| VOLUSIA EXPOSED.COM |
|
|
AN OPEN LETTER TO CIRCUIT JUDGE ELIZABETH BLACKBURN The Deceitful Criminal Prosecution of A Fourteen (14) Year-Old Child |
January 12, 2026 |
AS A JOURNALISTIC EDITORIAL,
NO LEGAL OPINION, OR AUTHORITY, SHOULD BE INFERRED
|
Last month (December 2025), the supporters of a then (2021) fourteen (14) year-old child (Nicole Jackson) - sent an open letter to Circuit Judge Elizabeth Blackburn via the Volusia County Clerk of the Court (Florida). Nicole's supporters, along with this publication - have been forwarding the belief, supported by facts and evidence, that since her June 2021 arrest - she has been railroaded by several agencies within our local criminal justice system. Her arrest is based on the blatant lies of Volusia County Sheriff Mike Chitwood. Nicole was purposely, and ineffectively represented by the local public defender's office - eventually being coerced during a non-public court hearing, into accepting a twenty-year prison sentence, followed by a forty-year probation term - all solely to save the local sheriff, and several of his deputies from public humiliation. While the "supporters" provided Judge Blackburn with some "coverage" regarding on how, and whom railroaded Ms. Jackson through our local criminal justice system - this publication (VolusiaExposed.Com) opines our belief that Judge Blackburn colluded with the sheriff, the public defender, and the state attorney in a conspiracy to deny Ms. Jackson a fair and impartial trial. VolusiaExposed.Com has published several articles on this particular topic (see below linked example). Florida's Injustice System The Railroading of a child This OPEN LETTER has been made a part of the official Court docket - as available at https://www.clerk.org. The OPEN LETTER, together with the links to all supportive documents, can also be reviewed below. Donations to assist in Ms. Jackson-Maldonado's appeal can be made to: Advocating For Others, Inc. P.O. Box 512 Lake Helen, Fl 32744 OR BY CASH APP 
IN THE INTEREST OF NICOLE MARIE JACKSON Case No. 2021-303222-CFDB Circuit Court Judge Elizabeth Blackburn S. James Foxman Justice Center 251 North Ridgewood Daytona Beach, Florida 32114 December 18, 2025 Ref: State of Florida v. Nicole Marie Jackson 2021-30322-CFDB An Open letter to: Judge Elizabeth Blackburn, This letter is prepared by the supporters of Nicole Marie Jackson, and submitted regarding the unethical and illegal actions by the Public Defender’s office, State Attorney’s office, and the falsehoods perpetrated by Volusia County Sheriff Mike Chitwood, and several involved deputies. The main lie presented by the sheriff deals with the AK-47 which was never fired as shown by the documents presented within the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) report, and the Volusia County Sheriff’s investigative documents, herein attached. ENCLOSED ARE ATTACHED DOCUMENTS FROM THE CASE DISCOVERY THAT WERE HIDDEN FROM THIS COURT BY DEFENSE COUNSEL IN THE CASE OF NICOLE MARIE JACKSON (a 14-year-old) WHO WAS SENTENCED TO 20 YEARS IN PRISON WITH 40 YEARS CONSECUTIVE PROBATION (We supporters have utilized the website www.VolusiaExposed.Com for the linked discovery documents of this case. They have graciously consented to allow us to use their documents and we are thankful. Though Volusia Exposed is not part of this group, they are very big supporter of ethics and truth within our law and judicial system, and we applaud them) Why do we title such ( 66 ) shots? Because that is the bullet count fired by Volusia County deputies on June 1st 2021, upon a 12 year-old boy named Travis, and 14 year-old Nicole Jackson, as was documented within the Florida Department of Law Enforcement ( FDLE ) report. This evidence would have refuted the false statements made by Volusia County Sheriff Mike Chitwood, as well as by the offices of the Public Defender and the State Attorney had it been submitted for the Court’s review. Their corrupt actions, as stated within this letter, and supported by exhibited evidence, effectively railroaded a 14 year-old girl into that above stated sentence. These “public defenders” were Larry Avallone, Jessica Roberts and Alyson Hughes – along with the support from their supervisor, elected Public Defender Matt Metz. We allege that all of these “public defenders” negated their professional responsibilities of defending Ms. Jackson in exchange for gaining some favor from Volusia Sheriff Mike Chitwood. The Assistant State Attorneys attached to the Jackson prosecution were Sarah Thomas (0who is now in charge of the St Augustine office) and Mark Anthony Interlicchio Jr. (who has since left the office), and their boss elected State Attorney R.J. Larizza, all of whom had a hand in the manipulation of the facts and evidence. You see your Honor, it wasn’t just Sheriff Chitwood who perpetrated these false stories against Ms. Jackson, he had plenty of help. Ms. Jackson’s supporters appreciate that the filed 3.850 motion by the defendant’s retained attorney Daniel Ripley (supporter funded) contains the Court’s legal road map to any future ruling. HOWEVER, it is clear that the above named participants poisoned the “discovery well” within this instant prosecution. Our primary goal within this