If this nightmare had not happened to my son, I would have never believed that such atrocities could happen in the good old U.S.A
My name is Pamela A. I am a 54 years old widow with four children. My oldest son, Charles graduated A/B honor roll from a Catholic School. He is 3 classes away from a Bachelor’s Degree. He has been a Boys Scout, member of the Big Brothers Big Sisters Association, volunteer at the VA Medical Center and a mentor to young people. He is now incarcerated.
On May 13, 2011, Charles called the police because he was assaulted and robbed at gunpoint. He was robbed of his money, his cell phone, the keys to his car and 2 guns. The detective that was assigned to his case decided that he fit the description of 2 earlier attempted robberies.
The description was a dark African-American man between 5’7″ and 6′ tall. wearing glasses.
Do you know anyone that fits that description?
Then the horror show begins.
The police detective got a false confession from my son. They had met on several occasions and talked on their cell phones at least 14 times. Yet it was their last time together, that the detective had their conversation recorded.
However, even in my son’s so-called confession, he gave inaccurate details but that did not deter the detective from her tunnel vision.
Charles was manipulated into confessing the same way the victim was manipulated into identifying my son as the culprit even though she knew that she was unable to identify anyone.
Deliberate prosecutorial misconduct, police manipulation of evidence and egregious ineffective assistance by defense counsel prevented the jury from hearing much of the most important evidence in my son’s case.
The following are a few examples of what my son’s attorney did not do at trial. There’s more but this will give you an idea.
- He did not put the 911 call into discovery where the victim said that she could not identify the assailant because his face was covered with a bandana and wore a hoodie
- He did not put the original police report into discovery where the officer at the scene wrote a statement saying ” the victim said that she would be unable to identify the assailant. She said that she could only see the eyes.
- He did not challenge the 2 photo lineups. He did not try to have the 2 photo lineups suppressed. The first lineup was done in the victim’s home and she was unable to identify the assailant. The 2nd lineup was done on a table in the lobby of the police station. Now the victim says that she is 60% sure that it was my son. She said that the nose looked familiar. How can the nose look familiar if you only saw the eyes, unless it looked familiar from the 1st lineup?
- He did not put a crime line into discovery showing that the caller said that the assailant had dreadlocks.
- He did not put into discovery the detective’s statement that my son’s phone was not used during the time in the area of the robbery. It was in the incident report.
- He did not question the fact that it was the same detective that handle the related cases. She was the detective when my son was robbed. She was the detective for the victim. She also interviewed the guys that robbed my son.
- Quite the busy busy detective.
- He did not challenge the picture of the guns taken from the cell phone of the guys that robbed my son. (Remember that my son was robbed and called the police and that is how this whole thing got started).
- The police never had the gun in their possession.
- A week before the trial he asked for a continuance. He was not prepared to go to trial.
- He did not do an opening statement.
- He did not object to any evidence being entered.
- He did not object when the prosecutor engaged in inflammatory closing remarks.
- He did not challenge the 2 photo lineups.
- He did not challenge the victims change of identification. At trial, almost 3 years later, she is 100% sure that it was my son, even though she initially said that that she could only see the eyes.
The jurors were confused and asked many questions during deliberation. There questions went to the heart of the case.
These are a few of the questions asked my the jurors:
- Are a lot of guns black? Is a Glock an unusual kind of gun? Do different Glocks look different from each other? Are Glocks easily accessible? (The jurors had a Xerox copy of two guns taken from the cell phone of the eyes that robbed my son. These could have been any 2 guns. The police never had the gun in their possession.)
- Are there phone records showing calls between detective and defendant? How many and how long?
- Is it a coincident that both cases ended up in the lap of the same detective?
The jurors were not given any answers to their questions.
My son’s attorney did not request a mistrial.
My son was found guilty.
He was unjustly convicted of attempted and aggravated assault with a firearm. He is sentenced to 12 years with a mandatory 10 years that he must do. . He has no prior criminal history.
What type of justice system allow such a travesty of judicial misconduct to take place?
Justice for My Son 2
PO Box 70111
Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35407
Facebook – Under the Realm of the Wrongly Convicted Group – Charles Ajoloko Is Innocent. Please like page.
Email – email@example.com
Twitter – https://twitter.com/justiceforhim2
Instagram – Pamela Ajoloko