Taj Tarik Bey’s 1967
Written By Tutashsumeb Heryumr
On November 7, 1967 agents interview’d defendant, Warren L. Williams Aka Taj Tarik Bey at his home. He was asked if he used the name Warren L. Williams and Taj Tarik Bey at different times. Taj answer’d affirmatively. Also, he was ask’d if he was convict’d on a charge of larceny in 1963, also was ask’d if he bought a gun from Dave Cook in Denver. All answers Taj said yes.
After the meeting with agents,Taj thought no persecution would happen to him, but he was wrong. He was arrested, yet again. Now, we all know Taj Tarik Bey thinks hes smart, Forhaps he is. But the district Judge Dumbauld said “Before the warnings were given (means to be read your miranda rights) the agents extract’d from defendant’s own mouth proof completely establishing his guilt of the crime under scrutiny.” Basically, Tarik Ali Bey (his other name at the time) told on himself.
Now let me say that Taj Tarik Bey was trying to suppress information about his arrest because agents obtained his guilt illegally under some procedure, read what judge says below.
“Nevertheless other essential “links” in the chain of proof needed to demonstrate guilt[5] were obtained in violation of defendant’s right not to give evidence against himself. The facts that he ordered a gun from Colorado, that he received it in Pennsylvania, and that its number was 218966, were surely not observable characteristics of defendant’s life-style visible to passers-by and the general public. The existence of these essential ingredients of the government’s case was established by means of testimonial communication emanating from the defendant in response to interrogation.
Substantial injury to defendant thus resulted from failure to give the appropriate warnings until after the evidence had been extracted. The violation of the Escobedo requirement for timely *230 protection of the rights of persons upon whom investigation has “focussed” as specific suspects was plainly injurious to defendant. The improperly obtained evidence must be suppressed.”
Well moors, another case clos’d.
Link to Taj Tarik Bey’s case below.
Case: United States v. Bey, 385 F. Supp. 227 (W. D. Pa. 1974)
Leave a Reply