Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Radical Conviction, Overturned [Dan Collins]

American Eric Volz, falsely convicted of the murder of his ex-girlfriend by Sandanista-sympathizing Judge Ivette Toruno Blanco, despite eyewitness evidence by 10 people, and cell phone records, that placed him 2 hours away at the time of the murder, and despite the prosecution’s witness on DNA evidence saying that none of it could be attached to the accused.

On February 16, members of the US Embassy were barred from entering the courtroom.  The reasons for this action remain unclear.  Shortly afterwards, Judge Ivette Toruno Blanco found Eric guilty on all counts and sentenced him to thirty years in prison.  Five days later, Judge Blanco failed to appear in court.  In her place, a court clerk said that the judge had rejected the testimony of all four defense witnesses.  The clerk also stated the judge had refused to accept the testimony of the medical examiners and that she had discounted the cell phone records and instant messaging documentation.  Both Eric and his codefendant, Julion Chamorro, were sentenced to 30 years in prison.

An appeals court overturned the convictions, and Eric Volz is back in the US today, no thanks to the evil bitch who convicted him:

Judge Ivette Toruño, who had presided over the murder trial, had held up his release for three days by refusing to sign release papers, according to Volz’s Nicaraguan attorney, Fabbrith Gomez.

So, while we are gratified by his release, and thankful to those responsible, we don’t want to forget that this is one of the faces of evil:

52 Replies to “Radical Conviction, Overturned [Dan Collins]”

  1. Q30 says:

    You only call her evil because you’re afraid of having women in powerful positions, Dan.

  2. McGehee says:

    It was obviously Volz’s own fault, for being born with one of those toxic Y chromosomes and then not having it removed at the earliest possible opportunity.

  3. MayBee says:

    Is this what Google is celebrating today?
    Does anybody know what their little picture is all about?

  4. SarahW says:

    Ceding the shocking lack of concern with evidence displayed by the judge, I don’t think the sex of either was controlling with regard to the judge’s corrupt craveness.
    A wish to accept the work of the police and prosecutor and paranoid prejudice against a purportedly bribey “meddling foreigner” , seem to be behind the miscarriage of justice. Or maybe she’s just stupid. But leave the man-hating out of it. There were other men guilty who got away with murder.

  5. The irony is that Volz is one of those “people are not illegal” liberals who was working for a magazine that encouraged fleecing “baby boomers and young adventurers” to travel to third world dumps so that their money could be equitably redistributed “to the community as a whole”. At least that’s a good cover when you’re a real estate agent looking to get rich off hick locals selling cheap to expats.

    I honestly feel sorry for the guy but there’s a part of me that would want to ask “have you learned anything yet?”

    What happened to him could happen to any gringo tangled into what passes for a justice system down there.

  6. Dmac says:

    A great injustice has been avenged – but when I first read of this case, I thought the guy a ridiculous fool for ever getting involved with a local in a region that’s infamous for it’s hostility to the Americanos. Next time keep it in your pants, amigo.

  7. The Lost Dog says:

    Yup. Always the skeptic when it comes to reporters “reporting”.

    There must be more to this story. It may be what it is presented as, but, in my experience with “journalists, they push whatever it is they want to push.

    Something pissed this woman off, and unless she is a psycho (always a possibility), there are some circumstances involved here that we are not being made aware of.

    Lying by omission (The Progg’s backbone)is still lying.

    I might be way off track, but something smells funny in this story. Even though this story is presented in black and white, black and white are very rare in the real world.

  8. SarahW says:

    re #3:

    Maybee, It’s just the 2007 version of Googles “holiday doodle” logo series.

  9. PB says:

    Great post! People here in Nashville are really excited. This story has dominated our local news, ‘Free Eric Volz’ bumper stickers are everywhere.

    Ignoring the ill-informed cynicism of your other commenters, suffice it to say a lot of us are really happy right now. And appreciate your post.

