STATE OF MAINE UNIFIED CRIMINAL DOCKET
CUMBERLAND, ss. Location: PORTLAND
Docket No. CPL-11531

SANBORN, 111.,
APPLICATION FOR
RELEASE ON BAIL PENDING FINAL
1.1. DISPOSITION OF PETITION
STATE OF MWE, 15 MILE. 2129
Crirn. P. 74
Respor-IoENT. 15 1.4.11.5. 11151

 

5 
now CDMES the Petitioner. and through counsel, Amy L. Fair?eld. pursuant to
Title 15, Section 2129 of the Maine Revised Statutes and Rule T4 of the Maine Rules of Uni?ed
Criminal Procedure. and respectfully applies to this Honorable lli'ourt to order his release on bail
pending ?nal disposition ol'111e Petition for Post?Conviction Review ?led in the abot'evcaptioned
matter on. Upon information and hello!" and in support thereof. Counsel submits as follows.
PRUCEDURAL BACKGROUND
1. On January 5. 21] I 7, the Petitioner {through counsel} filed a collateral state Petition for Poss
Conviction Review (hereinafter, to 15 11.1.1313. 2121-2129. The
petition was assigned to the docket by order of this Court dated February 1,
201?.

. The State ?led an answer to the Petition on March 21]} concurrent therewith, a
preheering conference was requested.

STATEWIENT 0F FACTS
. Anthony Seubom was convicted of the murder of Jessica Briggs in November, 1992. IT-A
M.R.S.A. 201 (1933}; State Sunburn, No. CUM-93-212 (Me. Super. Oct. 29,
1992). He was tried as an adult after a bind-over hearing in 1990. Sanbom was sentenced to

seventy years in prison on April 23, 1993.

 

 

The body of Jessica Briggs was found in the water beneath the Bath Iron Works pier in
Portland Harbor on May 24, 1939. it is supposed she had been killed in the early in the
morning hours of that day. l-ler shoes, an earring, a pack of cigarettes. and a pool of blood
were discovered by employees of Bath Iron Works on the morning of May 24, and her body
was discovered by Fenland police divers later that day. She had bled to death in a prone
position from a long incision across her threat that severed her windpipe and opened her
carotid artery. She had multiple ether incision and stab wounds to her neck and torso,
including one potentially fatal stab wound that penetrated her right lung. Moreover, her lower
abdomen was sliced from one side ol" her to the other. leaving her disentbowcled and partially
cviscerated. The kill was vicious and depraved. it does not have the signature of someone
who has never killed before. and it certainly- does not scent to be a murder a sixteen-year-old
boy would commit. Her clothes were in disarray and had been damaged. After her death,
Briggs?s body had been dragged to a gap in the pier and dumped into the water below. Semen
was found on her Underpants and on a swab ot? her vulva. Despite a seven?inch bladed knife
being found in the ocean with the hotly?a knife that she brought with her that night, and
referred to as ?Eutchie?-?tl1e murder weapon was never found. a fact the State proffered at
trial. There was no physical evidence linking Sanborn to the murder. The State?s case was
entirely circumstantial.

There were over a hundred interviews conducted by Portland Police Department
detectives and of?cers, and the sum and substance of individuals interviewed as part
of the police investigation, was that there was no shortage of suspects as to who actually may
have killed Jessica Briggs; and it is completely unclear if, when and how many of these

individuals PPD actually ruled out as being Briggs' murderer. To the extent anyone was

 

 

 

 

ruled out, the State never provided any discover}r explaining how anyone of the individuals
was determined not to be the perpetrator. In fact, Detective Young tells Tonv during a July
12, 1989 interview that they have interviewed ?fteen or seventeen people from Bath Iron
Works who saw .lessica Briggs with a he}: on a hike that night crossing Commercial
SLteet toward the water. Yunng ?ll?li't?'l' indicated to that these individuals descrilic
the ?boy on the bike" as ?tting Tony?s general description. First. the State onlyr provided
interviews related to sin interviews from Bl?lltr foil-ts; second, none of these people identi?ed
Tony in a line-tip, or identi?ed him at trial.
Sanhorn?s trial. presided over by the Honorable Stephen L. Perkins, began on October
15', 19'9"- in the Cumberland County Superior Court and lasted apprnitirnateljrr nine days. The
State was represented ii}: .J'ttssistant General Pamela :?tmes and Donald Macomber.
As the lead detective. James Daniels was present at the Statcis counsel talilc. Sanhorn was
represented by Portland attorney?s Neaie Duffs-ti and Edwin Chester. Late at night on the
ninth day ot'trial. after ten hours ofdeliheration. thejurv returned a guilty verdict.
No one else was ever charged with the murder, as an accomplice, co-conspirntor or
otherwise.
OF AUTHORITIES
M.R.U. Crint. P. T4 governs bail pending ?nal disposition of a petition for post-conviction
review.I Subsection expressly permits the Petitioner to make his present application to this

Court for bail pending disposition. In evaluating the Petitioner?s application, M.R.U. Ct'irn. P. 

 

MR. U. Grim. P. 74' derives its authorinr?om the statute governing petition ondproeeo?nrefor
paranoia-victim review certi?ed or 15 M. 2129(4). providing. "?ajending?noi disposition.
the may order the retense ofrhe petitioner on bait at such time and
under such circumstances as the Supreme Court provides by rule. 

3





requires the Court to consider the evidence presented in pleadings or through evidence at hearing
and make an assessment about the merits of petitioner?s claim, and determine whether bail
should be granted based on the strength of petitioner?s claim. and the crirne and ultimate relief
sought upon petitioner prevailing. Once the Court has had an opportunity to assess petitioner's

claims, the Court has wide discretion in granting hail pending final disposition of the petition. to

 

making its assessment, the Court consider the factors contained in IS MR5. (2) and the
Court must also consider 15 MRS. 1026. the current day ?bail code."
4. Rule T4. providing that petitioner may apply to the court. For bail pending final

continues in pertinent part:

Standards Governing Bail. 'l'hc court. may order the release ofthe petitioner on bail
ii":

[i the court is satisfied on the basis ofthe pleadings. or the pleadings supplemented by
an}; evidence received at. a hearing on the petition pursuant to Rule 7'3. Ihat the petitioner
has a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on the petition;

release on bail is appropriate given the crime and the nature ofthe ultimate relief
contemplated by the court if the petitioner were to prevail; and

the standards and conditions preventing hail contained in 15 MES. 52?; and (3)
are satis?ed.

M.R.U. (Trim. Faith).

5. Title 15 MR3. 5 lt'lil contains the section ofthe Maine Bail Code that governs post-

corwiction bail. The relevant subsections as stated above provide state in full:

 

(2) Standards. Except as provided in subsection 4, a defendant may not he admitted to
bail under this section unless the judge orjustiee has probable cause to believe that:

A. There is no substantial risk that the defendant will Fail to appear as required and wiil
not otherwise pose a substantial risk to the integrityF ofthe judicial process;

 

 

 

S. Then: is no substantial risk that the defendant will pose a danger to another or to the
community; and

C. There is no substantial risk that the defendant will commit new criminal conduct.

in determining whether to admit a defendant to hail, the judge or justice shall consider the
factors relevant to preheonvictinn bail listed in section 1026, as well as the facts proved at
trial, the length of the tertn of imprisonment intposed and any previous unexcused failure
to appear as required before any court or the defendant?s prior failure to obey an order or
judgment of any cotm, including, but not limited to, violating a protection from abuse
order pursuant to Title 19. section 2?69 or Title lit-A, section 401].

If the judge orjustice decides to set post-conviction bail for a defendant. the judge or
justice shall apply the same factors in setting the kind and amount of that hail.

3. Conditions of release. Except as provided in subsection the judge or justice may
impose, in lieu of or in addition to an appearance or bail bond any condition considered
reasonably necessary to mini mire the risk that the defendant may fail to appear as
required, may compromise the integrity of thcjudicial process, may commit new criminal
conduct, may fail to comply with conditions ot?rcleasc or may constitute a danger to
another person or {he cormnunity.

 

15 MRS. 

6. Title IS M.R.S. 1026 enumerated sets out the Factors the Court must consider in
settint,I hail.
A. The nature and circumstances of the crime charged;
B. The nature of the evidence against the defendant; and
C. The history and characteristics of the defendant, including, but not limited to:
The defendant's character and physical and mental condition:
The defendant's family ties in the State:
The defendant's employment history in the State;
(4)1116 defendant?s ?nancial resources;
The defendant's length ofrcsidcnce in the community and the defendant?s community
ties;
(6) The defendant?s past conduct, including any history relating to drug or alcohol abuse;
The defendant?s criminal history, if any;
(ii) The defendant's record conccming appearances at court proceedings;
Whether. at the time of the current offense or arrest, the defendant was on probation,
parole or other release pending trial, sentencing, appeal or completion of a sentence for an
offense in this jurisdiction or another;
(ii-A] Any evidence that the defendant poses a danger to the safety of others in the
community, including the results of a validated, evidence-based domestic Violence risk
assessment recommended by the Maine Commission on Domestic and Sexual Abuse,

 



 

 

established in Title 5, section IMO-LI, subsection and approved by the Department of
Public Safety;

(10) Any evidence that the defendant has obstructed or attempted to ohstructjustiee by
threatening, injuring or intimidating a victim or a prospective witness,jtn-or. attorney for the
State, judge,justiee er other officer of the court; and

(11} Whether the defendant has previously violated conditions of release, probation or other
court orders, including, but not limited to, violating protection from abuse orders pursuant to
Title 19. section T69 or Title lit?Kt, section 401 l.

DISC USSIDN OF LAW

l. The Petitioner can demonstrate a reasonahle likelihood of prevailing on the petition
and thereby satis?es the ?rst standard governing hail set forth under M.R.U. Crime
P, 74.

Lo his original petition for review, the Petitioner asserts four distinct ground
Upon which lie bases his ultimate request for relief: Iirsl. that the State suppressed Brady material
in violation due process right to a Fair trial tltereinallcr, the 
that police misconduct and misconduct hy an Pamela fitness in the investigation
and trial ofhianhont were in tiulation ot?tltc Due Process clause ofthe 11.5. Constitution
(hereinafter. the police and-'or prosecutoriol claim}: third, that Sanbom received
inciTectivc assistance From his trial counsel the "itte?'ectit'c assistance ofcourtse]
claim"}; and reach, :1 general claim ot?ineffeetiee assistance ot'eottnsel. as petitioner is innocent
and continualljr asserted, and continues to unequivocally assert his innocence (hereinafter, the
"actual innocence claim"). This petition shall deal with the ?rst two claims, as well as assert that
Anthony Sanhorn is actually innocent of the elttoge ot'morder.

Pursuant to the Februaryr l, 201? Order assigning this matter to the docket, this Court has
already determined the Petitioner to have met the jurisdictional prerequisite of ti MRS. 2124

and, by agreement of the parties, to have satis?ed the prerequisites to relief speci?ed by MRU.

6

Crizn. P. 66, These conditions precedent having been met. pursuant to M.R.U. Grim. P. T4(a).
the Petitioner now submits this timely application for release on bail pending ?nal disposition of
the petition.

A- Standard of review.

7. Rule 74(b)[ 1) requires a showing. to the satisfaction of this Court. ?that the petitioner has a
reasonable likelihood of prevailing on the petition.? The ?reasonable likelihood" standard
has its place on the lower. less stringent end ot'a probabilistic continuum. which has far-
ranging applications in American jurisprudence. The standard presents a threshold question.
which. absent clearly de?ned cutoii? points. is necessarily subjective- and this has resulted in
the emergence variable. contest-dependent standards. This point was preface to
the Law C?ourt's BHdE?VL?trl?g tn articulate a broader. more universal standard in a recent
opinion:

As we have stated in other contests. a reasonable possibility is differenL and less
burdensome to prove. than a reasonable it is synonymous with a ?reasonable
likelihood." and is a lower standard than a preponderance of the evidence. See Store v.
Patton. 20] 1 ME Hill. 35. Elli Add 114? [considering the reasonable possibility
standard for determining the likelihood that a different jury instruction would have led to
a. more favorable verdict): Tc?f'ij? TJ. Coin cit Stirrup Co, 4-1? Air! 312, 314
(?Reasonable possibilityr is a standard less onerous than proof that success is
more Ill-[Ely than not." {quotation marks omitted?; Botmron v. 425 .A.2d 1325.,

1323 (Me.l93lt [evaluating the propriety of an attachment order based on whether the
underlying claim has a "reasonable possibility of recovery").

 

MaineTodav Media, lnc. v. State, 2013 ME 32 A.3d 10?1, 114.

Evaluated against the ?reasonable likelihood" standard as de?ned by the Law Court in
MaineToday Media v. State?impel" than a preponderance of the evidence?it is inconceivable

that this Court would not be satis?ed that the Petitioner would prevail on the merits of his claim.

 

l. Petitioner's Brady Claim

Police misconduct and Prosecutorial misconduct by Pamela Amos in the
investigation and trial of Sanhorn were in violation of the Due Process clause of the US.
Constitution.

The State, more specifically, MG Pamela Amos and Detective Danny Young of PPD
intentionally andfor with full knowledge and awareness suppressed whole statements given in
this case in favor of reducing proffered statements to narrative reports produced by Detective
Young.

There is no greater violation of Br'orh' Meiji-lam}. 373 US. 33! 36 {1963} than when
suppression of material evidence is done intentionally, and in had faith. In this case, the Defense
can prove bad faith on the part of AAG Pamela .ftmes and Detective Danny Young of PPD.
{Please see attached Exhibits A and alt-1L:

The State failed to provide Sanborn with favorable material evidence in its possession or
control relating to its most important l-lope Carly.

Although Briggs likely died shortly alter her throat was cut or after her right lung was
penetrated by a twelve-inch stah wound, she further endured her abdomen being cut from one
side of her to the other. Moreover. it is opined that the several super?cial cut marks on her chest
area coupled with the multiple slice like wounds on both of her hands, suggest torture and terror,
as Briggs was, by all accounts, laying on the dock when these horrible acts were perpetrated on
her. Additionally, hor abdomen was partially oviscorated, which was done post?mortars,

depicting acts that are unnecessary and pathological.

 

These ?rst three pages are documents that were in the possession of the ?fties oftho Attorney General
and were recently provided to current counsel. The second three pages are reports that were
actually provided to trial counsel in April and July 1990.

3

 

Briggs?s death must have been a. horrible ordeal that involved unspeakable fear and
suffering. The only questions for police during their investigation?and for the jury during
Sanborn?s trial?were who had caused her death and why?

A fair trial foliowing an authentic investigation would leave the peopie of the State of
Maine able to answer that question. It could be said beyond a reasonable doubt that Sanborn had
killed Briggs. But, instead the conduct of the principal state actors in this case so violated the
trust placed in them to do their jobs with thoroughness and integrity that it is not possible to rely
on the verdict reached by those men and women who served on thejury during the course of nine
days of trial.

To begin with1 Detectives Daniels and Young or the Portland Police decided to pursue
Sanhorn as the perpetrator of this crime at a time when they lacked any evidence connecting him
to the murder. There was never any physical evidence linking Sonhorn to Briggs?s slaying. The
knife that killed Briggs was never Found?even though a witness relied on by the State was
supposedly ahle to say where Sanhom had hidden it. No blood. ?lters. or other physical evidence
?rom Briggs were ever found on Sanhorn. on his clothing or personal possessions, or in any of
the places he Was said to have stayed alter the murder. No physical material from Sanhorn was
ever hound on Briggs?s body. clothes. or at the crime scene. Moreover, no witness testimony
linked Sanhorn to Briggs?s murder until almost a year after the crime. Yet Dauiets and Young
treated Sanborn as their primary suspect from the very beginning ot'their investigation.

This conduct was not misconduct, but it set the tone for and informed the State?s
misconduct. Each act of misconduct may be traced to the detectives? unreasoning determination
to pursue Sanbom without due regard for the evidence and what it suggests happened to Briggs.

The initial miseaiculation by the police?whether intentional or an error made in good faith?led

 

 

 

Detectives Daniels and Young to violate the core principals of our criminal justice system in
order to obtain the result they wanted to obtain. Their mishandling of the investigation persisted
through trial. and other state players were recruited to amplify and exploit the detectives?
unlats'f'ul maneuvers. Principal among these was Assistant Attorney General Antes, who added
her own misconduct to the mitt, and ruthlessly leveraged the damage done to Sanhorn?s ability to
present a complete defense. resulting in a complex admixture of impennissible State action that
eventually cemented into a conviction and sentence in violation of the Constitution.

Acting as a united from. the detectives and Antes waged a campaign of intimidation and
deal making in order to manufacture the testimonial evidence they needed to put Sanborn on
trial. Their unmade of misconduct led them to threaten a witness with prosecution in order to
silence her truthful testimony, to suppress important exculpatory evidence, to offer suh-rosa
deals to addresses in order to obtain favorable testimony. to hadger and intimidate wimesses into
testifying as they wanted them to. and to time the release of to Sanhot'n?s defense
team so as to cloud its ability to cope with the case. .r-?tmes then exploited these ill-gotten
advantages at trial. suborning perjury and leveraging Seabom?s ignorance of suppressed material
in order to gain a wrongful conviction.

Meanwhile. Jessica Briggs?s [tiller remains unidenti?ed to this day and possibly at iarge.
Briggs and her family have been denied the justice they deserve because Detectives Daniels and
Young and Assistant Attorney General Antes decided to build their case. brick by brick, based
on what they wanted to be true, rather than on the evidence they actually had before them. The
criminal justice system of the State of Maine has deprived Briggs and her family of the meager

solace it could have offered them. The inappropriate actions of a handful of State players has

10

 

seen to it that justice was not done. and may never be done. in Briggs?s murder. This failure is

most acute, but it is not alone.

Anthony Sanhorn has suffered. He has spent the last: twenty?seven years in prison for a
crime he did not commit. The ?awed character that he exhibited at sixteen years of age?a
troubled period when his parents allowed hint to roam the streets of Portland at will. whoa he
sought easy thrills in alcohol and drugs. and associated with the twang people?have been
transformed into a physical cage that will contain hirn ttntil he dies. And there is a third victim of
the State?s misconduct.

The people of Maine have been defrauded. They were told that justice had been done.
that a most awful murder had heen esatninetl. explained. and punished. But justice has not been
done: in fact. Sanhom's trial was a terrible injustice. .t?tn innocent man has wasted in prison for
twenty+seyen years because trusted public of?cials chose to break their oaths. The criminal
justice system depends on honest state actors who follow the to ensure fair trials
with reliable outcomes. When police and prosecutors conduct themselves improperly. and
especially when they appear to act and. in fact. are dishonest in carrying out their
Constitutional duties. it is not just the victim and the victim's family. not just the wrongfully-
conyicted defendant who suffer. The whole of society is injured. Each person in the State of
Maine hears the weight of the done in their name to Jessica Briggs and Anthony
Sanborn. Daniels and Young and Assistant Attorney General Amos acted on behalf of the People
when they acted improperly and failed both the victim and the defendant in this case.

Because an unfair trial is unconstitutional and imprisoning an innocent man violates the
most basic principles of our justice system. Sanborn?s conviction should be vacated and he

should he head from prison immediately.

11



 

 

Petitioner?s Brady claims are more full}.I set out as follows:

The State suppressed Brody material in violation of Sanhorn?s due process right to a
fair trial. In its initial discovery request sent to the State in or about April 1990. Counsel for
Sanborn asked the State to provide an}.f and all exculpatory information andr'or evidence in
Sanhom?s case. Additionally. counsel for Sanhorn sent letters requesting any and all 
evidence throughout the pendency of the case. When the State withheld critical information
regarding witnesses and alternate suspects from Sanhorn. the Slate suppressed material evidence
favorable to Sanhorn and brazenly disregarded the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth
Amendment. Brittle r, 37.? lit-i. 53. 3o The State was in exclusive possession
antifor control ot?rnoch ol' the evidence that was material and thvorahle to Sanborn. yet it failed
to supply that evidence to the defense. and Sanhom saith-red prejudice at trial as a result.
Strr'rlder v. Greene. :32? NH. 2n}, Elli?HZ ll?i?l?l'l. .-?trnong other things. the State suppressed
evidence of the eivctreroclp~ poor eyesight of Hope Carly. Cad}: reporting having seen the ?Tony"
who killed Jessica Briggs at or near Saco Beach at a time when he was in custody awaiting trial,
a confession made by an alternate suspect in the case. and the various deals and promises it made
with crucial witnesses in order to secure their testimony.

The State failed to provide Sanhorn 1with material. exculpatory evidence in its
possession or control relating to its most important witness. Hope Cad)". {lady claimed she
witnessed the Briggs's murder, and was the only person who said she had witnessed the Briggs'
murder. The State's failure to disclose evidence it had tending to impeach her credibility and
undermine the factual of her testimony violated Sanborn?s right to a fair trial. The
suppressed evidence was not nor could it have been discovered by Saohorn prior to year before

?ling of this petition.

12

 

 

First, the State had evidence in its possession that Cody had serious vision problems that
were entirely uncorrected at the time she claimed to have seen the murder occur. Nevertheless,
the State suppressed this critical information that bore heavily on the determination of Sanboro's
guilt or innocence.

Cady was the only person who ever claimed to have witnessed Briggs?s murder. The
State's failure to disclose evidence it had tending to impeach her credibility and undermine the
factual accuracy other testimony violated Sanborn?s right to a fair trial. The suppressed evidence
was not nor could it have been discovered by Sanhorn prior to year before ?ling of his original
petition for postreonvictiott review.

a. The State had evidence in its possession or control that Cody had serious vision
problems that were entirely uncorrected at the time she claimed to have seen the murder
occur, and it suppressed this information in violation of its clearly de?ned constitutional
duty to disclose it. The State?s questions to (lady at trial clearly demonstrate its knowledge of
her vision problems. but the Sate led {"ady to frame her vision issues such that they had no
bearing on her ability to have seen the murder occur. New evidence proves that Cady did have
vision issues at the time of the murder1 that the State knew about them. and that it did not
disclose what it knew.

