Case: Sgt David Gutierrez
This is the case of a U.S. Air Force Officer who tested HIV+ and potentially exposed hundreds of men and women to the virus by attending swingers parties with his wife and gay bath houses by himself. The defendant was found guilty and sentenced to 8 years in prison. Clark Baker has filed an appeal based solely on the defense not accepting an offer of help from OMSJ and not for any legal justification. Clark Baker accuses the defense attorneys of conspiracy, incompetence and no interest in putting on a rigorous defense:
From the time OMSJ Director Clark Baker received word of the case, USAF officials resisted OMSJ’s efforts to assist. From August 30th through January 7th 2011, Whiteman Air Force Base (AFB) Area Defense Command (ADC) showed little interest in defending their client from charges that threatened to end Gutierrez’ honorable 20-year career and send him to Fort Leavenworth Federal Penitentiary for life.
However, Mr. Baker provides an email from defense counsel which clearly states that this is a flat out lie:
“I appreciate your time, but at this time, based on defense decision and informed client consent, we will not be needing your services.”
The email from Captain Aaron Mannes states that it was “based on defense decision and informed client consent…”
According to Clark Baker’s own words, it seems as if the defense counsel was well aware of Clark Baker’s lack of credibility and crack pot theories:
Gutierrez said that USAF Major James Dorman and Capt. Aaron Maness told him that Baker and OMSJ were frauds and that both attorneys would quit if Gutierrez accepted Baker’s assistance.
The defense attorney, Capt. Mannes, did not emphasize Baker’s strategy that HIV is not pathogenic, but instead utilized the facts of real HIV science and transmission. Because the defense counsel used logic, facts and science, Baker is claiming incompetence. It is also important to note that the defense attorney also utilized current case laws as well as a constitutional argument to try and get many of the counts dismissed.
During opening statements, defense attorney Capt. Aaron Mannes had asked the judge to note the conduct of Gutierriez’s wife when considering the adultery charges.* Mannes also argued that having sex without disclosing one’s HIV status is not necessarily aggravated assault and urged him to consider recent science regarding HIV transmission. (emphasis mine)
When it came time for cross examinations, defense attorneys emphasized that none of the witnesses who testified had been infected with HIV and that during many of the encounters they described, Gutierrez either used a condom or did not ejaculate.
*The woman said Gutierrez’s wife also participated in the swinger lifestyle. “She was talking about opening a bed-and-breakfast for swingers,” the woman said. “She was all for it.”
*A Wichita man who said he participated in swinger events with the couple also testified that Gutierrez flatly denied being HIV positive and that the airman’s wife pushed him into having sex with others. (emphasis mine)
Military judge Lt. Col. William Muldoon rejected a defense attorney’s request to dismiss the aggravated assault charges as unconstitutional because similar case law on aggravated assault in effect says his client can’t ever have sex again.
It looks to me like the defense counsel utilized every legal strategy available and did indeed put on a rigorous defense. It will be interesting to see if Mr. Baker’s assertion that defense counsels’ refusal to accept Mr. Baker’s help is legal justification for a new trial. However, Mr. Baker could not simply write a post discussing the legal aspects of the trial. For fun I will also dissect another of Mr. Baker’s crazy theories.
It is very interesting to note that Mr. Baker has a very hard time staying on point, which always leads to compounding lies. This tactic always gets him into deep trouble which further destroys his credibility. Take for instance Mr. Baker’s discussion of Vaccinations in this post. It would have been much more credible for Mr. Baker to simply state that Sgt Gutierrez had received multiple vaccinations before his HIV test which caused a false positive result. This overused canard of HIV denial would have been incredibly dubious in and of itself to any normal person. But Mr. Baker could not help himself. Let’s break this down, shall we? Baker writes:
“…he was subjected to more than 40 experimental vaccinations for anthrax, hepatitis, influenza, meningitis, measles, mumps, rubella, polio, pneumonia, tuberculosis, tetanus, diphtheria, typhoid and yellow fever…”
The most egregious part of this statement is the one word “experimental”. Perhaps if Mr. Baker had only thrown in a couple of scary sounding and less well known vaccines like Anthrax, Typhoid and Yellow Fever (boo!) he could have gotten away with it. But since even these vaccines are well established (1970, 1937 and 1896 respectively) he would have needed to really lay into the scary aspect and foregone the word experimental completely. Because Mr. Baker does not consider the logic of his lies, he failed as usual.
Baker runs headlong into the next bit of bullshit:
Although none of these disease
(sic) kill or injure more than a few dozen Americans in any given year, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reports that thousands of Americans are injured or killed every year by the vaccinations that are marketed to fight these diseases.
(Terrible sentence fragment is all Baker.)
One look at the link Baker provided exposes his lies: First look at Adverse Events:
Since 1990, VAERS has received over 200,000 reports, most of which describe mild side effects such as fever. Very rarely, people experience serious adverse events following immunization. By monitoring such events, VAERS helps to identify any important new safety concerns and thereby assists in ensuring that the benefits of vaccines continue to be far greater than the risks. Many different types of adverse events occur after vaccination.About 85-90% of the reports describe mild adverse events such as fever, local reactions, and episodes of crying or mild irritability. The remaining reports reflect serious adverse events involving life-threatening conditions, hospitalization, permanent disability, or death, which may or may not have been caused by a vaccine.
(all emphasis mine)
Do I really need to expose the lie “none of these disease kill or injure more than a few dozen Americans in any given year”.
I could go on, but why? Mr. Baker’s claim, “none of these disease (sic) kill or injure more than a few dozen Americans in any given year”, is obviously complete and utter nonsense.