To Free the Truth

A torn up disciplinary report with my name on it was found by Nagle’s body. This, undoubtedly, made investigators focus on me. The thing is, the only evidence found on that disciplinary report was an unknown palm print belonging to neither me nor Nagle. Keep in mind, the building sergeant reviews all disciplinary reports, speaks with the rule violator, then decides whether or not to sign off on it before processing. Sergeants Ortiz and Martinez were at 3 building desk with Nagle after my confrontation with him several hours before he was killed.

During cross examinations of Sgt. Ortiz and other officers, items at the crime scene which were inside a multipurpose room by 3 building desk, were logged in as being found in different locations from where the free world CSI’s found them. The guards who first found Nagle were ordered to secure the area, per protocol, for the CSI’s–not to touch anything. Based on this testimony, the crime scene had been tampered with…

The state’s case against me consists of inmates only. Only 1 inmate, Allen Thompson, signed a statement the day of the murder. Everyone else interviewed that day said they didn’t see anything. Thompson, who worked for Sgt. Martinez as an informant, claimed to witness me attacking Nagle. He then took off running to the first guard he could find. Problem is, he had to wait for Officer L. Gleiu at the 3/4 gate to open the gate before he could get to Officer Dancer, which was the first person he alerted. He told her he needed to speak with Sgt. Martinez. Officer Gleiu testified that she has no memory of seeing Thompson that day. Allen Thompson was the state’s star witness.

Once the word got out that I was the prime suspect, scores of inmates wrote investigators claiming to have witnessed the murder of Nagle. But, some of these inmates couldn’t have possibly witnessed it–prosecutors acknowledged at trial–because they were on the opposite side of the unit or not even on McConnell that day.

Every inmate who testified against me received a reward–early parole, pending criminal charges dismissed i.e. Anthony Casey had a possession of marijuana and an assault on a TDCJ officer charge dropped, and favorable treatment. Not one inmate testified for free or out of the goodness of their heart. The jury heard what each inmate’s reward was.

Also, most of those inmates changed their stories. In statements, they said one thing, but stated something different on the witness stand. Furthermore, their collective stories didn’t add up–everyone seen something different.

The prosecution argued that I cut my thumb while stabbing Nagle to death. The murder weapon was found at the scene of the crime. Pictures of it were taking of the gaping cut on my thumb. Wouldn’t it stand to reason that if I was the culprit, some of my blood or fingerprints would be in or around the crime scene? Wouldn’t some of Nagle’s blood be on me.

The crime scene was tested for physical evidence including DNA evidence. Blood wasfound at the crime scene. It all belonged to Nagle except a spot on the murder weapon that could not be identified. None of my DNA or physical evidence was found in or around the crime scene.

DNA was tested on the blood on my clothes and the torn pockets I used to stop the bleeding on my thumb. It all came back as only my blood. There is absolutely no physical link between me and this crime. It’s all in the trial record.

Defense Attorney Joseph Colina, "People lie. DNA doesn't."

It must be noted that Sgt. Martinez was indicted the same day I was for laundering $60, 000 of drug money for a prison gang. He was apprehended with the money a month after Nagle’s murder along with several other officers. Sgt. Ortiz resigned around the same time. Ortiz wasn’t implicated in anything illegal, but he and Martinez were close friends and it was widely known that both belonged to the same prison gang.

Nagle was the President of the TDCJ Worker’s Union in the Southern Region. He was famous for busting dirty guards. A week before his murder he was leading a march at the state Capital for pay raises for guards. He was then quoted as saying, “A guard will have to die before they do anything about it.” 

*See article in the links section entitled Shades of Gray*

In light of these fundamental violations of the Constitution, the Texas Rules of Evidence, and the trial court’s pretrial discovery order, Pruett’s conviction should be set aside

   –Judge Joel Johnson to the Criminal Court of Appeals

The law requires jurors to presume a criminal defendant innocent until the state proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Defense attorneys are explicit in their explanation of this law, and every member of the jury swears to follow it, but how many honestly do? Think about it. On one side of a courtroom you have what many believe to be the noble prosecutors, dressed in expensive suits that exude authority. These are the defenders of justice, hard at work fighting crime. Now, look over at the defendant typically dressed in cheap street clothes, if not prison garb, who has been charged with a crime. I believe a lot of jurors start out thinking the defendant and his lawyer are the bad guys while the prosecutors and their team are the good guys. These jurors-honestly hardworking Joes and Janes-naturally wonder why the good guys would hall the bad guy in here, spend all the money to take him/her to trial, if they weren’t sure he or she is guilty. No doubt about it, the burden of proof quickly shifts to the defense. It’s no longer innocent until proven guilty in a courtroom once the trial commences; despite your Constitutionally guaranteed rights, you are guilty until you prove your innocence whenever you’re in that defendant’s chair. 

