Runaway JuryLatest Developments: People vs. Giuca
Hyne's Foe Snubbed Me
Visit the Free John Giuca site for petition and more information

Doreen Giuliano on Anderson Cooper

"Mother fights to free son from murder conviction, Son speaks out from prison"

Watch on Anderson Cooper site

"On the Case" with Paula Zahn

Runaway Jury

Every American has the right to a FAIR TRIAL with an IMPARTIAL JURY.

The extent of Jason Allo’s misconduct is staggering. From his own mouth he admits:

If this whole situation was reversed, and a juror committed all sorts of misconduct in order to acquit a defendant, do you think the District Attorney’s office would let him get away with that? So why are they now condoning Jason Allo’s misconduct and trying to cover it up?

This was a TAINTED VERDICT brought in by a POISON JUROR.

What happened to fair trials in this country?

Above The Law

Albert Cleary changed his story several times and was caught in numerous lies before eventually sharpening his story and transforming himself into the centerpiece of the prosecutions case. Albert claims John told him he ordered the murder but was not present during the crime.

The 911 calls were buried and the jury never heard about them. Mr. Cleary was the only person from the group with access to a vehicle in the vicinity. It is also beyond any semblance of credibility that at least six separate house-holds in the area heard the thunderous roar of gunshots, but Albert Cleary, who lives fifty feet away, “Never heard any shots.”

The actions of the Kings County D.A.’s office in using Mr. Cleary as the prime witness against Mr. Giuca clearly raises serious question as to why he himself was not actually a prime suspect. Certain conflicts of interest appear paramount in this regard. Specifically head D.A. Charles Hynes and his relationship to others involved in this case.

The Kings County Republican Executive Committee has the authority of granting, or not granting, a “Wilson Pakula” to anyone running for office in Kings County. A Wilson Pakula is an endorsement or permission slip that allows a candidate to cross party lines and run on the Republican Party ticket if he fails to win his own party’s nomination. Since the Mark Fisher murder in 2003, Democratic candidate Charles Hynes has used the Wilson Pakula privilege, granted by the strange bedfellow at the Republican Executive Committee, twice. Once in 2005 (The same year John Giuca was dragged to trial) in a nail biting close race against Rep.  John Sampson, and again in 2009 when he used the Wilson Pakula privilege to monopolize the race and hang on to the D.A.’s seat unopposed. Both times the Wilson Pakula aided him in maintaining his office. Both times the Wilson Pakula was courtesy of the Vice-chair of the Republican Executive Committee, Albert Cleary’s mother, Susan Cleary.

Trading Lies For Freedom

John Avitto is a Jailhouse informant who pulled details of the Mark Fisher Homicide straight out of news reports in order to concoct a story to trade for freedom. John Avitto is a career criminal and drug addict who has been arrested over twenty times for everything from use of a child in a sex performance to possession of crack cocaine.

John Avitto testified that John Giuca confided in him while on Rikers Island to pistol whipping Mark Fisher and being present during the crime. Avitto also claims he overheard an incriminating conversation between John Giuca and his father in the visiting room at Rikers. What Avitto did not know, and the jurors were never made aware of, is that John’s father had a stroke in 2002 that robbed him of his speech. The conversation Avitto recites could never have taken place because of John Giuca seniors inability to speak. Avitto and the D.A.’s office deny that any deal was made for leniency regarding his pending burglary charges and insist that he was given no special consideration in exchange for his testimony. We can prove he was given seven get out of jail free cards.

After A.D.A. Nicolazzi repeatedly told a straight-faced lie to the jury (“There was no deal”), she eventually admitted that she and the police took no notes while interviewing Avitto so there would be no documents for cross examination.

The testimony of the prosecutor’s two chief witnesses stand in stark contrast to each other, but John Giuca was still convicted and given 25 years to life. This is the “Evidence” against John Giuca, if that’s what you want to call it. A.D.A. Nicolazzi presented the jury with a combination of contradictory theories and motives.  Meanwhile “There is no physical or forensic evidence to back up any of this.” (Vanity Fair, January 2009, pg 59).

Truth vs. Power

The toxic brew of prosecutorial misconduct, hidden agendas, and a rogue juror doomed an innocent man to life in prison.
The D.A.’s office has brazenly stonewalled our attempt to expose the truth.

Their strategy is to do anything to take the focus off the real issue: the fact that John Giuca did not get a fair trial.

Latest Developments: People vs. Giuca

The most recent development in People vs. Giuca was the denial of the juror related motion by acting Judge Alan Marrus. In a 22-page decision he arrogantly attacks Doreen Giuliano, the grief stricken mother desperately trying to prove her sons innocence, and labels her a “jury misconduct vigilante.”

