State Exhibit 6 was Weak before the Jury was even charged in 2008

Ashley Wright (the State) request to charge the jury dated 2007; yet, certificate of service to public defender Hugh Hadden is dated 2008. (Pictured above)

 . . . and in the form set forth in the attached Exhibits 1 through 15.

Pictured is Exhibit 6.

As the #exonerateMichael good fight continues, Mr. Blocker noticed that Exhibit 6 was missing from the paperwork that I mailed to him.  I thought that maybe it was missing as a result of a copier paper jam, but no, upon examining the original paperwork, Exhibit 6 (six) was truly missing from the rest of the pages.  Luckily, I remember seeing that document within a MASTER set of paperwork.  I found it!  It surrounds reliability of Identification.  This exhibit is so weak that I do not understand how the State was even able to Charge the jury.

Let us examine Exhibit 6.

"Identity is a question of fact for you to determine.  Your Determination of Identity is dependent upon the credibility of the witness or witnesses offered for this purpose. You should consider all of the factors previously charged you regarding credibility of witnesses."

1. Mr. Blocker was arrested one week after alleged burglary and alleged rape "monster hunt."  
2. The mugshot which the alleged victim picked out from the pre-existing mugshot collection that was presented to her did not look like Mr. Blocker.
3. No rape DNA match was EVER identified.
4. The allegedly victim fabricated other parts of her story like outgoing phone calls on the land line which proved be to falsehoods.
5. The "second burglar" concept was never addressed possibly because a separate "deal to squeal" was worked out?

Shall I continue?

Rest assured that Michael Christopher Blocker did not sit in jail for a whole year just to sign a guilty plea for crimes that he DID NOT commit.  The State is guilty of prosecutorial misconduct surrounding the phony indictment 2007-RCCR-181 The State should be ashamed of robbing Mr. Blocker's parents of their health so that they could use Michael Christopher Blocker as a scapegoat to get a series of promotions during the 2008 election year.

The Grand jury INDICTMENT should be removed and Michael Christopher Blocker should be exonerated.