So, I want to break down the main evidence for my newly filed petition, EXHIBIT H, posted below (and in another post). It consists of 4 pages, two of which are mostly blacked out. I got this document from the government AFTER I filed my FOIA lawsuit (still in “Summary Judgement” phase as I write this).
After not hearing from Joe Gross (my NE attorney) for over a month (late November 2014 until January 2015), he emails me in early January 2015 that; 1) he’s hired experts to examine the NIT without my advice or consent & 2) they are on their way to the FBI Omaha office as he wrote that email to me. My knowledge of the NIT at this time was that something was wrong with it; because, my session ids were different when they should be the same and the browser reported that the previous page is the current page. Both anomalies were HUGE red flags.
For clarity, remember that I was arrested on April 9, 2013 based solely on the evidence in the table on my about page. I immediately determined that table had two HUGE red flags, strongly indicating that the evidence was fraudulent. Joe Gross ignored that FACT for about a year as he pursued a dismissal based on the government’s Rule 41(f) violation. That litigation lasted until October 2014 – when the NE court denied the Rule 41(f) dismissal motion.
So, on October 8, 2014 Gross informed Becker (the POS prosecutor) that he intended on challenging the NIT via a motion called Daubert. As a preliminary matter, Becker had inserted into the discovery process a “declaration” that the “NIT” was a flash application on September 4, 2014. I rejected that assertion immediately, based on solid technical grounds. Becker tried to reiterate his nonsense on November 10, 2014 – I forcefully rejected it and Becker embarked on egregious prosecutorial misconduct.
Basically, I told Gross that Becker was lying about the NIT and Gross made it clear the Daubert challenge would continue. From November 10, 2014 until January 2015, Becker convinced Gross (proven by FOIA docs) that the NIT was just a flash application. Becker also introduced irrelevant accusations that they had found contraband on my Linux computer. I knew that accusation was also false, but Becker convinced Gross that it might be true and Gross began to deliberately sabotage my defense strategy.
So, in January of 2015 Becker had a HUGE problem, if a defense expert exposed the fraudulent logging system his team inserted into TB2 (the website I was accused of visiting) all of his Operation Torpedo prosecutions could be dismissed (not just mine). Becker (I suspect) somehow got Gross to hire Podhradsky’s team, who I call the “Shills”. In the middle of January, the Shills produced a report that focussed on the Flash Application and how it worked on Pedoboard (NOT TB2). It’s important to understand that the logging system on Pedoboard was legitimate and native and the logging system on TB2 was totally fake / fraudulent.
After I get their ridiculously biased report, I’m furious that they (Gross & the Shills) have deliberately sabotaged my case ending strategy by accepting Beckers Flash App nonsense. So, I – with the help of Gross – petition the Court to have Gross and the Shills removed from my team. The Court grants the motion and assigns Joe Howard BUT things get MORE corrupt, not less.
Howard was appointed in February 2015, so at that time Becker doesn’t know if his Shills will remain on the case. So Becker flies to Buffalo to get a second indictment against me. This was done for the improper purpose of getting me to end the Daubert challenge to the NIT. I refused, BUT Howard also refused to fire the Shills and hire Mercuri. So on May 18, 2015 the Shills write this:
Hi Jeffrey,
I wanted to touch base about our investigation outcome for the Cottom case. Long story short, my team and I found that the NIT was repeatable and Cottom had further questions he wanted flushed out as part of the investigation. Specifically they are attached. Mr. Cottom wasn’t happy with our analysis however the judge wanted my team to continue on for this case . . . .
As you can see, the Shills improperly shared my confidential opinion and their preliminary findings with Becker’s team. That was highly inappropriate act of sabotage, but was nothing compared to what they did in June of 2015.
Remember that the shills have already determined how the Flash Application worked in January, so their June task was to determine the authenticity of the logging systems. (There were two, one on TB2 and one on the server the flash app connected to). As I have proven, the logging system on TB2 was FAKE. That means that the legitimacy of the other logging system didn’t matter at that point because both must be legitimate for the system’s veracity to survive.
So, in this context, you can understand that it was imperative (from Becker’s perspective) for the shills to ignore that TB2’s log was FAKE. Keep that in mind when you read the 4 FOIA pages below. (Read them from Page 4 to 1). On pages 3-4, you’ll see that the lead Shill “Ashley” is writing “Jeffery” again (redacted for some illegitimate reason) on June 8, 2015. She thanks Jeffery for hosting her team on Friday June 5, 2015 and has a few questions for the FBI. This email is highly improper because at this time, there are no proper adversarial questions for the Shills to be asking the FBI. Remember, they already know how the flash app works, they are just analyzing the logging systems. This work is technically complex (analyzing php and python code) but easy for them. They had all the code and the technical skill to “decode” and test it, thus there were no proper adversarial questions to ask the FBI at that time, so we can strongly suspect collusion.
Then, the email chain gets worse on page 2. You can see it is from Becker, to Howard and Podhradsky. The smoking gun sentence is “Also, can Dr. Podhradsky let us know what information her team found/did not find on the data her team reviewed” Worse, on page 1 there is confirmation of illegal collusion where the Shills (Specifically Matt Miller) answered the FBI questions (the blacked out parts on page 2 below Becker’s questions on that page) and ends with Becker satisfied that they accomplished their illegal task of legitimizing TB2’s fraudulent table.
Colluison