My case is a perfect example. In fact, I was even further behind the 8-ball than most. I’d already been convicted of murder once, which the jury learned by the reading of my indictment prior to opening arguments. They heard this on that indictment because the circumstances which caused the case to be capital was my being in prison for murder already–a conviction I was not allowed to expand on. The jury never heard that I was convicted under the law of parties for a crime committed by my father.  So, there I am, a convicted murderer in prison charged with killing a guard. Oh, being covered in tattoos didn’t help perceptions either. You don’t think that jury wanted me to prove I was innocent?

Sadly, my prosecutors not only exploited this advantage, they illegally obtained a conviction by not playing by the rules. Judge Joel Johnson granted a “discovery of evidence” order during pretrial hearings. Basically, the state was required to give my lawyers names and statements of all witnesses against me so I could prepare a defense. Judge Johnson had something come up, though, and traveling judge J. Villareal tried the case. Judge Villareal let the prosecution get away with anything and everything including violating the discovery of evidence order of Judge Johnson which still applied to my case. During the rebuttal phase of trial, the prosecution sprung the testimony of witnesses Michael Hall and Michael Ross on me. Both of whom said I confessed to them. My lawyers had no way to prepare for the lies of Hall and Ross because they had no statements by these inmates. We asked the judge by statements from these inmates, but the prosecution claimed there weren’t any.

    ”What are the papers you are referring to, then?” my lawyers demanded.

    ”Notes by an investigator, not statements, ” prosecutors said. 

Judge Villareal looked at the “notes” and decided they weren’t statements and not subject to disclosure under the order of discovery. 

During a post-conviction hearing, Judge Johnson was made aware of all of this. He reviewed the notes compiled by the state’s investigator on Hall and Ross. Under the Texas Rules of Evidence, he said they clearly constitute witness statements and handed them over to my attorneys. These “notes” were clearly inconsistent with the Hall and Ross’ testimony. Judge Johnson concluded that the prosecutors had committed prosecutorial misconduct. In his Proposed Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law, he wrote, “The accused has the right to inspect evidence material to his defense. The court has authority to make such evidence discoverable and did in this cause…The state acted in bad faith in withholding the information on Hall and Ross, deliberately disregarding the Court’s order to obtain an advantage. The trial court (Judge Villareal) abused its discretion in allowing the testimony of Hall and Ross…The prosecution had in its possession detailed summaries of interviews with Hall and Ross–these consitute witness statements under 615f (2) Rules of Evidence. These witness statements contain inconsistencies with trial testimony. The failure of the court to compel production harmed Pruett, violating his Constitutional right to confront his accusers.”

Is it not enough that presumption of innocence is a myth, that the burden of proof shifts to a criminal defendant and he or she must prove innocence? I guess not in my case. Prosecutorial misconduct should lead to that prosecutor being disbarred. Maybe that would make district attorneys think twice about cheating to win a conviction. Defenders of law and order and justice? Please. Prosecutors look at convictions at notches in their belts; I doubt most care how they get them.

“You didn’t see that,” is a common refrain among officers inside McConnell, one boss told me. The free world rarely even tries to look, and that is how the agency prefers it.

                                                  –N. Blakeslee in Shades of Gray

There are multiple reasons why my attorneys called guards in to testify in rebuttal of the inmate witnesses against me but not any inmates on the unit the day of the murder. When I first spoke with investigator Jim Dixon, who the court hired for me, I was still toying with the idea of suicide by state, so I didn’t offer many names of people who might corroborate my story. Even if I had, it wouldn’t have done any good because all but 2 of the inmates Mr. Dixon interviewed refused to sign a statement and testify on my behalf. While many told him things favorable to my defense, they feared getting retaliated against by the TDCJ not to mention having their parole denied. 

I corresponded with a couple of inmates on McConnell unit after I was transferred to Michaels unit. They informed me that over 100 white inmates were placed on 7 building and locked down for over 2 months after Nagle’s death. They were harassed in many ways, including being denied showers, necessities such as clean clothes, hygiene, and cleaning supplies, and visitation. After weeks without a shower, a few guys on 1 row broke their toilets in protest. Horace Groves wrote that all of 1 row was flooded and you see chunks of feces floating around but no one cleaned it up. When they brought johnny sacks around for meals, the guards ordered the inmates to kneel down in that filthy water if they wanted to eat. Most refused choosing to starve instead. The guards told them life would get considerably better if they would sign statements against me. 

Warden Johns ordered video recording of all movements and operations concerning me upon my arrival on Michaels unit–for my own protection. I couldn’t recreate, shower, or eat without the camera rolling. Despite this and other measures, the guards found ways to make my life hell–banging on my window and walls while I slept, trashing my cell when I went to shower, and once a lieutenant spit in my food before he told the camera operator to roll the tape. Of course, I refused the tray which is what he wanted. 

An inmate down the run who wanted to be kind to be offered me a few shots of coffee and some mint sticks. I tied a string together to try to ‘fish’ the goods under the door. As soon as he had the stuff tied on my line and out on the run for me to pull, the gate popped open and several guards stormed the run, confiscating the coffee and mint sticks. They yelled at the inmate and threatened the entire run, “If we catch anyone giving Pruett anything, you won’t eat, plus it’s a disciplinary case. Pruett don’t get shit except a meal.”