  10. CochinoMarrano says:

    I loved him in Mask.

  11. JHoward says:

    It was obviously Volz’s own fault, for being born with one of those toxic Y chromosomes and then not having it removed at the earliest possible opportunity.

    For which there are Courts. And Joe Biden’s IVAWA. Because as long as there are men, there will be men.

    http://www.womensedge.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=366&Itemid=4

  12. daleyrocks says:

    My ill-informed cynicism is one of my best features.

  13. Speaking of ill-informed, it’s generally not a good practice to have your attorney offer to bribe the victim’s mother to swear to your innocence for a million dollars. I’m just sayin’.

    It speaks nothing to guilt or innocence as much as bowing to certain realities of the situation down there but his release will be the equivalent of OJ Simpson going free in Nicaragua’s eyes.

    I wouldn’t want to be an American planning a vacation there anytime soon.

  14. MayBee says:

    Thanks, Miss SarahW.

  15. B Moe says:

    Don’t know if you read your own link or not, Brian, but the allegation of a bribe by the victim’s mother was completely unsubstantiated, and seems a bit far-fetched given the accused financial status, don’t you think?

  16. commander0 says:

    SarahW said:
    “But leave the man-hating out of it. There were other men guilty who got away with murder.”
    For this MayBee thanked her.
    I think you two may have your own man issues. My guess is her mother whacked her. Or the judge herself.

  17. Darleen says:

    commandero

    I think you two may have your own man issues

    putz

  18. JHoward says:

    About man-issues, there’s not a woman or feminist alive, including of self-identified conservative stripe, that’ll question her prejudice when there’s a good dose of presumption of male guilt standing by, typically held in the hands of the State.

    Okay, let’s see how that statement fares. It’s not so much that it’s an unfair generalization (because it lacks technical verification or verifiable reason) but that the heart of it is simply never questioned: Whaddya mean, presuming male innocence? Now we have conviction by allegation.

    Okay, that’s two generalizations. Or is it?

  19. JHoward says:

    See what I mean?

  20. rao6n says:

    okay, is it just me, or is anybody else going to admit that this “judge” is HOT?
    know what I mean., what I’d do to get out of a couple years incarceration, wink wink, nudge nudge?

    Y OW W Z R. . . .

  21. Darleen says:

    JH

    Of course this “judge” was prejudiced … against a Norte Americano aka “gringo” who had the audacity to have a successful business concern [to them “exploitation of locals”] AND there was local rabble demanding Eric’s scalp

    You think a male “judge” there would have acted any different?

  22. JHoward says:

    I’m not talking about the judge. I’m talking about men under the law. Did you research Biden’s IVAWA? Welcome to the future…which will have decidedly less negative impact on you than me.

  23. Pablo says:

    SarahW,

    There were other men guilty who got away with murder.

    Actually, no. Another delightful twist to this ludicrous case is that someone else has been also convicted of the murder, another fact which was ignored by the trial judge. But I agree, this is more racism than misandry, though I wouldn’t rule misandry out of the mix.

    And you know what else is funny? The spell checker in Firefox thinks misandry isn’t a proper word.

  24. Pablo says:

    You think a male “judge” there would have acted any different?

    I’d like to think that any other judge would have acted differently. But I know that would be naive of me.

  25. Merovign says:

    Oh, come on, she exclusively rejected all evidence presented by the defense and socked someone into jail for murder without even bothering to show up for court.

    How can that not be evil?

    There are plenty of examples even here in the US of crazy-ass psycho judges – some of them even get impeached.

  26. happyfeet says:

    Fie on evil bitches.

  27. As a rule, I won’t link to something unless I’ve read it. So while there is plenty of plausible deniability from the family’s standpoint, when it says “While Baltodano (the Volz family attorney) denies offering a settlement, he admits the subject came up. “You know,” he told me, “this sort of thing exists everywhere in the world. I said to her that her daughter would never live again, maybe we could do something.”

