What Happened ?!
Updated: Apr 24, 2022
Re: The (Not So) Mysteriously Silent April 14th Zoom Hearing.
Jamil Rasul Bey -v- A.D.A. VAN EPPS; JAMES BUDREAU, Presiding.
Lucha El Por Libertad and Jamil Rasul Bey were scheduled for same day hearings on different topics. Jamil was scheduled for 9am and Lucha was scheduled for 10am. Jamil is assigned to appear in court room 460 with JUDGE BUDREAU, while Lucha is assigned to courtroom 430 with JUDGE FRISON. The backstory is that when Lucha is in the courtroom with ADA VAN EPPS, VAN EPPS gets up to leave and Lucha assumes he’s going to use the restroom. When he doesn’t come back for awhile, it’s discovered that VAN EPPS’s is in the courtroom with Jamil. Meanwhile, several people are waiting to witness Jamil’s hearing on Zoom where folks can't hear anything but we just assume it's because we’re waiting for proceedings to start.
What Transpired While We Were All Left Out of the Conversation.
An interview with Jamil Rasul Bey
Jamil puts ADA Van Epps in the hot seat. Van Epps is attempting an exclusion of time with Jamil Rasul Bey as he is attempting with Jamhal Talib Abdullah Bey, but Jamil makes sure to point out that an exclusion of time is only in regards as to why someone wouldn’t be brought to court as soon as reasonably possible, which still does not show the commonwealth’s good cause on why Jamil is to be held exceeding the 180 days when it’s already been ten days past the expiration of a 58 dangerousness hold. So the judge allows the commonwealth to file a motion of good cause on why the time should be excluded. Jamil asks the judge to clarify his allowance of the commonwealth’s motions, since it could only be in regards to not being brought to a trial as soon as reasonably possible and not the good cause on 58a detention. Van Epps claims he hasn’t filed anything because there "hasn’t been the chance to conduct a colloquy” and Jamil points out that Van Epps is using that as an excuse when Van Epps always KNEW the current hearing was coming up and is using that as a reason to exclude time. Judge Budreau clarifies that while Van Epps’ claims are not accepted, and proceeds to say he will take a look at things and see why the time should or should not be excluded. Jamil tells Budreau that everything is right before him in black and white. Jamil stresses that he has a family to get back to and the judge says while he has a lot on his desk, he will get to the matter before Friday (he does not clarify if it is this Friday April 15th, or next Friday April 22nd). Jamil clarifies how he is not the named defendant and that the court has continued to show prejudice by not correcting the docket to reflect his true name. (Audio snippet)
Regarding Jamil not being the named defendant:
Jamil asks Van Epps “Mr. ADA Van Epps, who do you have here?” The ADA tells Jamil “YOU.” Jamil questions Van Epps reliability. “What? is it LAMAR DOW? is it Jamil Rasul Bey? Who do you have here?” And Van Epps says “the defendant”. Van Epps loses his cool (as we can see in the video although we cannot hear). Van Epps knows that he is frivolously proceeding because he cannot clarify who he is holding and also the fact that he is unlawfully holding Jamil captive. The judge asks Jamil “so you were never LAMAR DOW before?” And Jamil replies “My chosen name at birth (by my Mother) WAS Jamel. So even if that’s (LAMAR DOW) the case, the commonwealth does not have a valid claim against Jamil and/or Jamel”. “Therefore”, says Jamil, “The commonwealth has not provided the court with accurate information to the best of their ability. And that’s the fact of the matter”. Van Epps goes on to say that Jamil is facing a possible 60 years, in attempts to freighten Jamil in to taking a plea and not going to trial. First off, Jamil is not the defendant and states that he is a Man at the age of majority and of sound mind and why it is not a prerequisite of the court to perform a colloquy prior to trial scheduling. Jamil goes on to ask the judge “am I supposed to pretend like I’m someone that I am not? Is this not real life? Is this a movie?”
Regarding the big hype about Jamil’s property:
When Jamil bring’s up property (which has been the topic of several affidavits and courtroom topic for a very long time) and how Van Epps perjured documents, he shows the judge the proof that Van Epps claimed he couldn’t find certain items of Jamil’s that were ordered to be released, so the judge asks the ADA “why can’t you release his things?” Jamil tells the judge it’s been ten months. Then Jamil shows the judge the photo of his wallet and keys together and Van Epps looks away in frustration.
Regarding Jamil’s continual battle attempting to remove the negligent standby attorney:
The judge tells Jamil he must sign a waiver of rights, to which Jamil replies he would never wave any of his rights, as he is not refusing standby council. Jamil simply rejects the courts offer of standby, and if the court is going to assign standby anyway than it is required that Jordan is immediately replaced.
Jamil points out to the judge that the colloquy that Van Epps attempts to use as an excuse are not even part of the rules of criminal procedure. The judge confirms that Jamil is correct and that it’s something that Massachusetts does, and Jamil asks the judge if these rules that the court makes up are as things go along? “How is that right?” Jamil asks the judge. Jamil says “I’ve maintained this position since August. How can I be held accountable for the internal issues of the court or not knowing when there are scheduled trial dates on the calendar?” Clerk of Court Lucille Pasquale looks at Jamil, then tries to get the judge to end the hearing early, making it seem as though she couldn’t hear what was being said on the record when she’s sitting right there. Then Jamil re-addresses Van Epps re: the property, telling Van Epps “how about the commonwealth gather ALL My property including the keys you claim you can’t find, and My library card…” as Jamil holds up the photo evidence of the wallet with the keys sitting RIGHT next to it that Van Epps claims he couldn’t find, and Van Epps says “you know what judge, we can do that. I’ll get in contact with the superintendent and see what he says about it”.