At trial, Assistant Attorney General Antes and Cody had the following exchange:

Q. Jose?hold on just a minute. Hope. you have developed a vision
problem; is that right?

A. Yes. 1 have.
Is that far away or close up?

A. Pretty much everything.

13

 

 

Q. Everydu'ng? Baek in 1989 did you have a problem?

No.

Q. Okay, so it's something that?s developed over the last 3 and a half
years?

A. Yes.

Q. leid you see from where you were sitting in that upper deal:

over to the urn ester?

A. Yes.

There was not hing-woo problems with your vision at that little?
zit. NH.
Q. No?

This colloquy proves that the Slale had actual knowledge of Candy?s vision problems. Even if it

believed that these vision problems had only developed recently. the State should have disclosed

this information to Sanhorn so that he could seek out further information regarding Cody's vision

and prepare to moss-examine her on the snhiect at trial. instead, the State's suppression of what
it knew, combined with its leading questions, seemingly steered both Cody and Daniels to
perjury and stripped Ssnhorn of hotlt the opportunity and the rationale l? or exploring this subject.

The State's suppression was signi?cant because. not only did Cady have vision problems
at the time she supposedly witnessed Briggs?s murder, it also appears that the State had
knowledge that her vision issues esi steel :11 that time.

in July 2016, Cody told a journalist investigating this ease that she has suffered from

acute vision problems all of her lit'e. ?the Following is a colloquy that took place between (lady

and an investigative journalist:

14

 

 

Cache:

Carly:

Cindy:

Batty:

 

showed her some family pictures Kate (Hope?s biologicai
sister) had given me. She held them inches from her face?
ohvious prohIcms.] How long have you had 1vision
problems?

Since I was a kid. My eyes have pretty' much deteriorated since
then. i Can?t see ?re feet now.

[She told her daughter to Fetch her glasses from the other
house. Daughter comes heel-z with it pair of thick lilac}: frame
glosses. Fihe put her glasses on to look at the photos, then took
them oil" For the rest of the lute-niche]

i hate: wearing them.

Did you hate tt?eari ng them as a hit]?

Yeah. I have white lien-e disease. My optic nerve is white. 
found out my dntl. I'Iiologicul dai is legally blind. He
walks with a cane.

Ml}: did you testify at trial that your vision was not impaired
when it was?

That makes me wonder. My mind is going ?fty different
directions. I?m wondering, why is there a gap? Like someone
punching a hole in your memory. It sounds like they need to

take this hack to court and ?gure it out. My head is starting to

Spin.

IS

 

JR: Glasses?you had glasses when you were 13 years old? When
you were living on the streets of Portland?

Cody: [just remember having them and losing them. having them and
losing them. But in that picture I didn't have them. [She points
to the news clipping of her testifying at trial.] Didn't anyone

notice? Something doesn't feel right.

Iliad}t herself could not explain wit}.r no one in authority ever questioned her ability to see
what she claimed to have seen. though she. also seems to he stating that she has gaps in her
toentor}.r of the trial and related events. But there is no question that Cadv*s vision problems
arose long before she tool: lite stand. and long helhre she claims to have seen Briggs murdered.
Her DHS reeords supply ample proof.

The narrative ings in Cody's tile show that he: caseworker, Margaret Bragdon.
lutew Cody sul?fered from serious impairment of both her hearing and vision. that she questioned
Candy?s ability to see what she claimed to have seen on the night of the murder. and that she
addressed these eoneerns to Detective Daniels.

On September to. [933. Cad}; was hospitalized at the Augusta Mental Health Institute.
While there, a neuropsvehoiogieal evaluation was ordered by one of her physicists who noted.
inter alia. Cody had blurred vision. On September 19. 1933. Dr. McKay performed a oeuropsyeh
on Cody and stated the following. "visual annuityr problems Were noted. and menr have lowered her
scores on the visual analysis subtests. which were her 3 lowest scores in this section."

On August 21. 1939. Jayr Economy. Regional Case Review Manager for DHHS.

documented an Administrative Case Review held for the purpose of assessing Hope Cadv?s ease

I6

 

 

 



as a child in State costody. He wrote, ?The past evaluation which recommended this audiologicel
evaluation indicated that Hope?s hearing?vision de?cits might be related to her academic
dif?culties.? Per the record. the pest evaluation mentioned by Economy was held in June of
1939. demonstrating that her trision problems extend back to the time of Briggs?s murder and
before"

011 March 19%, Cody had a cremation during which she told the doctor
perforating the tests. do have problems and I have glasses. bull don?t wear them.?

Do July 13. 1990: Margaret Eregtlon Wrote the following in Cady?s narrative logs, ?Per
the optometrist, ocular pressure is high. The doctor scents neurological consult. Nerve problem of
the eye?"

On July 16, limit. the following note appears in Carlyle DHHS tile, had some
audiologicnl processing di t?tic cities."

In June and July. Cody met with :1 Dr. McCann who noted that ?Hope has
permanent vision prolilent in one due to lazy condition which had gone untreated in her
youth. Her can't correct the problem. but Margaret Bragdot?t to get glass-ea because
she wants Uten?t."

[in October 2! Witt], Cody was Found to have coco vision in both eyes. This means that
she needed to be twenty Feet From an in order to see it. when a person with normal vision

could see it from two-hundred Feet. According to the American Medical Association, a person
who has vision is considered legally ?olind.

On March 20. HEN, during a routine review meeting for Cody at The Maine Youth

Center. Bragdon?s only notation regarding Cady?s medical needs reeds, ?eyes, heating.?

1?

 

 

On August 9. 1991, Sweetser noted in Cady?s treatment plan. ?Her vision screening was
20.151] right and zone left with glasses. Her current prescription was obtained in March
of this year.? in order to drive a car in the State of Maine, oneis vision must me correctable to a
minimum of Edi-40.
in February 1992. Dr. William Atlee saw Cady tie-cause of reduced vision. The doctor
noted that she had had muscle surgery in her left two years prior (around February of 1990]
for estropia. a condition in which the eyes torn inwards. Also referenced in Dr. Atleeis report
was the fact that Cady?s 1vision and eyes generally were examined by a neurologist in Bangor
who found that  tZ'ady suffered from pate optic nen'e-s and diagnosed optic atrophy. In addition to
her vision remaining poor even when corrected. the doctor noted that her visual ?eld showed
marked constriction ot? Ihe ?eld in both eyes.
A narrative log entry dated February 25. 1992 by Bragdon noted,
Get. Daniels is going to make Hope testify. . . . Something de?nitely
wrong with her optic nerves in both eyes. Need to pinpoint what she
can see and how she sees . . . . Daniels talked to her for over 3 hours.
When Hope came out she appeared pale and shaken and said she
wouldn't talk to him anymore and she wouldn't testify either. Spoke
to Riehard?-we can get a lawyer if: It Hope is charged. 2) Hope

needs to talk to one ahead of time if she thinks she might be charged.

It is apparent from this narrative log entry that Bragdon. connected the information Carly
was providing to the police with her vision problems and doubted her ability to see what she

claimed to have seen. It can be infest-ed from all this information, as well as from the

18

 

 

 

communications Brandon had with Detective Daniels rogardirtg Cody?s claim of seeing Sanhom
in Base. and ?nallyF from MG Ames?s questions to Early at trial, that the State knew of Cady's
vision problems. Yet it did not disclose this prodigious shortcoming in its case to Saab-ore, as it
was required to do under Brady and its line of cases.

h. Sighting in Seen

The State heard from iiragdon that Hope Cody believed she saw the ?Tony? who killed
Briggs near Saco on July 10, date when he was actually in custody and she could not
have seen him. But the State did not disclose this important impeachment evidence to Sanhorn.

Bragdon records the following on July 10. 199], ?Hope saw Tony.r (of Jessica Brigg?s
[sicl murder} at {near} Saco Beach. Tony saw her too and was looking and looking at her. Coil
Det. Daniels. Is he out? is Ilope safe?? The narrative logs go on to state that on that same date.
Bragdon spoke to Detective Daniels and recorded the lollowing: ?Tony Sanhorn is still in jail.
The}: ltad hearing not long ago on case. lie will see prosecutor tomorrow and discuss. Will get
back to see Hope probably on [sic] nest week or so.?

This incident should have been disclosed to Sanhont. It is strong impeachment existence
and could have been used to undermine Cody?s testimony at trial- The fact that Cody incorrectly
observed and identi?ed Sanhorn in Will?even going so far as to imagine an interaction
between the two of them?hears signi?cantly.I on the reliability of her trial testimony. The State
had a constitulional dot}.r to disciose this information to Sanhorn even it" it were the only evidence
of vision problems in its possession.

On March 6, 1939. when Cad}r was placed at I-liocltley. she was referred for a
evaluation because staff at Hit-icicle}P wanted to he infonned about the possibility

that Cad}: had a ?thought disorder." Dr. Peddicord of The Child Parent Center. noted that a

19

 

 

 

 

review of (lady?s prior treannent record stated the following: ?At the time of her admission to

AME, Hope reportedly reveaietl that she had been hearing voices {good and bad voices that

are of age.? Dr. Peddicord also noted in the

argue) ever since she was injured in a fall at 9 ye

evaluation that Cativ ?made reference to a twin sister who may reside with her biological
mother." a fact that is complete fabrication.

In addition to issues and signi?cant vision problems, Cad}! also had

sociological de?cits. This is eatremci}r signi?cant because. despite allegedly being some

distance from the murder scene, she claims to have heard Tony Sanhom. Michelle Lincoln and

Jessica Briggs and recognised their voices.

On February a. 19439}. when Cari}- was at residential treatment at l-iinckley, her case plan

notes the following: "i-liltitlev agrees to schedule an audiological evaluation for Hope within next

three months as was in her nettropsvelroiogicai evaluation in September 1938.

On it was noted in tf'atlv?s tile that, ?[tlhe past evaluation which

recommended this autiiologicnl evaluation indicated that i-lope?s hearingfvision de?cits might be

related to her academic dif?culties."

Hope Cody also provided multiple. coldly-differing accounts to investigators. and none

inconsistent statements were provided to Sanhorn for preparation of his defense, in clear

violation of his constiturional right to a fair trial. Moreover. the narrative logs indicate that Cody

herself was threatened with prosecution for the Eriggs? murder, and that her testimony.r was the

product of police and prosecutorial coercion andfer leniency ultimately delivered after she was

itrtu'rtlunizeal+

Sanbom trial, Antes opening statement, Oct. 1992

20

 



 

"Hope Carly is the name of this 13 yearwold She just kept quiet for

about the last three years. Finally in April of this year she's now out of the

Portland area. She?s new sale. She's doing well. She came forward in April to the

Portland Police Department and was interviewed by Daniels and told the state

what she had seen that night."

Whhin two days of murder at Peppermint Park Hope Cady ?came into the park and spoke
to me" Carly said she knew Jessica Briggs and last saw her Monday before death. Daniels report:
5-1532, pg. i. it was learned through ?tbllowoup interviews? that Cady was "with a group" on

Conunercial Street. Daniels report: 5?15-92after the murder. i saw Cady at the PPD. "She was at the police station

 

and she was at the elevator just leaving. She had been meeting with Det. Young-? Daniels at

l?gl.

"i did see her Inter that night outside" the police station. Daniels at 1119i.
Antes then asked Daniels il? he saw [Tady again after May 26 or and he responds by stating:

"Well there was gum: chance encounters. One or two chance encounters within the next two or

three days after that." Daniels at 109] .

Ames then asked whether Daniels whether he had interviewed Cody during these other

chance encounters?

spoke to her about what she had heard about this case, or if she had heard anything etc.

or knew anything about it at all.? Daniels at 1091-1092.
Later on in the ?direct examination,? Antes stated, "I'd like to go back in time.?
Did you have intermittent contact with Cady over next few days 

?Yes. We exchanged greetings and perhaps chatted.?

21

 



I recall one conversation, I asked her again about. you know, if she was down around
Commercial Street etc. And she was evasive and said something about maybe she was sitting on
a bench.

Ithroes then asks Daniels the following:

When was this statement made?

The Cady statements are "kind of running together."

spoke with Cad}: on a couple occasions after that. Carly would come and see me but didn't
wish to speak about anyone she had seen down on Commercial Street that night."

Daniels report. 5-15-92, pg. 

"Detective Yoturg attempted to interview Hope Cad}; at Portland Police Department on or about
343*90." Daniels report. 545-92. pg. I.

"She eventually did not want to he inten-ietved and Walked out of the station." Daniels report. 5-

l5-92. pg. 1.
But Margaret Bragdon recorded the following in her nan-ative logs:

Meeting with Hope at Denny's RE Dets. Portland PD. Young and Daniels-
Jessica Briggs investigation. The}; questioned her for shoot 2 hours 
yesterday-she get angry because they were rude. Del. Young called her [sicl ?fucking
bitch? according to Hope and she refused to cooperate at this point. According to a
statement made to me Hope says she saw Michelle Lincoln hit Jessica and she has told
police that [sic] police wanted her to give Tony?s last name and she did not want to. She
had seen Tony Sanhorn and Jessica arguing that night she was murdered (it was too far
awayr for her to hear what was said). Said she had alreadyr given them all this information

some time ago. I remain surprised that the police have never contacted me.?

 

 

 

 

received a message dated 4-26-9tl. Hope [lady stopped by the police station at 

pm that date. Wanted to see me down at ?9 Union Street." Daniels report, 5-15-92, pg. 2

4-21-9D. I went to the address on Friday at 8:3t} a.m. Ht: upset.

"ii-?ord was getting back to her that. she had some knowledge of the Briggs murder."

Daniels report, 5-15-92. pg. 2

"Told rne Lhat she saw Briggs by a trash can that night arguing with someone. She then

said that Briggs was with Tony Sank-om. Michelle Lincoln and "someone named Jerry.

?Cady wouldn't tell me anymore at Ihat point and] left. Daniels report, 5415-92

returned to 9 Union Street3 nhout two weeks later? and spoke to {Early again. "She did

not wish to speak shout What she had pres-ionsly told me." Daniels report. 5-15-92.

I started rcceiying phone calls from h'largaret Dragoon. social worker. "around March

1991." Eragdon says Ht." "interested in speaking with me about what she knew about the

murder.? Daniels report 5.154.};

However. Margaret Ergdon recorded the Following in the mutation: logs:
"3t26f91 PC to Elisabeth. lu'lilte can't hear anything anyone is saying to hint. heliite?s

reality is Liz is taking Hope army from him. March 2 I . Mike arrote Hope a letter=it?s not

 

a nice letter. 1 am going to trade tapes for warrant. I will not tell Daniels because you?ll

go tojail. She held Jessica Briggs down according to Mike. They were fooling around

with tape recorder when stoned and Hope says she knows who did it and who was there.?

Margaret Bragdon goes on to note:

 

3 According to DHS narrative logs. on or about 332331, Michael Lamereau lived at 9 Union Street and
Hope Cady o?en stayed with him there.

23

 

 

?3f26t?91 PC to Shirletr Connors, MYC. Told Shirley about Jessiea; [sic] 2) need for Mike
to have a meeting; 3) Should cottage do initial intake?

Call Det. Daniels-does he have the tape. [sin] has he seen Mike.

Hope has mentioned tapes to Shirley.

stasis] PC to Bet. Daniels of Portland D. Isie'l D. Slit?33th). Le? message.

PC to Elizabeth. She has wtitten letters to Hope and main issue is Hope has to
tell the truth. Hope did tell Elia. They lx'IItin who dirl it but she knows who was with
them. Liz thinks involves a pimp and Hope. Lia. thinks l-Iope is afraid for her life.
3t2$t91 PC to Del. Daniels. 374-3330. Le? message again.

3f23t91 Spoke to Daniels. Mike wants to tell about these tapes but he thinks he is
going to be arrested, ere. Daniels has talked to llope- she called him from Ellsworth a
number of times hut net-er gave him much liliix'ill PC to Elizabeth. Gave her
info on Daniels and interview as well as with Mike.

Hope said I wasn?t there and didn't do it hat I know who the other person was.?
?tiliit?ill PC to Shirley Connors. lit-WC I. Bolh meetings Tues. at 1:00 and Thurs. at 2: ish.
Held in main building. room IT, 15: Floor.?

I?ll PC from Elizabeth Miehaud. Feels Ilope will be in danger ifshe talks to Daniels.
Liz toid her she needs to tell the truth both re relationship with Mike and Jessica Briggs
murder.

Mike has gone to Daniels. Mike is saying Hope confessed to him that she held Jessica
downw?ope says she did not lay a hand on her ai?tough the]: had an argument the night

before.

4! H91 PC from Mike. Gave him info. re time of meeting with Hope.

24

 

 

 

 

PET 4mm] at MYC To consider alternative placement for Hope. Been at 1:14 hold for
court, 2:13 formally committed. . . . Problems were noted. Effon, participation, anger,
explosive anger, manipulative."

Det. Daniels written report signed 5! states the following:
began receiving phone calls from Michael Lamoreaux [sic], 06-] 3-63 around
March 20, 1992. He was living in an apartment on the corner of India and Federal Streets
at the time. Lamoreaua [sic] told me he was the boyfriend of Hope Carly and that she was
in the Youth Center and that he was trying to communicate with her. Larnoreatet [siel
told me that he knew that Carly had knowledge of this ease. He told me of conversations
he had with Cody. Lantoreaus lsiel told me this over the course ofahout tiu'ee
conversations that I had with him during that week . . .l-le told me that he had overheard
her deny to me one time on Union Street about having any knowledge of this case. . . . He
told me another time how [Tady not angry at a woman named Emily because this Emily
apparently disrohecl in front of lamoreaus [sic]. Cady was reported to have said she now
knows how Michelle felt because of the anger she was experiencing. He then said he
didn't know who she meant when site was referring to h-?lichellc. but guessed it was
regarding Jessica Briggs but wasn?t sure. He said that that conversation may have been in
November of 199D. He then told me of a conversation that he had with Cady in which she
told him that she, Michelle Lincoln. Tony Sanborn and two others were with Briggs that
night. He said that Sanhorn made some joke and that all ofthem were tripping. that
Briggs did not want to party. Sanhorn heearoc angry. . . .l-le said that he was told Briggs
tried to leave and they were in a circle and they were pushing Briggs around like ring

around the rosey. He said at one point. Briggs fell and hit her head. . . .l-le said that Cody

25

 

 

 

 



then told him that Sanhorn was holding Briggs when Lincoln stabbed her and then they
all stabbed her taking turns doing so. He said he asked Cady if she had stabbed Briggs
and Cody responded that she had not, that she hadjust pushed her around.?

The Daniels report dated 5? 1 5-92 states as follows:
Interview of Cody at Maine Youth Center on 4-2-91 at 136% hours.

Margaret Brag-don was also present during the interview.
Cady appeared to be nervous and evasive when I asked her about what she wanted to

tell me. Beginning to tail: about what she icnew of this case and than would stop and

change subject.

 

At first blush, the 1992 reference appears to he a typo because everyone. including Daniels, snows
Hope Cody is living with her t?oster family in March 1992; she is not in the Youth Center as Lamoreau
reports to Daniels. Uf great signi?cance is the Defense Motion for Sanctions and Incorporated
Memorandum of Law. in relevant pan. this motion states in paragraphs 7 Fe 3, ?On May IS, 1992. an
agent oFthe prosecution hand-delivered an additional discovery package to the Office 
Duffett. This package included. inter ntin. a 3-page statement by Hope Cody that she gave to the Portland
Police on March 5, will in which she relates being at the scene of the homicide and watching the
defendant stab the victim. while other people were present.?

Paragraph 3 goes on to state, ?On May 2t}. 1992. an agent of the prosecution handdelivered an additional
discovery package to the of?ce of Attorney DutTett. This package included: a} a 3-page report by
Detective Daniela dated May l5, in which he summarises his dealings with a Michael Lantoreaua
[sic] in late March l992. when Lantnreautt [sici?said that Hope Cody said the she witnessed the homicide; .
hi it 3-page report by Detective Danieis dated May l5, WEI, in which he summarises his numerous
contacts with Hope Cody since March 1990, including his Cody's statement on April 27, 199D that she
saw the victim and the Defendant arguing the night ofthe homicide. and Ms. Cody's statement on Marclt
5. 1992 that she saw the Defendant stab the victim while other people were present."

Viewing these statements in the contest of this investigation and the then pending Motion for Sanctions
as well as the Motion to Dismiss contained in the Court's tile where the Defense ?led a Motion for failing
to disclose an audio-taped interview with Gerri Rossi done by a Florida detective. Detective Danicis could
not say he had contact with Hope Cody witnessing the murder before he takes an of?cial statement from-
her. as that would have led tremendous credence to the Defense?s argument that there was a had faith
discovery violation. Daniels also writes in his 3mm!) statement that on 3.42090 he salts Tony during an
interview with hint in Volusia, FL ifhe knows a ?Hope Cody." Tony tells him he does not. Daniela then
tells Tony that Cody lives at 11 Kennedy Park..Tony reiterates that he has no idea who Hope Cody is. It is
curious why Daniels would be asking Tony about Hope Cody are time when the allegedly know
nothing about Hope Cody saying Tony had something to do with the Briggs' murder.

26

 

?1 was with her in this meeting for over two hours but she still did not speak about what
she had called me abate. Cady asked fer a piece ef paper and she mete down what she
wanted to say. She also drew a map ef the area on Cetnmereiai Street. "She did not wish
to speak in greater detail about what she had written."

told her I wnuld need to speak in her in mere detail abeut what she had written.? She

told me she understand and wnuld eensider speaking in me again at some time in the

future."

