May 27th, 2008


My name is Angela Ehlers and I am writing to you regarding several violations of the rules in JAGINST 5803.1C committed by Lt. Michael Melocowsky. I have sent several other letters specifying what others have done, and who were also involved with this misconduct and that they were all aware of these violations, before, during and after my husband's wrongful conviction and incarceration. The others that I am referring ta are prosecuting attorney's Major Plummer and Capt. Ellis, also the Military Judge Major Kasprzyk (who violated the UCMJ), and the Staff Judge Advocate Lt. Col. Robert Miller. I would first like to state that I have sent in a formal complaint against Lt. Melocowsky to the State of New York Supreme Court Appellate Division, where they are conducting an inquiry into the professional misconduct committed by Lt. Michael Melocowsky. I am sure, as having dealt with Lt. Melocowsky in the past and knowing that he does not like to report misconduct committed by himself or others that he has probably not been in compliance with the reporting requirements of JAGINST 5803.1C Rule 8.6. These reporting requirements require all covered USG attorneys to report promptly to the Rules Counsel any disciplinary or administrative action, including initiation of investigation into misconduct committed by a covered attorney. In having said that, I can now go into the details about the violations of the professional conduct rules that have been committed by Lt. Melocowsky per JAGINST 5803.1C. Lt. Melocowsky violated rule 1.1 Competence by ignoring evidence that was available in my husband's case file (which I now have in my possession) to prove his innocence. In an NCIS Report of Investigative Action dated 25JUN04, Randi Hester, who was present the day that these allegations of sexual assault came forward against my husband, told NCIS that the mother of the "victim" told her daughter that Edwin had committed these

acts with her, otherwise the little girl would not tell on the person who did it, because as she put it "her mommy would be mad at her". Lt. Melocowsky did not competently handle the inquiry into, the analysis of the factual and legal elements of Sgt. Edwin Ehlers' case. Instead he chose to ignore the fact that there was a witness to support Edwin's innocence and there by violating of Rule 3.4, that states a covered attorney is not allowed to conceal a document or material that may have evidentiary value. A few weeks before the trial, one of the prosecuting attorney's, Capt. Ellis contacted Angela R (another defense witness) as well as myself. He told both of us that he was a defense attorney and would like to ask us a few questions (I have filed a separate complaint against Capt. Ellis and Major Plummer). After our conversations, we both called Edwin so he could contact Lt. Melocowsky. Lt. Melocowsky told Edwin that he would be in contact with both Angela R. and I regarding our conversations with Capt. Ellis. Lt. Melocowsky never followed up on these phone calls, and also never reported this to Major Plummer, Capt. Ellis' QIC. At the first day of trial on August 20th, 2007 John Robbins and I questioned Lt. Melocowsky about the incidents with Capt. Ellis. Lt. Melocowsky told us that there was nothing he could do about it. Lt. Melocowsky implied that he was disinterested in what had happened and the misconduct committed by Capt. Ellis a few weeks prior. I would think that by Lt. Melocowsky's actions regarding these phone calls would be a clear violation of Rule 4.3 that states "a covered attorney shall not state or imply that the covered attorney is disinterested when dealing with an unrepresented person'7. After my husband's conviction of August 21st, 2007, Lt. Melocowsky gave me his business card and told me, my husband, my mother in law and John R - that Edwin's appeal was his number one priority. Later that day, I contacted Lt. Melocowsky regarding what was to come next, and also to ask him some questions regarding his role at the trial. At first, he told me that I should not question his motives or role at trial because

I did not understand the law or the UCMJ and had no legal training, I then specifically asked him why Special Agent Muelenberg testified to hear say evidence of a confession (which there was no proof of) that my husband had "allegedly" made during an interrogation of May 25th, 2005. Lt. Melocowsky told me that "your husband was guilty and he should have pleaded guilty to all charges" (violation(s) of Rule 3.6 and Rule 3.4) and then he hung up the telephone on me. I was stunned after that remark. It was only later after returning home and retaining a new attorney for Edwin, that I realized Lt. Melocowsky did not want to represent my husband at all. I have been copied on several e-mails going back and forth between the attorney I hired, Michael Eisenberg and Lt. Melocowsky where he stated that he did his job to the best of his ability. Lt. Melocowsky couldn't wait to get back to DC and continue "new" job at the pentagon. As far as my husband being his number one priority, we (attorney Michael Eisenberg and 1} have seen very little of that. When I finally got the case file sorted out (it was not in order when Lt. Melocowsky gave it to Edwin), I found several things that pertained to Edwin's innocence that were never introduced as evidence at court-namely the statement from Randi Hester saying that the mother of the child told her Edwin was the one who did this to her. Around October 1st, 2007 Edwin received a letter from his ex-wife Gloria who had testified against him at trial. Gloria stated that she had found out some things about the Skovranko's (the family that accused Edwin of sexually assaulting their daughter) the Tuesday after he was incarcerated. She went on to say that if helping him cost her Skovranko's friendship that she did not care because she knew that he was innocent. Gloria also gave Edwin her and Randi's telephone numbers because they wanted to talk with his new attorney. Michael Eisenberg contacted Randi and Gloria after receiving a copy of the letter from Gloria. Randi told Michael Eisenberg that Stacey Skovranko (mother of alleged victim) told the victim, H that Edwin had done these things to her.

Randi went on to say that h. \ never said anyone's name until Stacey told her that Edwin did these things to her but that the only thing I would say was that "my mommy would be mad at me if I told". Upon hearing this disclosure from Michael Eisenberg about Randi's statement to him, I started doing research on the claims of the parents, the father of the victim in particular. RP2 Skovranko told NCIS and the judge that he took his daughter to the Beaufort Naval Hospital on June 2nd, 2004. I have 2 documents in my possession that state he never took her to the naval hospital in the month of June 2004. If Lt. Melocowsky had bothered to do a thorough job and research the claims of this family, he would have realized that they lied to NCIS in official statements and also lied duringthe court proceedings. Instead he chose to ignore his duty to act with diligence, violating Rule 1.3, where it states "a covered attorney should pursue a mater on behalf of a client despite opposition or personal inconvenience and should act with commitment and dedication to the interests of the client".

Lt. Melocowsky has also violated Rule(s): 3.5-a covered attorney is required to avoid contributing to a violation of such provisions 4.1-misrepresentations can also occur by a failure to act 8,4-It is professional misconduct for a covered attorney to: Violate or attempt to violate these rules, knowingly assist to induce another to do so, to do so through the acts of another. Commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the covered attorney's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as an attorney in other respects Engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation Engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice

Lt. Melocowsky has repeatedly violated these rules and paid no consequences for his actions, he was also made aware of the others who have violated these rules and has yet to report them. By not reporting these violations, Lt. Melocowsky was not only serving his own purpose so as to not "get into trouble", but by not reporting the others involved he is now aiding them to continue to violate the UCMJ, these rules and also rules of judicial conduct. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Respectfully submitted,

Angela Ehlers , Ehlers II, active duty, USMC Wife of Sgt. Edwin