Acting judge Marrus makes several credibility determinations without even ordering a hearing and refers to Mrs. Giuliano’s actions as nothing more than the “Malicious intention of a convicted murderer's mother to discredit the verdict.” (pg 13 of the decision)
He also says the undercover operation “was conducted by a woman, with a clear motive to generate a claim, not to exonerate her son…” (pg 21 of the decision)

While practicing his mind-reading abilities, acting judge Alan Marrus must have missed the fact that John Giuca is only a murderer because Jason Allo pushed the jury to convict him. Doreen Giuliano’s motive has always been to exonerate her son and if Marrus wasn’t so busy trying to bury this, he would have at least held a hearing to assess the facts.

Every American deserves a fair trial with an impartial jury. This decision has us all wondering if acting judge Marrus actually wrote the decision or if the D.A. wrote it for him. If a juror committed all this misconduct in the reverse circumstances, such as:

  1. Commit perjury and contempt of court.
  2. Disobey the courts instructions.
  3. Lie during jury selection to sneak onto a jury.

Then this particular juror convinces the rest of the jury to come back NOT GUILTY, and eventually he is exposed, do you think the D.A. would let him get away with that?

ABSOLUTELY NOT! So why when the tables are turned, not only are they letting him get away with it but they are actively trying to cover it up?

A juror who commits perjury is just as damaging to our truth-seeking process as a juror who accepts bribes. How can someone who does not comply with the duty to tell the truth stand in judgment of others people's truthfulness? Acting judge Marrus and the Brooklyn district attorney’s office are brazenly telling the public that they are only concerned with convictions, not with the truth, and not with justice.

Acting judge Marrus spends considerable time in his decision questioning the authenticity of the tapes (the secretly recorded conversation between Jason Allo and Doreen Giuliano).
This is peculiar since Allo himself has appeared on both Nightline and Geraldo and doesn’t even bother to have an expert review the tapes or order voice analyzer tests. Instead his agenda is to arbitrarily throw a cloud of suspicion on the recordings authenticity.

Alan Marrus also stresses the need for a law to protect juror’s privacy. This is a diversion tactic to take the focus off the real issue at hand: THE FACT THAT JOHN GIUCA DID NOT GET A FAIR TRIAL.

What happen to fair trials in this country??? This is a battle of “Truth vs Power.” Acting judge Marrus' job was to apply the Law, not make it up.

This was a tainted conviction brought in by a biased juror. Now it’s clear why a man who should have been acquitted is serving life in jail.

Hyne's Foe Snubbed Me: Undercover Mother

Then and Now
September 11, 2005- May 5, 2009

The brave mother who went undercover for Brooklyn D.A. Charles Hynes to expose judicial corruption charged that she first tried to report the wrongdoing to the office of a state official at the time vying for Hynes' job.

Frieda Hanimov said she phoned a general number for the Albany office of state Attorney General Eliot Spitzer in October 2002 after she learned Judge Gerald Garson was going to take her kids away in what turned out to be a fixed custody case.

She wanted her case investigated by the Public Integrity Unit, which at the time was run by Mark Peters, who was trying to unseat Hynes in the Democratic primary. "I called the attorney general's office," Hanimov, 36, recalled. "They told me, 'OK, we will send you an application.' "

"But I needed action right away," she said, explaining how she then turned to Hynes.

Hynes gave her the green light to investigate and assisted her along the way. Hanimov exposed the truth of the corrupt Judge. Frieda had to be deceptive to uncover the judicial corruption, so you may say to yourself, why is this any different than exposing a corrupt juror, who committed perjury, contempt of court and a bias crime to push a conviction on a very weak case.

Doreen Giuliano went undercover and exposed a corrupt juror in her son John Giuca’s case.
Why did the Judge reprimand Doreen and the prosecutors deny her request for a fair trial? Is this not a truth seeking system or is it all about just winning a case regardless of the truth? Doreen said. “I needed action right away,” Doreen Giuliano said, explaining how she believed in the system and at first hired private investigators.

When they repeatedly came up empty handed and Doreen knew the conviction was wrong, she went undercover and exposed the juror herself. Doreen calls upon the Public Integrity Unit to view her evidence and decide if she found serious corruption with the Judge the D.A. and the juror on her son’s case. Her son’s acting trial judge Alan Marrus didn’t even hold a hearing.

"He based his decision on the prosecutor's rejections of my evidence," Doreen Giuliano said. "He even called me names. I did nothing different then what Frieda did. I have all the evidence of corruption and they buried it, its all there."

"I will continue my search for justice and my faith in finding an honest Judge to take a closer look at this case. I will be my son’s voice."