letter is to provide to the Court, the media, and the public, the facts as to how Ms. Jackson, a juvenile defendant was manipulated into waiving her “due process” rights to a trial by the very people who were there to protect her. Our secondary goal is to advise the Court how these government tax payer supported “employees” purposely mislead the Court by skewing, or hiding, the facts and evidence within Ms. Jackson’s prosecution. The enclosed exculpatory and mitigating evidence would have clearly assisted the defendant in her case, including plea negotiations, Nelson arguments, and sentencing. Regardless of what was, OR was not provided, it is the defendant’s counsels Larry Avallone, Jessica Roberts and Alyson Hughes who are the ones most responsible for the fraud perpetrated upon this Court. The supporters do not believe that the defendant should go scot-free, rather she should have been properly sentenced based on the actual evidence, the facts, and her juvenile legal status, and not the fictional story telling presented by the sheriff, and in their silence or inaction’s supported by all the self-serving attorneys involved. The good news for this Court is that there is clear and ample proof that the Court did not know of these egregious actions, as this Court was never provided this exculpatory and mitigating evidence by the above named individuals. Proof of such is found within the Court’s own statements during the January 27, 2023 ex-parte hearing. Therefore, a conclusion can be made, that this Court NEVER knew the actual events that took place, that lead to Ms. Jackson’s arrest and prosecution. These intended failures by this group of unethical participants would circumvented the cause of justice. As supported within the court transcript, the Court factored in the Public Defender’s and State Attorney’s dereliction of duties, along with their false narratives regarding the Court’s Nelson hearing ruling, the plea acceptance, and in it’s sentencing determinations. Regarding the January 27, 2023 ex parte hearing transcript, we are aware that this transcript was immediately sealed by the Court, in order to protect the defendant’s U.S. Constitutional right to due process of law. HOWEVER, in late February of 2025 – upon the filing of the defendant’s 3.850 motion – this transcript became mistakenly downloadable from the Clerk’s office. It is believed that several persons may have gained access to this transcript. One group is of course the supporters of Ms. Jackson. However, in keeping with this Court’s order to seal such, we will not, at this time, be releasing this transcript out to the public in it’s entirety. NOTE: It is important to know the supporters fully anticipate filing complaints with the Florida Bar regards all three (3) defense counsels, Larry Avallone, Jessica Roberts, and Alyson Hughes, as well as the two (2) listed assistant state attorneys, Sarah Thomas and Mark Anthony Interlicchio Jr. Whether we decide to submit complaints to the proper administrations regarding Matt Metz and R.J. Larizza is yet to be decided. DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL FAILED TO PRODUCE EXCULPATORY & MITIGATING EVIDENCE THAT WAS GIVEN TO THEM IN DISCOVERY (The below list labeled A & B is just two of several violations) A.) Defense counsel Larry Avallon advised the Court that he does not have any police body camera footage of the defendant being shot. This is a lie, as we the supporters have that footage, so it does indeed exist, and we will submit this footage once this Court orders an evidentiary hearing. ( This lie is address in ISSUE #5 enclosed below ) B.) This same counsel lied to his client, and to the Court, when the defendant requested him to cease the false statements by Sheriff Mike Chitwood that was spreading through the media. Mr Avallone told his client, and the Court, “Obviously, that is not what we do.” SEE: EXHIBIT -A - January 27, 2023 Ex-parte Hearing Transcripts P. 49, lines, 3-22 https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitA.pdf (This lie by Mr. Avallone is listed in ISSUE #1 enclosed below ) WHEN DID SHERIFF CHITWOOD COME TO THE REALIZATION OF THE TRUTH ? Ms. Jackson’s supporters suspect that the sheriff was initially unaware that the information provided to him by his deputies were a series of false stories. Which leads us to ask the following questions: 1. Why was Sheriff Chitwood grandstanding in front of the media prior to the proper vetting of those allegations against Ms. Jackson? 2. When did Chitwood find out that many of these allegations were false? 