Send a Message
to ANGLETURNER

Comments

47

Joined

Apr 19, 2011

ANGLETURNER Profile

Forums Owned

Recent Posts

Ayer, MA

Serving life for Ayer murder, ex-Green Beret sues for las...

Posted on TOPIX - "Ex-Green Beret loses appeal in "79 wife killing" - cf. Article in LOWELL SUN, Lisa Redmond, 10/04/14. Dismissal of current Tyree appeal @ www.massreports.co m. Search for SJC-11633-Tyree vs. Commonwealth. SJC-6 MEMBER QUORUM-TYREE vs. COMMONWEALTH –SJC-11633- ORDER, 10/01/14 LOWELL SUN- “Ex-Green Beret loses appeal in ’79 wife killing” – Lisa Redmond-10/04/14 PART 1 35 years later, both the SJC quorum and the SUN article appear to have overlooked a “res judicata”, “AGREED JUDGMENT”, approved by a single justice of the SJC, “FILED Nov 20 1979”: “4. The individual defendants [the Ayer District Court and/or Judge Killam, Clerk Birch] shall de- cline to exercise their jurisdiction to entertain complaints brought by any party which seek to charge any individual or individuals with COMPLICITY in the murder of Elaine Tyree, unless so ordered by a justice or justices of the supreme judicial court.” Peter Agnes for Droney et al; Robert S. Potters for the Ayer District Court et al "Nov 20 1979" Our understanding of ‘hornbook’ law: 1. There is no statute of limitations for the act of murder. 2. Both the Commonwealth (via Agnes) and the Ayer Court (via Potters), as well as the full bench of the Supreme Judicial Court (acting sua sponte), could well have objected to, moved to reconsider or appealed the above judgment to the full SJC bench. Such did not occur. 3. Whether the term for such appeal was 30 or fewer days in 1979 is immaterial – term has expired and all parties to this judgment, INCLUDING THE CURRENT 6-MEMBER QUORUM WHO AUTHORED THE RECENT OPINION, remain, to this day, bound by the ancient expression, “res judicata” and are no longer in a position to avoid the 35 year-old mandate, their very own case law. Parties who peruse the single justice proceeding (SJ-2013-350) will find that Justice Lenk (in her dismissal of Tyree’s current case against the Commonwealth) noted an earlier ruling in the 1979 case, SJ-79-279. This same ruling Is cited as “1” in the November “AGREED JUDGMENT”, viz., that the July 6, 1979 view and judgment given then by Justice Kaplan is confirmed, i.e., that the arrest warrants issued by Judge James Killam were void and issued contrary to law. Oddly lacking from Justice Lenk’s ruling is any reference to “4” (above) and her court-ordered, legally established duty to consider the evidence, carefully cited by Tyree, for the COMPLICITY of Earl Michael Peters in the murder of Elaine Tyree. Whether or not Tyree has sufficiently advanced such evidence does not appear in her decision nor her duty thereto. The same absence of “4” is evident in the current 6-member quorum from the SJC, citing only that “[a] single justice of this court allowed the petition [to void the arrest warrants] and voided the complaints that had issued against the witness [Peters]. SJC-11633, @2 – 10/01/14 The same opinion faults Tyree for his failure “to rais[e] a third-party culprit defense.” @2 The latter expression indicates a failure (perhaps on the part of a law clerk) to consider the “AGREED JUDGMENT” in its entirety, including the mandate, # ”4”, to take into consideration the evidence for the “charge[s]” against Earl Peters for Elaine’s murder embodied in Tyree’s brief. The “rais[ing] of a third party culprit defense” is precisely what Tyree has done and has carefully cited the 1979, “AGREED JUDGMENT” as the grounds for the Court’s obligation to so proceed. We shall subsequently review Tyree’s past efforts to properly present this evidence and the manner in which the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, although having actual knowledge of the 1979 judgment, deflected those efforts. The transcripts of the 1979 Probable Cause proceedings and the viability of Judge Killam’s 2 page order, finding probable cause against Peters for Elaine’s murder, are also available from court records. End Part 1  (Oct 6, 2014 | post #125)

Ayer, MA

Serving life for Ayer murder, ex-Green Beret sues for las...

