself contains obviously misdated clerical errors that he refuses to address before coercing Taylor to undergo a 2nd cpmopinion. Furthermore, denial of access to the assessment suggests that Vernon Patterson is conspiring to systemically deny Taylor the ability or opportunity to make necessary objections at the appropriate stages of legal proceedings. This falsified competency assessment was initiated by the court in response to the defendant asserting his constitutional rights to his public defenders via text, voicemail, and email that has timestamps. It is imperative that all emails between the defendant and the public defenders are subpoenaed to ensure there was no foul play or manipulation under the guise of attorney-client privilege. A defendant being upset over being denied due process is not a valid reason to initiate a competency assessment under PC 1368 when the public defender explicitly informed the defendant the assessment would be pursuant to PC 1001.36.
How Nathan Hochman Applied Double Standards to the Menendez Brothers
On June 27, 2025, the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office , led by Nathan Hochman , filed a forceful reply brief in the Menendez resentencing matter — a reply that sent ripples through legal and public circles precisely because it explicitly urged the court to weigh honesty, insight, and acceptance of responsibility as determinative factors in sentencing and risk assessment. But that very standard — a standard of accountability and truth — appears to vanish like mist the moment prosecutorial interests turn inward. In a press release bearing Hochman’s official imprimatur, the DA’s office did not mince words: “The Court must consider such lack of full insight and lack of acceptance of responsibility for their murderous actions in deciding whether the Menendez brothers pose an unreasonable risk of danger to the community.” The office continued, affirmatively stating that their motion position was based on “the current state of the record and the Menendez brothers’ current and ...
Comments
Post a Comment