Only 2 inmates ever tried to help me. Kevin Vecshi and Damont Jackson, neither of which were on McConnell at the time of Nagle’s slaying. Vecshi testified that Anthony Casey, who testified against me, told him that he knew I didn’t kill Nagle. That he, Casey, just wanted to get pending criminal charges dismissed. Jackson said he overheard Casey say that he knew a “Mexican” did it, but the court refused to let Jackson testify. 

Vecshi and Jackson were transferred to Connally unit with the state’s inmate witnesses prior to my trial. They both told the judge that the staff on Connally unit wouldn’t let them have their personal property including hygiene because they were testifying on my behalf, yet all of the state’s witnesses received their property while waiting their turn to take the stand… Treatment like this and the above mentioned harassment deterred inmates from trying to help me.

The way I was raised in prison was you don’t ever back down from anyone, no matter how big and bad they are. If you feel disrespected you immediately address the issue. To let anything slide without doing so will inevitably draw the interest of those who want something from you you’re probably not willing to give. Remember that any sign of weakness is exploited.

Once, I was outside playing basketball with a  little dude we called Critter. As we volleyed the ball, a huge black guy, about 6′7″ and well over 350 lbs, ran right through the court. He was running laps around the yard to lose weight, I guess. What concerned me was him running through the handball court while we were playing a game–a huge violation of the convict code.

“Hey, dude, ” I called. “Don’t you see we’re playing a game here?”

No response. He kept running laps.

I told Critter that it was disrespectful of him, that it’s not acceptable. He agreed. We thought maybe he’d go around the court next lap, or so we hoped. The dude weighed more than both of us combined.

As he got close to the court on his return lap, I saw that he was going to run through our court again. We were in the middle of a game, for crying out loud! I snatched the ball up and dropped it on the ground with my left hand and power served it with my fist as hard as I could right into him as he passed through the court, no doubt leaving a welp under his shirt. He cried out and turned after me.

There was no way I stood a chance with the dude head on, so I ran around him, danced around him sort of… I talked bad to him as I ducked aroudn his advances, hoping to tire him out some. After some name calling, he was pretty furious, but he couldn’t catch me.

Finally, after 2-3 minutes, he stopped running and merely walked fast after me. He told me, “I’m gonna get some of that pretty white butt when I catch you, white boy!” I took a deep breath, thinking it was now or never as the fence was crowded with observers,and lunged forward, connecting square in his face and busting his nose. By then I’d developed a pretty solid fight game, or so I thought. My punches were quick and solid, and I bobbed and weaved away from all of his. At first. I was damaging his face, cutting him up, and briefly, I thought I might win this fight. Then he finally landed one of his powerful overhands and I dropped to the ground instantly, dazed out of my mind.

Had he kicked me, jumped down on me and punched me a few more times, I would’ve been hurting pretty badly, but I would’ve been okay with it. Instead, he simply pointed down at  me and shouted, “I drop you ho-ass white boys!” That’s what we call clowning someone after a fight, adding insult to injury. I’ve lost many fights, and I’m okay with that. Disrespecting me further and calling me out like that in front of everyone can’t go unchecked. I ran to the metal trash can and yanked the lid off, then darted towards him and swung, hitting him in the arm. I tried to swing again, but he caught it and tossed it to the side before barrelling down on me. Just then the yard filled with rank led by the captain who stopped the fight and locked me up..the next time I ran into him he apologized to me and shook my hand, saying he hopes it’s over. In my book that made it over. Thankfully!

That incident is one of the disciplinary offenses I was convicted of…the report simply states that I fought with a weapon. In my trial, to show that I was a future danger to society, that report was included with all the other s in my ‘prison file’ for the jury to deliberate over in the penalty phase. This is one of my key issues on appeal. I wasn’t allowed to defend myself against that prison file. I didn’t get to tell the jury that I picked that lid up and fought with the guy because I had to. To do otherwise opens the door to robbery, rape, and all sorts of degrading repercussion. There is no running in here. You either “fight, f*ck, or bust a $60.” The guards don’t protect you. If you read those reports and don’t hear the entire story, of course I look like an aggressive person, a ‘future danger to society.’ They don’t tell the full story though. That’s one of the reason’s I’m writing this post. Yes, I hit him with that trash can lid. Yes, I was in possession of prison shanks. Who didn’t have a shank? That’s the question. We all did. Very few of us ever wanted to use them, but everyone kept one close just in case. I’m thankful I never had to use one. Fighting back was all I ever had to do besides the trash can incident. Some weren’t so lucky. Imagine living in a 9×7 cage with a guy the size of the one I hit with that lid. How do you defend yourself when he gets horny and looks at you? My jury never got to consider that scenario when sifting through my prison file nor did they get to consider the reasons I received the disciplinary cases I did. I didn’t have a fighting chance at any stage of my trial.