

The attached letter dated April 6th, 1995 (FN1) clearly shows that the crimes against Tripati were manufactured by employees of the Maricopa County Attorney's Office. The August 15th, 1994 (FN2) interview given by Teresa Archuleta, the December 22nd, 1996 (FN3) interview by Jane Doe and the June 16th, 1993 (FN4) memo by Teresa Archuleta by clear and convincing evidence show that Mr. Tripati was subjected to misconduct by Arizona authorities.
In the affidavit filed September 10th, 1996 (FN5) Helen Maureen Jones stated in plain language that Mr. Tripati was not involved in any criminal conduct. Frank Cotter by his letter dated July 12th, 1993 (FN6) stated he was told he must not testify for Mr. Tripati.
Attached January 18th, 2000 (FN7) and 24th November, 1999 (FN8) memo with the record of investigation by Arizona authorities show they lost the evidence that support matters set forth by Teresa Archuleta in her interview and memo.
The Arizona Attorney General submitted an affidavit executed by a Judy Gabbert and this affidavit shows that on October 29th, 1999 (FN9) Arizona Judge Ronald Reinstein called her about Mr. Tripati. We all know from our experience that judges are not supposed to make such phone calls.
A document generated by the State of Arizona on November 25th, 1999 (FN10) shows that the judge who made the call Ronald Reinstein, along with Judges Jonathan Schwartz and Gregory Martin asked that evidence favorable to Tripati be destroyed and this was done. They advised the state that employees of the State shall be protected by these judges.
One has to recognize that 52.5 years with no parole for these charges is a bit much considering the charges and what people get for more serious crimes of violence. It raises one's suspicions that there is something wrong in the system here. What is wrong here is that there are some judges that are also part of this system of corruption in Maricopa County. The excessive sentence is intended to make sure Mr. Tripati dies in prison and is not able to expose Maricopa County and their illegal practices of targeting racial minorities and disadvantaged persons for criminal prosecution.
Teresa Archuleta from the Maricopa County Attorney's office evidently did not approve of the system she was part of and had unknowingly to the others provided documents to Mr. Tripati and taped an exposing interview. Teresa Archuleta was later "mysteriously" killed under "curious circumstances" and the murder is still "unsolved." It is believed Ms. Archuleta was a "contract killing" initiated by her co-workers in the County Attorney's office as she was a "whistle blower" threat to their crimes being exposed; many persons being released from prison, and members of the Maricopa County Attorney's office and some judges being prosecuted and going to jail.
Efforts by Mr. Tripati to appeal and to go thru the system have been unsuccessful because "dirty" judges have kept his cases in their courts. Their rulings have not allowed him a "fair" outside audience. The corruption runs deep in the Maricopa County legal system.
Mr. Tripati has filed a $100 million dollar civil action against all those involved using the civil rights act. This landmark civil rights case against certain named members of the Maricopa County Attorney's Office, and some Maricopa County judges filed in federal civil court is finally getting a day in court. In June of 2003, a Federal Judge did finally grant a hearing to Mr. Tripati and has determined a jury trial is indeed warranted in this case. Pre-trial activities are in progress at this time. The defendants, Maricopa County et al, lawyers are now refusing to provide witness lists and evidence and are filing numerous motions in a desperate attempt to derail the case from getting to a court trial in front of a jury.
After Arizona State Officials talked to Judge Roslyn O. Silver, she, as described in Section E, acted as the lawyer for Maricopa County, changed her decision, so as to protect high ranking Maricopa County and Arizona officials.