I am the only person in Arizona who has been tried and convicted for deprivation of reputation in the community and posting, and I was sentenced to 52.5 years.
No one has ever been prosecuted for this in Arizona.
On June 24, 1992, Deputy Maricopa County Attorney Donald E. Conrad and three others went to Beverly Hills, California, and arrested me on manufactured charges of fraudulent schemes.
To secure my conviction, the court handpicked Judge Jonathan Henry Schwartz. In recent years, documents have surfaced indicating that Maricopa County judges colluded with the County Attorney’s Office on how to arrest and prosecute me.
Evidence has also come to light that the Maricopa County Judges’ Pension Fund invests money in prisons and industries that support prisons. This creates a financial incentive for Maricopa County judges to send people to prison to increase the returns on their pensions. Years ago, it was similarly discovered that prison guards’ pension funds are invested in these industries. Everyone in the criminal justice system appears to have a vested interest in keeping citizens in prison.
I applied for a pardon and provided evidence of actual innocence. However, the Board of Pardons and Parole does not consider actual innocence a valid claim. (See: Motion to Change Rules below.)
Mena Mendez, a former Assistant Arizona Attorney General, stated that the Board would not consider evidence of my innocence because I showed no remorse—a condition for granting release—so they denied my request.
Louis Quinononez, another board member, stated that because I am litigious, he would not consider my claims. He added that he would give full faith and credit to the conviction and would not consider evidence that the charges were manufactured.
Sal Freni, the third board member, rubber-stamped the decisions of the other two.
I am applying again for a pardon in January 2025.
MOTION FOR THE BOARD OF CLEMENCY TO CHANGE
ITS RULES AND ADOPT EMERGENCY RULES
December 19, 2024 January 3, 2025 I shall file this motion with the Board of Clemency because NaphCare is not following Jensen.
Anant Kumar Tripati (hereinafter I) in the custody of ADCRR, moves this Board to exercise its emergency powers, change/ adopt its rules to comply with Federal Law and submits:
THE EMERGENCY
ARS 31-401.G authorizes the Board to adopt and/or change its rules to comply with Federal injunction ARS 41-1026.A3.
The US District Court in an extensive 200-page order entered on June 30, 2000 (Ex. A ECF 4335) discusses how Arizona has been killing prisoners by denying them treatment for their serious medical needs. On April 7, 2023 the Court issued a permanent injunction. (Ex. B ECF 4410).
NaphCare is continuing to kill inmates and deny inmates treatment for their serious medical needs even though they hired Attorney Sarah Barnes to conceal, falsify, manufacture evidence so NaphCare has the contract (Ex. D). This constitutes an emergency I have written extensively about this. See https://linkedin.com/in/anant-tripati/a794ab311//recent- activity /articles/.
STANDING
Since June 24, 1992 I have been in custody on crimes manufactured by the State, sentenced to 52.5 years with no possibility of early release. In accordance with the practice of this Board not to consider actual innocence claims, even when clear and convincing evidence is presented that the crimes were manufactured, this Board refused to consider my actual innocence claims stating courts must consider these (See Records of Hearings July 23, 2024).
However, over the years, due to denial and delay in providing medical care, I developed serious medical issues as reflected in the medical records submitted in conjunction with the July 23, 2024 pardon hearing.
I was transferred to Cibola Unit in 2021. I was fortunate to receive medical care from two providers, NP Diana Curd and ADON Marcela Meza who managed my medical conditions.
However, in December 2023 they were directed by NaphCare administrators to stop treatment. Since then my conditions have worsened and I have not been able to walk without pain, have shakes tremors, had eye surgery, have dangerously high blood pressure due to pain and need more surgery, etc.
Cibola Unit has not been able to retain qualified providers because Yuma is a poor county, and NaphCare refuses to pay Hispanics in Yuma the salaries they deserve. Marcela Meza has to struggle to provide inmates with medical treatment they need. NaphCare has travelling nurses/providers who are present in body but unable to provide necessary care. NaphCare transferred NP Diana Curd to Lewis Complex because they refused to pay her the $500,000 that travelling providers receive for treating 1,000 patients
NaphCare has refused to provide me with the treatment that NP Diana Curd provided, treatment which managed my medical conditions.
REASONS WHY THE RULES MUST BE CHANGED
(a) THE BOARD SHOULD ASK THE DISTRICT COURT TO APPOINT A RECEIVER TO TAKE CONTROL OF THE PRISON SYSTEM
The Board should request the federal court to appoint a receiver to take control of the prison system to ensure compliance with Jensen, relieving NaphCare so that Article 2 Section 3 is followed. The findings by the District Court and the injunction is federal law and Arizona has the duty to comply with it. This Board has refused to exercise its authority and ensure compliance.
When Arizona inmates were sentenced, nothing in the sentencing order directed Arizona to deny them treatment for their serious medical needs, kill them, or inflict upon them unwanted pain and suffering.
(b) ARIZONA SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT WHEN IT IMPRISONS
PEOPLE, IT MUST COMPLY WITH FEDERAL LAW. LACK OF
FINANCIAL RESOURCES IS NO EXCUSE.
The Ninth Circuit and the District Court have stated repeatedly in Jensen that the Struck Law Firm has been making frivolous arguments. They have also stated that Arizona has chosen not to provide inmates with medical treatment.
Clearly Arizona has made the choice to imprison inmates therefore, it has to take monies from other state programs to pay for inmate healthcare. Lack of financial resources is no excuse for violating federal injunction.
(c) NAPHCARE RIGGED THE BID AND HAS CHOSEN TO DENY
INMATES TREATMENT IN ORDER TO MAKE A PROFIT
Arizona, not NaphCare, is responsible for inmate healthcare (Ex. A, B). By delegating this duty to NaphCare, Arizona is not relieved of its duty.
I have asked the court to dissolve NaphCare (Ex. D) because when NaphCare obtained the contract David Shinn, the former ADCRR Director had personal knowledge that NaphCare was incapable of complying with the injunction. Shinn also knew NaphCare has the highest death rates nationally. (Ex. C). However, as James McLane had Shinn hire Larry Gann, a former NaphCare employee, career ADCRR employees helped rig the bid.
CONCLUSION
The Board has the power to adopt emergency rules to prevent the violation of federal law as set forth in the Jensen Injunction to prevent serious prejudice to those subject to Jensen 41-1026.A.5 and to protect the public health, safety and welfare of the public, 41-1026.A.1.
The Rule should provide for inmates who have serious medical needs, and are not receiving the treatment Jensen has ordered, to apply for commutation.
In the alternative the Board should ask the District Court to appoint a receiver to take control of the prison system to ensure compliance with Jensen and we do not die, receive medical treatment.
Respectfully Submitted,
Anant Kumar Tripati