You are on page 1of 7

Judge Advocate General 1322 Patterson Ave Washington Navy Yard, DC 20374

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 be addressed, investigated and corrected. 1 have documentation showing that Major Brian E, Kasprzyck, who stood as a military judge alone violated the UCMJ section 854 Article 54, when he authenticated the official record of trial. Under article 54 it states that at a judge alone court martial the court reporter and attorneys have to authenticate the record of trial. Because Major Kasprzyck took it upon himself to authenticate the record of trial, he knowingly violated the UCMJ and thus created a conflict of interest prejudicial to my husband's constitutional rights. Subsequently, because Major Kasprzyck chose to ignore the laws set forth in the UCMJ he knowingly omitted several statements made on the witness stand by the prosecution pertaining to my husband's innocence. By removing these statements from the official record of trial, he unfairly justified his actions by manipulating the record of trial to reflect his personal opinions and not the facts as he stated several times through out the proceedings. After reviewing the record of trial, I discovered that statements of NCIS Special Agent Meulenburg's testimony at trial were omitted from the final copy that my husband's new attorney, Michael Eisenberg and I received. There is one excerpt that Major Kasprzyck failed to remove, and that is at the end of the second day of trial on August 21st 2007 and before he found my husband guilty, where he stated "Prior to announcing the findings of this court, I want to make clear that I did not consider the testimony of Special Agent Muelenberg with regard to Sergeant Ehlers electing to terminate the interview and askfor a lawyer during the interrogation on 25 May 2005. Additionally, I have disregarded those portions of trial counsel's arguments that could tend to give the appearance of shifting the burden of proof in this case." I have re-read Special Agent Meuienburg's testimony several times, and was also a witness to the proceedings in August 2007. I, as well as 3 other witnesses, specifically remember Special Agent Muelenberg telling the military judge, Major Kasprzyck that Sergeant Edwin Ehlers requested an attorney and Special Agent Muelenberg said he did not terminate the interrogation, he continued to question my husband until the duty driver came to pick him up from the NCIS building. This statement made by Special Agent Muelenberg has been conveniently omitted from the official record of trial but is referred to by Major Kasprzyck during his closing statement before sentencing. How can a statement that was made by Special Agent Muelenberg be considered by the military judge, Major Kasprzyck if, in fact, according to the official record of trial the statement never happened? Where did that statement go? If the judge refers to the statement and is

disregarding it, then one is to believe that the statement was made and later omitted from the 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 Agent Muelenberg, 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 being deceptive to the relevant questions. This interrogation and polygraph examination were not 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 has since, very "conveniently" disappeared. No one has the original print out from that day and have failed to produce any record of the exam to date. NCIS Special Agent Muelenberg also during the course of the trial pointed out to the judge, that HE, not my husband filled in the diagram submitted into evidence. My husband, Sergeant Edwin Ehlers was questioned my Major Kasprzyck at one of the many article 39 hearings regarding this drawing of the home at 204 Alderwood Rd. My husband told the judge that he "had seen the drawing in his case file that he received from his military attorney's but that no, he did not draw it". I also find is highly suspicious that 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 handwriting 1, being his wife would obviously know my husband's handwriting and spelling techniques. This alleged drawing made by my husband also lacks a signature or date anywhere on the document, yet the other drawings obtained from the prosecutions witnesses 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 is 14 months AFTER the alleged "confession" given to Special Agent Muelenberg, where it states "When interrogated, s/Ehlers denied wrongdoing. S/Ehlers subsequently submitted to a polygraph examination, at the conclusion of which, it was the opinion of the examiner that s/Ehlers had been deceptive to the relevant questions. During a subsequent interrogation, s/Ehlers made tactic admissions; however, continued to deny wronsdoing as alleged by v/Skovranko" Where is the confession? If there was a confession it would have been included in this document, which serves as a timeline of events that NCIS has preformed and also the evidence gathered. I have discovered other cases where NCIS have used unlawful practices to gain the confessions that they want. You may not be familiar with the case of Petty Officer King, who was held in custody for over 500 days while NCIS fabricated a case of treason against him. During the period of his unlawful detainment, he was subjected to numerous rounds of interrogations that lasted for over 20 hours per sitting. When NCIS finally let him sleep, the made sure that loud music was playing at all hours of the day and night

