Sentence Disparity
This window was created to demonstrate a transparent view of how prosecutors and judges treat certain people, like how they've treated Abe. This info is an accumulation of all the disparities contained in all the appropriate windows.
In Colorado, especially in Denver County how a defendant will be handled will vary depending on the race of the victim and the defendant. Click here to view a CU Law Journal Study
If you're a minority, best case scenario for a reasonable disposition of your case is if your victim is another minority.
Worst case scenario is if you are a minority, especially black, and your victim white. You will then feel the full weight of the Denver District Attorney's office, Denver Police, Attorney General's office, and any other resource they choose to seek.
A great example in Abe's case was when a personal he has never met, Johny Leng-Neng AKA "Sniper," was given a 10-year sentence for shooting a young hispanic male in the back five times.
The Denver District Attorney's office required "Sniper" to testify to some hearsay conversations between him and other Asian gang members, to recieve this extraordinary plea deal that was the minimum he could have received. Click to see Johny's plea arrangement in state witnesses and plea deals
The following is a perfect example of how The Denver District Attorney's office treats criminal defendants based on their race and their victims race. Under the District Attorney's Office the theory of these cases were identical. The District Attorney's Office decided to file the death penalty against Abe when he was 23 years old and had never been in trouble with the law. They chose not to file the death penalty against Mr. Villanueva.
| Defendant | Case Number | States Theory | Defendant’s Race | Victim's Race | Death Penalty Eligible | Death Penalty Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abraham Hagos | 99CR2738 | That the deceased was killed because he was a witness in a drug case | Black | White | Yes | Yes | Martin Villanueva | 06CR10408 | That the deceased was killed because he was a witness in a drug case | Hispanic | Hispanic | Yes | No |
A prosecutor is the most powerful person in a courtroom. They have the power, authority, and discretion on how to charge someone, who to charge with what crime, and if they want to, file the death penalty. In Abe’s circumstances, he was the only person they filed the death penalty on.
In Colorado there are two statues that have identical elements, but the sentence that they carry are astronomically different. One is not even a crime – complicity – rather it is a theory that a prosecution can choose to attach to a crime, which will then carry the same penalty as that charge. On the other hand, accessory to a crime, like to murder, would be a class 4 felony carrying a sentence of 2-6 years.
In both of Abe's cases, the Denver District Attorney's Office charged him as a complicitor. The complicity statue has been confusing and contradictory and has seen an ongoing change in the law throughout the last few decades from the Colorado appellate courts. In Abe's kidnapping case, the jury sent out the following question during their lengthy deliberations:
Instead of clarifying their question, the judge deliberately gave them an illegal response that was not legally adequate. The judge was aware that the jury was ready to acquit Abe, so he assisted The State. This is an action of judicial misconduct and corruption.
Click here to read his response
Mr. Hogan was charged and convicted of the following:
- 3 counts of Second-Degree Kidnapping
- 1 count of Aggrivated Robbery
- 2 counts of Crime of Violence sentence enhancer
Over two decades later Mr. Hogan petitioned Beth McCann to review his case
Beth McCann agreed to review his case
(She gave him immediate release)
Abe was charged with the following, but acquitted of some of the charges
- First-Degree Kidnapping: guilty
(Judge gave an incorrect jury instruction that does not exist as law) - First-Degree Burlary: guily
- Aggravated Robbery: not guilty
- Second-Degree Assault: not guilty
- Conspiracy to commit First-Degree Kidnapping: not guilty
Over two decades later Abe petitioned Beth McCann to review his case
Beth McCann refused to review his case
In Abe's circumstance one of the reasons why Beth McCann refuses was because the appellate courts did not reverse his case
This is her actual quote to Abe's attorney, "Mr. Hagos conviction for First-Degree Kidnapping was appropriate, and has been affirmed by both The Court of Appeals and The Supreme Court -- twice."
The hypocrisy in Beth McCann is that while she states one of the reasons she refuses to plead Abe's case is that the courts have upheld his convictions but they did the same thing in Mr. Hogan's case twice. She chose to override the Colorado Court of Appeals and Colorado Supreme Court decision for Mr. Hogan. Additionally, the victim in Abe's case was a childhood friend of Abes. In 2002, and as of recent, Billy Leopp has tried to speak with Beth McCann regarding how he feels Abe should have never been charged and has no objection to his release. Billy Leopp testified to the following at trial:
Beth McCann has continued to ignore Colorado's victim rights act by refusing to speak with Billy Leopp. Under these rights, Billy is a victim and is not being heard.
The question is, what is the difference between Abe and Mr. Hogan?