According lei Margaret Bragdun's mites, smnelime. in or nhnut ntid- September Iii?? - Hope runs

away to Florida.

tn Del. Daniels. M?t't? is picking up [tape in Busters tenterrett' at Willi am.

He will gt) with them.?

te tn Del. l.}nniels. Left message with new plume if and inf'nmtati?n {In Hope for
him."

EC to Daniels. Appeintnient is already set up ii?Jt? him ten interview l-lepe again
regarding Jessica Briggs murder. He has already talked to Elizabeth. [lope had gotten
threatening phene calls neer weekend l'rnm Dick and Mike called Michelle
Lineuln in [sic] person whe is saying keep Innulh shut er she?ll Iape] he tel-ten care of.
Bet. Daniels Tues. am he is meeting with llepe. is [sie]. geing to trial in April probably.
Seunds as it?l-lepe may not have any infemtalien they need but he needs to make sure.
l-lepe did not feel there was anything wrong with giving her phone it to others. Miehelle

has not talked direetly te tie-mu threats apparently earning thru ike andfer Dick.?



 

 

 

I bagan receiving calls fram Cady?s faster mather an 2-1 1-92. "1 was told Carly ?nally
wanted tn speak with me again and tell me what she knew." Daniels report. 5-15-92

met with Carly an Tuesday 2-18-92. She me she was ready tn tell me what she
knew ef this case. Afraid ta cpen her ntauth and was afraid for her life. We sat dawn

alane. "Ether several minutes she told me that she couldn?t tell me anything. I left at this

paint." Daniels repnrl. 5- 5-92

However. Margaret Bragdtin recorded the following:

 

[Tarn Flizaheth. Del. I.ianie1s is going it: make lie-rte testify. Daniels is talking
to FLAG regarding this hit Something tlelittilcly 1uniting With her optic nerves in
bath eyes. Need It? pinpnint it'hal she can see and law..- she sees. . . Daniels talked to her
for ever 3 hnurs. When l-ltipc came out she appeared pale and shaken and said she
wnuldn't tallt' ta hint aayrne-re and she testify either. Spoke to Richard?we can
get a lawyer if: Hope is charged. Hope needs to talk te- nae ahead of time if she
thinks she might he charged-"

tc l?rnm Elisabeth Daniels daes not think it is just talk. [sic] Unless she tank
active part she will mil he charged with anything. Tony?s lawyer is Ned Chester. What is
really impenam is if there is mere than one persan? i-Iape needs to tell?Daniels thinks
Tony is playing his card [sic] nut and that he Tnny doesn?t think he will be convicted.
Daniels says Hope knaws things?not an the street."

tc from Elizabeth. Hop-e will tell me everything [sic] she said she did not take
an active part an should not he charged to Bet. Daniels. ane 1ares airaid of 1)

going hack in MYC, 2) afraid threatening her.?

23

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ili'isit with Hope. Hope told me what had happenedAshe witnessed but was
not involved up to Jessica?s being stabbed is and tithing to ground."
to to Den Bates attorney. A?er speaking with Richard decision was made to
retain attorney? for Hope to protect her rights ie: in case DA is so interested in murder
conviction for that Hope is not adequately defended from peopie she fears may
harm her. Dan will Check out witness proteclion."
was contacted by attorney.r Den Rates on ?3-132: Esdy scared but "still wishes to speak
to me.? Cad}: linally gave me a slatettIenI on Daniels report, 545-92.

[iragdolt recorded the fitiiowinig in her narrnlitc logs I'e: Hope Cody:
h'Ieeting with l-lojte. 'i'nois Hope For interview with Dan Bates attorney in
Portland. ile interviewed Hope and then We went over to PD. For Hop-e to he
interviewed regarding Jessica Briggs murder lw litet. Daniels. Hope did good job despite
being very fearful. lsic] it was fortunate Dan had heen here and because Hope had
something to say that would have been chargeable so we all lei"! room while he conferred
with her."
3f[92]: he to Del. [aniels He spoke to I?D-an Rates and Hope will not he charged. Trial
sometime in May hat possibly not due to Hope?s testimony. There is not witness
protection program but it will he shown in eourt that Hope did not plan this to get anyone
in trouble."
?4fl4il'321: Hope got immunity for her testimony. Don?t know [sic] where court is going
to be yet."
Cad}; signed ?her" statement on 543-92. Daniels report. 5-15-92

Margaret Bragdon then wrote the following in her narrative logo:

29

 

 

 

tl?e from Det. Daniels, 314-8593. May 24, 1989 on sequence of dates of
Hope?s whereabouts at time of murder. Told him 1 would check this out. Had dif?cult
time getting all data due to multiple moves ete.

Visit with Hope. Went out tn lunch1 long tall-r: Hope wanted to know if she had

to sac,r where site lived and ?Tina would be there in count-l told her] wouiri ask him. i

also checked over dates with her and explained how she would have become confused

with her rattanr moves. I also checked in with her again on what happened."

S??l?zl: to from Dan Bates. I asked Dan the questions 1Hope had for me and explained

the nth: up with dates. he will get hack to me."

in November 2015. Early was interviewed by Lorea Gillespie, a Private Investigator who.
until recently. was employed It}; the Innocence Project. Gillespie traveled to Orlando. Florida to
where Carly was living and interviewed her at her home while one of Cindy's relatives was
present. During that interview, Carly told Gillespie that she was surprised Sanhorn was still in
jail and that someone needed to "get him tint."

In Januan' 1992. Earl}.r was released from the Maine Youth Center and went to live with
Elizabeth "Liz" Michaud and her boyfriend William ?Bill" Caldwell. On December 6. 2016.
William (Bill) Caldwell, (lady?s foster father. was interviewed and stated that he did. on several
occasions. speak with Ends about what she supposedly witnessed on May 24. I939. Caldwell
said that Carly was consistent in her accounts of what she said she allegedlyr saw.

Dn December 6, 201a William Caldwell was interviewed and said, in substance. the following:

1. He is familiar with Hope Carly.

2. Hope stayed in his heme with his then girlfriend Elizabeth Miehaud in the Augusta,
Maine area before. during, and after the Sarthom trial.

3. Hope Carly told him that she was a wintess to the Jessica Briggs homicide.

3t}

 

4. Hope Cad}; told him on multiple occasions that on the night of the murder Anthony
Sanbom Was on the pier with Jessica Briggs. She further stated that no one else was at
the end of the pier other than Sanhorn and Briggs. Cady told him that she had been
sleeping on a pile of lumber and woke up to a verbal ?commotion" on the pier. She said
she looked on as Jessiea Briggs and Anthony Sanbom. two people she recognized. but
did not really knew had a verbal altercation that escalated to physical triolenee, and

Sent-lent stabbed Briggs. Site said that alter Seahom began stabbing Briggs, she left
without garnering anyr attention from Sanhern or Briggs.

Para Antes notes. see: "Hope Cody inter-view, 55'
interview Ma},r l. 1092 w! Daniels
Know alternative suspects:
Tim}F iezzi
no -- George Ingalls
nt -- Sammy Call
yes Freddy Carey
yes -- Gerry Rossi
no Butch Maurice King

yes Shawn D'Amieo

 

11} Anthony Saul-mm Jr.

Daniels, summary report on liope Cody. 5-15-93
"(Indy and I revieWed what she had mitten for me at the Youth
Center with a statement she had ?nally dictated."
Daniels. surmnary report on Hope Candy. 549-92
"1 was reviewing the several conversations I had had with Hope Carly
regarding this ease a?er I had ?nally taken a statement from her."

noted something she had told me during a conversation we had on Friday 4-ZT-90. She

told me during that interview that she saw Jessica Briggs by a trash can arguing with

31

 

 

 

someone. Carly then mentioned that Briggs was with Tony. Michelle Lincoln and a
Jerry.?
I did not speci?cally recall Cady saying the name Jerry but found that

in my notes of that conversation. That name doesnlt appear in any

other notes of other conversations and don?t recall her over telling

me that name.

"1 called Cody ahout this on Friday 5-1592 after] had noticed the name

Jerry in my notes. 

was later told by Bragdon that (any had been transferred to the Sweetser Group

Horne. DHS records show that she was there Et'otn 05?29-91 to [1342-915 . She then

 

According to Margaret Eragdon's notes. sometime. in or about ntid- AugusttSeptenahcr 1991+
Hope runs away to Florida.

?31?143'91 CES rnerno. 10 pm. message. Front last night: Sweetser. Did file 6. Hope ran h'orn
Sweetser.

Ef22l91 PC to Liz. Day before yesterday she knew where Hope was? not sure now. Hope has
died her hair black and is staying in Portland according to Paul. Paul. who is one of Millie?s [sicl
Mike?s) best friends gave info and he hates Hope so gives info to Lie.

B??lt?l PC from Liz. Hope is at Mike?s! Has a new tattoo. Has bus ticket to Florida. This info was as of
this morning from Danny who is Mike?s brother.

PC to Bet. Daniels. They will go early tomorrow are. to Mike?s apartment and see if she is there.

EEWQI PC to Del. Daniels. Gaye him all info.

32

 

 

 

 

reportedh,r ran away from Sweetser and went to Florida. She was in Florida from {Ill-22-
91 to [Bald-EH. She was returned by Youth Center Of?cials to the Maine Youth Center
on '39-24-91. She was there until 01-24- 92 and then she was sent to her foster parents

home where she remains today."

Margaret Bragdon recorded the following:
?Stigli?ll: to to Bet. Daniels. left message. i had information on Hope?s dates.?

9:23? to to Hope. she was with the prosecutor for 4 hours and it was tough?Dan was

there the whole time and ho}- was she glad!

The State suppressed promises, inducements. and favors it offered to GENT Hossi in
order to obtain his testimonyP against Esnhom. ft signi?cant lstate witness, who testified that
Sahborn confessed the killing of Briggs to him [said testimony was at odds with what his. Cody
described she saw the night ol? the murder}: was substantially rewarded by the State for his
cooperation. Though there was no of?cial deal, the State declined to charge andt'or prosecute him
with gross sexual assault on minors who had not achieved the age of 14. despite multiple reports
from victims and physical evidence regarding the same, charges that would have normallyI

stemmed ??oro a reported rape1 traf?cking andfor furnishing in scheduled drugs to said minors.

 

gil?f?l Fe to Judy Ridge corsets]. Judy is on vacation for month and Del. Daniels is gone for two
weeks. I explained Det. Daniels had wanted to interview her {Hope} she checked with another detective
who thought Daniels was planning to go to Florida to get her.

9l23l?91 PC to Bet. Daniels. MYC is picking up Hope in Boston tomorrow at Will] am. He will go with

them."

33

 

 

l-lindering Apprehension relating to his arrest in Florida that led to the interview where, after
steadfastly denying that Tony Sanhorn had confessed to the murder of Jessica Briggs to him
during a taped interview with a Florida Detective, but only provided the statement Where Tony
Senbom purportedly to him during an unrecorded interview with him. done by
Detectives Daniels and Vonng when they went to Florida and conducted the htterview, or
violation of his felony probation for any of the above referenced charges or a myriad of technical
violations of his probation to include leaving the State of Maine for weeks on end, which was in
clear violation of his probation. which was never violated. Additionally. upon infonnation and
belief, Rossi was also offered immunity For his tcslimony at trial against Tony. This infomtatioo

was clearly relevant to the character of this witness and the reliability of his testimony at trial.

GERARD R0551

At trial. Ilte prosecutor I?reely acknowledged the long delay and strange circumstances
surrounding Gerard Rossi's emergence as witness against the defendant. "Gerry Rossi didn't say
anything for a long. long time. He didn't say anything until he got arrested down in lorida".
{Amer at 163-1] (in direct examination. Rossi confronted the issue. explaining that his
reluctance to come forward was a result ot?coercion hy the defendant. "He told me that if I said
anything, that he would report to my probation of?cer about all my illegal activity, about drugs
and [hell and all this. So naturally. wasn?t going to say nothing." (Horst, at 943}

Defense counsel sought to draw an alternative narrative. arguing that Fenland police 1)
had compelling evidence of Rossi's involvement in a variety of illegal activity. 2} that police
threatened him with criminal prosecution if he did not implicate the defendant in Jessica's
murder, and 3) that after Rossi cooperated with authorities in the case against the defendant. he
suffered virtually no repercussions for his known illegal activity. "it goes directly to his bias,
Judge, the fact that he knows that he can get a free ride as long as he testi?es the way the state
wants him (De?cit. at 965)

Defense counsel's bias argument rested in large part on a late disclosure of evidence by

the prosecutor. namely a tape-recorded interview ofRossi conducted by a Florida sheritl?s

34

 

 

 

 

 

deputy, Frank Josenhans, on the day prior to Rossi's unrecorded March 21, 1999 statement to
Beta. Daniels and Young. The existence of the March 20 interview was not revealed to defense
counsel until Febniary 13, 1992. 22 months after the defendant's arrest for murder. On that date,
the prosecutor produced to defense counsel a 36-page typewritten transcript of the March 20,
1990 interview. Shortly thereafter, when defense counsei sought a copy of the interview
audiotape, a thriller 10 pages ol'transeript were disclosed. at 51) The transcript, prenared by at
Portland police stenographer. was dated March 26, 1990.

in the tape?recorded interview. Rossi repeatedly. speci?cally. and adamantly denied that
the defendant admitted murdering Jessica Briggs. ("Whether he killed the girl or not, he didn?t
tell me." 11.5. "Tony, he might have did it. for all 1 know. but he never came outright and told

P- 5- i know is this. He never told me. he never outright, he never came right out and

 

say that he killed her." p. "I'm being honest with you. He never told me straight outright that
he killed anybody." p. 9. never heard him say nothing. 1 mean. I'm sure ifI killed aonsehodyl
wouldn't tell nob-tidy." p. "I'm telling you right now that he never fucking told me outright so
tell them to eharge me and give me a free ride." 11. I. "?t?t'hat else do you neat to know? I'll say
all I know is this. i was in the VA. and the kid never told me nothing." p. 12. ?He never told me
nothing outright." p. "He is vicious hut I'm not going to sit here and lie to you. I'm not going
to say that yeah, he de?nitely told me that he killed Jessica at a certain {blank} and how he did it
because he didn't, okay?" 16. ""r'ou jost tell them, like I told them in the that Tony didn't
tell me that he directly killed anybody- Now it" they want to spend all that money and please
come down, then I'd be glad to go home because this is going to save me." p. 17. "This kid never
came out and told me square that he killed the girl." p. lit. "He never came outright and told me
that he killed anybody, okay?" 32. "Listen, l'm telling you the truth. He never told roe." n. 34.
Rossi transcript. at 50)

The tape-recorded interview also showed Rossi's clear awareness that he faced criminal
charges hack in Maine. ("l'll take the two felonies and do the three years.? a. 5. "He didn't tell me

 

nothing so Pm going to go back and tell 'em to charge me with a couple more things.? p. it]. ?I'm
telling you right now that he never fucking told me outright so tell them to charge me and give
me a free ride.? p. 11. "Now they can charge us whatever they want. Crossing state lines,
juveniles." p. 12. "I'm ready to Sign a Miranda warning. You can send me back." p. 15. "Look,
don't you think I'd fuel-ting say. hey, you know. you charge me with these two fucking little

35



 

 

 

 

mickey mouse felonies." p. "I'd tell you if they,r give me five felonies, I'd still do the time." p.
"I'll be glad to get a free ride home. The}I can put me injail.? p. 20. Ross! transcript. at SD)
Near the end of the tape-recorded interview. Dep. Josenhans told Rossi he had just

spoken to Del. Daniels by phone:

JOSENHANS: Okay. Gerry. let me explain. I've called them up. I
told them I thought you were being pretty honest with me.
I have no reason to lie.

JOSENTLANS: No. yeah. I know, and I've talked to Daniel. is that
his name?

RUSSI: Deteetive Daniels.

JUSENILANS: Daniels says that he doesn't believe it.

ROSSI: [linelli'ttrl

JDSENHANS: What he's saying is this. than}: lie says that he has
some photographs of you with some real young girls. okay. that
apparently he's going to try.- to hit you with 3 or 4 rape
charges and stutt'like Iltal. okay-'5' I told him that I think you're
being pretty honest. I said I know he?s holding back some, but,
and that's the way feel. you're holding back some-

ROSSI: No. I'm not, hut. you 

JDSENHANS: Well that's the way the]. Okay. He said he's
going to roII you up in the dirt unless you come elcan-

RDSSI: No, I ain't lying. Alright. I tell him he can roll me over in
the dirt if he Wants to. Fine. I've got nothing else to live for

anyways. (Ram. at 50}

Prior to trial. defense counsel sought to have the defendant?s 1991 grandqu indictment
and 1990 hindover dismissed due to the prosecutor's "knondng and intentional failure" to
disclose the cleverly,r et-teulpatorg,r tape-recorded interview. at 51] On June 15. 1992, Justice
William S. Erodriek denied the defendant's motions. agreeing with the prosecutor that the failure

to disclose the tape-recorded intention: was an accidental oversight and a good faith error. "It is

36

h;

 

just a mistake of the type that happens from time to time in the criminal justice system. When it
does happen it has no constitutional significance." {Brodriek. at 56) The justice further noted
that the defendant retained the ability to cross~esaroine Rossi at trial about his inconsistent
statements to the Florida deputy. "If the jury ?nds that he did not murder Ms. Briggs. then it will
make no difference that a taped interview was inadvertently missing at the bindoyer heating.?
[Bmdriek at 56}

On September 3.4. 1992. the prosecutor ?led a motion in limine seeking to exclude any
and all testimony about "alleged sexual activity with women andtor young girls of Gerard
Rossi.? The State's motion in litnine was followed by a supporting memorandum of law on
October 23. 1993.. the day of ltossi's trial testimony.

(In direct examination. the prosecutor queried Rossi about the tape-recorded interview:

STATE: Did this deputy threaten you that you were going to he
charged with rape up here in Maine?

R0531: Yeah.

31 ATE: :?ttul did you tell him even then 

RGSSI: I said don't really care. Just tell them guys to cotne down
and get me. face u-hatet?er I can up there."

STATE: Why did you lie'.?

RUSSI: Why did I lie?.? Because I didn't trusa any of those guys down
there. If you want me to mention the organizations. shall.
STATE: No. No. Okay. i take it do you know what happens to
people in jail if they rat on someone?

Yeah. You don't make it out of the jail. especially bikers

coming down there. and bike week going on down there. at 955}

At chambers conference, before his cross-examination of Rossi. defense counsel
informed thejudge that he intended to expand on the prosecutor?s inquiry into the threatened rape
charges from the Florida deputy?s tape-recorded interview. The prosecutor objected, arguing that

"all of the issue of inquiry" related to criminal conduct by Rossi not resulting in a conviction.



 

 

 

including but not limited to rape, was out ofbounds. ?it?s not admissible and it should not be

allowed." (Amer at WE)
The prosecutor eonrinued:

STATE: The bias issue isjust a smoke screen. The bias issue is that he was
not given immunity. He was not given speeial treatment. He was not given
deals. And that's what he's going to to. The defense doesn't iike it. but
that's what the reality is. They rna},r believe that there?s a hidden agenda
through all ofthis, that he's getting special treatmenL but there's no evidence

of that. and Mr. Rossi's not going. to testify to that. (Antes 31972)

The trial court ruled in tin-or of the prosecutor. eautioning defense counsel to sharply
limit the scope of his inquiries into ant.r erirninai eonduet int Rossi not nasulting in eonvietioo. 
don?t see that as having any relevance any reiersney in temis of the evidence here at trial. I
reailg.r don?t." (Perkins at Flo?) Defense heeded the trial court?s warning and did not

question Rossi at all about his involvement in sea erintes involving women or young girls. As a

 

result of defense counsel's caution. the jury never heard -- either in the original audio. or read
from the transcript .- the section ot?the tape-reeorded interview in which the Florida daputy
informed Rossi that Portland police had "sortie photographs" of him ?with some real young
girls," and intended to charge him with "three or four rapes."

The issue of the i?pC'mEOl?tiE?ti interview resurfaeed again during the prosecutor's direct

examination of Det. Daniels:

STATE: Did you ever tell Deteetive Josenhans -- or Deputy
Josenhans to threaten Mr. Rossi?

DANIELS: No.

STATE: Did you ever tell him that you had 3 or 4 rape charges that

 

you were going to charge him with HP here in Maine?
DANIELS: No, I never told him that.
STATE: And did you ever have 3 or 4 rape charges up here in

Maine that you were going to charge Mr. Rossi for?

38

 

 



 

 

 

DWELS: No.

STATE: Did Deputy Josenhans just do that on his own?
As you explained it, yes. There is some he did do
that on his cum. as far as bringing up rape charges. i didn?t iniit

about anything that with him. at 

On cross-examination. defense counsel questioned Der. Daniels about the threatened rape
charges against Rossi. and the detective again denied conveying any such threat to the Florida
deputy. "i didn't say anything about rape charges in Maine." {Dimieis at I When defense
counsel sought further inquiry into what. exactly. Daniels irmi told Florida deputy. the prosecutor
objected. ?This was a road that we were not allowed to take with Mr. Rossi. Mr. Duffett's going
down that same road right now. It is in'elcvant. 1! is trying to get evidence ofprior bad acts. This
defective inn" testi?ed rim! ire riin? no: reii Den. .inrenimns anything about charging anybody
with any crinn'nrri condor-r. Limes at The trial court again ruled in favor of the
prosecutor's motion. "I?m going to sustain the objection. Mr. Dut?l?et't. I'd ask that yott move on."
[Perkins at 1197'}

On redirect. the prosecutor hammered home the point that ltossi's statement to Portland
detectives was completely voluntary and had no connection to any threatened criminal

prosecution by Portland police.

STATE: Detective Daniels. you didn't have probable cause to
charge Mr. ltossi with rape. did you?

DANIELS: No.

STATE: And you didn't have any probable cause to believe that he
was involved in the Nixon case in any criminal activity. did you?
DANTEIS: Na.

STATE: And you didn?t have any reason to ask for his probation to
be revoked, did you?

DANIELS: I'm not certain that?s within my authority anyway, but

DO.

39

 

 

 

STATE: Did you make any deals with Mr. Rosai in Florida in
exchange for the information that he gave you concerning Mr.
Sanhorn'?

DANIELS: No.

Have you made any premises, anyr incentives whatsoever
for Mr. Rossi to talk to you initiallyI or to testify in court?
DANIELS: No, not at all. at 1219}

(in re-cross. defense counsel began to question Det. Daniels on his blanket statement that
Portland police lacked probable cause to charge Roast with any conduct suf?cient to warrant a
probation violation. The prosecutor irrenediatciy objected. At sidebar. defense counsel argued to
that Daniels was testifying falsely. ?There is substantial evidence that he was involved in the
hiding of the murder weapon in the Nixon case." [flatten at 1230} The trial court again sided
with the state. "1 don't want this to get on a tangent that has no real neuriticntiar},r value for this
trial, and therefore l'd like to limit this area of inquiry as much as possible." (Perkins at 1231)
The trial court told Defense counsel he could ask a general question" about Rossi?s involvement
in the Nixon case, "without getting into speci?cs." [Tat 1231}

Before resuming questioning of Dct. Daniels. however. defense counsel then informed

the trial court that he had "another issue to follow":

DEFENSE: There is evidence. which I believe the prosecution has.
that Mr. Daniels has, suf?cient to charge him with rape, and 1 want
to get into that.

THE COURT: Well.

DEFENSE: The State the State has statements front girls under
the age of 14 who had sexual intercourse with Mr. Rossi, and the
state has photographs oer. Rossi engaging in sexual activities
with girls under the age of 1-4.

STATE: That?s incorrecL

THE COURT: Well, I'm going to cut it off right here, because I?m
not going to have any further inquiry. again, along the lines of 

40

 

that have no real bearing upon this case. and I note the objection of

defense counsel.

On the issue of Rossi?s ?sexual activities," the trial court limited defense counsel to a
single question. "Ask him if he had any evidence of an}.I involvement with sexual crimes."

(Perkins at 1232)

DEFENSE: Do you have any evidence in your possession or in
your liie which von believe tends to implicate Mr. Rossi in the
crime ol?rapc involving girls under the age of 14??

DANllil._S: I?m not certain ahout the ages.

DEFENSE: ?i?unng girls at :ill'? I'm not saying; you had probable
cause. Inn I'm saving do you have anv evidence at all implicating
Mr. Rossi which may possibly implicate Mr. Rossi in the crime
Dirt-title. mung-:15, intercourse with young. women under the
age of 15'?

DANIELS: Accusations.

DEFENSE: Do you have anything more then that?

DANIELS: No.

At this point. defense counsel ended his cross~esamination of [?Jet Daniels. and after a
brief redirect, the prosecutor ended her examination of the witness. Defense counsel then

requested a chambers conference. where he again accused Daniels of lying on the stand:

THE lr'our next move is tvhot?i'

DEFENSE: I'm going to ask that some evidence he provided to
the defense.

THE COURT: Some evidence he provided?

DEFEN Yes.

Hls' COURT: Like what?

41

 

 

DEFENSE: Mr. Daniels when he was asked about ifhe had an}t
evidence about Mr. Rossi?s involvement with rape indicated yes.

and I said what was that, and he indicated -- Mr. Daniels indicated

that it was allegations -- accusations, is the word he used.
Accusations. Upon information and belief. the State is in

possession of actual photographs of Mr. Rossi engaged in

unclothed activity with another ttnelothed young Woman who is

readih,r identi?able and she?s under the age of 14, and I'd like to
have that and cross-examine Mr. Daniels with that. because Mr.

Daniels said that the onlyr evidence that he had was more

 

accusations. and the -- actually.' the state has actual photographic
evidence.

The prosecutor acknowledged that the State did in fact have such a photograph in its
possession. "The photograph does not show sexual contact -- sexual intercourse. lr very well may
he pornographic. it very well may he it-lr. Rossi nail-ted. and a female nal-rerl. Ilte female is
identi?able as Breett." {at toes at The prosecutor then referred the trial court to
the probable cause portion Urlht: defendant's hintlover hearing. where Custal Breen testi?ed
briefly for the defense.

STATE: Breen testi?ed under oath that this night in
question that she went to bed with all her clothes on. and that she
woke up with all her clothes on. and that nothing happened. and

that nothing ever had happened between her and Mr. Rossi that

 

she is aware of whatsoever, and she's the woman that's identi?ed

in the photograph.

The prosecutor argued that the photograph did not prove the falsity of Det. Dauiels'
testimonyr regarding Rossi?s criminal activity with underage girls. "i?hepltotograplt is not
evidence ofany criminal oetfttint. lt's only.r being used as a prior bad act. that he posed for

pornographic pictures, if you want to call that pornographyr -- whatever you want to call It.

42



 

 



{Amer at 1239} The trial court then ordered that "izfthere is a photograph. see that he gets it to
take a look at the photograph." [Perkins at 1239] In the same breath, the trial eourt hatred
defense eounsel from further intntirzir into the origin or disposition of the photograph. ?Ijnst don't
see it as having su?ieient probative value under Rule 403 to permit further inquiry". {Perkins 
at 1239)

The remainder ofthe trio} Featured no Furlher mention of the photograph of Rossi and
Breed. and no further testimony at all li'om Bet. Daniels or Rossi. No record of the
photograph as evidence was preserved in the trial traroeript or the clerk's record. As a result, the
jury heard and saw no evidenee or testimony relating to the Fenland Poliee Department?s
possession ofa pomegraphie picture of Rossi and Breed.

The statements of the prosecutor and Der. Bartlett; relating to l-tossi?s potential culpability
in sexual crimes are in fundamental contradiction with evidence from the Portland Police
Department?s investigative file, a lit-emerge report by Del. Daniels dated April
1990'.

The report states:

Der. Daniel ?t'onng and some photographs from Sgt.
Milton Gerard of the Augusta Police Department. The photos
showed Gerard Rossi and a young woman engaged in sexual aets.

We dress from Sgt. Gerard on 

Der. Young and I spoke with Breen at the poliee station on

Wednesday. 3-23-90- She was aware of the photos because Staples

had just told her about theta. She knew we had them but didn't wish

to see them. Breen said she was told by Staples that Rossi

threatened that something would happen if they told anyone. Breed

told us she wouldn't have consented had she been sober. [Daniels 4-

21901}

Breen's date of birth was July 19, 1975 (IT at 43}, making her 14 years old at the time of

her interview with Daniels and Young. During the probable cause portion of the defeadratr?s

biadover hearing, Breen was called to testify for the defense. Defense counsel questioned Breen

43

 

without bene?t of Det. Daniels' April 1990 report, which would not be disclosed until the day
after the conclusion of the hearing. Defense counsel had heard from the defendant, however, that
the Portland police possessed photographs of Eteen with Rossi, taken in a motel room in
Augusta the previous year.

Breen testi?ed at the hindover that one afternoon in late summer or fall of 1939, she
travelled to Augusta in Rossi's car along with the defendant and Gloria Staples, her friend. (JT at
43) That evening, Rossi paid for a motel room and purchased co?'ee brandy for the teenagers.
Breen and Staples drank the coffee brandy. ?And I remember I was passed out. and from there, I
don't remember what went on." at 43)

In a recent interriew Will] Cry stal Iireen in June 2016:. she told investigators that she had
been summonsed into the police station by Young and Daniels. and was shown the photographs
depicting her in bed with Rossi in sexual positions. Ellie indicated that the pictures were too hard
for her to look at because. although she teas fairly certain Rossi did something to her in the hotel
room in Augusta, she was not certain. Brecn lold the detectives that she wished to press charges
against Rossi, to which Young told her that the conduct happened out of hisjurisdiction and any
complaints would have to be made through the Augusta Police tilepanrnent. said she asked
her mother to help her with this, and her mother told her that they did not have gas money to get
to Augusta. It should also he noted that nowhere in Detective 1r?oung's report does he record

Breen?s age, but rather referred to Breen as a "young woman," in his report.

GLEN BROWN

Glenn Brown was interviewed by police twice after the murder of Jessica Briggs. The ?rst
interview, by Del. Daniels, occurred amoros'intatei}I six weeks alter the murder at 335).
Daniels did not. take Brown's statement at this time. or ?le a summary report on the interview.
Brown?s second interview, also by Daniels, occurred on March 1. 1990, and resulted in a twoh
page typewritten ?rst-person statement (T at 1192}. At trial, Brown testi?ed for the state.

Brown testi?ed that on Sunday, May 2! st, 1939, two days before the murder, at around
pm, he saw Torr},r San?oorn and Jessica Briggs walking through Peppermint Park at 3W).
At the time, he was hanging out in the park with a group of young people: Freddie Carey, Hope
(lady, Tommy Peters, Mark Lorraine and Dorothy Gammon, his girlfriend. Brown knew Sanka-om

44

 

 

 

 

?oor the Kennedy Park area and the two were casual friends. Briggs and Sanhorn were getting
along ?good" and Sanhorn told him that he and Briggs werejust out walking. at 321)

Brown testi?ed that he nest saw Sanborn on Tuesday, May 23, again at Peppermint Park
(T at 321?322). He was alone when Sanborn, also by himself, walked up. He estimated the time
was "about ?ve" in the afternoon. Ames then asked whether "he was sure it wasn't any later than
that." Brown said he couldn?t remember, then agreed that it was "dark out" and "could have been
as late as nine." (T at 824] At the park, Sanhorn told Brown that the previous evening Jessica
had Spent the night with him "at his mother?s house" and le?'1 by herself, that morning. at 824,
Sanhorn told Brown that he tell "hurt," was out looking for Jessica, and was headed to
George Lngalls? place on India Street to see it? she was there. (T at 323, 365] Before walking off,
Sanhom showed Brown a folding knife with a titre-inch blade and said he hadjust purchased it
that day at 324'}. After Sanhom left, a group of young people showed up at Peppermint Park -
essentially the same group from May 21-. Hope Cody. 'l'ontmy Peters, Freddie Carey and Dottie
Gammon (T at 323']. Brown did not see 'l'ony Hanhot?n again that night. at 329)

The group hung out at the park until about It] o'clock at 350-351) then walked down to
the waterfront and over to DiMillo's restaurant. where lirotm worked as a dishwasher. was
going in to see what schedule I had nest week, for the week 1 was working.? (T at 323} After
going inside DiMillo's, Brown rejoined the group. who then walked out on one of the piers. 
come back out and we went over by the boats." The group then returned to Peppermint Park,
where they continued to hang out. At around 1 1:30 Brown neat home to Anderson Street
and went to sleep. He did not see Jessica Briggs at all that night. at 329)

Two days later, on May 25. 1989. Brown was at his mother's house on Anderson Street
when Sanhorn, accompanied by George lngalls. dropped by for a visit. at 330) Broom. Ingalls
and Sanborn hung out together at the house for an hour and a half, talking about the Briggs
murder and playing Nintendo at ?ll-E32). Whli? playing Nintendo, Sanhorn told Broom and
ingalls that on the night of the murder, he found Jessica outside of lngalls' house. Sanhom said
he and Jessica spoke, had sex, then argued for about thirty minutes. "And hejust talked with her.
and he did his thing- He got laid. And then he argued with her for awhile." (T at 331?832)

After Hope Carly and Gerald Rossi, Glenn Brown was the state's most important witness.
Aside from Hope Cady, only Brown testified to seeing Sanhorn out on the sheets of Portland on
the evening of May 23, 1939. "So we do have Glenn Brown. That that is it.? (Amos, at 1537-

45



 

 

 

1633} In her annotation, nines used Brown's testimony to establish Sanbom?s motive for killing
Briggs and his whereabouts on the night of the crime (T at 1594-1695):

On Tuesday, the 23rd of May, Glenn Brown sees Tony Sanbom
again up in Peppermint Park about 9100. Well, now. things are a 
different. Now Tony's mad at Jessica. lle?s hurt. She had left him. and
taken off from him that morning, and he was out looking for her. thought
she was probably over to George lngalls' house. and he was going to go
over to George Ingalls? house to ?nd her. This is on 'l?uestlajr night around
9:00. He showed Glenn Brow his new pocket knife that he had just
bought around 5:30 in the afternoon, opened it up, showed him what a
nice pocket knife it was. and then Tony 

Thursday, after the death, Tony Sunburn went to Glenn Brown's
mother's house over on Anderson He admits that he did ?nd
Jessica that night out in front of George lngalls' house. that they went for

a wall-t. that he screwed her. then they argued for shoot halfan hour.

Brown?s testimony was most clearly contradicted by the state's oust evidence and
witnesses. Brown testi?ed that on Snuday. hint.r Ell . when he saw Sanbom and Jessica Briggs
walking through Peppermint Park. he was accompanied by Freddie Carey. Brown also testi?ed
that around 9:30 on May 23. after his meeting with Sanhorn. Carey joined him at Peppermint
Park, and was part of the gruup that wall-zed around the waterfront that night. ("Everyone showed
up after Tony lef Brown. at 

Brown was unequivocal that Carey was with him on the evening of May 23. know it
was that night." Brown. at Yet the state?s own evidence - Carey?s timeeard from
DiMillo's restaurant -. proved that statements about seeing Carey on Sunday- and
Tuesday nights were false. (State's 13. at TM: The DiMillo?a tintecards showed that Carey
worked on Sunday from 4 pm. until nearly a.ro.. and on Tuesdayr from 4 pm. until midnight
The state celled Stephen DiMillo, owner and manager of DiMillo's who testi?ed that Carey
indeed worked on May 23 from four until ntidnighL (T at 202?203) Another state's witness,
George Ingalls. wholly refined Broum's testimony planing him and Sanborn together at Brotarn's
mother's house on May 25, where Sanhorn purportedly made the statenteuts about meeting

46

 

 

 

Jessica Briggs the night of" the murder outside of lngalls' residence. having sex with her. and

arguing afterward. lngalls stated that while he knew Brown as a casual friend from school. he
had never been to Brown?s residence, on May 25 or any other day. at 1503)

Al?davits. testimony and other evidence titrther show that Brown's statements
implicating Sanbom in the murder of Jessica Briggs were made under duress by Portland police.

Brown fully recanted his trial testimony in a June 23. 2016 af?davit to private
investigator Kevin Cady. lied when testi?ed in Saaborn's trial." {Brown o?ldmv'r; In the
af?davit, Brown stated he was pressured to lie to or they were going, to arrest me," and that
the statement attributed to him by detectives was "99% false." in his affidavit. Brown stated that
he did not recall seeing Sanhorn or Briggs at Peppermint Park at all around the time ofthe
murder. that he did not speah with fianbont on the night of Briggs death. and that Sanhom and
lngalls did not visit him at his nmtl?ter's house on May 25. troji?irfovft ot'Gtentt Brown) the time
he gave his statement and testimony. the prosecutor 1was sit-an: that he was functionally illiterate.
"Mr. Brown. you have a hard time reading; is that correct?" Mines at 864} In his af?davit.
Brown stated that he was threatened by the prosecutor to testify in accordance with his statement
to police, which he had newer rear]. lite tor-e testi?ed in court. I was told by Pam Ashes. if i

didn't testify to the written statement. 1 wratld he charged with a crime."

In MIL-3, the State failed to disclose the earth-salon of a man who had been a suspect

in the case, anti before Sanborn?s trial failed to disclose that suspect?s identity and what

evidence the State had against blur. the State did not disclose that in 2005. another roam

Charles Hall. a federal inmate confessed to the murder of Jessica Briggs while Sit-?t Feury of the

FBI questioned l-Iall about another homicide that occurred in Maine about one month a?er the

Briggs? murder. Despite having this infonnation. Prosecutors never turned it over to the defense

[Please see attached Exhibit of the email exchange between police and prosecutors that was in

the ?le contained at The Of?ce of the Attorney General and was only turned over recently}.

Ninth, after Portland Police Detective Karl Rybeck was infonued by SEA Peary of the.

FBI that Charles Fish confessed to the murder, Rybeclt spoke to Detective Daniels about Charles

4?

 

Hall?s confession. Detective Daniels said that Charles Hall was an acquaintance of Lincoln and
Sanborn?s and was thought to have been one of the men htvolved in the Briggs? murder. Charles
Hall?s name is not mentioned in any police report relative to the lessica Briggs case.

Legal .irgument

Suppression of material evidence favorable to an accused is a violation of the Due
Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Brady. 31'3 US. at 86. This requirement of Due
Process is so fundamentally important that it has been codi?ed in the automatic discovery
requirements of the Maine Rules ofUni?ed Criminal Procedure. Crim. P. (?The
attorney for the State shall provide the following to the defendant . . . statement describing
any matter or information known to the attorney for the State that may not be known to the
defendant and that tends to create a reasonable doubt of the defendant's guilt as to the crime
charged?)? The rules enhance dcfendants? Brody protections. placing the burden of production
on the prosecutor alone by making disclosure of Brecht evidence automatic. It is almost
hnpossible to overstate the importance of the principles and interests at stake when a Brecht
violation occurs because almost all ol'the fundamental rights afforded an accused by the
Constitution are put at risk.

The elements of a Broufy violation are material evidence favorable to the accused in
the possession or control of the State that is suppressed, resulting in prejudice. Strickler v.

Greene, 52? 263, 231-82 (1999}. There is no harmless error revievtr when a Brady violation

has occurred. Kyles v. Whitley, 514 US. 419, 435 [1995).

 

It has been further enshrined in the Maine Rules ofProfessional Conduct. MR. Prof. Cond. 3.3{b}
(?The prosecutor shall . . make timely disclosure in a criminal orjuvenile case to counsel for the
defendant, or to a defendant without counsel. of the existence of?evidenoc or information known to the
prosecutor after diligent inquiry and within the prosecutor?s possession or control, that tends to negate the
guilt of the accused. mitigate the degree of the offense, or reduce the 

43

 

 

 

considerable degree, defining its scope and requirementsoffers a defendant any advantage or assistance in making Izus case, whether is three 5r

exculpatory eotdd he used to impeach witnesses, leads to the discovery of other evidence, or rs

more generallyI useful to the defendant in

preparing for trial. id. Material evidence is any

ome of the case, partially becausc

evidence with a reasonable probability nf changing the cute

con?dence in the result and the fairness of the trial are undermined. ?utes. 514 US. at 434-35.

The State suppresses Broth- evidence when that evidence is in its possession or control.

Ellsworth v. Him-den, 333 F.3d I. 4 (1 st Cir. 1063], and it fruits to disclose the evidence to the

defendant. Whether intentionally or inadvertently. Eu'frt't'itier, 527 US. at 232. All employees of

the prosecutor?s of?ce. as well as all other persons acting. on behalf of the State, including the

police. are treated as an entity for Brady purposes. Gigiio v. 1.13.. 495 US. 150, 154 (1917:};

Kpies, 314 1.1.3. at 437-33; 52? at 230. This means that. if anyone acting on behalf

of the State has control over ?rmly evidence, that control is imputed to the prosecutor and will

support a Brody violation It is irrelevant that a parlicular prosecutor does not know that Brady

evidence isin the control ol'IIte State. Gigiio. 4&5 1.1.5. at 154.

Finally. the State has the burden oi'disciusing all Brady evidence to the defendant and
matF not shift this burden to the trial court by requesting in camera review to determine whether
the evidence should be disclosed. Jenn-ks ?323.. 353 US. 657. 669 practice of
producing government documents to the trial judge for his detennination of relevancy and
materiality, without hearing the accused. is disapproved"). Further, Brant}: evidence need not be
admissible because it ma}.I he used in a permissible manner under the rules of evidence or may

lead to the dissed-fer}F of other admissible evidence. Jenelcr v. ?113.. 353 11.3. 657. 669

49

 

 

(1957}. Thus, a determination of inadmissihility cannot overcome the State's duty to disclose
Brady evidence to the accused, who must he allowed free access in order to determine how or
even Whether to use it. id. The State has a simple choice when it controls Brady evidence:
disclose it or do not prosecute. Id. at GTE.

Applying these rules to the present case. the State has clearly violated Tony?s right to due
process under Benefit and the Maine Rules of Unified Criminal Procedure by suppressing the
foliowing evidence: Esculpatory and impeaclring evidence of the State?s wimess: police and
prosecutorial misconduct: promises. inducements and favors it offered to multiple witnesses;
false testimony at trial narrated by Pamela Rimes and adopted by Portland police detectives
Daniels and Young; and. evidence of 'l?ony?s Actual innocence. The enumerated suppressed
evidence is evidence that is at the center of this ease. The suppressed evidence is of the breadth
and magnitude that, it properly and timely proffered to the Defense, most assuredly would have
produced a different trial result. implicating Tony's Fifth Amendment right to Life. Liberty and
the Pursuit of Happiness. [t is hard to ?nd at ease in American Jurisprudence with more egregious
instances of abhorrent behavior by State actors.

The suppressed evidence will be favorable and material to Tony because they contain
valuable exculpatory and impeachment evidence, both as to the States expected testimony at
trial and that of virtually every other witness listed on the State?s witness list. It is clear that the
unavailable evidence certainly would meet any materiality bar. Impeachment is always
important, but in this case it is vital: there is absolutely no physical evidence linking Tony to
Jessica Briggs? murder in any way, and the credibility of the State's witnesses were critical to the

outcome at trial.