THE ORDER OF JUDGE JAMES W. KILLAM, III, AYER DISTRICT COURT JUDGE – MAY 15, 1979 EARL PETERS AND HIS SHOTGUN PART II-o Reference to the Killam order may be found @ #28 (08/12/12) and #33 (10/12/12) It is now clear, as of 04/11/79, that the Court has begun to find Probable Cause against Peters: “It’s entirely possible that Peters is the knife man.” DAY 6, P. 25; L. 4-5 (See Post # 123, 09/03/14) An inquiry into the grounds for the Court’s covertly expressed (to counsel) view is now properly before us. And so, it is imperative that we now be informed that, 2 days before, on DAY 4 (04/09/79), the infamous “letters” from Tyree to Menzie and Woodland, exhaustively cited in their prior testimony on that day, had been submitted to the Court as “EXHIBITS #7, 8 & 9” (DAY 4) at the conclusion of Michael Menzie’s last appearance on the stand. It is clear that neither the Court nor counsel had heretofore read the contents thereof. An odd legal crossroads (if not a ‘roadblock’ for the Commonwealth) has appeared: The letters appear to contain material which, IF BELIEVED,, completely destroys the value of Earl Michael Peters as the chief witness for the Commonwealth. If Tyree had appeared as a witness in the current proceeding, his statements in the letters would be subject to cross-examination and potential impeachment. But, since Tyree has decided not to testify, there are no direct means of impeaching the crucial statements, cited but yet to be found in his letters. DeMichaelis (for the Commonwealth) could recall both Menzie and Woodland AFTER perusal of the letters’ contents (an option which, oddly, he failed to pursue). He could move to have the letters excluded from formal submission to the Court (an option denied by the Court) BUT COUNSEL WAS NOT ALLOWED TO SEE THE LETTERS UNTIL AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF THE MENZIE/WOODLAND TESTIMONY. Consequently, DeMichaelis will have to deal with ‘the cow AFTER she leaves the barn’. In the interim, the Court saw the letters. The letters, 3 in number, are postmarked March 14, 23 and 30, 1979, the first being presumably written by Tyree little more than 4 weeks from the day of his arrest on February 13, 1979. THE FIRST LETTER – EXHIBIT #7 Item 1. The joint Peters/Tyree criminal activity After the conclusion of the personal body of the letter, Tyree drearily recites some 16 occasions, some of which necessarily involved him in, either participation in or witness to, several varieties of criminal activity. Most of the occasions involved cooperation with Peters, one with Erik Aarhus. Certain materials were stolen by Tyree from military supply but, according to him, given, not sold, to others. None of the 16 occasions involved Tyree in harm, threatened or otherwise, to any person. Item 2. The letter repeatedly specified the existence and notoriety of the “books” kept by Elaine Erik Aarhus had approached Elaine, December, 1978, when she and daughter were sitting in Tyree’s truck and demanded that she “she had better…[get] rid of [the books]...”. P.2 Tyree later confronted Aarhus, fought with him and laughed off Aarhus’ threat to kill him. Aarhus had then stated that Peters was aware that Aarhus’ name was cited therein and that becuse with those’s books,. I could go to jail.” P. 3, original spelling retained Item 3. The letter specifically cited the animus of Peters against Elaine “Mike Peters was at my house the Saturday before she died, me him and Elaine discussed what we would do with the books so at that point, Mike discovered that his name was in the Books as often as AARHUS. He got mad and asked me to drive him back to Post. On the way back to Post, he told me that with Books like those’s floating around, ‘some-one could get their throat cut'.” P. 3. Original spelling retained EARL PETERS AND HIS SHOTGUN - End PART II-o  (Oct 2, 2014 | post #124)

Ayer, MA

State's highest court to mull murder conviction in 1979 A...