Timeline of the Zoom Sabatoge WITH EVIDENCE! :
8:16 am : Clerk of the Court Lucille Pasquale is emailed regarding Zoom information for Jamil’s hearing that day. There is no answer, so the information is received upon calling the subordinate clerk’s office.
10:06 am : Several people have been waiting upwards of two hours to get in to the hearing. An email is sent to Lucille about the matter, stating that surely, proceedings have already begun. It is asked that she confirm the zoom information for Jamil as well or if there have been any changes.
10:09 am: Lucille replies via email that “the hearing is detained due to the late arrival of one of the parties”.
10:13 am: Lucille is asked via email if the late party is Jamil, or one of their officials.
10:15 am: Lucille is asked via email if proceedings have generally begun, as it is general practice that the people be let in the courtroom as soon as processions begin.
10:45 am: Lucille does not answer as to who the late party is, but states via email “we will be starting shortly”.
10:48 am : Lucille is emailed about the lack of professionalism regarding the tardiness of the courts and how they are conducting themselves. It is asked she confirm that Jamil has arrived safely, seeing how random acts of retaliation against him at the jails by their correctional officers either before or after hearings require that we ensure he has safely arrived to the courthouse.
10:58 am: approximately 9 people are let onto the Zoom conference, although several more are contacting our offices waiting to be let in and asking why they are being booted out or sitting and waiting. While the people in the court room can be SEEN, they cannot be HEARD.
11:05 am: video evidence confirms that proceedings have begun. Although it LOOKS as though perhaps the court is in preparation, it has been confirmed by attending parties that proceedings were actually occurring. Still, the audio is undetectable.
11:13 am: Lucille is contacted about people having problems getting into the courtroom, and asked if certain people are being let in while others are not.
11:15 am: Lucille writes back that the link is open to all who have it, and says she sees no one in the waiting room attempting to get in.
11:23 am: Lucille is asked to confirm Jamil’s hearing details for that day that include the Meeting ID, Passcode, and Court Room given by her subordinate clerk’s, who had the courtroom listed as room 430. Lucille never responds to this email
11:27 am: Lucille is reminded a second time that people cannot get in, and that they’ve now been directed to contact the clerk’s offices via email that the clerks may clarify the confusion. Suddenly, 5 of the several people who were in the waiting room magically begin to appear on the Zoom call. How ironic.
11:48 am: Where one can see that Van Epps is flailing his arms around emoting some sort of intense communication in the courtroom, Lucille is informed via email that prosecuting A.D.A. Van Epps is speaking, but the microphones are muted, then asked if processions have begun, to which she never replies.
11:58 am: Van Epps is seen standing, slumped over the table.
11:59 am: Lucille is seen turning off the camera for the Zoom conference, and is emailed asking whats going on and if the proceedings have ended, to which she never replies.
approx. 12:15 pm - 12:30 pm: People are still sitting around waiting on the Zoom after Lucille's left for quite some time with no updates, assuming it was possibly recess. It is then decided that the hearing must be over amongst those few left in the courtroom. Lucille as well as her superior, Magistrate Clerk Daniel Flarety, who expressly stated to contact him in the event there are issues with Zoom hearings conveniently fail to follow through appropriately after several communications regarding the matter over past months. However they are placed on notice that the Zoom-tampering has been documented for the record as one of several instances where Jamil Rasul Bey's hearings have been sabotaged.
Come to find out, the clerk’s office information when originally contacted read that Jamil’s hearing was in room 430, when it was REALLY in 460. Attempts to confuse people to keep them from sitting in on Jamil’s hearings happen ALL THE TIME.
That is why it is SO important for those who can physically attend and witness to be present because it shows the courts that they cannot fool the People and get away with it! We find that when there happened to be a few people at the courts for Jamil‘s hearing this day, it did not go unnoticed by the court and made quite an impact. They cannot deny people the right to witness public hearings and/or trials in their courtrooms.
If this is happening to Jamil, can you imagine how many people lose their opportunity to fair hearings and trials?
Now YOU be the judge.
Was the clerk-of-court, Lucille Pasquale, lying about what was really going on in the courtroom, or were there truly technical difficulties? Were the clerk-of-court and her associates attempting to mislead the people by confusing them with setting Lucha and Jamil’s hearings on the same date around the same time in separate courtrooms with misinformation for the public, or was this just an honest mistake? Do you feel that clerk of court Lucille Pasquale’s lack of communication when she chose not to do so was ignorant (keep in mind - she STILL has not responded and it’s April 16th), or just a mistake? Do you find that Van Epps is making a frivolous attempts to continue holding Jamil captive when the hold expired over ten days ago and the A.D.A. STILL has no probable cause, injured party, accuser of a crime, or a crime to date (mind you, it’s nearly been a year)? To access case files for yourself and analyze data, visit here .
the motion to extend time according to the judge at the hearing was not granted to the commonwealth, yet the judge requires that Van Epps provide a good cause on why trying to hold Jamil longer makes any sense. The judge then inquires if the next hearing is about motions, and Jamil asserts - “Judge, not before handling the fact that I’m being held longer than the 58A statute of limitation, which has already expired. So lets handle this (matter) first, and then I would like to discuss a bail hearing IF I’m not going to be released on personal recognizance without surety…the delay and exclusion of time is only in regards to being brought to trial within a reasonable time and there is really nothing to discuss whether granted or not because it still has nothing to do with me being held past the expiration of My being released”.
Jamil asked the judge several times how long it would take to host a bail hearing and the judge eventually gets around to telling Jamil he will get back to him with information by Friday (presumably April 22nd).