50

 

Impeachment is not the only use Tony will make of the suppressed material. The plethora
of withheld evidence can ?nally be used to rebut evidence presented by the prosecution, and
would likely cause the prosecution to change its tact completely at a new trial. The suppressed
evidence could most likely lead to other important. evidence.T The newly discovered evidence
will now allow Tony to determine what questions he should ask the State?s witnesses by
revealing where their lmowledge and certainty are insuf?cient to support their assertions.

In this case, it hardly seems necessary that Tony demonstrate how the evidence will be
material and favorable to him: the newly discovered evidence impacts foundational pieces of
evidence that the State used to make dieir case. The centrality to the case is made obvious by the
State?s complete reliance on witnesses who only provided circumstantial evidence as to who
killed Jessica Briggs. making their credibility key. The necessity ofcretlilrility also extends to the
investigation and the prosecution, all of which is now called into question with the revelation of
the newly discovered evidence. Further. Ihc suppressed evidence certainly contains data and
statements that undermine the disclosed portions: suppressing what they did is the equivalent of
the State offering hall" a sentence into evidence when the redacted portion of the sentence
substantially alters its meaning. in short, the suppressed evidence is at the center of this case?
the argument is that the newly discovered evidence is the entirety of the State?s case?and this
absolute miscarriage of justice must be reversed.

There can be no argument that the State has not had control over the evidence for

approximately meant-seven years. Prosecutors and police were the authors of what has now

 

1' The- files and record are voluminous in this case, and the suppressed evidence has made this case
incredibly dif?cult to parse through. as there appears to he a massive effort to mask withheld evidence on
the part of State actors. Undersigned counsel has worked on this case nearly every day with rare
exception, since being assigned in May Bills. Through diligence and persistence, newly discovered
evidence is surfacing on a regular and frequent basis1 the likes of which are hopefully never seen again.

51

 



been discovered, and what they did not author= they had access to. Most smel?callv. state actors
had access to Hope (lady?s?the only witness to the crime?{3H3 record: and they also had
access to her caseworker and author and Reoper of the DHHS file, Margaret Bragdon. For nearly
three decades new= state actors tell an innocent man in prison without so much as a whisper as to
what they have consistently Withheld. It was only through incredible perseverance of Tony and
his recent defense team. and the willingness of the current Office of The Attorney Geocral?s
Of?ce to partner in a pursuit for the truth as to who killed Jessica Briggs on 24, 2939, lhal
this evidence has ?nally seen the light of day.

The State?s supprEssion of the records has udiced Ton}: by destroying his ability to
conduct any meaningful pretrial investigation. prepare for trial and defend himself at trial. The
onlyr remedy For the multiple egregious and game changing Broth violations reversal of the
Jury's verdict and dismissal of the Indictment. Alternatively. this Court should Order a new trial,
as this will ?nally he Tony's opportunity to present a complete defense. As noted. there is no
physical evidence linking Tong.- to this Case. and there was never anything close to a confession
by Tony. and as such there is only one type of evidence in this case: the testimony of the
witnesses whose credibility is key. It was unthinkable and higth prejudicial to Tony to take him
to trial when he had not been provided with evidence that the State?s only witness had
signi?cant vision issues. saw ?Tony," the man who she claimed she saw kill Jessica Briggs ata
time when he was incarcerated, did not remember the dates of signi?cant events regarding the
murder and perhaps even when the murder occurred, as well as the numerous deals witnesses
were given for their testimony against Tony, and the coercive methods police used to gather
evidence suggesting Tony killed Jessica Briggs. As stated above. the State had complete control

over what evidence they did and did not provide to Tony; moreover, the},? also had complete

52

 

control over when in the pre-trial proceedings they gave Tony critical pieces of evidence; at best

the timing of certain discovery was suspect. at worst intentional. A selection of such suspect

tinting of production of evidence to the Defense is as follows: Rossi interview tape with

Josenhan's. all statements regarding Hope Cody were only provided in May 1992.3 statements David Schwara . as well as other critical witness statements. This newly discovered evidence

allows Tony the time to plan his trial strategy, matte inquiries. and seek expert advice or

testimony as to the contents of the undisclosed material. It is clear. Prejudice resulted from the

State?s suppression of the evidence in this case.

Tony has made out the elements of multiple iiornfv violations. He has shown that the

State had control over material evidence Favorable to him. that the State suppressed that

evidence. and that suppression was preiudiciai. The State's actions in this case get to the heart

and soul of a Harrods.J violation. It is unconscionable to allow the evidence suppressed in this case

to prevail in any way. It was indefensible for the State to choose to use favorable portions of

 

The trial was originally slated to begin June 3. Mill. however all statements regarding Hope Candy
were only provided to the llel?ense beginning on or about May 13. IWZ. Despite the State's last
disclosure. the De?'ttse filed a Motion to C'nntiuuc with the (?tnirt stating the need for more time was
because Ant} t-?trnes suggested they move to continue because more infonnation would be forthcoming: a
purported witness to the murder who had her ?rst contact with police within 2-3 days ofthe murder.
Despite simultaneous interviews oftwo other crucial witnesses who contradicted Carly ?s statement when
she told police she was alone that night. Detective Daniels could not recall the exact date he met Hope
Cady for the ?rst time.

Detectives Burton and Daniels interviewed David Sci-twine multiple times commencing May 2ft. [939-
four days after Jessica Briggs body was found. He immediately told detectives he was on the waterfront
the night Briggs was murdered and reported to them the following: he awoke from sleeping on a bench
near the waterfront in front of Casco Bay Lines. heard someone scream. heard the crack of something like
a 2nd hitting a surface. heard a splash. and then saw a man walking away from the area where he heard
the noises. In the next several days and weeks. Detectives Daniels and Burton conducted multiple
interviews of Schware where he gave further detail. and. according to Detectives. gave some differing
details from previous interviews. On at least two occasions. Detectives Burton and Daniels took Schwam
from the NYC to the waterfront for interviews. Schwinn also worked with someone front the Maine
College ofArt who drew a composite of the man he saw From approximately 3ft feet away that night.

Despite interviews beginning days after the murder. the State only forwarded all of their reports misting
to David Schwar'c on or about May I 5. 1992.

53

 



eiddence?all of which are material to the innocence or guilt of the accused?and hide the rest.
That course of action undermined any semblance of fairness ofTony?s trial, public con?dence in
the accuracy of its result, and is a resounding violation of?l'ony?s due process rights.

Having demonstrated the titres elements required to prove a Brady violation, the
appropriate sanction must be determined. In most Broth.- violation cases, the remedy is a new
trial, because revie?n.r generally takes place on direct appeal from conviction. However. in this
case, suppression is seemingly intentional, and prosecutotial or police misconduct are likely most

certainly involved, so that the correct sanction. especially in ligJ?tt of the magnitude of the harm,-

 

is dismissal with prejudice ot?the h-lurder indictment. Therefore. in this case, where Tony has
already wrong?tlly served over twenty?seven yam-s in prison. the appropriate remedy for these I
egregious violations is reversal r-t?the conviction. and dismissal of the indictment. In the
alternative. the minimum appropriate remedy is a new trial he ordered. and for Tony to be
admitted to bail in the interim while he awaits a new trial.

The instinctive question here is why the State suppressed all of this exculpatory and
impeachment evidence. It is dif?cult to what compelled the State to act the way they
did, and this question has the ability to derail even the most stable of minds. The answer can only
be an unspeakable truth, the litres of which need not be answered for the purposes of this Court?s
analysis. The facts of what the State did to Anthony Sanborn in this case support that what the
State did, it intended to do, that the suppression was intentional and is a gtarinn example of
prosecute-rial and police 

This is especially so considering the volume and magnitude ofthe sappressed evidence,
and the multiple ways in which the State committed Brody violations and intentional Brady

violations. which together acted to strip Tony of his constitutional rights and revealsa pattern of

54

 

 

 

 

misconduct by the State. At a minimum, Tony should he admitted to bail. and the Court should
grant a new trial based upon newly discovered evidence.

Recently, the Supreme Court has overturned two convictions on similar Brody violations
grounds. First. the Supreme Court overtumed the first-degree murder convictions of Juan Smith
based on Brody violations. Smith v. Coin, 565 LLS. i3, T4 (Hill). In that case. the State failed to
disclose a police of?cer's notes that contained statements made by Larry Boatner, in which he
said he did not see the {ace of tlte person who eonunitted the shooting, in direct contrast to ?hat
Mr. Boatner testi?ed to at trinI. at Mr. Bonmcr?s statements at trial were the only
evidence linking the to the crime. M, at to. Reasoning that the failure to disclose the
of?cer's notes were a Bonn.- violation because Mr. itontner was the State's onlyr witness and that
these statements were plainly material because they directly contradicted Mr. Boatner?s
testimony at trial. 

Similarly. in a decision tinted March lttl?. the Supreme Court overturned the capital
murder Conviction of h-lieltael Ween-y. Il?eony Coin.  36 SCI. will ?1'32 tents}. in that
case. the defendant was convicted almost exclusively by the testimony of alleged witnesses Sam
Scott and Eric Brown. In?. at Him. The State had. however. failed to disclose to the defense
police records of statements that Mr. Scott had made to Fellow inmates that ?cast doubt on
Scott's credihitity," saying that Mr. Scott had had sought the conviction against the defendant as
a means of revenge. Id. The State also failed to disclose that Mr. Brown had been promised a
possible reduction in his unrelated sentence if' he testi?ed against the defendant. and than
commented on the lack ufnny promises throughout the trial. Id.

Based exclusively upon the Petition for Certiorai. in a Per Cttriant decision. the Supreme

Court overtumed Smith?s convictions. The Supreme Court reasoned that this suppression of

55

 

 

 



evidence violated the ?ngley standard because ?beyond doubt. the newly revealed evidence

su?iees to undermine con?dence in Weany?s conviction." id. at Ill-[16. Fm'thcr. the Sepreme

had the netsr evidence been admitted. Smith- v. Coin, 5153 US. 3?3. SCI. 62?. 625'-

The State's trial resembles a house ofcarcls. built on the jury crediting Scott's
account rather than alibi. See United?i?rnres v. US. HS. 9630'. 2392,
49 Ed 2d 342 {l Wt?) ["[llf the verdict is already of questionable validity. additional evidence
of relatively minor importance might be suf?cient to crente a reasonable doubt.?) Similarly, in
Tony's case, the State?s evidence does resemble a now falling house 

Tony has made out two serious 1violations ofhis constitutional rights under the Fifth,
Sixth and Fourteenlh Amendments. the Maine Constitution. the Maine Rules of Unified Criminal
Procedure.

However. the Criminal Rules speci?cally allow dismissal for violation of the discovery
rules, and dismissal is the only appropriate remedy to the State's deliberate misconduct in
suppressing Brady material ofsueh compelling substance in Tony?s case. Finally, the amalgam
of these two yioletions makes a poisonous mixture that can only be remedied by dismissal with

prejudice.

56

 

 

 

 

Police misconduct and prosecutorial misconduct.

Police misconduct and Prosecutorial misconduct by MG Pamela Antes in the
investigation and trial of Sanhorn were in violation of the Due Process clause of the US.
Constitution.

The State, more speci?cally. AAG Pamela Ames and Detective Danny Young of
P131) intentionally andfor with full knowledge and awareness suppressed whole statements
given in this case in favor of reducing prol?l?crcd statements to narrative reports produced
by Detective Young (Please see attached Eshihits A and 

The Due Process right to a fair trial estends beyond the Brady issues discussed above and
the ineffective assistance of counsel claims discussed in tiround Three, in general. a fair trial
occurs when the ultimate ?nding is not undermined by what occurs hetero, during. or after trial.
Brody. 373 at l?rosccuturial misconduct. including improper statements and leading
questions, is a basis for violation of the right to litir trial for this reason. Store 1-. Done, 522
904. 91 L912 (Me. 1987). it prosecutor must work "to avoid jeopardizing without reasOn Or
need the validity of a just conviction.? Id. at ill I (quoting Store v. Conner. 434 A.2d 509. 514
(Me. 1931]. and unconstitutional actions by the prosecution. "subver?sl the public
interest in the proper perfonnoncc of the prosecutor?s function." id.

Apart from the suppression of Bruits material outlined above. the secret deals and
promises it made with Gerard Rossi, and the improper methods it used to intimidate stintesses
into testifying as it instructed thorn. the State also actively leveraged each of these points of

advantage over Sanme during the trial. and even during Seahom?s appeal to the Law Cowl.

 

it: These ?rst three pages are documents that were in the possession of the Of?ce of the Attorney
General and provided to current counsel The second four pages are reports that were acntally
provided to trial counsel in April and July 1990.

5?

 

 

One striking example of this is the manner in which Assistant Attorney General Antes
relentlessly led Hope Cody on direct examination, even admitting to Judge Perkins, who said he
had not really been hearing whether the questions were loading or not, that she needed to lead
Hope Cady because she Was young and underprivileged, and she did not want to let something

?Just pop out? that Antes did not want to. This was misconduct that deprived Ssnhorn of his right

to due process of law.

Bail is appropriate in light of the Petitioner?s eugniashle claim ut'aetuat and the

ultimate reliefsought by the Petitioner and contemplated Ity this Court. in accordance with

M-R.U- Crim. r. straits).

Should this Court tin-:1 merit in the eieinitst set forth in the petition such that the Court
detemtiucs that reiiefis warranted. the Petitioner is asking this Court to order reiiefiu one of
three forms: ?rst. that the Court reverse the Judgment oi" the Court dated June 15, 1992
[Broderictt, and ?nd there was :1 diseot'ery violation signi?cantly implicating Satthorn's Due
Process rights during his hind-otter hearing. and consequently reverse the Judgment dated June
15, 1992, and dismiss the Indictment against him, and free him from incarceration-
Alternatively, Petitioner requests this Court conduct a hearing, reverse the criminal judgment,
and reicase him from incarceration. Finally, and Petitioner requests that this Cetu't
conduct as hearing, reverse the crirninaljudgrnent, set the matter for a new trial, and release the
Petitioner on bail pending trial in lite matter.

Weighed against the nature of the crime for which the Petitioner

53

 

11]. The Petitioner's record since the outset and throughout the entire duration
of his Ell-years incarcerated as a wrongfully-convicted man demonstrates
unequivocally that the standards and conditions of IS M.R.S. 10511?2) and
(3) 1would he satis?ed in accordance with M.R.U. Crim. P. 

8. Title 15 establishes the standards governing release on post-conviction bail:

Standards. Except as provided in subsection 4, a defendant ma].r not be admitted to
but] under this seetiott unless dtejudgc has probable cause to believe that:

A There is no substantial risk that the defendant nill fail to appearas required and will
not othenrtse pose a substantial risk to the integrity ofthejudieial process;

El. There is no substantial risk that the defendant will pose a danger to another or to the
community; and

C. There is no substantial risk that the defendant will commit new criminal conduct.

9. The remainder t2] sets forth the process by which the Court is to evaluate
whether the requisite showing of probable cause is made in satisfaction of the standards,

including to de?ne the scope ol?inttuitjr and the inl?onnation relevant thereto:

in detcnnining whether to admit a defendant to bail, thejudge injustice shall consider the
factors relevant to pro-conviction hail listed in section as well as the facts proved at
trial, the length of the term of imprisonment imposed and any previous unexcused failure
to appear as required before any court or the defendant's prior failure to obey an order or
judgment ofany court, including, but not limited to, violating a protection ?otn abuse
order pursuant to Title 19, section 2769 or Title l9-t't. section 401 I.

If the judge orjustice decides to set post-conviction bail for a defendant. thejudge or
justice shall apply the same factors in setting the kind and amount of that bad.

It]. Title 15 MRS. 1026(4) identi?es the factors that the Court is to consider in setting bail (or

otherwise rendering a decision as to release). Those factors, which the Cote-t consider,

are:
59

l?

 

 

A. The nature and circumstances of the crime charged;

B. The nature of the evidence against the defendant; and

C. The hl?t?lji' and characteristics of the defendant. including, but not limited to:
The defendant's character and physical and mental condition;

(I) The defendant's family ties in the State;
(3) The defendant?s employment history in the State;

The defendant's ?nancial resources;

(5) The defendant's length of residence in the community and the defendant's
community ties;

(ti) The defendant?s past conduct, including any history relating to drag or alcohol
abuse:

(It The defendant's criminal history, it'anv:
The defendant's record concerning appearances at court proceedings:

Whether. at the lime ol'tlte cunent offense or arrest. the defendant was on
probation. parole or other release pending trial. sentencing. appeal or completion
ofa sentence for an olTense in tltisjurisdiction or another:

Any evidence that the defendant poses a danger to the safety ofothers in the
community= including the results ot'a validated. evidence-based domestic
violence risk assessment recommended by the Maine Commission on Domestic
and Sexual Abuse. established in Title 5. section 130044. subsection 7442?, and
approved by the Department ol' Public Safet};

Ill) Any evidence that the detiendant has obstructed or attempted to obstruct

justice lav threatening, injuring or intimidating a victim or a prospective witness.
juror, attorney for the State. judge, justice or other officer of the court; and

t? 11) Whether the defendant has violated conditions of release,
probation or other court orders. including. but not limited to. violating protection
from abuse orders pursuant to Title section 7'69 or Titte 194's, section 401]-

Title 15 NLRB. 1026(4).
11. These factors are:

Factor A .-
i?Tte nature and circumstances nfthe crime charged

The murder of Jessica Briggs was unbelievably horri?c and shocked the conscious ofthe
State and beyond. This is not a murder that Tony committed. It is safe to say that eventr stage

of the judicial process leading up to Tony?s conviction and after, was ?awed. It is the

60

 

 

Defense?s contention that the Court should give this factor very little consideration, it?auy

given the absolute miscarriage of justice that occurred.

Factor B:
The nature ofrhe evidence against the defendant.

There is absolutely no physical evidence connecting .?tnthonjtr Sanhorn to the murder of
Jessica Briggs. In fact, the State?s case is completely circumstantial. and riddled with serious
Brecht violations. The nature of the evidence against Tony is that it is, for all intents and

purposes, non-existent.

hector (3 Hi!

The '3 character and physical and memo! condition, as evidenced through the history
and charac-tori-tries.

Taxing,r has been incarcerated for twenty-seven years for a crime he did not commit. to his
time at Thomaston, and. Maine State Prison in Warren, Tony has been a model prisoner
evidenced first by a complete lack of any disciplinary issues; in other words, he has zero write
ups. Second, Ton},r has embraced the attitude and lit'eatylc ofa Saint, Ton}r has taught a
Nationally Accredited Parenting Program for over IS years, Long Distance Doris. Through. that
program countless men have been reunited with their children in tlte visit room or other through
means of communication. As a recult of'l?ony sharing his personal experiences with his own
Santana, he has guided, encouraged and facilitated to the extent possible, many other
inmates through the process of restoring relationships with their own children. Repairing and
restoring these relationships between father and child, and even the hope of a restored
relationship has changed how individuals act while incarcerated. Many go from getting in
trouble i.e. ?ghting and using to drugs to focusing on programs, classes, attitude and actions, to
better themselves while incarcerated. Just a few weeks ago, a yotatg man who has been released
from Maine State Prison, approached Tony's wife, Michelle Sachem, and told her that because

til

 

 

of Tony he was able to maintain his parental rights and new has a relationship with his
daughter.

For about two decades. Tony has been "teaching" at the prison. During his time at

as certi?ed by Literacy Volunteers of America. Up and until nee-three years
age he taught Adult Basie Edueation

Themasten. Tony 

and ESL. teaehing men how to read and Write. Part of that

programming included GED test preparation. Lip and until about six months ago. Tony also

taught a creative writing class. During the years that Tony taught ei

taught countless men to read and write. A few 

asses at the prisons. he

ears ago. MSP hired certi?ed teachers. and new

Tony tutors inmates in Math anti Fleienee alongside elassroom teachers in order to prepare

inmates who hope to pass their Iii-Set tests.

For the past three years. 'I'ony has heen part ot?tlte Corrections program. training at

risk shelter dogs allowing them to heeome :ttloptahle. lie has trained sis dogs. and has assisted irt

training others. 'l'hrough this work. i?eny has l'telrteti to transform dogs that were unapproaehahle

and not ?t for adoption into dogs that went to homes and Families in favor of being put down.

More recently. and within the past nine months or so. Tony spends much of his evening
free time going to the Mental Health unit where he meets. tall-ts. and sometimes isjust a presence

for these who are signi?cantly mentally ill and cannot be housed in the prisen?s general

population. Currently. Tony is teaehing one inmate Fractions; he meets with an inmate who has
not some out of his cell in three years and did not talk to anyone before Tony started spending
time with him. Tony talks sports with another inmate who is deaf; not] even though this inmate's
parents are also deaf. they have reached out to Tony's family to tell them how much their son
[eel-ts forward to Tony's conversations with him. Finally. Tony spends a lot of time with another
man who has attachment issues and explosive tendencies and has been a beacon in the storm for
this inmate who. at least for brief periods. must feel human.

 

When Tony?s mother was ?red from her job after 20 years of employment, he paid her

rent ?-em prison. Tony has also been a major support for his younger brother Thomas as
well.

62

 

 

 

 

These who have Ihe grind fertune ni' icnewing 'l?eny lend he say it best ahaul this man the
State at" Maine threw away in 1when he was arrested far a murder he did an: cemmit (Please

see attached Exhibits "Cll?l'?tt?f letters in supperr ni? Anthony Sanhem.

Fame:- 41' {21:

The derfcedmi! Cr?rmiiy ties in the State.

