Letter to the Judge Advocate General May 2008

8/2/2019 Letter to the Judge Advocate General May 2008

1/7

Judge Advocate General1322 Patterson AveWashington Navy Yard, DC 20374

Sir;

I am writing to you today regarding my husband's conviction at Camp Pendleton,CA in August 2007. I have found numerous legal and judicial errors that need to beaddressed, investigated and corrected. 1have documentation showing that MajorBrian E, Kasprzyck, who stood as a military judge alone violated the UCMJ section 854Article 54, when he authenticated the official record of trial. Under article 54 it statesthat at a judge alone court martial th e court reporter and attorneys have to authenticatethe record of trial. Because Major Kasprzyck took it upon himself to authenticate therecord of trial, he knowingly violated the UCMJ and thus created a conflict of interestprejudicial to my husband's constitutional rights. Subsequently, because MajorKasprzyck chose to ignore the laws set forth in the UCMJ he knowingly omitted severalstatements made on the witness stand by the prosecution pertaining to my husband'sinnocence. By removing these statements from the official record of trial, he unfairlyjustified his actions by manipulating the record of trial to reflect his personal opinionsand not the facts as he stated several times through out the proceedings.

After reviewing the record of trial, I discovered that statements of NCIS SpecialAgent Meulenburg's testimony at trial were omitted from the final copy that myhusband's new attorney, Michael Eisenberg and I received. There is one excerpt thatMajor Kasprzyck failed to remove, and that is at the end of the second day of trial onAugust 21st 2007 and before he found my husband guilty, where he stated "Prior toannouncing the findings of this court, I want to make clear that I did not consider th etestimony of Special Agent Muelenberg with regard to SergeantEhlers electing toterminate th e interviewand ask or a lawyer during th e interrogation on 25 May 2005.Additionally, I have disregarded those portions of trial counsel's arguments that couldtend to give the appearance of shifting th e burden of proof in this case."

I have re-read Special Agent Meuienburg's testimony several times, and was alsoa witness to the proceedings in August 2007. I, as well as 3 other witnesses, specificallyremember Special Agent Muelenberg telling the military judge, Major Kasprzyck thatSergeant Edwin Ehlers requested an attorney and Special Agent Muelenberg said he didno t terminate the interrogation, he continued to question my husband until the duty drivercame to pick him up from the NCIS building. This statement made by Special AgentMuelenberg has been conveniently omitted from the official record of trial but is referredto by Major Kasprzyck during his closing statement before sentencing. How can astatement that was made by Special Agent Muelenberg be considered by the militaryjudge, Major Kasprzyck if, in fact, according to the official record of trial the statementnever happened? Where did that statement go? If the judge refers to the statement and is


2/7

disregarding it, then one is to believe that the statement was made and later omitted fromthe official record of trial.NCIS Special Agent Muelenberg told the judge that my husband, Edwin gave him

a "full" confession of the misconduct against K Skovranfco. Special AgentMuelenberg, on May 25th 2005 interrogated and administered a polygraph examination,to which it was his opinion, prior to NCIS quality review that my husband was beingdeceptive to the relevant questions. This interrogation and polygraph examination werenot video and audio recorded, which according to manual 5219.48-R, it is a requirement.The polygraph examination never found it's way to NCIS quality evaluation and hassince, very "conveniently" disappeared. No one has the original print out from that dayand have failed to produce any record of the exam to date.

NCIS Special Agent Muelenberg also during the course of the trial pointed out tothe judge, that HE, not my husband filled in the diagram submitted into evidence. M yhusband, Sergeant Edwin Ehlers was questioned my Major Kasprzyck at one of the manyarticle 39 hearings regarding this drawing of the home at 204 Alderwood Rd. M yhusband told the judge that he "had seen the drawing in his case file that he received fromhis military attorney's but that no, he did not draw it". I also find is highly suspiciousthat the word laundry, which is written on the document, is:

1. Spelled correctly (my husband can not spell the word laundry)2. Is not my husband's handwriting1, being his wife would obviously know my husband's handwriting and spellingtechniques. This alleged drawing made by my husband also lacks a signature or dateanywhere on the document, yet the other drawings obtained from the prosecutionswitnesses by NCIS all have the names and date of the people who drew them. Why was