and that the telephone would ring every 5 minutes, so they could continue to harass him until he gave them what NCIS wanted.. .a confession. My husband was not subjected to the same degradation as Petty Officer King was, but he was subjected to an 11 Vz hour interrogation on May 25th, 2005 although, Special Agent 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 Agent Muelenberg told him that he (Muelenberg) would dictate what he wanted said for the confession. My husband, of course refused to sign anything because he had made no confession and being angry at that statement, Special Agent Muelenberg took it upon himself to make one up to use at court where he lied to the judge about what actually took place before, during and after the interrogation. This is a violation of the UCMJ 931 article 131 Perjury and section 907 article 107 false official statements; along with these violations is also tampering of evidence which he unknowingly admitted to during court. The lead prosecuting attorney, Captain John Ellis falsely represented himself to me as well as another defense witness in July and August 2007. Angela Rwas contacted prior to the court martial in August 2007 by Captain Ellis. At the beginning of their conversation, he identified himself as the defense attorney working FOR my husband and that he was calling to ask her a few questions regarding her testimony that she would be giving at the trial. He proceeded to ask her numerous questions about when Edwin received his tattoos from her husband. John R and how long she has known Edwin and his ex-wife Gloria. Towards the end of their conversation, he told her that Edwin had pleaded guilty to some of the charges, and he wanted to find out how she felt about this. Angela R< replied that she had just spoken to me prior to the phone call 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 his name was Captain John Ellis and that he was the prosecuting attorney. She confronted him about his misrepresenting himself at the beginning of their conversation and he told her that although he had said that he was the defense attorney to her he still had a right to know what she was going to testify about, and that was the only way he was going to get her to talk to him. Immediately after she ended the conversation, I received a call from her and she was in a panic. I contacted my husband, and he contacted his defense attorney Lt. Michael Melocowsky. Lt Melocowsky told Edwin that there was nothing to worry 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 a response. The first day of trial on August 20th; 2007 John R and I specifically asked Lt. Melocowsky why he did not call Angela R ; about this incident a few weeks prior, and why he never looked into this matter. Lt. Melocowsky told John R and me "not to worry about it because there was nothing he could do, Capt. Ellis had every

right to call Angela R and if he misrepresented himself to her that it was ok", I started to question Lt. Melocowsky; he completely ignored my request for information by walking away and not mentioning it further, After my husband's wrongful conviction and incarceration in August 2007 I inherited the case file that Lt. Melocowsky had given him prior to the trial. After returning home tc . I started to read the case file and found numerous inconsistencies with statements given before and during the trial that no one ever touched on during the trial. I convinced my husband's new attorney Mike Eisenberg. who I hired after realizing Lt. Melocowsky's incompetence as a defense attorney, to submit a FOIA request to the Beaufort Naval Hospital regarding RP2 Paul Skovranko's claim of having taken his daughter there on 6/2/2004 when his daughter told his wife about these allegations. The Beaufort Naval Hospital replied and said that they have no sign in or out for the month of June 2004 for H Skovranko contrary to what RP2 Skovranko told NCIS in his sworn written statement on 6/3/2004 and the court on 8/20/2007. This would mean that RP2 Skovranko LIED about taking his daughter to the hospital that day and still continues to lie to this day about what really happened. This information was also forwarded to the Family Advocacy Program (FAP) who has also sent, in writing a document 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 a requirement for all allegations of abuse to be reported to the local SAVI/SAPRO so that a timely assessment of the victim can be completed. Also, RP2 Skovranko said that he told his commanding officer, Chaplain Gibson of the situation in regards to his daughter's allegations, but Chaplain Gibson did not report this to the PMO. As a matter of fact he did 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 told anyone that Gloria Ehlers (Edwin's former wife and her mother's best friend), Donna Kerr (Gloria's mother), and a little boy named James walked in on this attack, yet there is video evidence that NCIS obtained on June 9th, 2004 where she makes all of these statements. Gloria, Donna and James were never questioned by NCIS or brought up on charges. Why? Even Special Agent Muelenberg admitted that he, being the "end of the line" as far as this case went did not "know" H made these allegations but they were in the case file and that EVERY possible suspect should be questioned regarding H 's allegations, why where they the not at the very least interviewed hi this case?