Teny is loved and cherished by all Ihnse crime intn centacl with him. Additienaliy,
he is a lifelong resident el' Maine. in fact. his parenlylieien anti .-?tmheny Sanhem, 5L, still
reside in the same apartment they dial when '[eny Wes. arrested liar fear Tony wnnhi knew where
tn gn 1til-hen he get t?ltll ul'prisnn il'they mnved. years sen. 'l my married Michelle Sanh?m
(FILE: h-iichelle Liner-1m. nuns hum-e in when: i'nny 1will reside if' this
l-[enerahle Court permits hail in this neuter. Michelle is a manager at l-?air Paint C'ummunicatiens
where she has werlceti for approximately six: years; she has ewe adult children hiew and
lease Tnny. as Well her [nether Lintln is local. and her father Russell whe lives in Northern
Maine with his step-wile. Beth ei' enemies: parents snppen her and support I?eny's release
irem prisan. Teny else has a very large seppert netwurk nf liter-lily anti friends in Maine, which
will enly grew when he is reieased. a knew 'l?eny is to here and trust him1 and he has an many
lives yet he reach.

Feemr 

me de?ndem "s empinymenr hisi'mjyF in the Smte.

 

As stated aheye, any has been incarcerated fer his entire adult life. incarcemte?

he has demonstrated a work ethic that few possess. it is the policy efDepartment ef Cenectiens

63



 

 

that State employees are prohibited Front writing any sort of reference letter for any inmate;
however, the letters attached as exhibits above detail and describe Tony?s work efforts, all of
which are voluntary positions, and an attitude that one would be hard pressed to ?nd in the
market piece today. Tony has an excellent track record For hard work, and an obvious ability to
navigate stressful situations when they arise. He would be an absolute asset to any work place.

Factor 

The Jakarta?! ir?nancial resume-es.

Available to Tony is the love and ?nancial support nl'a whole host LtFpeaple, to include
his wife Michelle. Michelle is gainfully employed hy Fair Point Communications as a whole sale
manager. She has worked for the company for eight years. and held a variety ot?positinns. Tony
also intends to work once he is Free ft?tntt incarceration. He has gained valuable skills

during his incarceration and has

Fraser t? (Fl:

The "s length r'tfr'cs't'rh'ut'e in the mat the defendant is community ties.

Tony has been incarcerated for the last 27 at his 44 years, with all but a few of those
years [during which he was being held either at the Maine Youth Center or the Cumberland
County Jail}. He has an unbelievable community ol? family and l?riends who anxiously await his
release and have pledged to support him in whatever ways are necessary to ensure his successful

transition back into his real life where he belongs.

Factor (6):
The defendant? is past canducr. including an history! relating to drag or alcohol abuse.

 

 

 

On or about December 25, 1989, Tong.r was attested for DUI in Augusta. He was ii". It is
fair to say that Ton}P Head alcohol and marijuana when he was a youth. He has not used a single
drug since being incarcerated. This is evidenced by negative drug screens randome taken from
him while he has been incarcerated. Tony is adamantly opposed to alcohol andfor drug use and
spends time in prison counseling inmates shout dangers associated with such use.

Footer 
The de?nition! '3 criminal history. forty.

Ton}.t was essentially couch sur?ng and living on the streets of Portland dating back to
when he was about ?fteen-years old. He did get into some trouble, and Portland Police
had Tong.- Sanborn in their sights. It is the Defense?s contention that the frequent trouble he was
getting into ultimately led Portland Police to choose him as the who killed Jessica Briggs.
lDuct: police locked in on Tony as hein the chicfsuspee! ol' the Briggs' murder, the evidence
was fashioned by the State to try to secure a conviction, which they accomplished.

Nomithstanding the charge that is the subject of Ihis motion and the DUI referenced
above, Defendant has no other adult criminal history. As mentioned shove, he does have a
misdemeanor .W history, and did spend some time at the MYC.

Factor 

The Jejhna?oot ?3 record concerning appearances of court proceedings.

The Defendant failed to appear for Court appearances for Juvenile offenses. Additionally,
he was absent without leave {tom the Maine Youth Center on at least two

occasions. Torn.r also failed to appear for his DUI charge, as this was during a time when Tony

65

 

 

 

 

Ider ?'icnd who the Juvenile Justice

was in Hurida with Gemd Rossi who was Tony's much 0

system approved as an appropriate pianement f'nr Tuny.

Fitcmr (9):

Wis-titer. at the time of this rut-rent a?ense 0r arrest, the iiuyirndam 1m: on probation. parole nr
reimse pending ti'itii, sentencing. appeal in campiction aft: sentence?r an o??me in this
jurisdiction til!? trimmer.

On May 9.4. 1939. the date Jessica Briggs was killed. Tony was an entrustumm status

from the MC.

Furtar 
Any evidence that the I tgt'tnzit?mtt pulsar a iinrigrr tn the mint? nfntiic'rs it: the: cmnmunigr,
int-hating HIE tie-suits oft: uricicnmr-buscd domestic I?f?t?dil?f? risk 
recommended by the Maine {Jimmim'inn an Dammit" and Serena! Mime. estabiisiwd in Tide 5,

section i?iJ?J-i. mbitrctinn 7-HT. and by the ufPiibtic Safegr.

There is name.

Fartar (I rift}:

[instructed in to obstruct justice by threatening,

Any evidence that tits. defendant has
imam, juror. attumeyfor the State. judge.

injuring or intimidating it victim ?t it irrespective 
fusrice in other rg?itmr court.

There art: acme.
Factor (H): Whether the defendant has previausfy violated rantiitians aft-dense, probation

or other court artists. inciuding, but not limited to. violating protection ?am abuse orders
pursuant Titiiz I9. section 3'65? car Titie. section 401].

65

 

 

 

 

 

 

"When Tony was sixteen years old and on an ?entrusttnenI? status ?ora the Maine Youth
Center. Tony vvent to Virginia Beach the very day he was subpoenaed to testify at Grand Jury

against a peer who was charged with murder.

As a youth. he also was said to have violated probation and conditions.

3. Conditions of release. Except as provided in subsection 4, the judge orjustice may
impose. in lieu of or in addition to an appearance or hail hood any condition considered
reasonably necessary to minimize the risk that the defendant may fail to appear as
required may compromise the integrity of thejudieial process. may conunit new criminal
conduct. may fail to comply with conditions of release or may constitute a danger to
another person or the community.

ts tans. 

Tony agrees to be hound by any conditions the Court sets forth. It is beyond all doubt that
he will succeed on any conditions the Court imposes.

WHEREFDRE. Petitioner. furthony Sachem. through counsel. herehy requests that this
Honorable Court Order that the Jury's verdict of October 29. 1992 be vacated and the charges
against him he dismissed with prejudice for the multiple and egregious Brady violations. In the
alternative, Petitioner asks this Court to Order a new trial and admit Tony to bail pending the
outcome of the trial1 which will most assuredly prove. ?nally. that Anthony Sanhorn is actually

innocent.

Date: 6

 

Kevin G. Moynihan (Willi)
1 15 Middle Street, Suite 300
Portland, ME 04101

935-94d5 93546

 

t5?

 

 

 

CERTIFQTE 0F 

Amy Fair?uld, Attorney for Ike Pc?tirhn?r, Sunburn, hereby curlify that on this
4* day of :?Ipril. Hi?, I made Henri-cu ui?thu within ?pl?icnljun Fm Bail Funding Final Dispnsilinn of
Fe?li?n, by dupcrsiting :1 mm 01? mm: in the 11.53. MALL prqmid? addrc?scd as follows:

Dnnuhl chuml?u?

Of?ce HIE-1111.3. Lturney General
55131:: 1 Htutinn
Augusu. ME. 1.1-1 

 


FLLii'i-Zit'] 
Ill Drunk 
[Minna MIT 


 

 HECDRDE PA. DI. OETEC-TWES CRIME PREVENTION


SUPPI. M. INVESTIGATION 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

um? Egg-16863 cue-ruin? Jessi; Briggs mm {our Mb mu I Hi ?Bit Street.
nu c1 new or Homici??' m? or ?mm" . 5-211?59
DHAILS DI: INVESTIGATION

Statement. of Christine M. Eprcgue, D013 8- 1?Th, 28 Hersey Street, Pox-bland.
TTh?Egh?, taken on 3-2?90 st 15GB hrs. hy- Bet heniel Young in the Detective

Bureau of 105! Midzile Street.

I live with my mother are fe?s- reet. I as: going to Heel-1n:
High School. - Mg Tali Wit-h Janet Store:- 11: 35
Street st) 322

One night 1:111:12) cm and Michelle Lincoln
coming out of ant cf'anet'e house with

-- . Mcie Burton. @pm said that she had to say
goodbye. I She and-Ton? to go to Florida.

I me going to
I ssked Tony 5:
Jessica. use ten
didn't. scar 3.1331
if I could see
envelope, thong
Burton saw her

When I spoke to

scratches on hi:
three scratches.

told 

ther {#13'1
know
{23.1151

FREE.
When;

it she
ten 
were T1
Tore 1:1
friend.
police
bus'ehe
tell arm-

\ncr?f? 'l 

mm wcxf?w?- 

was 1:1 WW 

er to see me, but. I didn't.

sly a couple days after

:15 involved in it. Michelle

I to Florida. I asked her
She did show me a. brass

an away because Dulcie

me? three
There were
etched. ?e
fight. I was
I ?cn't
to Ten to

MQWW 11+,
911+ 0% 01%. m? 


Lu} Us?? 1-. 10:30. I

see everyone

esked. Gloria

the meme

1 there to
cops know
her heat
1d the
-- well! be: life

?oi, so leave when Gloria said. can't.
see 2.1: she knew the police are waiting for her to

say somethi?grhut she was going to.

 

 

?Ehrist.ina H. Spa-cane

 

 

 

 

m. . . . 4- 

. Bet. Denial 1mm; 3-2-9D Boson
A
CIIMII I?l' a MTIVI {?01 ?l "all?! MI. Fill!? mm
mink seem cum 
mom iv 1' D- IT

imhl?lumu 

 

'Hr: 




secosos PATROL came Peeveru'rlolw
tonnes. wins: noun: DEPARTMENT
SUPPLEHENTAI. INVESTIGAIIDN REPORT

 

 

onset Jessica. Briggs mm? {cm mo HIE?Fries ?l?'?h?hmn Street
EQ-IEBGS

GI 01 

 

 

Homicide Didi OFFENSE DI 5-2h-69

 

 

 



Statement of Christina H. Sprague, DOB B-l?Th. 23 Hersey Street, Portland,
TTh-Qgh?, taken on 3?2?90, at 1500 hrs., hy Det. Daniel Ioung.in the Detective

Bureau of 139 Middle Street.

I now live with my mother and father on Hersey Street. I am going to Deering
High School. Last year during April and May I lived with Janet Storer at 35
?xford Street. I had run away from home.

One night while I was living there I saw Thny Sanborn and Michelle Lincoln
coming out of Tony's motheris.house. I was in front of Janet?s house with

- -, Dulcieihurton. Michelle came over to see me. She said that she had to say

I goddhye. She said she'had airline tickets for her.and?Tony to go to Florida.

I was going to best Michelle up before she came over to see me, but I didn't.
I asked Tony Sanhorn why he was leaving. It was only a couple days after
Jessica was found. He told me he didn?t want to get involved in it. Michelle
didn't say anything else, Just that they were going to Florida. I asked her
if I could see the tickets but she wouldn't let me. She did show me a brown
envelope, though. I know Michelle didn't leave right away because Dulcie
Burton saw her the next day or the day after that-

When I spoke to Tony Sanhorn he walked right over to me. I saw three
scratches on his face. I think they were next to his left eye. There were
three scratches. They looked fresh. I asked him how he got scratched. He
told me that Donna Happersett scratched him while they were in a fight. I was
there when Tony and Donna fought and Donna didn?t scratch his face. I don't
know if Tony had the scratches then but Donna didn't do anything to Tony to
cause the scratches. -

Michelle once told me that the reason she left with Thny was because everyone
was after her for giving a statement against David Nixon.

When I was in school today I spoke to Gloria Staples. It was about 10:30. I
was with Tina Cote. Gloria was with her foster sister, Robin. I asked Gloria
if she had seen Tony Sanborn. She said the cops were going out to the Maine
Hall tonight to arrest him. Then she said that she was going to be there to
.. . -. warn Tony and to go with him.if she had to. I told Gloria that the cops know

:j Tony killed Jessica. they knew that she knew, and that Jessica was her host

- . friend. Sloria said that Jessica was her best friend but if she told the
police what she knew she would get ten years. She said Tony would get life
hut'she would get ten years. I got ready to leave when Gloria said, can't
tell you what happened.? She said she knew the police are waiting for her to
say something hut she'was going to.

 

 

. Christina M. Sprague
sea-Bet. Daniel Young Roach
a;

 

cunts' Ir 'Aj'i'ui 
- . . . manor! mm CLEMEM .
he non-my- All Hul?lul El '3

IMH- --I

 

-- 

 

 

PATROL DETECTWEE CRIME FRWENTIDN
FDITIMTD. PGLHIE DEPAITMIHT

SUPPLEMENTAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

 

 

?mar-.1535:

mam mm lair no mm a m.
EDHHA Jessica Eriggs

 

 

out on? cums: on manta!

ml or anon: DI mli?dl?n? Homicide 

 

DETAILS OF 

Statement of Dottie Gannon, DOB Tl Sherman Street, Apt- T. no phone.
unemployed, given in her home on Thursday, 3-1-90. at approximatEl? 1955 hrs.,
to Bets. Daniels and Young.

I remember the night when Jessica Briggs was killed. That night I was in the
Bid Fort with Glenn Brown, Tommy Peters, Hark Lorraine and Hope Eady. we net
Scott Knoll and Tony Maffei. ?ne of them was wearing a jacket with a unicorn
on the bank. He met them in front or a bar room in the 01d Port. I think it
was Exchange Street. It was the street that goes down and connects to a
smaller street that cones out right in front of Di?illo?s. we walked down
toward Di?illo's after meeting those two guys. I bought a soda from the
machine in front of DiMillo's. I also went inside and bought a pack of
cigarettes out of the machine. They were Marlboro box. I saw Jessica at
DiHillo's that night too. She was working- I think George Ingalls was in the
kitchen working too.

He kept walking around. He ran into Paul Bell and Sean D'Amioo. We saw them
across the street from the Longfellow Boat. They came ower and talked to us a
while. They were on bikes. They said they were coming from the Hillion
Dollar bridge. They.said they were looking for David Saunders who liwes on
Chestnut Street. David's got blond hair and blue eyes and he liwes on
Chestnut Etreet. Paul was riding a red or naroonish lD-speed. Sean was
riding his mongoose. That is a BHI sports bike. His is red with a white
seat. I road it that night. I just road across the street and back. Bean
still has that hike. He doesn't like 10 speeds. Sean has loaned it to other
people. He loaned it to Chris Foss one time. He has loaned it to Tony
Eanborn too. I have seen Tony riding it. Tony has a white one with a purple
seat.

I didn't see Tony that night. We left Sean and Paul. He walked over to
Peppermint Park from there. He were all sitting on the wall and me and Glenn
went home.

I didn't see Tony Sanborn at all that night. I didn't see bin.with Sean
D'Anieo that night hut those two do hang around together almost every day.

A couple or days before that, on Sunday night? I was sitting on the wall in
Park again. There was no. Glenn, Tommy Peters and Hope Cady. It
was about 5:oo or 6:oo o'clock in the ewe-hing. I think. The two of then
walked by right in front of me. I said Hi to then and they both said Hi to
me- They were holding hands and standing real close. I remember that I
hadn't recently seen Tony around town much before that night.

 

 

muse Gannon

 



 

I

Dot. James Daniels 37}'90 Roots

 

um I: sum
T?'ll? DTHIMH


 

I A

mum: mo: ?cowl" or norurr: an. El Hum a Hold 
uwrouunto 

 



 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

 

 

lEl?i?drT
Hemens FATRDIL came PREVENTION
PORTLAND. Mm! DEPARTMENT a
SUPPLEMENTAL INVESTIGATION arson 
at no. cameraman snot!? arm mm am 4H Datum:
Jessica Briggs 151 Sherman Street
IN DI m??hll?? CM TE DF URINE. IHEIDEHT
Homicide 5-2h.39
or [means-anon 
Harrative of interview with DEB E-l?Th, 23 EErsew

Street, Interviews and conversations took place during the months of
January through 

I first spoke to Christian Spragne on lad-yd. The purpose of thia-interview
was not related to this ease. However. Christina offered the follhwing
information which I noted.

Bhristina stated that she_saw_Ton,v Sanhorn and Michelle Kennedy
night she saw the television news about Jessica Briggs! death.
Hiehelle told her they were going to Florida. Tony Seahorn told her he didn't
tent to get~involved_in the Briggs case. Christina also told me that-she saw
Jimmy Stuhhs'in Did Grehard Beach the night she saw Jessica's death on the
news the first time. Jimmy Etuhhs asked her to heat Jessica up for him. He
was surprised and obviously didn't know Jessica was dead until Christina told
him.



- 0n 2;23-90; I hgain spoke to Christina. I was with Det. Daniels and we were
at Michelle Lincoln?s house. I actually went to Michelle?s house to speak to

her hut Christina was present. Christina said that David Nixon knew where
Tony Sanhorn was and that Tony killEd??eseiea. David Nixon had told Christina-
he was going to kill Tony if he ever went to Theneston- Christina also said
that she heard from someone, unknown eraetxy who, that there was blood in Ten?
Sanhorn's bedroom the night of Jessica's murder.

 

 

0n 3-19?90, I received a telephone call from Christina. I went to her
residence to speak to her. Christina told me that a Tree: Loggins knew
something about the murder heeanse Michelle Lincoln told her.

On 3-2?90. I spoke to Ehristina Epragne at the Detective Bureau. I shtained a
.statement from her relative to her seeing scratches on Tony Eanhorn's faee the
week nf the mnrder.

Investigation to continue.

 

 

 

 

-.: .
-
:1 r?
inf: 

a 

1.

. -

is. "air". . ..

-. I..- . -cairn-Its urns!
- Bet. Danielgionng 5-10-90 Hosea

. 'It a

Iv JHAC11VE
mm cunts: ?rem" oer "brunt All. run
. AL

Luann 01!!?le El umrmunm NONI 
a! "limit! 

- F1

 

     
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

sscoaos en?rsor. can-1s 
Forums. MMHE FGLTEE DEPARTMENT
-- .. SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT
Jr. .

Hike- no. LUMIAFHAHT seams [em LIME ?'wm rename:

39?15353 Jessica Briggs .
DI DI ?#15 UP OFFENSE DI INCIDIHI

Homicide 

DETAILS OF IHVEETIGATIDH

Statement of Glenn A. Brown, DUB 56 Chestnut Street, Apt. 3, 
unemployed, given in the Detective Eureau on 3-1?90, at 121T hrs.. in_the
presence of ?at. Young, hat. Daniels, Off. Beltane, and Sec'y Boson.

I have known Tony Sanhorn sewen years. I knew Jessica Briggs as his
girlfriend and I knew her for about four months.

On the Sunday night hefore Jessica was killed I saw Tony and Jessica
together. I know it was Sunday night heeause I get paid on Thursday and I
took Dottie out to eat that Sunday night. At the time I worked for Dihillo's
Restaurant. I would say it was shout 10:30 p.m. Freddie Carey, Hark Lorraine;
Tommy Peters1 April Keaney, Bettie Gammon and me were sitting on the stone
wall at Peppermint Park. Tony and Jessica wa_ked up to us. They wore walking
with their arms around each other. Tony was wearing blue Jeans and a blue
jeans Jacket. Jessica was wearing jeans and a CB jacket. It may have been
'blue and red: I am not sure. They stopped and talked with us for about ten
minutes. Tony mentioned that he had Just got back from Florida. He said that
they were going for a walk in the Old Port area. They seemed happy to be
together.

A cguyle gf nights later, it_3gs_Tuesday_eight, around 9:06 p.m. I saw Tony
again. He was by himself and was wearing jeans and a jed??_jeeket. It was at
Peppermint Park where I saw him. We stopped and talked with each other for
Que?half hour. While we were talking
Tony showed me a brown gold on the end of the

handles. He said he had Just got it shout fiwe o'clock that day. Tony always
had a lot of knives. He was earrying it in the inside pocket of his coat.
said he was gging to EULEFETEE lngallihouje to try to find
Jessica Briggs. He was mad at her. Tony?said"that Jessica was staying with
his hut that she took off that morning. He said he was going out looking for

her and that she was probably over at George's house.

I saw Tony again on the neat Thursay during the day time. He knew that
Jessica was dead and so did I. He had come over to my house at 52 Anderson
Street with George Ingalls. I asked Tony if he saw Jessica that night. He
said no but he sounded nervous when he said it. Tony also said that Jessica
was knifed. I asked him how he knew that and he told told him that I saw the TI and I don't remember hearing anything about her
heing knifed on it. Tony also said that he was-going to Florida and he
sounded nervous then too. We started playing Nentendo, then Tony said
Something different than he said before. To?z_5aid that he did find 
out front of George?s house and that they said

I then thgg_arguEd for shout o??-half hour. I knew
it was Thursday that I talked to Tony at my house. I got paid aEEid that day

 



 

HAIE AND IEFBRI
.IECI 

I mum ?town or nor m. me
am ?mums; HAL El HEIHE 

 

r-I



 

 

 

 

 

. eeconos pareoL CRIME PREVENTION
pommo. MAINE Ponce common
SUPPLEMENTAL INVESTIGATION RIPCIRT



 

I on. cow-wont
39?15853

[In or Ollwil on turnip-sane?

     
 

 

AMIIH

   
 

Mil} ELM I H131 Ihl 

 
 

Jessica Briggs

   

 

D-IUE OF DEFENSE Di 

Homicitie 5?211-39

DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION

Statement of Glenn A. Brown, cont., p. 2

and it was the first day that Jessica's name was in the paper and on TV.
George Ingalle seemed to be really hurt because she died. She was going out

with him then. The only thing George said was. think I know who d1d it."
He had a smirk on his face and then be shut up.

While Tony was talking about her. hcei?es saying she was knifed. he also said
she was stabbed.