NCIS Special Agent Muelenberg an exception to correctly obtaining "evidence"?I have in my possession, an NCIS report of Investigation, dated 8/1/2006. This is14 months AFTER the alleged "confession" given to Special Agent Muelenberg, whereit states "When interrogated, s/Ehlers denied wrongdoing. S/Ehlers subsequentlysubmitted to a polygraph examination, at the conclusionof which, it was the opinion ofth e examiner that s/Ehlers had been deceptive to the relevant questions. During asubsequent interrogation, s/Ehlers made tacticadmissions; however, continued to denywronsdoing as alleged by v/Skovranko" Where is the confession? If there was aconfession it would have been included in this document, which serves as a timeline ofevents that NCIS has preformed and also the evidence gathered.I have discovered other cases where NCIS have used unlawful practices to gainthe confessions that they want. You may not be familiar with the case of Petty OfficerKing, who was held in custody for over 500 days while NCIS fabricated a case of treasonagainst him. During the period of his unlawful detainment, he was subjected to numerousrounds of interrogations that lasted for over 20 hours pe r sitting. When NCIS finally lethim sleep, the made sure that loud music was playing at all hours of the day and night


3/7

and that the telephone would ring every 5 minutes, so they could continue to harass himuntil he gave them what NCIS wanted.. .aconfession.M y husband was not subjected to the same degradation as Petty Officer King was,but he was subjected to an 11 V z hour interrogation on May 25th, 2005 although, SpecialAgent Muelenberg said that it only lasted 7 hours. When it finally came time for Special

Agent Muelenberg to "seal the deal" and get a confession from Edwin, Special AgentMuelenberg told him that he (Muelenberg) would dictate what he wanted said for theconfession. M y husband, of course refused to sign anything because he had made noconfession and being angry at that statement, Special Agent Muelenberg took it uponhimself to make one up to use at court where he lied to the judge about what actually tookplace before, during and after the interrogation. This is a violation of the UCMJ 931article 131 Perjury and section 907 article 107 false official statements; along withthese violations is also tampering of evidence which he unknowingly admitted to duringcourt.The lead prosecuting attorney, Captain John Ellis falsely represented himself to

me as well as another defense witness in July and August 2007. Angela R- wascontacted prior to the court martial in August 2007 by Captain Ellis. At the beginning oftheir conversation, he identified himself as the defense attorney working FOR myhusband and that he was calling to ask her a few questions regarding her testimony thatshe would be giving at the trial. He proceeded to ask her numerous questions aboutwhen Edwin received his tattoos from her husband. John R and how long she hasknown Edwin and his ex-wife Gloria. Towards the end of their conversation, he told herthat Edwin had pleaded guilty to some of the charges, and he wanted to find out how shefelt about this. Angela R < replied that she had just spoken to me prior to the phonecall from him and I told her that Edwin was still saying he was innocent.This statement from Captain Ellis immediately sent a red flag to Angela P ,so she again asked him for his name and telephone information. He told her that hisname was Captain John Ellis and that he was the prosecuting attorney. She confrontedhim about his misrepresenting himself at the beginning of their conversation and he toldher that although he had said that he was the defense attorney to her he still had a right toknow what she was going to testify about, and that was the only way he was going to gether to talk to him. Immediately after she ended the conversation, I received a call fromher and she was in a panic. I contacted my husband, and he contacted his defenseattorney Lt. Michael Melocowsky. Lt Melocowsky told Edwin that there was nothing toworry about, but that he would call Angela R himself. Edwin gave Lt.Melocowsky Angela R ' contact information, and left it at that. In the mean time

Angela Ri sent an e-mail to JAG reporting this incident and has never received aresponse.The first day of trial on August 20th; 2007 John R and I specifically askedLt. Melocowsky why he did not call Angela R ; about this incident a few weeksprior, and why he never looked into this matter. Lt. Melocowsky told John R andme "not to worry about it because there was nothing he could do, Capt. Ellis had every


4/7

right to call Angela R and if he misrepresented himself to her that it was ok", Istarted to question Lt. Melocowsky; he completely ignored my request for informationbywalking away and not mentioning it further,After my husband's wrongful conviction and incarceration in August 2007 Iinherited the case file that Lt. Melocowsky had given him prior to the trial. After

returning home tc .I started to read thecase file and found numerousinconsistencies with statements given before and during the trial that no one ever touchedon during the trial. I convinced my husband's new attorney Mike Eisenberg. who I hiredafter realizing Lt. Melocowsky's incompetence as a defense attorney, to submit a FOIArequest to the Beaufort Naval Hospital regarding RP2 Paul Skovranko's claim of havingtaken his daughter there on 6/2/2004 when his daughter told his wife about theseallegations.

The Beaufort Naval Hospital replied and said that they have no sign in or outfor the month of June 2004 for H Skovranko contrary to what RP2 Skovrankotold NCIS in his sworn written statement on 6/3/2004 and the court on 8/20/2007. Thiswould mean that RP2 Skovranko LIED about taking his daughter to the hospital that dayand still continues to lie to this day about what really happened. This information wasalso forwarded to the Family Advocacy Program (FAP) who has also sent, in writing adocument stating that to this day, they have no knowledge of these allegations of abuse.

I find this fact highly interesting considering that under DoDI 6495.02 it is arequirement for all allegations of abuse to be reported to the local SAVI/SAPRO so that atimely assessment of the victim can be completed. Also, RP2 Skovranko said that he toldhis commanding officer, Chaplain Gibson of the situation in regards to his daughter'sallegations, bu t Chaplain Gibson did not report this to the PMO. As a matter of fact hedid not report this to anyone and being part of the SAVI program it is a requirement.

The victim, H . admitted to lying at trial when she said that no, she never toldanyone that Gloria Ehlers (Edwin's former wife and her mother's best friend), DonnaKerr (Gloria's mother), and a little boy named James walked in on this attack, yet there isvideo evidence that NCIS obtained on June 9th, 2004 where she makes all of thesestatements. Gloria, Donna and James were never questioned by NCIS or brought up oncharges. Why? Even Special Agent Muelenberg admitted that he, being the "end of theline" as far as this case went did not "know" H made these allegations but theywere in the case file and that EVERY possible suspect should be questioned regardingH 's allegations, whywhere they the not at the very least interviewed hi this case?

RP2 Paul Skovranko violated the UCMJ by making false official statements, whydoes he go unpunished? I realize that the United States Marine Corps and United StatesNavy does not want to admit they are in the wrong by convicting an innocent man basedon no evidence, the lies of a child and her family and there were several mistakes made


5/7

along the way, even when they had the chance to correct them they chose to give myhusband clemency of 6 years. General Thomas Waldhauser, acting on the advice of hisill informed and possibly ill educated staffjudge advocate Lt. Col. Robert M . M iller,reduced Edw in's confinement from 25 years to 19 years, 6 years less than Major BrianKasprzyk had given him at trial.The record of trial was made available on 12/3/07, yet the attorney of record,Mike Eisenberg was not given a copy until the beginning of January 2008. The onlyreason M ike Eisenberg knew about the record of trial becoming available is because theDeputy SJA C apt. Dawn Steinberg called him on 12/12/07 and wanted to know if he wasgoing to submit matters of clemency on Edwin's behalf. Mr. Eisenberg informed her thathe had not yet received his copy. This began a mass of e-mails going back and forthfrom the SJA, Lt. Col. Miller, Mike Eisenberg, and Deputy SJA Capt. Dawn Steinberg.O ne e-mail in particular that I have in my possession is where Deputy SJA Capt.Steinberg told M ike Eisenberg that shenever told him that he was going to get a copy,there by not acknowledging him at the attorney of record. Obviously she did notremember the e-mail dated 9/12/07 where she did just the opposite. I also have that copy

of that e-mail in my possession.When the time finally came for the submission of the clemency packet weapprised the SJA Lt. Col. M iller of the violations of the UCMJ committed by the M ilitaryjudge, NCIS, and RP2 Skovranko. We requested that the charges be dismissed or at thevery least have a new trial granted. Lt. Col M iller told M ike Eisenberg that "thoserequests were rem edial and held nomerit". Held no merit? These are violations of thelaw that are prejudicial to Edwin's rights. Unde r the UCM J these would have warrantedcharges being dismissed or at the very least a new trial.O n April 25th 2008 I contacted Major Plummer, team D elta stationed at Camp