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

along the way, even when they had the chance to correct them they chose to give my husband clemency of 6 years. General Thomas Waldhauser, acting on the advice of his ill informed and possibly ill educated staffjudge advocate Lt. Col. Robert M. Miller, reduced Edwin's confinement from 25 years to 19 years, 6 years less than Major Brian Kasprzyk 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 only reason Mike Eisenberg knew about the record of trial becoming available is because the Deputy SJA Capt. Dawn Steinberg called him on 12/12/07 and wanted to know if he was going to submit matters of clemency on Edwin's behalf. Mr. Eisenberg informed her that he had not yet received his copy. This began a mass of e-mails going back and forth from the SJA, Lt. Col. Miller, Mike Eisenberg, and Deputy SJA Capt. Dawn Steinberg. One e-mail in particular that I have in my possession is where Deputy SJA Capt. Steinberg told Mike Eisenberg that she never told him that he was going to get a copy, there by not acknowledging him at the attorney of record. Obviously she did not remember 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 we apprised the SJA Lt. Col. Miller of the violations of the UCMJ committed by the Military judge, NCIS, and RP2 Skovranko. We requested that the charges be dismissed or at the very least have a new trial granted. Lt. Col Miller told Mike Eisenberg that "those requests were remedial and held no merit". Held no merit? These are violations of the law that are prejudicial to Edwin's rights. Under the UCMJ these would have warranted charges being dismissed or at the very least a new trial. On April 25th 2008 I contacted Major Plummer, team Delta stationed at Camp Pendleton. I was calling him to find Capt. Ellis' bar information so that I may file a complaint against him. Major Plummer asked me if this involved a particular case, to which I replied yes, the case of SGT. Edwin Ehlers. He went on to tell me that he remembered 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 any and all misconduct committed by Capt. Ellis, so I let him know that Capt, Ellis falsely represented himself to me as well as Angela R in July and August 2007 via telephone. I let him know that I had discussed these incidents with Lt. Melocowsky, and Major 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 working on my husband's case. I told him that no, he was not, that I had hired a new attorney Mike Eisenberg after Edwin's conviction. Major Plummer also took a keen interest in finding out if the Convening Authority had acted yet and shortly after told me that if there was evidence showing my husband's innocence it was his duty to look into it by re-opening the case. I told him that it was obvious he did not look at anything pertaining to Edwin's innocence, if he had bothered to read the case file, he would have known that Randi Hester, who was

present when these allegations came out on June 2nd 2004 told NCIS that it was the victim's mother, not the victim herself who brought Edwin's name into thisH never 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 of H ., 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 testimony at trial along with Samuel Hester and Gloria Ehlers (who H - implicated in this alleged crime) played no role. I can see that now. considering that Stacey Skovranko's testimony was impeached by the military judge because she was caught lying on the stand. ':

. .. , He told me that he was unaware of these facts, and if RP2 Skovranko lied under 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 of our conversation he wished me luck in getting my husband out of prison. I documented our conversation that evening and sent him a certified letter on April 25th, 2008. When Mike Eisenberg contacted him on April 30th, 2008 regarding our conversation, Major Plummer denied talking to me a few days prior. Mike Eisenberg asked him how I knew that he had 3 daughters unless we had a conversation, and he told Mike that I was a distraught wife and mother and did not know what I was talking about. In my letter to Major Plummer I let him know that by not reporting the violations of the UCMJ that he, himself was also violating the UCMJ section 877 Article?? Principles and Section 878 Article 78 Accessory After the Fact. I was not surprised at what Major Plummer said to Mike Eisenberg, I also was not at all shocked when he said that he was not going to do anything about this matter either. As an adult who grew 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 of continuing 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-buck mentality our military justice system has adopted in place of the U.S. Constitution and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Angela M. Ehlers Wife of Sgt. Edwin A. Ehlers USMC Enclosure:

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


B. Received by (Prinie^ Name)

BfAgent D Addressee C. Date of Delivery

D. Is delivery address different from item 1 ? d Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: C3 No

3. Service Type Registered Insured Mail D Express Mail D Return Receipt for Merchandise D C.O.D.
D Yes

4. Restricted Delivery? {Erfra Fee) 2, Article Number (Transfer from^servk


DDDH Sflkb ?7Sb

Domestic Return Receipt

PS Form 3811, February 2004