Parties seeking the grounds for the current Tyree appeal before the Supreme Judicial Court may peruse the following site: http://www.topix.c om/forum/city/ayer -ma/TD7GG3KCS626B7 C4A#lastPost or, by GOOGLING: “Serving life for Ayer murder, ex-Green Beret sues for last Army…” In 1979, a Probable Cause hearing in Ayer District Court (of some 13 days duration) before Judge James Killam, presiding justice, found: No probable cause against Tyree for the murder of his wife, Elaine Tyree- Probable Cause against Earl Michael Peters for the first degree murder of Mrs. Tyree. A lay analysis of the 1979 Ayer proceedings may be found at the following posts on the above-cited URL: #23(07/23/12),26,2 7,29,33,34,36,40,4 2,43,4748,49,50,51 ,54,57,73,74,75,78 , 90,92 #96,96,97105,107,1 10,111,112,113,114 ,115,117,119,120,1 21,122,123(09/03/1 4). The co-defendant (cited in the SUN article – “Erik Aarhus”) has exonerated Tyree from any participation in the murder of Tyree’s wife, Elaine (cf. #73,#89). “WITNESS (TOPIX post name)” saw a man run from the Tyree building at the time of the murder who was clearly not Erik Aarhus. His posts can be found at #7(02/10/10),24,25 ,32,35,79,90(07/01 /14) “WITNESS” was interviewed by local authorities, underwent hypnotic recall and was exposed to 2 or more lineups in which Erik Aarhus appeared. His comments on the TOPIX site confirm his former statements (now available) and his interview on MURDER AT FORT DEVENS (A&E documentary, 1998). The Tyree landlord, Francis Gardner, saw Earl Michael Peters walking aware from the area of the Tyree apartment, shortly after the time of the murder (cf. #26,73,112,119). None of the defense witnesses (INCLUDING “WITNESS”) listed for the Superior Court trial of Tyree (1980) testified, including all but one of the most critical testators from the Probable Cause hearing. Those wishing to follow the current activity in the Supreme Judicial Court can access their site at file:///C:/Users/o wner/Desktop/SJC.h tm clicking “DOCKET SEARCH” and by entering the case#: "SJC-11633” Docket for the underlying “SINGLE JUSTICE” case can be accessed by clicking “SJ-2013-350” Under the latter case, Docket #12 moves to amend Tyree’s complaint with a presentation of “WITNESS” ’ firm position, over a 35 year period, of the non-identity of the person he saw run from the Tyree apartment as that of Aarhus. His concern over the failure of the justice system to seek his testimony in court is palpable in the cited posts. Docket #10 on the first (SJC-11633) cites the letter (April 10, 2014) of Col. (Ret.) Forest S. Rittgers, Jr., Base Commander of Fort Devens, 1979 vacating the permission to search the barracks room of Erik Aarhus, telephonically given to CID Agent Joseph Burzynski in the evening of February 13, 1979. Two weeks later, Docket #13 (April 24, 2014) cites the letter from Commonwealth of Massachusetts A.D.A. Charles, stating the default of the Commonwealth, i.e., that it will not file a brief in opposition to that of Tyree. Tyree’s brief (pdf) may be accessed by clicking “Appellant Tyree brief”. The Supreme Judicial Court presumably began discussion of the Tyree case yesterday (cf. Docket #15).  (Sep 4, 2014 | post #1)

Ayer, MA

Serving life for Ayer murder, ex-Green Beret sues for las...