    People are free to interpret that however.

  28. Or in whatever capacity Baltodano was allowed to act.

  29. Dan Collins says:

    I think that the idea that she excluded the prosecution’s DNA expert and wouldn’t allow cell phone or IM records into evidence, and that she excluded any embassy staff from attending, are pretty prejudicial factors, Brian.

  30. JHoward says:

    You think a male “judge” there would have acted any different?

    You think either would have acted any different had the defendant been female?

  31. SarahW says:

    Man hating isn’t the problem here. It’s the stuff I said up top.

    Pablo, but that was Stolz’ codefendent. Do you think the charges against that guy were also trumped up? I had the idea that some guilty types were let off the hook.

  32. narciso says:

    She was probably a Berkeley educated Sandinista.

  33. Dmac says:

    “Ignoring the ill-informed cynicism of your other commenters…”

    OK, I’ll bite on this one – in this scenario, I’ll play Sherman to your Mr. Peabody. Prithee, please inform the unwashed, cynical hordes among as to your worldly insights into facts that apparently have yet to be reported on in this case.

    Sound fair? If not, then please put a voluminous sock in that sack of moral piehole you’re spewing out.

  34. Dan – Don’t interpret anything I’m saying here as a defense of Nicaraguan courts. Between this case and the Natalee Holloway one, people should be getting an education on kangaroo courts abroad and make their travel destinations accordingly. Especially in view of the growing ties between Nicaragua and Iran.

  35. Pablo says:

    SarahW,

    Pablo, but that was Stolz’ codefendent.

    No, this was someone completely different, as I understand it. I caught that bit on the TeeVee, so I don’t have a link handy, but I recall talk of a completely separate conviction for the murder.

  36. Darleen says:

    Pablo

    What I was saying is that Toruno’s evil actions would seem to have very little to do with her sex. Change her into an anti-American male judge and what would have turned out differently? here

    The case has been front-page news in Nicaragua, where Volz is characterized in headlines as “the gringo.” The local Sandinista party took up the case, fanning public opinion against Volz, who was dressed in body armor during his trial, while angry mobs demonstrated outside the courthouse.

    Now, some are accusing Volz’s family of paying off the appeals court judges to have his conviction overturned.

    or here

    With the local Sandinista political party inflaming sentiment against the “gringo” who killed a local woman, angry crowds wielding machetes and demanding Volz’s death besieged the jail and courthouse during his trial.

    BTW, I haven’t found a thing yet that shows anyone else has been convicted of Doris Jimenez’ murder. So, it does look like someone HAS gotten away with it.

  37. SarahW says:

    From the article Dan linked in the blog post above:

    “Both Eric and his codefendant, Julion Chamorro, were sentenced to 30 years in prison.”

    Pablo, are you thinking of someone else, or Chamarro?

  38. happyfeet says:

    I piss on her head. Mostly nonmisogynistically.

  39. Jeffersonian says:

    Has Amanda draped Pandagon’s homepage in black crepe with this news…another member of the Patriarchy wriggles free?

  40. Darleen says:

    Ah. Julio Chamorro who was convicted along with Volz didn’t have his conviction overturned on appeal.

    The decision to free Volz and not Chamorro seems to have divided people along class lines, with most expatriates and wealthier Nicaraguans applauding the decision. The vast majority of poor Nicaraguans, however, complain that it is another case of the rich getting away with murder.

    In the blogs run by the daily newspapers here, some commented that justice has finally been served and wished Volz a Merry Christmas with his family back home. Most comments, however, expressed outrage at what many consider to be corrupt judicial system. “Justice here is like a snake, it only bites those who are barefoot,” one reader posted, referring to popular notion here than only the poor do jail time. Similar ire was expressed by the Sandinista government’s Chief Prosecutor Julio Centeno, who called the decision a “barbarity,” and Human Rights Ombudsman and former guerrilla leader Omar Cabezas, who said Volz should not be allowed to leave the country.

