Justice Watch Support JW "State of CA vs. Mackie Eugene Boykin" [ Main ] [ Post New Thread ] [ Help ] [ Search ] Table of Contents ................................................................... State of CA vs. Mackie Eugene Boykin, Chris, 09:50:04, 9/10/2000 THANKS Y'ALL, Msracoon, 10:22:44, 9/10/2000, (#1) Now that I've read, Msracoon, 10:32:28, 9/10/2000, (#2) No msracoon, v_p, 11:30:21, 9/10/2000, (#3) I hope the filthy bastard, Cassandra, 12:55:19, 9/10/2000, (#4) ................................................................... "State of CA vs. Mackie Eugene Boykin" Posted by Chris on 09:50:04 9/10/2000 For those who are interested in learning more about this case, you're invited to read these documents. http://www.zing.com/album/?id=4293644005 These 27 pages were obtained by the poster Holly by contacting the clerk at the Inyo County Superior Court, Inyo, CA. The docs represent the State of California vs Mackie Eugene Boykin and is all the available court record copied from micro-film. The case is #CRF-55-79S filed March 9, 1979. The victim's last name has been removed. The first 14 pages represent a 14 count criminal felony complaint filed by the District Attorney Jack D Davis. There are 7 counts of rape and 7 counts of oral copulation. The second set of docs represent the "information"/description that yielded the charges of the counts advanced to trial. The counts were reduced to 12 because the original counts 13 and 14 were discharged. Those are the counts that are dated August 1, 1977 as the date of the offense. It's not clear if discharged means dismissed, withdrawn, "nol prossed" (declining to prosecute) or otherwise taken care of. Bail was set at $15,000.00 It looks like the arraignment took place on May 17, 1979. You will see in the charge language for Penal Code 261 (2) & (3), the word "rape" does not appear, but the language is for a rape charge. Someone else posted the "Arraignment Sheet", but the clerk does not know how that was obtained. It does not appear as part of the microfilm record of the case. A "Probation" sheet was also posted. Normally that information would be held only by the Court, defense counsel, the Probation Office. It is confidential according to the Court clerk and is not included in these 26 pages. [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 1. "THANKS Y'ALL" Posted by Msracoon on 10:22:44 9/10/2000 THIS IS GREAT! MsRac. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 2. "Now that I've read" Posted by Msracoon on 10:32:28 9/10/2000 these documents I am roaring mad. What is that thing Boykin - totally possessed by the devil himself? (and of a minute size himself?) Please, this is REALLY evil.) God in heaven, help us. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 3. "No msracoon" Posted by v_p on 11:30:21 9/10/2000 Jurisprudence is the monster. The people who judge, try, defend, police, pass legislation and laws are made up of 99% men. The victims of violent crimes, including rape and molestation are 99% women and children. Ironic, isn't it? I'm not bashing men, I just don't think they put as high a value on women and children as they do on themselves. Somehow they understand "urges," and feel a slap on the wrist sufficient. We've come a long way baby, but we still have an even longer way to go. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 4. "I hope the filthy bastard" Posted by Cassandra on 12:55:19 9/10/2000 is paying for his crimes in the hereafter. He certainly didn't pay enough here on earth! Cassie [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ]