The last message I’d sent to Ms. Tormanen was on March
14, 2013. On April 1, 2013, I read of Sandra Couture’s “confession” to the (otherwise
unreported) arson fire and tampering with the (still unnamed) witness related
in (this post).
I’ve noticed that – perhaps just coincidentally – there
have been several “breaks” in the Langenbrunner murder case that have occurred
just shortly after I myself have made a move in relating my testimony. For one instance,
the sudden arrest of Joseph Couture in the 12-year-old “cold case” was just days
after my presence in Minnesota after 7 years in Laos became widely known out in
Munger. (Munger is policed by the St. Louis County Sheriff’s Department; for
the first few months I’d been back in Minnesota, I’d been in downtown Duluth,
which is policed by the Duluth Police Department.) Then now this sudden and
very doubtful “confession” of Sandra Couture in the very doubtful arson case
occurred just 2 weeks after I’d contacted Shelly Tormanen. There will be more
such coincidences to be related in this and subsequent posts.
But anyway, my next step was to try to make contact with
the Public Defender’s office. I’d been reluctant to do so, as I had some
prejudice against this office in Duluth as being part of the “good-old-boy” system
of justice only for those who have money to pay for it. The office is known in
local slang as the “Public Pretender's office”.
However, I did do an Internet search, found the name of
Fred Friedman as head of the local Public Defender’s office, and found that he
was also a professor at the University of Minnesota, Duluth. That fact was a
little encouraging, so I sent him an exploratory email. I was answered by Ron
Taggart, who told me that he was the investigator assigned to the case, and
that I should send any information I had to him.
I’ve decided not to reproduce all the letters I sent to
Mr. Taggart here in this blog, as they are quite repetitive of what I’ve
already published here in previous posts. Instead, I’ll publish some excerpts
of what I wrote to Mr. Taggart, along with his full responses, and the dates
these exchanges were made.
There is a mention here, and there will be in a subsequent post an exchange of correspondence between myself and Duane Johnson, a former jailer at
the St. Louis County jail. This will show my attempt to get Mr. Taggart to
contact Mr. Johnson, or alternatively, to get Mr. Johnson to contact Mr.
Taggart. I was hoping that one or the other of these gentlemen who’d chosen to
work in the career field of “justice” would do some serious investigation into
my claims of Tom Hinze’s statement to me one morning just 2 or 3 days before
the murder that he’d been given size 11 to 12 New Balance shoes by the jailer
who processed him out of the jail the night before. That hope turned out to be
yet another “dead end”, this time literally. That will be related in the next
post.
The rest of this post consists of selected comments from
me to Ron Taggart, and his full response. I will indent the email conversations, and my comments as I write now, will not be indented.
Taggart, RonTo meApr 1, 2013Mr. Wagner I am the Investigator assigned to this file by the Public Defender’s Office. If you have anything to share- please forward it to me.Ron TaggartInvestigator
…………………………………….. At this point I sent Mr. Taggart files
of all the letters I’d previously sent to various agencies, my correspondence
with Shelly Tormanen, and the photo of the Camel jacket.
[Notice: I apologize that the information given about the jacket in this post and previously is in error. Please see Post 16 of this blog, for more details.] I also mentioned names of other witnesses who knew Tom Hinze. Please notice in Mr. Taggart’s response, just below, that he never contacted any of these witnesses, but “ran background checks” on them, as if they were suspects, instead of witnesses! Who would the “background checks” have been answered BY? No one else but the Sheriff’s Department, of course! What an “investigation”, eh? What a defense team, here, eh? That’s EXACTLY why people call them the “Public Pretenders’ office”.
[Notice: I apologize that the information given about the jacket in this post and previously is in error. Please see Post 16 of this blog, for more details.] I also mentioned names of other witnesses who knew Tom Hinze. Please notice in Mr. Taggart’s response, just below, that he never contacted any of these witnesses, but “ran background checks” on them, as if they were suspects, instead of witnesses! Who would the “background checks” have been answered BY? No one else but the Sheriff’s Department, of course! What an “investigation”, eh? What a defense team, here, eh? That’s EXACTLY why people call them the “Public Pretenders’ office”.
Taggart, RonTo meApr 3, 2013Thank you for your memos. I am going over them now and running background checks on all mentioned.Ron TaggartTaggart, RonTo meApr 3, 2013The jacket issue has been solved even to our satisfaction. It had been left at Trina’s house by a boyfriend named William. It has been identified.
……………..Please notice that Ron Taggart did not tell me in
his response (just above) if the jacket in the picture I sent him was or was
not the same as the jacket in evidence. If it IS exactly the same as the jacket
in evidence, and if it is ALSO exactly the same as the jacket left at the house
by the boyfriend named William, it would really be quite a coincidence, as the one in
the picture I sent Mr. Taggart is the only jacket of that type I have ever seen
in my entire life.
[Notice: I apologize that
the information given about the jacket in this post and previously is in error.
Please see Post 16 of this blog, for more details.]
meTo Taggart, RonApr 6, 2013What is inexplicable to me is: if they want me to shut my mouth so bad, instead of threatening me through "Interpol", etc., why didn't they just check out the wood-stove in the trailer and the car itself, and why didn't they DNA Mr. Hinze??If all of those had turned out negative, they could have easily proven me a liar, and Mr. Hinze certainly could have sued me, and easily won.And another thing that is inexplicable to me -- I saw the printout of Mr. Hinze's string of DWI's. I believe there were 17 of them in 2003, on two pages, and several of them were "inimical to public safety" (Sorry, not "immanent", as I wrote before). Yet they released him after a not-very-long sentence at NERCC, with no requirement for probation, no requirement that he stay in the state of Minnesota, no nothing.I know people who have gotten worse for a 3rd DWI.
……………………………………………..
I’ve left out part of my email, here, as it’s been included elsewhere. However,
please notice that in his reply to this email, just below, Mr. Taggart admits
that Tom Hinze had STILL not been DNA tested, 11 ½ years after I reported the
size 11 or 12 New Balance shoes on his feet, just before the murder. And then
notice, that neither Mr. Taggart nor anyone else in the Public Defender’s
office does a damned thing to see that Mr. Hinze IS DNA tested, though they
should have means to have found out that Tom Hinze WAS actually still alive, at
that time.
What a defense team for Mr. Couture!! They
background-checked the witnesses as though they were suspects, they accepted 2
very unusual and exactly-the-same jackets in the same case,
[Notice: I apologize that
the information given about the jacket in this post and previously is in error.
Please see Post 16 of this blog, for more details.]
and they didn’t even ask
for a DNA test on Tom Hinze. It would be VERY interesting to know if they even
told Joseph Couture of my testimony. I’d like to ask him himself, but he’s not an easy
guy to get hold of, as I’ll relate in a later post.Taggart, RonTo meApr 8, 2013I don’t know the answers to the questions that you pose. They certainly DNA’d many many other people in the ensuing years. They followed up on many leads – 17 thousand pages!!!! We’re still trying to get through all the data. I too have alternate suspects than Mr. Couture. Interesting to note that the Sheriff’s Department commissioned a professional profile agency out of state early on in the investigation and paid them a good deal of money. These people came back with the recommendation that the killer was Trina’s husband. Yet he was never charged and certainly had motive and opportunity. WE are still investigating leads.Thank you for your thoughts.Ron TaggartInvestigator
meTo Taggart, RonMay 12, 2013About a week ago I wrote to Duane Johnson, the former jail employee, again. (I contact him on Facebook.)I asked him if he would please contact his fellow employees who worked in the St. Louis County jail in 2000, to ask if any of them possibly remember the jocular guy who came into jail barefoot, and the time of out-processing, asked for shoes because he had to walk out -- and was given flashy sports shoes about 2 sizes bigger than his feet.I sent Duane your e-mail address, and asked that if anyone does remember this, to send whatever he/she remembers directly to you, and not to me.Duane hasn't replied, and I don't know if he's willing to go out of his way for something like this, or not.Lloyd Wagner
meTo Taggart, RonJul 17, 2013Dear Mr. Taggart,I've written you a few time already concerning this case, and I have decided that I will write once more. This is a long letter, and I apologize for that, but you mentioned before that the Sheriff's Department had generated some 17,000 pages -- this will be just a few more. I hope you will find they are worth reading. Please note that the attached file belongs to the last part of this letter.
………………………………………….
(This was a very long letter that contained everything I’ve already
published in this blog, and perhaps even more. Please note the date, July 17,
2013. And then note the date of the “confession” of Joseph Couture, July 26,
2013. Another “coincidence” of a new “break” in the case shortly after I’d made
the move of “summing up” my testimony, all in one letter. For a week or so after the "confession", I didn't have any idea what to say, but finally sent Mr. Taggart this rather sarcastic email:
meTo Taggart, RonAug 7, 2013Dear Mr. Taggart,Inducing the guy to plead guilty is a sure way to eliminate the need for testimony of witnesses under oath, or the presentation of physical evidence to a jury.Congratulations are due, I guess,Lloyd Wagner
Taggart, RonTo meAug 7, 2013First of all Mr. Wagner I was out of town when all of this recent court activity went down. I only found out about it on Monday.Secondly from what I understand from the attorneys representing Mr. Courture that he confessed to them and filled in all the blanks. Case closed.
And
that was Mr. Taggart’s last communication with me. He didn’t even sign his
name!
However,
I did some research on the Internet and found an excellent article entitled “Police-Induced
Confessions, Risk Factors and Recommendations”, published by the American Psychology-Law
Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association, in 2009. This
article addressed the weaknesses and often deliberate falsehoods of
police-induced “confessions”, and gives a history of many cases in which people
who had “confessed” later recanted their confessions, and were later found
innocent through DNA evidence.
Boiled
down, the article says that police tend to use three basic tools in obtaining
false confessions: (1) lies, (2) threats and (3) false promises. This is a PDF document,
and you can find it through a Google search, if you’re interested in reading
the entire 36 pages yourself. I highly recommend it.
I thought Mr. Taggart in his role as an investigator for
the Public Defender’s office would CERTAINLY be interested in this document,
especially as he had so recently been involved in just such a case – so I printed
off a copy and mailed it by the very reliable Thai Postal Service to him at his
home address in Duluth. I never received any thank you for my efforts, however.
Subsequent posts will include my correspondence with Duane Johnson, the retired jailer at the St. Louis County jail, and then the newspaper articles relating
Joseph Couture’s “confession”, with my comments to be printed in red font.
Please stay tuned!