3. And most importantly, why didn’t Chitwood immediately present the truth to the media, the public, and most importantly to the Court, when he became aware of the truth? Regardless of the above questions, the ultimate responsibility to insure the presentation of the truth to the Court rests on the shoulders of defendant’s counsel, as well as the State Attorney’s Office. Therefore we present these following (5) ISSUES: ISSUE #1 DEFENSE COUNSEL’S FAILURE TO CEASE SHERIFF CHITWOOD’S FALSE MEDIA NARRATIVES This issue began when Defendant Nicole Jackson stated her concern to Larry Avallone about the false and outlandish stories that were being presented by Sheriff Chitwood, which exposed Ms. Jackson to the viral attention of the world-wide media. It was not the defendant’s supporters who instigated this ‘media show’ as stated by this Court, rather in actuality, the viral media coverage was ignited by Sheriff Chitwood’s own grandiose statements to the media. So, what does Mr Avallone tell his client, and the Court, when the defendant requests that the sheriff’s stop pushing these outrages stories? “Obviously, that is not what we do” is Mr. Avallone’s answer. AGAIN: EXHIBIT -A- January 27, 2023 Ex-parte Hearing Transcripts P. 49, lines, 3-22 https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitA.pdf Fact is, and as shown herein, Mr Avallone has in the past, filed motions with the Court to protect other clients from inflammatory pre-trial statements from law enforcement personnel. Therefore Mr. Avallone’s above statement was an “obvious” lie upon this Court, and is supportive evidence that Mr. Avallone with purposeful intent failed to provided Ms. Jackson with effective counsel. References: State Of Florida vs. Charles Ivey 2023-305335-CFDB Nov. 30, 2023 filing. Father kills ex-girlfriend and their infant child SEE: EXHIBIT -B- & B-1 https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitB.pdf ( Motion to prevent further prejudicial publicity ) SEE EXHIBIT -C-, C-1, C-2 https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitC.pdf Within the Charles Ivey case, Mr. Avallone requested that the Court silence Daytona Beach Police Chief Jakari Young, and others from making public pretrial statements regarding his client. Mr. Avallone’s failure to properly address Sheriff Chitwood’s false narratives regarding Ms. Jackson’s alleged criminal behaviors, brought unwarranted worldwide media attention to Ms. Jackson’s criminal prosecution. In the particular, based on the sheriff’s false claims and statements, that the children had fired a semi-automatic military grade rifle (AK-47 rifle) at his deputies, gained the children the worldwide media moniker of being the new 21th century version of the infamous 1930s couple “Bonnie & Clyde”. https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/florida-boy-girl-ak47-police-shootout-b2043254.html In truth, two investigations, one conducted by the Volusia Sheriff’s Office (VSO), and the other by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) would both conclude that the AK-47 rifle was never fired by the children. The Court having been mislead by the sheriff’s false statements, incorrectly assigning blame for this heavy world-wide media attention to Ms. Jackson’s supporters – when, in truth, the blame clearly rested on the shoulders of the sheriff and Mr. Avallone. The sheriff’s blame is attached to his false media narratives against the children, while Mr. Avallone’s blame is his failure to address these false narratives (ineffective counsel). As this Court will recall, during the January 27, 2023 ex-parte hearing, the Court articulated that this high media attention was the catalyst for the Court closing the Nelson Hearing to the public – as well as for the sealing the hearing’s transcript. The Court should now be aware, that is was not a group of alleged outside agitators (Jackson supporters) that gave rise to the extraordinary media attention, rather, the media’s interest was fueled by the comments, actions, and in-actions of government actors, with particular attention being given to Volusia County Sheriff “Media Mike” Chitwood. It is important to stress, that solely based on the falsehoods and failures of the sheriff, defense counsel, and the State Attorney’s Office, the Court was mislead into denying the defendant her right to competent counsel, and to a public trial that she had requested on numerous occasions. https://www.wesh.com/article/teen-girl-refuses-plea-deal-volusia-shootout/40230035 ISSUE #2 THIS NOW LEADS US TO THE MANY TALL TALES SHERIFF MIKE CHITWOOD SPEWED FORTH IN HIS MANY MEDIA APPEARANCES? This travesty of justice began on June 1, 2021 when a group of the Volusia County Sheriff deputies claimed they were taking gunfire from the two children for an hour and a half. Those highly embellished accounts were not true, because evidence suggest, that it was the deputies’ own gunfire, and not the children's gunfire. In, actuality the deputies were the targets of their own friendly fire as the attached exhibits prove. The attached exhibits within the Volusia Sheriff Investigation report and the FDLE Investigation Report provides evidence that it was the deputies who discharged the multiple rounds of gunfire, and not the defendant, or her twelve (12) year-old co-defendant. FDLE INVESTIGATION https://volusiaexposed.com/corrections/2023/jacksonmaldonado72023/fdleinvestigation.pdf VSO INVESTIGATION – concludes no AK-47 gunfire by the children https://volusiaexposed.com/vcso/2022/nicolejackson92022/chargingreport.pdf Those dozens of gunfire rounds that were heard for about an hour and a half were overwhelmingly fired by the deputies, as only a total of (6) shells were accounted to the defendants, Nicole (14), and Travis (12), and those six (6) rounds were fired within the master bedroom as shown in the Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigative report prepared by FDLE Special Agent Scott Ratliff. SEE: Exhibit -D- ( NOTE: The count shows 4 long rifle cartridges however, is was actually a (4) 22 caliber pistol that was fired by Travis and (2) shot gun shells fired by defendant and none of them from different sides of the house, or from the garage as the sheriff claimed.) https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitD.pdf Let’s do a review, of the deputies (66) bullet count as shown again in the FDLE report. SEE: Exhibit -E, E1, E2 https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitE.pdf That report breaks it down as to how many shots were fired by each deputy, proving there is going to be a lot of explaining to do by some of those deputies. In addition, the following Volusia Sheriff's document shows that ‘SEVERAL CLUSTERS’ of fired shells were located “east, northeast, and north side of the home with (4) distinct shooting positions being identified.” These were fired from outside of the home, not from within. SEE: Exhibit -F (Supporters have ALL the photo evidence of the shell casing) https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitF.pdf This document proves this is where the bullet count came from, during this hour-and-a-half gun play, that Sheriff Chitwood boldly claimed came from the children. The evidence supports that the deputies were shooting at one another – in short, they were victims of their own friendly fire. The second reason these outlandish stories flew about was the horrific condition the 12-year-old boy, Travis, was in when officers questioned him. Travis, a brittle diabetic and often Baker Acted, was handcuffed to a hospital bed as he was questioned by law enforcement. This boy's words during this interrogation are clearly from a little boy who was mentally incapacitated at that moment, as shown by his statement in the FDLE report. SEE: Exhibit – G, G1, G2, G3 - pages 17 thru 20. https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitG.pdf This in itself is shocking, as much of it is a made up story of a disoriented child. Nonetheless, Sheriff Chitwood willfully continued on with a fantastic series of stories only sick child suffering from a diabetic episode could conjure up (blood sugar level 443). SEE: Exhibit -H-H1, H2, specifically, lines # 37-68. https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitH.pdf So the question here is, why would the sheriff inject this little boy's made up “confession” and align it as if it were the actual truth? The sheriff then read to the media where Travis claims to have fired a double-barreled shotgun. However, such a weapon was never attached to this incident. Yet, the sheriff never brought any closure to this, or other erroneous statements to the media. The supporters wish to point out, that Sheriff Chitwood started his series of untruthful accounts immediately after the incident, and when one reads the FDLE report, it is clear Sheriff Chitwood’s deputies had provided him inaccurate information. As we have asked earlier, why didn’t the sheriff EVER countered this inaccurate information with the truth, especially as the decision whether to prosecute Ms. Jackson as juvenile or adult charging were being discussed. The original media coverage presented, based on the sheriff’s erroneous comments was never corrected, causing the sheriff to violated both the trust of the people, and of this Court. Within the court transcript, the Court stated that it had reviewed on-line media sources in order to gauge the level of media attention attached to this instant prosecution. We (supporters) do have some concerns that these media published and inaccurate statements by the sheriff, may have biased the Court’s understanding of what is actual fact, over what is merely the hyperbolic fantasy of our local sheriff. Shortly, after the shooting incident, while Ms. Jackson was fighting for her life on a hospital operation table, Sheriff Chitwood made his first media statement. This was Chitwood’s first media accounting of the shooting incident, in which he started the snowball effect of lies, which quickly turning into an avalanche of deceit by the State Attorney's and Public Defender’s office. IMPORTANT: The sheriff’s first media appearance can be viewed on YouTube...as most of the stories do. Here, the specific media clip that this letter addresses, as it appears on YouTube.com ( Search: “Sheriff Chitwood says 12-year-old, 14-year-old involved in shooting with law enforcement officers” ) ( Or click the link : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FK-mm2sR8co ) So, here is a break down of Sheriff Chitwood’s first media engagement, lasting (17) minutes (42) seconds, and was the original catalyst for the worldwide media frenzy. NOTE: The numbers besides each paragraph are the minutes and seconds into this media interview by the Sheriff, and are not the time of day. Yes, this is long, but so are most fantasy fairy tales of Sheriff “Media Mike” Chitwood. HERE GOES: 1.) .46 seconds into the above linked video: Sheriff admits the 12-year-old Travis is a severe diabetic. The paramedic’s report in the FDLE investigation shows the blood sugar level of Travis was 443, and that is considered to be a very high and dangerous blood sugar level. SEE Exhibit -I https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitI.pdf 2.) 