    Seems like the pressure to “get the gringo” runs pretty high.

  41. MarkD says:

    Nicaragua is off the “tropical paradise retirement haven” list.

    Fidel looks to outlive me, so Cuba isn’t looking so good either. Ideas?

  42. Darleen says:

    MarkD

    I’ve never really understood the idea of “tropical paradise” … “tropical” really means humdity and bugs. And some of those bugs walk on two legs.

    No.thank.you.

  43. McGehee says:

    Note to self: Never throw a match into a pile of tinder.

    Unless you really want to watch something go up in flames. Heh.

  44. Pablo says:

    Sarah, yep, apparently it is Chamorro, so it is the codefendant. But the two had no connection other than Chamorro fingering Volz as the killer. Which, if I’d done it, I’d be looking for someone else to pin it on too. But I suspect they’ve got the right guy locked up.

  45. Pablo says:

    It speaks nothing to guilt or innocence as much as bowing to certain realities of the situation down there but his release will be the equivalent of OJ Simpson going free in Nicaragua’s eyes.

    Well, if you ignore the complete lack of evidence of his guilt and the boatload of evidence of his innocence, then, yeah. It’s just like OJ.

  46. Pablo says:

    OT, but an interesting story linked on the Time page Darleen linked above, about a mother who has sent her child into hiding to avoid allowing him access to his father: Choosing Jail Over Joint Custody

    Professor Judith McMullen of Marquette Law School said judges are often forced to rely on gut instincts about who is telling the truth in custody cases involving allegations — but little proof — of domestic violence. “It’s a credibility issue, and judges often simply go with their intuition about who is telling the truth,” McMullen told TIME. “These are very sad cases. People usually want to say well, for example, the mother is lying and the father is an innocent victim. But that is not usually the case. Even if there was no abuse, the mother often truly believes there was.”

    Which apparently absolves her and indicts him.

    Until relatively recently, she added, judges routinely considered allegations of wife abuse as a separate issue not relevant to the question of child custody. “That has changed and the courts have come a long way in the past 20 years,” she said. “But it still often comes down to he said, she said.”

    And even if she’s making it all up, listening to her means we’ve come a long way, baby. Thanks, Professor. Are you sure that’s not Marcotte Law School you work at? Hundreds of thousands of fatherless children and childless fathers thank you for your astute insight.

    Then there’s the first line in the first piece on the story:

    How long must a mother be jailed to force her to give up her child?

    Because cooperating with joint custody is just like losing your child altogether. Brilliant.

  47. Pablo says:

    And of course, that second link is titled “When Motherhood Gets You Jail Time” because it’s the motherhood, not the contempt of court or the denial of parental rights at issue. It’s her motherhood that’s got her in trouble, the poor thing. Props to Judge Goulee for doing his job as it’s supposed to be done. Family courts need more like him.

  48. Q30 says:

    Pablo, if you look at the first part of “When Motherhood Gets You Jail Time” they referred to Dr. Elizabeth Morgan at the end. This is a pretty shocking case from the late 80s.

    Basically, she violated court orders for join custody by shipping her daughter to New Zealand (her claims of abuse were ubsubstantiated, by the way), and spent time in jail for violating the order. A bill passed Congress (unanimously) releasing her from jail early, and the bill was declared unconstitutional about a few years ago.

    The fact that congress would unanimously pass a bill of attainder (something specifically forbidden by the Constitution) so as to allow a woman to continue violating a court orders for joint custody is pretty damned extreme.

    But its all For The Children, though.

  49. Pablo says:

    But its all For The Children, though.

    But of course.

  50. Gulermo says:

    MarkD: Try Costa Rica.

  51. xtrm says:

    What a stupid bitch.

  52. Milly says:

    What ever happened to this bitch Judge Ivette Turuno Blanco?
    She must be into some corruption and has been found out.

Comments are closed.