Pendleton. I was calling him to find Capt. Ellis' bar information so that I may file acomplaint against him. Major Plumm er asked me if this involved a particular case, towhich I replied yes, the case of SGT. Edwin Ehlers. He went on to tell me that heremembered me and this case in particular because he was sitting second chair to"supervise" Capt. Ellis. Major Plummer told me that he would like to know about anyand all misconduct committed by Capt. Ellis, so I let him know that C apt, Ellis falselyrepresented himself to me as well as Angela R in July and August 2007 viatelephone.I let him know that I had discussed these incidents with L t. Melocowsky, andMajor Plummer informed me that he had not heard anything about them. He then began

to question me about Lt. Melocowsky asking if he was still w orking on my husband'scase. I told him that no, he was not, that I had hired a new attorney Mike Eisenberg afterEdwin's conviction. Major Plumm er also took a keen interest in finding out if theConvening Authority had acted yet and shortly after told me that if there was evidenceshowing my husband's innocence it was his duty to look into it by re-opening the case. Itold him that it was obvious he d id not look at anything pe rtaining to Edwin's innocence,if he had bothered to read the case file, he would have know n that Randi Hester, who was


6/7

present when these allegations cam e out on June 2nd 2004 told N CIS that it was thevictim's mother, not the victim herself who brought Edwin's name into thisHnever said anyone's name until her mother told her it was Edwin.Major Plummer told me that Edwin was only convicted based on the word ofH ., who admitted to lying several times during the trial and also NCIS Special

Agent Eric Muelenberg, He said that RP2 Skovranko and Stacey Skovranko's testimonyat trial along w ith Samuel H ester and Gloria Ehlers (who H - implicated in thisalleged crime) played no role. I can see that now. considering that Stacey Skovranko'stestimony was impeached by the military judg e because she was caught lying on thestand. ':- i. .. , He told m e that he wasunaware of these facts, and if RP2 Skovranko lied und er oath he was also in violation of

theUCMJ.Major Plummer then proceeded to apologize to me about what happened,

knowing that Edwin and I have 2 small children that I now support alone. At the end ofour conversation he wished me luck in getting my husband out of prison. I documentedour conversation that evening and sent him a certified letter on April 25th, 2008. WhenMike Eisenberg contacted him on April 30 th, 2008 regarding our conversation, MajorPlummer denied talking to me a few days prior. M ike Eisenberg asked him how I knewthat he had 3 daughters unless we had a conversation, and he told Mike that I was adistraught wife and mother and did not know what I was talking about.In my letter to M ajor Plummer I let him know that by not reporting the violationsof the UCM J that he, himself was also violating the UCM J section 877 Article??Principles and Section 878 Article 78 Accessory After the Fact. I was not surprised at

what Major Plummer said to M ike Eisenberg, I also was not at all shocked when he saidthat he was not going to do anything about this matter either.As an adu lt who g rew up in a military home, I understand now that the military"covers up" their mistakes and will never admit to wrongdoing. I have every intention ofcontinuing my climb up the chain of command and reporting every violation I come

across to the next person in line, eventually informing the press of the pass-the-buckmentality our military justice system has adopted in place of the U.S. Constitution and theUniform Code of M ilitary Justice.

Angela M. EhlersWife of Sgt. Edwin A. EhlersUSMCEnclosure:


7/7

SENDER: COMPLETE fHIS SECTIONa Complete items 1, 2, and 3. A!so completeitem 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired, Print your name and address on the reverseso that we can return the card to you. Attach this card to the back of themalpiece,or on the front if space permits,1. Article Addressed to:

COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERYA. SignatureXB. Received by (Prinie^ Name)

BfAgentD Addressee

C. Date of Delivery

D. Isdelivery address different from item 1 ?dYesIf YES, enter delivery address below: C3 No

3. Service TypeRegisteredInsured Mal

D Express MalDReturn Receipt for MerchandiseDC.O.D.

4. Restricted Delivery? {Erfra Fee) DYes2, Article Number

(Transfer from^servk 7Q07 DDDH Sflkb ?7SbPS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 10259S-02-M-1S40

Documents

Letter to the Judge Advocate General May 2008