While he was at my house i noticed that he had four scratches on his face.
They were beside his right_gye_an? went down EElow it. They looked to me like
acre en fingernails. I aehed Tony how He got those scratchee and he

?idn't nay anything. That was the last time 1 saw inny and I haven?t seen or
talked to him since.

 

0n the same Theeggihgight, the night Jessica was killed.
at Peppermint Park, 1 met with my girlfriend
Peters, Hark Lorraine and another girl whose name I can't remcmter. We-all
walked down to DiMillo'a on Commercial Street so I could go in an? check what
days I was supposed to be on the new schedule. On our way down to
DiMillo's, on Exchange Street, He met up with two guys that Dottie and Hope
knew. I don't know their names but one of them had a unicorn on the hack of
his Jacket. From there we walked together toward DiMillo?s. When we got by
the new condos on Commercial Street we saw four kids on bikes that we knew.
The? were Sean D'hmico, Paul Bell, Jason West and Chris Foes. They stopped
and talked to us for a little while. Sean had a mongoose-type bike which is
silver with a black neat. Bean's bike also had a star?type rim on the back
and had a regular spoted rim on the front. Chria Foes had a lG-apced bike
that was red. Jason had a black bike with a blue seat that he said was
stolen. I can't remember what Paul's bike was.

the night I saw Tony
. Dottie Gammon,anpe 

After we spoke to them they left, going down Commercial Street toward Casco
Bay Ferry. The rent of us went over to DiHillo'a. I checked my schedule and
then we walked over to the benches near the boats that they go out fishing one
whale watching on. We eat there for about ten minutes and then We 1Eft- It
was 10:30 when I was at D1Hillo's. I remember looking at the clock so I would
say it was about 10:h5 when we left Commercial Street went home.

Before we went home we all went to Peppermint Park and eat on the wall.
The only time I new They Sanborn Tuesday night was at Peppermint Park that
night. That in when he showed me his new knife.

I
Aim! no? we or on! ?roll

a Iii: Ions; 3-1- 0 Bosch
In: mom [3 9 

CHHIUI 0! Mann-fl All MHMI HGHI
If? r] I-I 

 

 

 

 

RECORDS PATROL DETECTIVES CRIME PREVENTION
MAINE POLICE 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SUPPLEMENTAL INVESTIGATION REPORT
Taf 'Ho. mam: 4cm .u-u mu: ll um Lu Palm: 
89?15353 Jessica Briggs
In: an ohm? m: but Dr (Minn GI mum-at 
Homicide 5-25-39
DETAILS OF INVESTIGATION
Statement of? Glenn A. Brown, 1+ 3
I know I got time at 11:30 because Bettie end I wen-t heme together after my
mother ceJed Freddie Carey?s mother-'3 house. His metber fcund us.- ea? 1:51.15 11::
that my mother vented us home. When we left; to go home Tunney Peters, sure,
Hope and the ether two guys that we met. earlier were still sitting an the
well.
I did net see Jessica Briggs {hat night.
I didn't suspect euygne Lee: end 5-1 I just: .?Zidn?t tell the police Luz-t1],
they came to me. I renter-1m.- 315 the p-zLicE- a: tar.- time. They juet
asked me what. 1 die that 7.15.117. .

?lenn A. Brown

mun um. c? urns neon
np+ nan-MT Tatum: q_1_o? u.

no u- unur :er :3:th nzcevur nonm, nun-.1. ?on: 

r: 

 

 

Jan. got: 13mm wan? I



Portland Police Department 
Criminal Investigation Division

  
 

 

 

109 Middle Street! Portland, ME 04101
Telephone BF4HSS33 or Bi4--8596 Fart 
This communication is intonoeci for the neo oi the aridrosnee named herein and may contain
legaiiy privileged 3. con?dential information iron are hereby noti?ed that any dissemination.
distribution or copying of this communication is strictty prohibited tryou have received this
communication in error, pteaee notify the Portland Police Department by telephone return

the Original communication to our department at the address above via the US. Postal

Service. The Portland Police Dept will reimburse costs you incur in notifying our department
and returning the communication to us Thank you to: your cooperation.

T0: bi LL 8T0 K53

mom: ber- R7656: Mme 05?
DATE: [th i 

PAGES (mcwome THIS PAGE): 8)
NOTES:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*1

- cap. .1- 1111:! ltIJ.lJ'l.l.i' ii

Case#89-16863
Supplement of Det. Kari Rybeck

On 10-17-05 at 1230 we [Portland Police) got a telephone call from FBI
Special Agent Joseph Farey from the Southern New jerseyr District Of?ce.
He was calling reference the 1939 homicide of Jessica Briggs. He stated he
had interviewed a federal prisoner who admitted to the Briggs murder saying
the wrong person was in jail. He left his telephone number, 609-577-6421.

011 10-13-95 at 15001 spoke to SIA Foray. He told me he had interviewed
Charles Hall, dob 4-06-71 who is a federal prisoner in jail in New Jersey. He
was interviewing him on 10?1105 on an unrelated matter when he stated he
had to get something off his chest. He then told SIA liurey that he had
murdered a girl in Portland, Maine back in 1933 named Jessica Briggs. He
went on to say another person is now serving time for the murder. Hall gave
him the name Anthony Sattdhorne. Hall then told SEA Furej,r he wasn?t going
to as}F anything more without his attorney.

?lmy stated he told Hall he needed more information about the
homicide so he could contact the Portland Police to treri?? what he (Hall)
was saying. Hall then told him it happened on the waterfront and he had
sliced her throat and then threw her In the water.

I told SKA Percy this incident did in fact happen. However, I told him I never
heard of the name Charles Hall being associated with this case. I told I
would pull the ease and speak with the detectives who investigated it.

After speaking with SIA Foray called the Maine Attorney General's Of?ce
and spoke with Deputy Attorney General William Stokes. I was asked to
look into this and report back to him.

About a week later 1 again spoke with SIA Furey. I asked if he could speak
to Mr. Hall and see where we are reference his attorney' and what does he
want to do. I also told Furey I spoke to the detective in charge of the
case, James Daniels, who told me about Charles Hall?s connection to it and
that he wasn't the murderer. Hall hung out with Briggs and Sandborne. Hall
may also have been the unidenti?ed person that witnesses saw in the area at
the time.

 

 

 

dill.

J.

 

hilt tlhofi'l no. 

Ialso told SJA Fare}; if anything comes of this, his wanting to talk to us, we
would some down to interview him.

On 11- 16-o5 at 1415 3m Fare},r ealled me. He stated he had asked Mr. Hall
at an earlier visit who his attorney was. Hall had given him the name Bruce
Merrill in Portland. He stated he told Hall he spoke to Bruce Merrill and Mr.
Merrill stated he did represent Mr. Hall at one time but, no longer did. He
then asked Hall what he wanted to do.

SEA Furey stated Hall began to tail: saying he used a rug cutting tool which
he stuck in her stomach and out up towards her chest. He then out her throat
and threw her in the water.

He elated he told Hall, all this information was in the news some the trial
started. He also told him the penalty for lying to a federal of?cer was more
time in jail and he would push for it if he ?nds out he is lying.

SKA Foray said Hall hesitated and then told him he was lying about what
happened. His reason for lying was so he eould get a higher classification

within the Bureau of Prisons so he would he moved to a penitentiary for
better health care.

SEA Furey stated the BOP will deal with Mr. Hall.

I then contacted MG William Stokes and told him Mr. Hall was lying about
what happened. I explained how he was trying to get a higher classi?cation

No limiter aetion to be taken by law enforcement. This ease remains closed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Stokes: William
. 
From: Karl Rybeolt [WRtonrtiandmainegov]
Sent: Tuesday. January D3. 2012 4:15 PM
To: Stokes. William
Subject: RE: Sanborn supplement

FBI agent sayinghevvasgoingtodoa 


Keri

3-sta- ?Stolros, William" {We IJEIZDIZ 3:05 PM nab

Thanks Karl. I have your fax. I don't remember ever seeing your supplement. Nevertheless, did the Agent with the FBI
ever do a written report to us?I Did the agent ever do any further follow up? [till

 

From: I-tarl Rybeclr 
Sent: Tuesday. January 03. 2012 2:30 PM

To: Stokes, William

Subject: RE: Sanborn supplement

Hl Bill, John Haipin and Ijust picked up the "panties" belonging to Jessica Briggs. John will be getting the evidenm to
the lab. You should also have my supplement by now, I faxed it to you earlier. Karl

33*} "Stokes, William" 1: 1.3312012 10:45 AM on}

Dear Karl: I have rechecked the three boxes of material on the Sanhorn case and there is nothing there about Charles
Hall. My recollection is that Hail made some remarks to some people at the prison (not sure to whom} and when he
was interviewed by the FBI he recanted and said he made the whole thing up because he wanted to get transferred to
Maine. At least that's my memory. I do recall assigning the matter to Melissa O'Dea and tremember her telling me
that the FBI interviewed Hall and he recanted everything. But I do not recall ever seeing anything In writing. Can you

fart whatever you have on this to me at 231-3120. Bill

 

From: Karl Rybeek 
Sent: Friday, December 30. 2911 5MB PH

To: Strokes, William

Subject: Sanbom supplement

Elli].r I do have a supplement that] wrote about my conversation with Sill. Furey of the FBI til-lanes Hat
saying he killed Jesslca Briggs. i don?t know why youdon't have It. {iostit?}. [will fax itto youorgtveyou a copy when
you come here on the 6th.

Kart

 

 

 

 

StrikersI William
From: Stokes. William

Sent: Tuesday. January DB. 2012 3:05 PM
To: 'Kari Hybeoi-i'
Subject: RE: Eanborri supplement

Thanks Kari. have your fair. [don?t remember ever seeing your supplement. Nevertheless, did the Agent with the Far
ever do a written report to us? Did the agent ever do any further follow up? Bill

 

From: Karl Rybeek 
Sent: Tuesdayy January U3, 2012 2:30 PM

To: Stokes. William

Subject: RE: Sanborn supplement

HI Billyr John Halpin and I just picked up the ?panties" belonging to Jessica Briggs. John will be getting the evidence to
the lab. You should also have my supplement by new, i far-red it to you earlier. Kai-1

"Stokes, William? USHER 10:45 AM 

Dear Kari: I have re?ehetketi the three boxes of material on the Sanborn ease and there is nothing there about Charles
Hall. My recollection is that Haii made some remarks to some people at the prison [not sure to whom} and when he
was inte rviewed by the FBI he recanted and said he made the whoie thing up because he wanted to get transferred to
Maine. At least that's my memory. i do recall assigning the matter to Melissa D'Dea and I remember her telling me
that the FBI interviewed Hall and he recanted everything. But I do not recall ever seeing anything in writing. Can you
far: whatever you have on this to me at 237-31551 Eiill

 

From: Kari Flybecit 
Sent: Friday, Deoember 30, 2911 5:49 PM

To: Stokes, William

Subject: Sanborn supplement

Bill, I do have a supplement that I wrote about my conversation with She Furey of the FBI canoerning Ulad? Hail
saying he killed Jessica Briggs. I don't why you don't have it, {lost Ivriil fast it to you or give you a copy when
you come here on the 5th.

Kart

 

 

 

 

 

 

Straits-e: William
Frem: Stokes. William

Sent: Tuesday. January 03, 2012 101% AM

Te: 'Kerl theeir.?

Subject: RE Senhern supplement

Dear Karl: I have re-checkee the three boxes ef material an the Senhern case and there is nothing there ahcut Charles
Hall. My recollection is that Hail made seme remarks to some people at the prison [net sure to where] and when he
was interviewed lav the FBI he recanted and said he made the whale thing up because he wanted to get transferred to
Maine. At least that?s my memerv. 1 tie recall assigning the matter to Melissa D?Dea and I remember her telling me
that the FBI interviewed Hall and he recanted everything. But I do not recall ever seeing anvthing in writing. Can yeu
fair whatever you have an this to me at 23131211]. Bill

 

 

From: Kari R?fb??k 
Sent: Frictav, December 2011 5:49 PM

To: Etc-hes, William

Subject: Bannern suepiement

Bill, I ch: have a supplement that i wrete about my cenversatien with SKA Furev er the FBI concerning Charles Hail
saying he itiliecl Jessica Briggs. I don?t knew why you don't have it, (lost I will fax it te veu er give you a copy when
you come here an the ?th.

Karl

 

 

 

 

 

 

Stokes. William

From: Kari Rybeok sKVR@portlandmaine.gove
Sent: Monday. July 29, 2013 1 :54 PM

To: Stokes, William

Subject: Re.- Anthony Sanbom

Hi Bill,

FBI and reporlsy?notes, they don't do them. I did check with our FBI guys here (FBI has task force office In our
building}. An agent called and no report was ?led, Info was Just passed on to us. I believe the reason there was no
report is the prisoner had no new info, just rehashed things. the prisoner was looking to better this stay in a medical
prison.

eh:- "Stakesf William" HEWEDIJ 1:10 PM 
Kari: Do you recall ever checking with the FEM Furey ever did a report on his interviews with Charles Hall back in

2005?

William R. Stokes

Deputy Attorney General
Chief, Criminal Division

5 State House Station
Augusta. Maine MESS-0005


Notice: Under Maine law, documents including e-malls - in the possession of public of?cials or city employees about
government business may be classified as public records. There are very few exceptions. As a result, please be advised
that what is lniritten in an email could be released to the public anchor the media if requested.

 

 

Stakes. William

 

Pram: Stakes. William

Sent: Mnndayr. Julyr 29, 2013 1:11 PM
To: kur?pertlandrnainegnv
Subject: Anthony 

Karl: Eta you recall ever checking with the FBI it Slip. Furey ever did a report an his interviews with Charles Hall back in
2005?

William R. Stokes

Deputy Attorney General
Chief, Criminal Division

6 State House Station
Augu?a, Maine 


 

 

 

 

February 1, 1993

Nicholas Haulers-av Trout
1?20 Emery Street
Portland, Maine 04102
207-??4-3264

Mr. Edwin F. Chester
Attornev at Lars

lb? Congress Street
Portland, Maine 04101

[ear Mr. Chester,

I am writing in response to your December as. [(392 request for a brief description
of my relationship oath allithonilr Sanborn. The purpose of this letter is to supply
both you and the court with personal observations oi Toniar over the past some
in hopes that I might somehow in?uence the sentence he is about to receive.

I want to begin b? stating. rather bluntly. that I am shocked and deeply saddened
by the decision of the court. Over the past several years of his detaininent I have
met With Tonyr on a weekly basis at very close range and have come to lcnoior him
well. We have spoken about matters that are deeply persons] on virtuallyr all of
these occasions, and I would like the court to snow that consistently, mthout a
sideways glance or nervous subject change, Tony has maintained his innocence.
This, above all, is the observation I feel most compelled to share. I believe that he
is telling the truth, and suggest that with this in mind he be treated with lonience
and respect and that Whatever appeal he might choose be honored.

I am a graduate or Syracuse University With a bachelors degree in mythology and
have been a volunteer at the Maine Youth Center and Cumberland County jail {or
appromrnately three and a hall years. My wort; as a volunteer involves the
discussion of substance abuse issues in non: one-bone and group settings. I Inst.
met Tony at one of these group sessions 1vl'hile he was incarcerated in the Secure
Treatment :3th (trim or the Maine Youth Center.

I remember the first time I met Tony, although the date is a little foggy,
perhaps in March of 1959. My first impression of him was that he was tough,
laconic, and rather indilrerent to the discussion or substance abuse issues. I also

 

 

 

 

 

recall that he seemed especially influential among his peers. mixing one or the first
few meetings he told a kid who was acting up to be quiet, and this obviously, was
helpful.

It was alter the fourth of lilth session at S.T.U. that Tony seemed to begin to open
up to the concepts or recovery. During the meetings. I would occasionally ask the
group by a show ol hands it any oi them really wanted to stay clean on the outside.
I remember when Tony raised his hand I was surprised to a certain degree, but
was also pleased, for it also relatively rare for the Kids I worked with to exhibit
any palpable changes over the course of these meetings.

Soon alter, Tony became vmat I would call a ?reluctant leader' of the group.
"Reluctant" in that he did not seem interested in his own popularity. ?leader' in
that be displayed an increasing openness in his discussion ol his own substance use
patterns and how they had interfered with his life. He also continually maintained
his innocence ol the crime he is accused or, and lrom time to time, would tall: about
his future plans in refreshingly realistic terms.

that endeared Tony to me was that lie was not a sycophant; that he didn't to
impress me with gallant promises of future morality, but instead, told the truth.

He also became intellectually confrontational with other members of the group who
were clearly in denial or even lying. This was very impressive to me. Tony
became more and more but very much on his own terms. It was my great.
hope that somehow he might be released so that he could pursue the recovery he
was establishing, as well as to lollow his vocational goals.

Alter his bindover hearing, Tony moved to the Cumberland County jail. He and I
began one-to-one meetings in Which we vigorously investigated recovery from
alcoholism. As we continued to do this work, 1 began to see changes coming over
Tony. His reading was improving noticeably, he rapidly devoured alerts oi
literature I brought him this favorite was Steinbeclc's The Grapes or Wrath snitch
he spoke of with coal). lie communicated his emotions with an increased candor as
we began in build trust between us, and most. or all, I began to sense that despite
his anger at being incarcerated uillairly, be displayed an uncanny optimism that
the truth would see him out of the jail; that he Iworth! soon be free. We talked
about his educational options, about his lamily. about his hopes [or a better lil?e.
Months and month went by, and I moved to Massachusetts to pursue an

educational I got to see less of Tony, although he wrote me letters
and I visited him occasionally.

 

 

 

I
I

I
II

I returned to the Portland area shortly hetero his trial, and recall a confident and
optimistic young man, energized by the prospects of a new the and excited about
the idea of his imp-ending freedom. During his many months in tail, he had ?nished
his GED, had pursued a physical fitness regimen, had quit smoking, and had stayed
sober in a prison setting that by all accounts otters its share oi temptations.

His conyiction has been a devastation and a catastrophe. We have oontinued to
work together on a weekly basis, and I have been very worried about him. He
cannot believe that he was actually conyictetl or this crime, and struggles to anchor
himaali in a world that most seem uniust and impossible. My insights are only
that he is so young, so full of possibilities, and i feel that his continued isolation
from the 'good things of life? will harden him utterly. He needs education. He
needs to her-come active in a community that offers him a chance to grow.

lam a true supporter oi Anthony Sanhern I know him well, like him a great deal,
and aroulti stake my name on his behaii. It is my great hope that somehow, the
true perpetrator of this crime is apprehended so that Tony can get on with his lire.
He deserves to be free.

Sincerely,



Nicholas Hathamy Trout

 

 

 

 

EXHIBIT

March 15, 1993

Monolss H. Trout
I21) Emery Street
Portland. ME no 1 [12


Justice Steven Porluus
1-12 Federal Street
Portland, ME 04112

Dear justrce Perkins,

I am writing to you 11] reference to the upcoming sentencing hearing ol Anthony
5311mm
1 wrote 3 letter on Anthony's bella? and his attorney, Ned

Glester I assume that this letter is Inoluded In the pro?sentencing Inlormamu you
have received. I have emoloseo. a copy just in case it. ms not.

It 1s my great hope mil read my letter closely and understand how
strongly lee] about Its contents I stress that I am a volunteer with no
prolemonst or legs] LIES to southeast:r other that the months and months of

discomons we have shared.

I have been invited to be a gusston a national television tall: 311on New for]:
titty this smelt, but I ?y back to Maine In order to be present at the time of his
sentencing on Friday. Please do not hesitate to ostl upon me 11' you feel I out be of

any assistance In this matter.

Thank you tor your consideration.

mowers,

Nicholas H. Trout

 

 



 

 

 

 

rind MEHCIHLIH Mall - Fwd:

EXHIBIT



It?

 

 

Fwd:

Falr?eld 

 

 

Michelle Beebern 
Te: Amy Fan-?eld Keegen Felrtiele Kevin Cedy

dkeedy?1?gmeileem>

Sent frem my iPhene

Begin fermented message:

Frem'. Jackie Speuleing <jeekieseeuldin959@gmell eern>
Date: September 11, 21316 at 9.1??29 PM EDT
Te: miehetlesanberni?hemeil eem

Te whem :t metar eeneem

tern Jacqueline SPBUldl?g I am eeueln e! Tenn; eanbet'h We grew up In the same enulrenment. We heel le
deal with elet at different lhung's ere-wing up Parent's 1hel did he: knew hew te perenl Aleehel was a major
teeter In our lile. Abuse tellewed Yer my Te-iy always knew hew in make me feel safe. He was there
threw ef my beatings and semehew alweye feune away in make me net hurl bed. He has heart
ef geld and puts elee helere himself I feel it's unferluiiete that he had le spend meet ef his life
where he clearly net heleng If he had the right peeple hacking him he weuid have been
preteen like anyene whe kriewe him kr?lLl'u'ilEl 1het he is weuld see him when we were growing up
erelecting enyene who needed ll net caring about he; ewn ee?ey I feel the system was leaking fer an
easy target and unleriunetely like merry lzmee eefere ll'l eur pest my cousin Teny was. it. Juet tell: to him fer a
moment tel-1e memeht leek his eyes. Yeu will see a et a great man nel 3 killer. lweute trust him with
the l'rfe of my children Sincerely his loving 



Sun. Sep 11,2!116 319225 PM



 

 

 


i 

 

To whom it may concern: I am writing you to provide my character
refrence for Anthony Sanborn .

