PRESS RELEASE
SPRING 2006
BY IRA EINHORN

Below you will find a cursory enumeration of the due process and other violations connected to my legal case. These violations are being ignored in the same manner that the media initially ignored the holes in the Bush Administration’s case for war in Iraq.

They are part of the same failure: group think and the unwillingness to do adequate investigative work. Such behavior is indicative of a declining nation and a sad inability to admit mistakes and correct them.

The behavior of the lower courts is a disgrace to our nation; it dishonors those who gave their lives for our now disappearing freedom.

These claims are all substantiated by documentation available to anyone who wishes more information.
We are in the midst of a great crisis that threatens our future. The networking that I am skilled at could help us solve our problems.

Please help free me, so that I can continue my work without fetters.

“And what has happened in this case – and I challenge defense counsel or anybody else to cite any case ever – and I really do mean that – ever in the sate of Pennsylvania – possibly the whole country – that has so personalized and so sensationalized not just the case but a defendant.”

Asst. DA Joel Rosen in the notes of testimony

1. The original prosecutor, Barbara Christie, blew down a report, due to the defense under discovery, done by two ex-FBI agents hired by the family of the victim. This action enabled her to disappear certain pages containing Brady (exculpatory) material.

A. She removed reports of five sightings of Holly Maddux, six months after the prosecution alleges she was murdered. An allegation they have maintained for 27 years.

B. She removed a statement by these two men that began: “if we are going to pin this on Einhorn...”

C. Other material, for reasons unknown, I have not seen.

2. It required 5 court hearings to obtain some of the material mentioned in 1(A) and 1(B) above, but the DA’s office continued to withhold two sightings by Philadelphia detectives until 2002, thus it was not available for my in absentia trial (1993). By that time one of the detectives had died.

3. The DA’s office did not use the normal procedure for the forensics. They sent all the material to the FBI laboratory. When they came up empty: no blood, no human protein in the case and fingerprints that were neither mine nor that of the deceased, that they did not bother to ask the FBI to identify, they sat on the results.

It took a court order for us to get those results.

4. The same procedure was tried again with Toxicon Associates, the same laboratory that later did the O. J. case. They came up with the same results that we had to fight to obtain.

5. So they turned to the local man they had twice bypassed. He invented a new test, never repeated by anyone, never published and never peer reviewed.

He got a presumptive positive for protein; his new untested procedure is an obvious violation of the Frye/Danbert standard and never should have been allowed in the courtroom. Dr. Tumosa, the man who did the original testing for Toxicon Labs made that clear in the courtroom: You can’t use an untested procedure when a man’s life is at stake. But Judge Mazzola wanted a conviction not justice.

6. In the mid 80’s, 67 volumes of my diaries, supposedly seized as evidence, were turned over illegally to a journalist, who used them to write a damning sensational book about the case. 13 television specials, innumerable other media tales and a 2 part TV mini-series – now available on video all over the world – were to follow. All based on material plagiarized from my journals, as for 20 years I spoke to no journalists.

7. In 1993, an unprecedented in absentia murder trial was held. My Lawyer, Norris Gelman, was coerced into defending me.

8. By early 1997 my decision was final.

9. In June of 1997, I was discovered in France.

10. When the French refused to extradite me, the PA. Legislature passed an obviously unconstitutional law (it violates one of our basic tenets: The Separation Of Powers) that the French still balked at, as the jurists who wrote the PA law books filed many briefs stating that the Einhorn Law was unconstitutional, but political pressure prevailed.

11. In 1999, a civil suit against me (filed in an untimely manner) went to court. I now owe, with interest, over $1,000,000,000.

12. The media commotion pre-trial included 565 local newspaper articles and a widely publicized tomato throwing contest, presided over by the Commissioner of Police.

13. On September 28, 2001, I was compared to Osama Bin Laden in a local paper, complete with pictures.

14. Judge Mazzola refused all pre-trial discussion of the journal issue.

15. He acted as a second prosecutor throughout the trial:

A. He did not permit my wife to testify at the trial.

B. He allowed 15 year old defamatory evidence to be presented. Material that took up the majority of my cross examination.

C. He asked me to comment on my treatment in his courtroom while I was testifying.

D. While I was testifying the Assistant D.A. held up a 4” by 12” bag which had “Bullshit Bag” inscribed on it. My lawyer insisted she be questioned about the matter. Judge Mazzola refused.

E. He insulted me at the end of the trial on the basis of a word that I had used, insisting that the word didn’t exist in his dictionary. An international society bearing such a name has existed since 1975. Google.com provided 4,000 hits at the time with 3 articles about me in the top 20.

F. In violation of PA Rules Of Court, he reseated the jury in the box after the trial and allowed TV in the courtroom.

G. However his worst and most flagrant act of bias was his telling the jury that they could ignore the time of death when deciding upon the verdict, thus destroying the very basis of the trial.

16. He then delayed my appeal for two years.

17. My lawyers refused to act.

18. I filed 4 pro se motions, re those delays. Twice the court ordered the judge to file. He finally did after he had been in contempt of court for 6 months.

19. My lawyers ignored the filing date of my appeal for over a month. The court could have dismissed the appeal.
20. They did not brief the issues in the way that I asked.

21. The judges’ 218 page submission (most are a few pages) is an abomination and full of outright lies.

22. Both the judge and my lawyers lied about the history of the case in their respective briefs; both omit my 4 docketed pro se motions.

23. Judge Mazzola defends my lawyers a number of times in his brief – hardly his function – and asks the court to close out all further appeals – hardly his prerogative – and rule on matters not raised.

His bias screams as loudly as Caesar’s wounds.

24. My lawyers continue to refuse communication.

25. The court has been asked to dismiss them; they have, so far, refused to do so.

26. I have effectively, at present, no counsel; a direct violation of my sixth amendment right to counsel.

27. Old TV specials and the TV mini-series, years out of date, broadcast their lies monthly.

28. Similar to Diogenes, I seek an honest broker, but with information instead of a lantern.

Ira Einhorn ES6859
P.O. Box 1000
Houtzdale, PA 16698-1000

P.S.: My recently published book, Prelude To Intimacy, is available at Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble, Borders and the on line publisher Lulu www.lulu.com/content/162719

My case information and other writings are slowly being posted at: http://www.iratheunicorn.blogspot.com/