In 2004, when Kevin Cooper received an En Banc hearing in which the 9th circuit – in a 9-2 decision—granted him a stay of execution, the following was learned:
Federal Circuit Court Judge Silverman, who was on the En Banc panel in the Cooper case in 2004, stated that Cooper was “either guilty as sin, or he was framed by the police, there is no middle ground.”
In fact, deputy state attorney general Holly Wilkens used those exact words at the oral arguments hearing in early 2007. A hearing in San Francisco in which none of the circuit judges appeared in person, remember?
Since 2004, the law firm Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, and their attorney Norman Hile have with the help of others uncovered, discovered, found, presented and exposed so many new things in the Cooper case that anyone who looks at all of this new information will see the truth. Especially if they look at it with unbiased eyes and minds and opinions.
They will see that all the evidence proves that Kevin Cooper was and still is being framed by the police, just as 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Silverman said….
How else can it be explained that for the first time in this court’s history at least eleven judges on the 9th circuit voted in favor of an En Banc rehearing and were denied? Or that five o those judges warned that “the state of California may be about to execute an innocent man”?
This, and the 105-page dissents singed by eleven judges is unprecedented! According to one of the dissenting Judges, “the en banc vote was extremely close, closer than the list of eleven dissenters would suggest.”
If Cooper was “guilty as sin” as the state claims, then none of the above would have taken place. Nor would Cooper’s legal team have proved that the state:
And the list of constitutional violations and civil rights violations goes on. Whenever you put all of these things together, it equals being framed by the police, and that framing being condoned by certain judges on the courts, and of course by the state!