By now most of you know that Ann Morgan Lilly has been accused, once again, of assault. As you likely know, on December 20, 2016, Ann Morgan Lilly, her husband Edward Rutledge “Rut” Lilly, Oscar Leeser and his wife got into a verbal altercation at the Thyme Matters restaurant. According to the police complaint filed by Leeser’s wife, Lisa; “Rut” Lilly “shoved” Lisa Lilly out of the way in order to get past her to grab Oscar Leeser’s telephone. As is expected, there are two stories as to what transpired that day.
What we do know is that a police complaint has been filed against Edward Rutledge Lilly by Lisa Leeser for “assault by contact”. We also know that Lisa Leeser desires the prosecution of “Rut” Lilly.
There is a concept in the legal system in the United States called the preponderance of evidence. Those of you, like me, who watched Law and Order have a rudimentary understanding of the concept. The preponderance of evidence is defined by the concept that the evidence that exists in a case is the likely correct version of events. In the vast majority of criminal cases, the concept of preponderance of evidence is insufficient to find someone guilty of a crime. This is because the penalty, that ranges from deprivation of liberty, rights or even life, requires that the evidence be beyond a shadow of a doubt. The idea is that you do not want to put someone in jail based on evidence that likely shows a crime was committed instead of outright proof that the crime was committed by the individual paying for the crime.
Unfortunately, like everything else, all is not black and white. Criminals do not follow the law. Instead criminals corruptly look for loopholes in the legal system and buy themselves protection through corruption.
I am surprised that a police report was made public because I believe that Ann Morgan Lilly is part of the protected class in El Paso. I’ll share with you more on this later this week. For now, let us focus on the preponderance of evidence.
We know that the Leeser version of events is that “Rut” Lilly assaulted Lisa Leeser. The Lilly’s deny that the assault occurred. So, let us look at the evidence.
Ann Morgan Lilly and her husband have a history of assault.
In 2005, Don Martinez alleged that he was assaulted by the Lilly’s. I conducted a telephone interview in 2013 with Don Martinez, who related to me what happened. You can read about it by clicking here. According to Martinez, there were two witnesses as the incident escalated. Dwight Jefferson, a former employee of the Sheriff’s Department and David Laub.
As the incident escalated, Ann Morgan Lilly allegedly threw water at Martinez during the altercation and somehow ended up “hanging on” to Laub’s back as she allegedly hit him in the back with a water bottle. In the meantime, “Rut” Lilly was allegedly verbally and physically abusive towards Martinez and his assistants; Jefferson and Laub.
A police report was filed, EPPD Case 05-220165, but to date the City has refused to release a copy to the community.
According to Martinez, the police were “pressured” to drop the case by the City Attorney’s office.
In 2013, a second assault case was filed against the Lilly’s, this time by a city employee. On October 21, 2013, Art Fierro alleged that Ann Morgan Lilly threatened him. Although I asked for copies of the police and investigative reports various times, they are yet to be made public. The excuse is that they are either nonexistent or that the investigation is “ongoing”.
However, I have kept looking for details because I know that one of the tools used by corruptors is to hide information. Without information, the corruptors can threaten litigation under the guise that it can’t be proven.
As far as I have been able to ascertain, there are three police reports about the 2013 incident. Read the details by clicking here. Ted Marquez with the city’s Street and Maintenance Department, the statements by Art Fierro, the complainant and his coworker Andres Rico. According to the information I have been gathering, it was allegedly both “Rut” Lilly and Ann Morgan Lilly that assaulted Fierro. According to information that has been shared with me by sources that wish to remain anonymous, the Lilly’s asked Fierro, “what’s the matter boy, you got rocks in your head?” They also allegedly threatened to “kill” him. Notice the use of “boy” as it fits the narrative that is starting to emerge. Remember this term as it will become important in a later post.
Both cases demonstrate clear patterns.
The first pattern is that Ann Morgan Lilly benefits from disappearing police reports and intimidation tactics. The second pattern demonstrates the inherent violence of the Lilly’s in dealing with those they consider beneath them.
Formal 911 calls were made for the incidents in 2005 and 2013. In both cases, documentation of any police investigations has not been made public. Ted Marquez ordered his staff that any questions or encounters with the Lilly’s should be referred to him directly. See the pattern of controlling the information that leaks out of the City?
Now that the latest assault case has been filed, the news media has only tangibly referred to the 2013 case without giving you details. The 2005 case has yet to be mentioned. The narrative is purposely being created to show an illusion that the latest case is one, thus leaving the impression of ambiguity as to who to believe.
That is how corruption controls the protected class. Tomorrow, I’ll delve more into that.
For today, look at the evidence I have provided you and see if a preponderance of evidence exists to show you which version of events is the likely truth.