My name is Michael Stairs, referred to by my preferred name Mishale
Stairs. I am a cousin of Anthony Sanborn who is an inmate at Warren
State Prison. I found out that my
cousin was in Prison about two years ago, in the summer of 2314. I
heard about his situation through my biological sister and decided to
apply to be able to visit him. Since visiting him several times in the
past two years I have developed a bond with him not unlike that of the
father figure I never knewmoral standard above
that of most people you will meet. Anthony believes very
strongly in right from wrongyr he shows an internal strength and
acceptance unlike anything I have ever seen. I personally heard him
say while he did not belong in the prison he also sees how God used it

to help him become a better person. I see an incredible future for
him if provided with the freedom he deserves, the talents,
skills, and things he has learned since his incarceration will be
bonficial
to supporting himself and his wife Michelle Sanborn. He could easily
upon being released start a dog training business if he wanted too, of
course after adjusting to new freedoms in a changed world. I believe
he has the determination and will to make something of himself and anything including adjust to todays world with as
much ease as possible. I know that he would also take over the
father role for myself and my sistEr if given the chance. We see
ourselves as his daughters and his leading example, as well as being a
strong role model would be beneficial to us and our own children.
Any chance you get to provide the world with someone who has managed
to find the good in the bad situations is it not imperative you do so,
with so much negativity in the world why would you deny a
positive influence. I am so grateful that if I say something that he
feels is off he will correct me with love and a fathers firmness
without making me feel bad. I am crying a little in hopes that somehow
this letter
will make a difference as not only do I see no cause to doubt his
innocence however since meeting him the fatherly void has diminished,
the one even being adopted did not help fill, please give grampy who will encourage and guide us in a manner consistent
with moral upstanding and humility. Anthony is the first one I would
go to for advice if I could freely see and or call him as I see him as
El
rock of integrity and feel I could trust his advice in any situation.
I can not deny as a [faux} daughter to him there will be times I will
:eed his advice yet do my own thing, I know though Anthony would be
irm
but 10Vlns if my decision was a mistake. I see a sensitivity in him
that says he would be a shoulder to lean on while making sure you
Iglly understood your mistake. I can also see him providing assistance

 

 

 

adjusted. I do not know if he
ed doing this but I do not think he
himself but to try 

could resist
aking dire mistakes.
I beg you to see even a

free is a good man who 

and all around
- days about the positives

to take up to much of the
for reading this. We love you Anthony I hope
that in this letter.

courts time. Thank yo
you get to know I wrot

~Michae1 ?Mishaie? Stairs
Date GBXIBXZGIG

Phone 

 

 

 

 

 

EXHIBIT

6i

 

Doris Balant
159 Whangtown Road,
Carmel, NY 10512

September 13, 2016
To Whom it May Concern:

I came to know Tony Sanborn in the sh: years 

pent time with him at Maine State Prison,
almost eyery Friday morning.

When MSP Chaplain Waiter Foster asked my friend and Buddhist teacher, Chis York, for support
for a Buddhist group that Tony had formed at the prison. I came also.

We found that Tony had already established the group, had done considerable study, set up a
room with blankets as meditation cushions, a little altar, and reading resources. it was clear
that Tony was there, not just for himself, but to support his fellow inmates who were looking
for a way to deal with their past and present liyes through spiritual practice. His own spiritual
practice helped him to deal with 20 years oi' tli'leJSLl'EiEd incarceration without bitterness,
teaching others by his Example. more than by .1 study of Buddhism.

[Tony told me once that after what had happened to him, being falsely conyicted at he
turned to Buddhism for his spiritual life, because he felt that the God of his Catholic upbringing
had failed him. He has since returner] to the Eatholic Church}.

The morning consisted oi seyeral periods of meditation, a short ser'yice and a time for
discussion. Chris and I would bring ln something to read from Buddhist teachings, but that was
only a starting point for the men to make thoughtful, often moying, comments about their llyes.

We only added a little structure - it was Tony's energy and deep commitment that gaye real life
to the group.

I recently had a letter from him. now lime in NY State]. He is still teaching, as he was in the
years I knew him, a parenting class for the men, at the time. He also loyes training a service
dog, and spends time with sick inmates in the prison clinic.

What I admire most is Tony?s amazing courage and heart, liying such an unjust, difficult fate,
and becoming an eyen better person.

l?m joyful and optimistic to know that his release may come soon, and immensely grateful to his
wife, Michelle, and all the others now engaged in making that happen.

With my yery best wishes for all of you and, of course, for Tony.

Sincerely,

Doris Balant

 

 



Fair?uld and Mao-rims Mull . "Tn Whom it Me}- C?htem"

FAIHFIELD EXHIBIT

a Keegsn Falr?eld 

1 tigm?u ?#37113 

   

 

 

 

"To Whom it May Concern'

1 message



 

Denise Peters Tue. Sep 13. 2015 at 1&5? PM
To: keegan@fair?etdandassociates. com
Co: Michelle Saneorn crnieheliesanborn?hotmaitcom>

To Where it May Concern.

My name is Denise Peters and Anthony Sanborn is my consin. are theirs known him my entire life. Anthony has always
been a Hindhearted person He is the type of person that will do anything for anyone, especially those he loves have-
neyer known him to he yioient to others. especially in women He would defend himseif it he needed to but did not go and
seek out a ?ght. He would also try to make sure his family and friends did not get lots any kind of trouble if he found out
that was doing things that was not allowed to de while i was younger he would tail: to me about It and redirect rne to do
the right thing. He Is de?nitely protective at those he loves. Those. along with his caring heart. are the reasons that I
believe he is innocent. I have stayed in contact with him and always will. not only because we are cousins and I love him.
but because he Is the kind of laying man I want my kids to be Thank you for taking the time to read this.

Sincerely.
Denise Peters

 

 



 

 

3129420] 1?

 



 

 

1 message

 

Fmr?otd 5-: Associelei. Meal Tony Steuben
FAIRFIELD 
- Keenan Fairlie-Id 
- eases!? t? -. 1
Tony Sanborn
Brenda Piersol Thu, Sep 15, 2916 at 5:15 PM

To: 

To whom this may concern:

I met Tony about 5 years ago through his wife. His kind and loving nature has kept me in touch 1nrith Tony through the
years. Tony always sends bday cards and letters staying in touch and always has positive outlook ot life, hope and his

closeness with God. He alwey

asks about my daughter and myself and his genuine eons-em when life struggles some

up. I've been praying for Tony for many years and know God will make this right for him i may for him everyday and my

heart ones for his time lost afte

hearing his story. i can't wait for day he's freed. Amazes me he's gone all these years

and how his strength from llSod has made him who he is today through his faith. know God will reward him for his faith in
him all these years. I love Tony. There is no one like him l?tre only been abte to visit him couple times but keep him in my

prayers everyday and his wife

Tony is a beautiful human bein

Michelle. i love them both

and doesn?t deserve whats happened to him. but God will make it right soon [know he

will. Anything I can do For Tony i?rn here' Thank you Blessings and Hope!

Brenda Piersol. Associate Broker

Realtor MLS B05929

The Maine Real Estate Nehyortt

Call: 
Fax: 



 

 

 

 

EXHIBIT

 

Character letter for Anthony Sanhorn September 16, 2t] 16

My name is Garrett Vail. in my work at the Maine State Prison as a college English
instructor have known Anthony Sanhorn for 11 years. in getting to know Tony all
these years, i can attest to Tony's deep commitment to the many students he has
served at MSP. as well as his exemplary personal qualities. In fact. the more i learn
about Tony the more i realize he is one oi'the most extraordinary people I have ever
met. or hope to meet.

Tony's prison employment is a model for prison service by an inmate. His work as a
teacher has spanned many years at the prison as an Adult Basic Education teacher
years]. facilitating the Long Distance Dads program [1'1 years]. creating a recent
group on work readiness called 1Emir Money or Your Life. and also his current work
as a math and science tutor tori-ii-Set/tiED preparation. Tony has taught literally
hundreds of students at MSP. This work in and of itself would speak to a person of
superb character.

But the most stunning aspect nf'l?ony is his steadiness and focus on others
in light of his Wi??i?i?ftil Tony has never discussed his case with me.
But the more I learn about it. however. the more i realise just how astounding
Tony's service To his fellow inmates has been all these years. To some steadily and
quietly all these years while wrongly convicted -?well. that. ltintl ofpersnn is rare
indeed. i can only imagine the kind ol'inucr strength and determination that Tony
has. to transcend his own needs and instead work for the betterment ofothers in
MSP Education. This prison is a much iietler place because oi'Tony, who ironically
shouldn?t even he there.

 




l?m not the only person to think so highly of'i?ony. Even Security at MSP thinks 
highly of'l?ony and his work. His reputation among sta it' and inmates alike is so I
solid. prohahly because he is a man ol'his word and has served his lime in service so 
sel?essly. Few other inmates have given on the level Tony has, and no one [know 
would have the strength to serve such a longtime working so hard.

I






What is clearer and clearer all the time to me is that Tony Sanhorn is a man ofqniet
courage. immense patience. and profound integrity. To be ahle to put aside the pain
and frustration of his own situation and instead focus on serving other inmates for
so many years shows Tony to he a man ot?almost unbelievable good character and
kindness. If didn't know him personally. I might doubt the story of'Tony myself.

It is difficult to put into words how moved I am by Tony's example. This man
deserves justice at last. and I hope and pray that this letter might assist him is some
small way. Goodness knows Tony Sanhorn has taught me so much by his example.

very truly yours.

 

 

 

 

EXHIBIT

a

mesting?rooi? ?ermitcge i 

208ept.201?


To whom it may concern.
1 am writing on behatt Tonv Sanborn.

I am a volunteer at Maine State Prison. I am also a university lecturer there. and a
former chaplain. I have done the combination of these things since 1989. some 27
years.

I've known Tohv lor over 15 veers. I've set with him in silent meditation. conversed with
him in inter-religious dialogue sessions, and chatted with him in our comings and goings
in the education department.

I know of his tutoring. his work with long-distance dads. his involvement with the dog
training program. and his leadership role in assisting men to clarity and practice their
religious and spiritual beliefs and practices.

1 like Tonv Senborn. He has impressed me over the years as a thoughtful. engaging,
solid. responsible. and respectful individual. I am alwavs happv to see him. He has
earned and reciprocated the respect and trust of his peers and staff.

And so I wish to add my name and thoughts to the process of Tony?s consideration of
innocence and release from his incarceration after the manv veers of prison-

I consider Tonv Sanbom someone who has displayed courage and resilience,
intelligence. and willingness to be of service. These qualities involve a steadiestness
and a sense of humor - a combination important to survive his current setting. and
important for what follows after as he begins a new lite.

I support his journey. his release. a ?nding ct innocence. and a reentry into a new tile
with a good home. a good woman. and his good prospects.

Mav his faith and the support of loved ones bring about what is wished tort

Sincerely.

Bill Halpin

64 ?emestmm roast. corneas mains. 04843
207.236.4346

 

 

 

 

 

 

semen Fnil?ltll nut-mm Ma Mt? -T?nli 

  

 

,j Keenan Fatrt'ielit 

 

 

Tony Senborn
1 message

Ilse ale sander sliseeleirtla?t @yehooeoms
To: Michelle Senborn smiehellesenborthotmniteome

This is a letter is to share my thoughts on Tony Senhom and his Innocence. have known Michelle for 5 veers, before she
and Tow; got married. And through Michelle have some to know Torry.

Truth be told the first time I was Introduced to Michette and heard her story. 1 was fairly skeptical. es I imagine most peeple
are. In a veryr short smotml ofiirhe? I knew that she was not believing in Tony?s she loved him but
he was innocent

I like most eeopte spent a good part of my adult Ilie believing in the jusLlee system. I have laws ever time that this
system is Flawed and broken. Thai II is not only plausible that there could be a miscarriage of justice but l?tEt?f. That there
was such a need to "solve" this case that a young boy without Family support and linencisl resents-es. could easily be
convicted of a crime he never committed.

As I have gotten to snow Tony first through wnlten nortesosndenno and eventually through face to lace visits. I have found
him runny. positive. God tearing. loving and totwertiing have also been astounded by his ability to give bed: to 
system that has stolen his edutlheod. To he pert oi helping cattle-ts. I believe is Tony's way at doing what is good and right

even when what was done to him was wrong Tony's way of honoring misting God

1 believe when the day comes that Tony is finally home, exonerated treat a crime he did not commit. surrounded by love.
he will use it to: bene?t others. I believe he has a steep eneugh support system that his transition will be easier than mostw
believe his marriage and his faith in God wuil tn the wait for and raise carry him in his freedom, I
believe the] Tony Senborn is Innocent and soon will be home where he belongs

I believe this not because Ton;r is a great guy, he is Met because even in prison. he gives best-2, he does. Not because

he loves and serves God, he does. Not because he and Michelle have one oi the best marriages have ever seen. inside
or outside tell, they do Not because I count him as irlentt, rto. I believe he is innocent because that is what the {slots

and evidence show and facts don't lie

Lisa Alexander

Fish! r. em ?i?snoo Mail for tFad

Mon. Ben 23. ems st 1133 PM



 

3 11 2'31"? Fuii'?cld it": Assisi-aim. PA Mail! - He? Tony 

 

 

 

Reagan Falr?eid 

 

 

Re: Tony Sanborn
1 message

 

 

 

Michelle Sanborn sMichelieSanbom@hotmallcome Thu Oct 3 201d at 5-29 PM

Chfi? York ?1ChHEtDPhEWOrhEi?ngailcome. "iteegan?fair?eldandassociates corn" 

Chris,

:thoutght for sure I had responded but see now that maybe I hadn't. Thank you for taking the time
Wl'l e.

Mich eile

 

 

From: Chris ?tort: 

Sent: Monday, September 12. 2015 5:23 PM

To: HeegsniQfair?eldas-socrates com; Michelle Sanborn
Subiect: Tony Sanborn

Dear Amy:

About 8 years ago. i received a call from the Chapiain at the Maine State Prison asking if I would
provide an introduction to Buddhism class for inmates- agreed and went to the Prison for
orientation. I met Walter Foster, the chaplain and he introduced me to Tony. Tony had been asking
for an orientation to and a chance to practice Buddhism for quite a while before Walter found me.

Tony was enthusiastic and eager to have me meet a group of men who he had been
meditating with him for some time. His enthusiasm was contagious and we agreed to meet the
following Friday. Tony was the heart and soul of that group of inmates. as well as the organized of
that community of meditatora. He coordinated everything with the administration. He was held in
the highest regard by both inmates and staff and we managed to keep a weekly meditation group

up and running. it is still going on today.

I have been impressed by Tony's courage. determination and generosity. It was clear to him
that he had been falseiy convicted of a murder when he was years old. This fact did not create
any apparent bitterness or resentments that i ever saw. He was making the best of a bad situation
and had become a resource for many of the men. He was teaching as well as learning. He is
respected and sought out by many inmates for support and tutoring and was clearly respected by

the Correctional Of?cers.

Tony is a warrior in the best sense of the word. His word is his bond. During the many hoursl
have spent with Tony in the prison environment, he has always been respectful and respected ever
when things were dif?cult. Tony is the epitome of the "stand up guy".

Hip-I .."lmti  realm rm Li'?'ll ?climate: lhlkall?rc?l?i MW: at I519: Id??h?l?lh?!

 

 

 



3:11am? Fnir?cid a- Anutimn. PA Mail RE. My 5mm?

1 greatly appreciate all the time and effort that so many people have devoted to proving his
innocence. Michelle, his wife has also been a warrior and has made this all happen. I look
forward to the day when i can finally see Tonv away from the Maine State Prison. give him a hug
and offer whatever I can to help him make the adjustment to the "world?-

Thank you for all you have done. The world will be a better place when Tony Sanborn ie a free
man.

Christopher York. LCPC

an
- . I Hn- .ItnrurI-I.I1ri

I ?m MI- 

ll-l l-II-l-ilu-a 1  .- 

 

 

 

 

 

On Mar 24, 3511?. Hi. 12:22 PM. Mary Kerelek {metereleh?grna Lennie- wreie:

 

Te whern it newr 

    
  
   
  
 
    
 
  

When I Ihinlr ei the icing emeunl til lime that my sun has spent er The Maine State Prison. beginning 31 the young age
el 19. not many gee-d thoughts name In mind. Te lie expeseri an yeung same el Ihe disheartening experiences
and very dieiurbing ihei usher in eueh en eniilrenrnenL Ie reel-i ihel weuld even-rheim rhea! young men el
{rile age, as; they are I'H?il yel grown Iriln maiurlly.

When reflect on me few enabled my 50:1 in cape wlih and eveniuelly neulgeie the enni'meus 
of his ineareeraiien. I think ei his irleneehip with Tang.r Sanhern. My sen merle uteriI lew 'lrlenrie' while anhe Maine
Stale Prison. HB cuneidere very [3w peepie I113 trig-ride, and lhnee he rinnelrlere in be SO, ere tin thal short list
because cf the lhel they passes as. human beings. My sen la. and remelne. a very prlvale persun. who
prelere in keen in himself reiher lhen with he not respect For many years. we have heard el
hie respect inr. and admiration er ihe queliiresihel Tony peeseei

We have been what a greed and men Tony I51. serneene whe Is Iny?l and a grand Wand Iliru ine gee-ii
Hmee and the more zines Tnny seemed in have when a hiring in our sun. seeing his lhru and
abeiie [he end el hie ynulhl Tony hecerne enmenne meld he misled for his ceuneeli his
support hi5 Miran! and banging 3133 his mentniing [if a ?nnIUSEri and Inrelreled but decent yeung
men.Teny could see the person We was my ?rm. beyond l'lrE ynuih, and Ihe experiences: that theyI both were in. and
chase in befriend him.

T?i'iir' Is ?amecne whe hes alwe ye been there for hirn, [in ma?er whal . hui always. euppenlng. TengiiI nee
else reeched nut is us perenis during Iimee with greeleue ihnughls. prayers. enmuregemenl end gnarl

Counsel. Fer ihet. my sen end we hie lemiiy ere ele meily grarelull

Mary Ciel-Ire KersieI-i

 

 

 

 

easiest? Fair?cld a asset-arcs. PA- Mnii - Re; Favor

           

 

 

 

. - EXHIBIT
as]? $1313ng - a Keenan Fair?eld 
-- 
4 
Re: Fayor
Michelle Sachem Fri. Mar 2:1. am it 319:49 PM

To: 
Cc; "hyunkockkorsiak@gmail.com" 

Keegan.

This is from Hyun Kcok. who was incarcerated with Tony.

"Admittedly. i don't know many of the intimate details of Tony Sanhorns case. but in all the years I've
known him. one of the many constants relating lo him is his claim of innocence. In my many
years incarcerated at the Maine State Prison. I'ye shared much of that time in the same living and even
work areas with Mr. Sanoorn. He's proyen {to me) beyond any doubt. manyr times over. the strength Of
his character. moral goodness. loyalty. and trustworthiness. when it would have been easy for a 
man to walk away without any involvement. He is a genuine. caring individual. and the fact that hE?s
worked in the Edu. Dept- helping others better themselves should he a testament to that simple truth.
Despite his situation. he remains an inspiration to many. and always sets a good exampie for the inmate
population. even without direct interaction with said individuals. I can?t praise. or thank Mr.

Sanborn enough for all he's done for me. and for all the good he continues to do for others. in a place
that is hard to do so.

I hope my words oroyide some insight when deciding how he gets to live the rest of his life.

Sincerely, Hyunkook Korsiak"

Michelle

 

From: Mary Korsiak <mckorsiak@gmaii.com>
Sent: Friday. March 24. 201? 8:58 PM

To: Michelle Sanbcm

Subjeo: Re: Favor



 



 

 

 

rui - RC: Time Jit SP Willi unborn

F?r?nld A?mmt? .

EXHIBIT

  
 
 

 

  

Hangar: Falrl'ielcl 

 

 

 



Re: Time at M.S.P with Tony sen - em

1 

 

 

 

 

Michelle Sanhern cmicheilesanhern?hehneil comb Sun, Mar 23. 2'31? et3:16 PM

To: Jeffrey Rice 
Ce: l-{eegan Fair?eld cnmb. Amy Feii?eld femy@feir?eidendaseeclatemzomh



Sent Ire-m mv iPlrene

On 201?. at 3:13? PM. Jeffrey Rice cwerlrt33 ir@gmail.cem> mate:

1?0

I ?rst get to November 20136.nne ef the lirst inmates to app-reach me was inmate was my ?rst
lime being incarcerated he appreeched needed anythingi was kind of acepticai at ?rst 
hear Shanir el? Inmelee that offer Ll something li'rev went scrneti'irl'lg in return .. that was de?nitely net the wee with
inmate Senbern. .ever the years of being incercerater'l me and Ten}; became good was always the one
who inmates could turn lee Ecr advice er gust it: tell: 1-: lrlirli-i'i have a high :acl-Ienl diploma he helped me study and
helped me get my GE he was also Fl really help in the gelling clean and staying cieen._ he was always an
inmale that ii semelhing vree geing tin happen he would always try and keep the peace. [received a sentence cf
E?years with all but 12 enepemecl IWP-H ant-1?3 irrim EGGS unlit was sent tee minimum security 2?14..in them veers
inmate Tony eanbern was a really irig help in me slaving clean anri mv Ilie track on can hene$iiv
eav if Tenv never had leek the time to tellr. in rne and gel tee i?Ll'l?w me I really Ihmlr mv elev have

been a lot different turn out

. ..- Hi-



 

 

EXHIBIT
i 

To whom it may concern

I am writing in reference to Tony Sanborn. haye known him for a long time. I
believe I met him at a prison function around 2004 or so. I was a yolunteer in
Maine State Prison.

Tony is a good man and admire his confidence in God in spite of the
circumstances, He is always positive and Full of joy. I haye seen him as an
individual who is really concerned with others around him. He wrote me kind
letters when I lost my husband. My husband knew him better than me and told
me he was the one person that indeed might he Innocent tn MSP.

Feel free to contact me by email. g?y?taii'tet?rpyahoocom with questions.

 

Kay Page