Judge Reger – Mistakes? For sure. Corrupt? Not with intent.

According to Jason, Judge Reger seemingly was attempting to be fair throughout the trial. Jason is positive that Judge Reger knew how incompetent Jason’s attorney was. During trial Judge Reger himself brought up certain case law that an intelligent attorney would have pounced on. Smith missed it. At a certain point, Judge Reger brought up a case involving a defendant named Searfoss. His conviction had recently been tossed because the same prosecution team used the same technique in his conviction that they did Jason’s. This technique was not bringing the actual evidence to trial and allowing Douglas Kinder to testify from a spreadsheet he created. This basically forces the jury to believe what Kinder says. As you see, none of the actual evidence matches what Kinder said. Defense attorney Smith did not catch it. Jason does not believe that the Judge was aware of the lies Kinder was telling and the trial was confusing; even for Jason at times.

One thing that Jason learned the hard way is that during the appeals process, judges don’t really seem to do what they are supposed to. They read the motion and the prosecution’s reply. It is very hard to believe they pay attention to the evidence.

For example, at no time during trial or sentencing did anyone ever testify that Visalus was created for the sole purpose of raising money for the PHCA. Not Anita, Stephanie, Pratt, Clifton, Jason, Kristie, Kinder, or Prosecution. Yet somehow, the Judge ruled that the affidavits from the people who earned money was of little consequence because according to Jason’s testimony, Visalus was for the sole purpose of raising money for the PHCA.

Thus, with his decision, he essentially told 11 people that they had no choice but to donate their money to the PHCA because Jason said so (which was simply not true). No testimony, no contracts, and a few of them sold Visalus for over a year before Jason and Kristie even joined the PHCA thus making it impossible.

Another Mistake. Jason requested his discovery from his attorney for the purpose of the appeal. Jason’s attorney not only supplied less than 20% of the discovery, but he also gave him some discovery from another client that had a sex case. Jason appealed to the Judge for his discovery and the Judge stated that his attorney gave him what he had on hand.

Flabbergasted.

Is the judge saying that if an attorney or prosecutor screws up or is corrupt, all they have to do is lose the evidence and discovery?

Even more odd is the first time Jason asked for evidence, it was before sentencing so his attorney had access to it all Even worse, the Sixth District Court of Appeals upheld it. Jason stated in his appeal that he could not find any case law that permitted the judge’s decision and the Appeals Court flipped the script. None of them have anyone to answer to. The discovery is where the actual records are that prove that Douglas Kinder is a corrupt liar and whether willingly or not the Judge helped keep it hidden.