Tommy Zeigler didn’t kill his wife and his in-laws. For 42+ years, his story has never changed, although the Orlando Sentinel and other lazy, crazy and/or corrupt news organizations have allowed seedy ‘public servants’ to assert the contrary, e.g.; former prosecutor Jeff Ashton, who is now a judge. Fact is, Florida’s 9th Judicial Circuit has a decades long reputation of being lawless (verified by their underhandedness throughout Tommy’s persecution), while Tommy has a stellar reputation.
Please share this post to better ensure that the 9th Judicial Circuit’s new Conviction Integrity Unit puts Tommy at the top of their list. Ray McEachern can lay out every shoddy detail for them, as his following plea indicates.
Essential Criminal Justice Legislation
Illustrated by a 42 Year Death Row Inmate
Prosecutors and judges must have legislated penalties for proscribed conflicts of interest. William T. Zeigler CASE has 3 Examples:
- The trial judge refused to step aside even though he and Zeigler had been opposing character witnesses in a trial four months before Zeigler was arrested for 4 murders in his own store on Christmas Eve 1975. That prior case resulted in embarrassment to the trial judge.
- Years later a Florida Supreme Court Justice wrote the denial of a Zeigler appeal despite being a friend and adviser to the sheriff who arrested him while Zeigler was in the hospital recovering from a gunshot wound to his stomach.
- The current circuit judge in the 9th circuit who was strangely assigned in 2003 to hear a petition granted by another judge failed to disclose he was married to an assistant state attorney working for the prosecution.
DNA testing must be granted to a convicted inmate before execution. William T. Zeigler Example: In 2015 a Zeigler petition for DNA testing of all spots that might be blood using the latest methods was denied by the same circuit court judge assigned in 2003 even though his pro bono attorneys would pay for testing. It was upheld by the Florida Attorney General and the Florida Supreme Court.
DNA results which refute the prosecution theory at trial must grant a convicted inmate a new trial. William T. Zeigler Example: In 2003 Zeigler’s pro bono attorneys asked that the sentence be vacated based on DNA testing which showed that blood on Zeigler’s shirt did not come from a man he claimed he did not kill and the blood on another dead man at the scene who Zeigler claimed had been one of his attackers had the blood of that man soaked into his pants. The prosecution had told the jury at trial that the blood on Zeigler’s shirt came from a Zeigler family member found dead at the scene.
For a complete review of this case, see www.freetommyz.com or call Ray McEachern at 727-378-7507