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN (Post 2) Non-public discussion before a Quorum of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts for SJC-11633 -COMMONWEALTH v. WILLIAM M. TYREE, JR. will commence on September 3, 2014 at the Boston courthouse. Docket activity may be viewed by entering www.ma-appellateco urts.org/search_nu mber.php Under docket number, enter “sjc-11633” The live site, @ “Appellant Tyree Brief”, fully addresses the purpose of Tyree’s appeal. The motions (not live on the SJC site) to: Dismiss Tyree’s 1979 indictment (“Paper # 4”)- Arrest Earl Michael Peters for the first degree murder of Elaine Tyree (“Paper # 5”)- are predicated on evidence advanced in the extensive brief. The factual allegations in support of the foregoing can be found in the brief, in part, on Page 7, Para. 21 and 22. “(a). the Killam decision” (cf. TOPIX site Posts #23,27,29,33,73,78 ) “(b). Gardner statement” (#26,73) “(c). Aarhus affidavit” (#73) “(d) Jack Hebb letter” (#23,73) See also recent posts beginning with #92, 07/11/14. Note: “Paper” #10 (04/10/14) was provided by Col. Forest S. Rittgers, Jr., former Base Commander of Fort Devens through the Probable Cause hearings in 1979. In the evening of Feb. 13, 1979, acting as a federal magistrate, Col. Rittgers gave oral, telephonic permission to Criminal Investigation Agent Joseph Burzynksi to search the barracks room of Erik Aarhus. This search resulted in the recovery of a knife which was purportedly tied to the murder of Elaine Tyree. Pursuant to information received by Col. Rittgers over the past 2 years, he has found a measure of deception in the information orally relayed to him by Agent Burzynski and has revoked his orally granted permission to search the Aarhus room, effective April 7, 2014. Note: “Paper” #13 (04/24/14) states that “[t]he Commonwealth will not be submitting a brief in opposition to [Tyree’s] present appeal”. The grounds given for this withdrawal from the Tyree case are that “[Tyree’s] submissions do not raise any new issues not previously addressed by the Commonwealth in its original opposition.” Parties acquainted with this latest development have noted a facial inconsistency in the latter statement since the decision of Col. Rittgers, revoking the search authorization (Rittgers letter to the Court, dated April 7, 2014), is clearly a “new issue[]” within the meaning of that expression. TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN – (End Post 2)  (Aug 15, 2014 | post #119)

Ayer, MA

Serving life for Ayer murder, ex-Green Beret sues for las...

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN (Post 1) Non-public discussion before a Quorum of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts for SJC-11633 -COMMONWEALTH v. WILLIAM M. TYREE, JR. will commence on September 3, 2014 at the Boston courthouse. Docket activity may be viewed by entering www.ma-appellateco urts.org/search_nu mber.php Under docket number, enter “sjc-11633” The “Case Docket” page has 4 active sites: “SJ-2013-350” – Single justice proceedings before Justice Lenk. Judge Lenk's denial of Tyree’s request for 1. Dismissal of the 1979 indictment- 2. Arrest of Earl Michael Peters- led to the current appeal to the full Court, "SJC-11533 ". The latter motion is pursuant to the terms of SJ-79-279, “AGREED JUDGMENT”, 11/20/79. Note that “Paper” #12 (10/03/13) seeks to amend the Tyree's current complaint with “Para (e)”. This submission cites the extensive statements (some current) of Vias Williams, witness to a man running from the Tyree apartment at the time of the murder (noon, 01/30/79) and the failure of the system of justice to bring his testimony forward. Recently a police report and result of a hypnotic session with Williams have appeared but could not be cited in the “Paper”. All statements of Willliams, including his exposure to 2 or more lineups, confirm that the man he witnessed was not Erik Aarhus. “James W. Sahakian, A.D.A.” – Mr. Sahakian (according to our under- standing) is currently appellate counsel for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Mr. Sahakian’s name also appears as an an associate District Attorney in the 1979 case of John Droney et al v. District Court of Ayer (Case No. SJ-79-279). This proceeding (conducted without notice to either Tyree or Aarhus) resulted in the withdrawal of an arrest warrant for Earl Michael Peters for the first degree murder of Elaine Tyree. The conclusion of the case, an “AGREED JUDGMENT”, Nov. 20, 1979, provided that “[t]he individual defendants [Ayer District Court and clerk] shall decline to exercise their jurisdiction to entertain applications for complaints brought by any party which seek to charge any individual or individuals with complicity in the murder of Elaine Tyree, unless so ordered by a justice or justices of the supreme judicial court.” Page 2, Para. 4 The current case brought before the Court by Tyree is, in part, pursuant to the terms of this “AGREED JUDGMENT”. “Jamie Michael Charles. A.D.A.” – An Assistant District Attorney assigned to the case by District Attorney for Middlesex County. “Appellant Tyree Brief” – The full (pdf) brief for the Tyree case, written and entered by Tyree. Cited, again, are the same 2 motions by Tyree found in the single justice case, SJ-2013-350: 1. Dismissal of his 1979 indictment- (#4) 2. Arrest of Earl Michael Peters for the first degree murder of Elaine Tyree (#5) End Post 1 – TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN  (Aug 14, 2014 | post #117)

Ayer, MA

Serving life for Ayer murder, ex-Green Beret sues for las...

THE ORDER OF JUDGE JAMES W. KILLAM, III, AYER DISTRICT COURT JUDGE – MAY 15, 1979 EARL PETERS AND HIS SHOTGUN PART II-k Reference to the Killam order may be found @ #28 (08/12/12) and #33 (10/12/12) “7.” ( POST #114), continued: After the lengthy complaint of DeMichaelis regarding the admissibility of Menzie’s testimony (now devastating to the Commonwealth), Spadafora has heard DeMichaelis (largely without objection from the defense attorneys) laboriously extract testimony from Menzie, HIS WITNESS, arguably favorable to the Commonwealth. Now, it seems DeMichaelis is unwilling that the defense be provided with an equal opportunity to hear alternate, contrary, testimony. Spadafora has heard enough. “MR. SPADAFORA: Your Honor, if I may respond to the District Attorney. On direct examination, the Sergeant here quoted Mr. Tyree as saying that he believed his wife was killed because of a series of incidents that he was involved in. Considering the fact that there were a number of instances involved in a number of different locations, it could result in the possibility that the people involved on the other end of those instances could have a great deal of reason to do away with his wife, specifically, because she knew what they were doing, and she had kept a record thereof. And, Mr. Tyree’s direct conversation is what I am eliciting here from the Sergeant; was that Mr. Peters on the Saturday before the wife was killed, specifically said when confront[ed] by his wife, that she had a book, and she knew what he was doing, people who keep books like that are going to get their throats cut. Now, if that isn’t relevant, then perhaps, the fact that she is dead isn’t relevant.” This has now become an arena of intense professional rivalry. DeMichaelis must counter the satirical statement which concluded Spadafora’s paragraph (above), else the prosecution’s posture will deteriorate further: "MR. DEMICHAELIS: May I further state that it isn’t so much the substance that I am objecting to, if it came from a source of a personal knowledge of this witness, such as if he had heard Peters say certain things, or if he had, which are inconsistent with Peters’ testimony, or if he had seen Peters doing this stuff personally, which would be inconsistent with Peters’ testimony, this is commonly called a hearsay self-serving source, to wit: the defendant, which is pure and adulter[at]ed hearsay, which also applies to cross-examination as well as direct examination, as far as I’m concerned I would strongly suggest, if You Honor please, that under those circumstances, this is entirely inadmissible, and I again, renew my motion to strike that whole series of questions and answers that come from a source, from the mouth of the defendant, not even an independent person.” Readers of this entire transcript (and others) might notice the failure of Bradley (for Tyree) to strenuously enter this ongoing fray on behalf of Tyree. This failure on the part of Bradley reveals an easily identifiable pattern which will be evident through the superior court trial of Tyree. Not so “THE COURT”. The transcript bristles with evidence that Judge Killam closely followed all: "THE COURT: I disagree with you that it’s self-serving. Your motion is denied.” P. 113; L. 6-P. 115; L. 3 There remains but one query to complete the destruction of what Judge Killam termed "the credibility of Michael Peters." [POST #114, P. 113, L. 4-5] Did Bill Tyree ever tell Michael Menzie that he believed that Earl Michael Peters murdered his wife, Elaine Tyree? EARL PETERS AND HIS SHOTGUN – End PART II-k  (Aug 11, 2014 | post #115)