What is interesting about this motion (which I just got today from Jim
Harr) is not so much the content as the lack of boundary between the
cult and the DA's office. Like they just gave up and treated Rhea
Smith as one of them because the paper and formatting is identical.
In the alternative, the cult has taken over preparing paperwork for
the DA's office. Well, who cares? The Justice Department can sort it
out or let the US be known internationally as a human rights violator.
One point they got wrong. On May 13, in fact even to early on May 15,
I had not made up my mind about staying in Canada. The May 13 post
(actually posted by Gregg) is because it would be really dumb to be
in Riverside on May 16 when the court is in Hemet.
I doubt lmt_watch, a cult identity based in Florida dedicated to
attacking the Lisa McPherson Trust, knew that there is not only a
Riverside county, but a large city by that name about 30 miles to the
west of Hemet. Of course, Robert Schwarz (who works in Riverside, the
city) would have figured it out the meaning and not made this dumb
mistake. . . if he had written the motion.
PS One other minor point. "Because the defendant was convicted of a
misdemeanor extradition does not appear to be a viable option and
since the defendant is still represented by counsel, his sentencing
should be done in absentia pursuant to California Penal Code §1193(b),
"If the conviction be for a misdemeanor, judgment may be pronounced
against the defendant in his absence."
Ok, judgment, but where does this say sentence?
County of Riverside
910 N. State St.
Hemet, CA 9254'3
Telephone (909) ?f6-2370
Slate Liar No. 202293
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, (Hemet) THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CASE NO: 11EM014371
Plaintiff, MOTION FOR SENTENCING OF
DEFENDANT IN ABSENTIA v.
H. KEITH HENSON,
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that at 2:00 p.m. on July 6,2001 or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard the: People will and hereby do move this Court to sentence the defendant, Keith Henson, in absentia pursuant to California Penal Code section 1193(b), as the defendant has failed to appear at his sentencing hearing and he has stated that be will remain in Canada indefinitely.
STATEMENT OF FACTS On April 26. 2001, before the Honorable Judge Robert Wallerstein the defendant was convicted of violating California Penal Code §422.6, use of force, threats, or destruction of property to interfere with another's exercise of civil rights, After his conviction, the defendant was released oil his own recognizance and was ordered to appear at the Riverside Superior Court Hemet Branch) for sentencing on May 16, 2001 at 11:00 a.m. in Department H-4. Sometime after his conviction arid prior to the sentencing hearing, the defendant left the United States for Canada, On May 13, 2001, the defendant publicly announced on the Internet (from Canada) his intention to be a Fugitive from justice: "1 will not be in Riverside May 161. In fact, l would have to be a complete idiot to be in Riverside May 16! Bon Soire! [sic] Eh? Keith Henson (Declaration of Rhea Smith ~,2 Ex. A.) On May 16, 2001, Defendant (while represented by counsel) failed to appear at the scheduled sentencing. Riverside County Probation Officer Gary Davis, however, was in attendance. He informed the court that on May 11, he received a voice mail message from the defendant indicating; that he was going to Canada. (Transcript of Oral Proceedings oil May 16, 2.001, p.9 11. 18I 21.) Moreover, Mr. Davis said that the defendant contacted hint the previous day (i.e. May 15th) and told him (Mr, Davis) that he (the defendant) had been in contact with the Canadian government and was offered political asylum. (Transcript of Oral Proceedings on May 1(i, 2001, p. 10 11. 11-14.) The Court accordingly revoked the defendant's own recognizance status, filed an additional criminal charge arising; front his failure to appear (under Penal Code § 1320), and issued a"no bail" bench ware ant. (Transcript of Oral Proceedings o_1 May 16, 2001, p.10,11. 24-27,) On May 23, 2001, a magazine interview of Henson was published and per the interview, when 1-lcnson was asked how long he intended to stay in Canada, he said "forever" (Declaration or Rhea Smith, 1(4, Ex. C.) Oil May 29, 2001, the Canadian newspaper, The Globe and Mail, reported the defendant's presence in their country. (Declaration of Rhea Smith S, Ex. D.) Because the defendant was convicted of a misdemeanor extradition does not appear to be a viable option and since the defendant is still represented by counsel, his sentencing should be done in absentia pursuant to California Penal Code §1193(b), "If the conviction he for a misdemeanor, judgment may be pronounced against the defendant in his absence."
CONCLUSION The defendant has voluntarily absented himself from the State of California and intentionally remained out of the United States during the time of his sentencing hearing, thus waiving his right to be present. Moreover, the victims of the defendant's offenses desire closure. Thus, for all of the foregoing reasons, this motion to sentence the defendant in absentia should be granted. Mile& June 20, 2001 Respectfully submitted, DROVER TRASK District Attorney
ROBERT K. SCHWARZ Deputy District Attorney ******************** GROVER TRASK
County of riverside
910 N. State St,
Hemet CA 92543
Telephone (909) 766-2370
State Liar No. 202293
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
(Hornet) THE: PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CASE N0: HEM014371
Plaintiff; DECLARATION OF RHEA
SMITH IN SUPPORT U1• MOTION
v. FOR SENTENCING OF
DEFENDANT 11. KEITH HENSON
H. KEITH HENSON, IN ABSENTIA
1, Rhea Smith, hereby declare: 1, I am an employee of the Church of Scientology International, As part of my job duties, I monitor the Internet and look for postings of interest to the Church, which includes postings from 11, Keith Henson ("Henson") 2. On May 13, 2001, Henson publicly announced on the Interact, from Canada, his intention to join the ranks of fugitives from justice: "I will not be in Riverside May 16. 1n fact, l would have to be a complete idiot to be in Riverside May 16! Bon Soire! [sic] Eh'? Keith Henson." Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of that posting. 3. On May 15, 2001, Henson posted his intention to stay in Canada and that he would remain there rind not return for sentencing. Ha also claimed he was entitled to seek political asylum from the Canadian government on the grounds that the United States and the State of California had persecuted him. Attached hereto its Exhibit l3 is a true and correct copy of a posting made by Defendant describing his intention. 4. On May 23, 20(11, a magazine interview of Henson was published and per the interview when Henson was asked how long he intended to stay in Canada, lie said, "forever," Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of the interview done on Henson. 5. Can May 29, 2.001, the Canadian newspaper, The Globe erred Mail reported Henson's presence in Canada Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of that newspaper article. I declare under penalty of penury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed in the State of California this 15th day of June, 2001. Rhea Smith