When Jonesy reviewed the police reports and authorized felony charges of Attempted Murder, Aggravated Assault, and Disorderly Conduct With a Weapon, he fucked the case up almost from the get go. After the Public Defender filed the expected motions to suppress Marcos Duendes’ confession under Brown v. Illinois and all the evidence the state had obtained after that under the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine, Jonesy conceded the issue that the police didn’t have probable cause when they unknowingly arrested Duendes by closing the holding cell door on him while they spoke first with his wife, Priscilla, after both had voluntarily gone to the station house to freely speak with the police. Jonesy should have fought the fight for the confession first there on the issue of probable cause and only argued secondarily that if, “for the sake of argument only,” there was no probable cause that sufficient evidence later arose after the unlawful arrest that “purged the taint of the illegal arrest,” which was the only argument he made in his sloppy brief and at the suppression hearing.

First Jonesy fucked it up . . . and then he got lucky when Judge Todd accepted the state’s argument and did not suppress Duendes’ confession or the evidence the police obtained after it.

The first trial, therefore, was a foregone conclusion. The jury convicted Duendes of all the charges, even though Priscilla testified that Dr. Ugliski had “raped” her during his obstetric examination of her when she went to see him after she had first learned that she was pregnant and after she had promised her husband who was leaving for his Army duty that she would only go to the Mexican midwives for all her pregnancy care, including the delivery of beautiful Dolores. Perhaps one of the reasons that the all white jury convicted Duendes was because Jonesy had used his peremptory challenges in violation of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Batson v. Kentucky to keep the one Mexican in the final jury pool off the jury, and Judge Todd denied Duendes’ motion for a mistrial.

Prisicilla had lied in her testimony. First, Dr. Ugliski had never raped her during the excellent medical care he had provided her. Second, Priscilla and Dr. Ugliski did have a brief, consensual, albeit unethical, sexual affair after Priscilla had recovered from her delivery of Dolores and while Marcos was still on leave from the Army. Only three people knew about this affair between the doctor and his patient; Priscilla, Dr. Ugliski, and me.

By the time Priscilla told me about her affair with Dr. Ugliski during my retrial of her husband’s case, there was only Priscilla and me who then knew about the affair because Dr. Ugliski had already killed himself when the second trial began because, I guess, he didn’t want to go through the horrible ordeal that he went through during and after the first trial when Priscilla had lied about him “raping” her, and, maybe also, because he feared that the truth about his affair with Priscilla would come out during the second trial. It never did. Priscilla never told anyone but me, and I never told anyone until now in this book.

Priscilla never told anyone to protect her life. I never told anyone to protect the only shot that I felt I had to protect my second prosecution. What I did violated my ethical duty and the Constitution of the United States as opined in another United States Supreme Court case, Brady v. Maryland. But Priscilla came to me in secret and other things happened during our after hours meeting in my office that I also never wanted to be known . . . but eventually they too were discovered after the trial was over.

As I said, Jonesy fucked up this case, and then he got lucky with the trial court . . . but it’s law and not luck that rules on the court of appeals.

[DISCLAIMER: NONE OF THIS HAPPENED IN REAL LIFE. IT’S ALL MADE UP. IF YOU THINK YOU RECOGNIZE SOMEONE OR SOME THING, YOU DON’T. JUST KEEP MOVING, PLEASE. THERE’S NOTHING TO SEE HERE.]