2:20 Sheriff states Nicole Jackson burned down a foster home in Flagler County. ( It was actually 8 panels of vinyl fencing, NOT a home. SEE: Exhibit – J https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitJ.pdf 3.) 2:45 Sheriff Chitwood states Sergeant Maxwell took fire multiple times.(Florida Department of Law Enforcement FDLE investigations Again, Exhibit - D https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitD.pdf Shows only ( 4 ) 22 caliber bullets and (2) shotgun shells were found from the children. HOWEVER, the Volusia County Sheriff's report shows (2) of those 22 caliber bullets were fired into ceiling light fixtures, (1) bullet misfired, and (1) bullet appeared to hit a wall as stated by the homeowner in his deposition that he saw a bullet hole in that wall. In addition, the shotgun was fired through the door window blinds, and the shot went out at NO specific target. SEE: Exhibit K https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitK.pdf And to further support the defendant's position, is the fact that NO AK-47 was ever fired ! The supporters claim this non-existent AK-47 gunfire was the sheriff's foundation for his ridiculous media circus surrounding the children (Bonnie and Clyde reference). SEE: Exhibit -L- lines 79,80 https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitL.pdf 4.) 2:54 Sheriff claims "other units" report the kids firing at them. (Those repeated gun shots were fired by the other deputies on the other sides of the home. These deputies were victims of their own friendly fire. Again, Exhibit -F) https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitF.pdf 5.) 3:00 Sheriff again states that 'another' group of deputies claim shots were fired at them by the defendant and Travis. ( Unless these cops were the light fixtures in the ceiling as shown in AGAIN Exhibit -K- then such evidence shows the deputies WERE NOT actually fired upon ) https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitK.pdf 6.) 3:03 Sheriff Chitwood claims the defendant emerged from the home and threatened to kill deputies.( None of the alleged threats are available on any police body cam footage ) 7.) 3:15 Then the sheriff states the most fraudulent lie of them all, when he claims the 12-year-old opened fire with the AK-47 military rifle, which was the foundation of the media carnival that would soon begin. ( Again, Exhibit -L- lines 79,80 ) https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitL.pdf 8.) 3:28 Sheriff now states the defendant came out of the garage, and levels the shotgun at deputies. While this appears to be true (leveling of the shotgun), the sheriff again claims his deputies took multiple rounds, this being just another lie by the sheriff, because deputies’ testimonies verified that they fired first, and the defendant never fired during this garage encounter. Those deputies' depositions are submitted herein. Deputy Omar Bello states he never heard defendant scream or yell anything as she exited the house, let alone making any threats like Sheriff Chitwood claimed. Exhibit -M- ,M-1, M-2- p, 17-18 https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitM.pdf Exhibit -N-N1, N2, p 18-19 of Deputy Donald Gray https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitN.pdf Exhibit -O- O1,- p 15 of Deputy Nicole Richardson https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitO.pdf Exhibit -P- P1, p 12 of Deputy Anthony Zimmerer https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitP.pdf Here Zimmerer states he fired a “couple of shots” at the defendant. However, he clearly is lying, as Deputy Zimmerer fired (14) shots as shown in, AGAIN: Exhibit - E-2 https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitE.pdf Think about that for a moment … Zimmerer fired (14) bullets at a 12 and 14 year old, and our Sheriff is proud of him. Exhibit -Q- Q1,-Q2, p 15 & 17 Deputy Anthony Ray Jr. https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitQ.pdf 9.) 4:07 Sheriff states law enforcement almost lost their lives. Yes, the deputies almost shot each other in a friendly fire cross-fire - and is why the deputies almost lost their lives. Again, we refer back to the light fixtures and the door in Exhibit -K https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitK.pdf 10.) 5:11 Sheriff Chitwood states that his men took multiple rounds with no choice but to fire. Remember, the deputy depositions show they fired first and fired from 4 unique angles of the exterior home during that hour and a half. Again, Exhibit -F https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitF.pdf 11.) 6:10 Sheriff Chitwood claims that the children came out to shoot and kill the deputies. It is clear the sheriff has a REAL NEED to tell false narratives, as all the exhibits support that that he is either simply wrong, or a purposeful liar. 12.) 7:09 Sheriff states the defendant and the 12-year-old boy shot at officers multiple times. 13.) 7:44 Sheriff says " they engaged deputies in a gun battle". Let's assume the sheriff was not given the facts at the time of the incident. But what if the Sheriff did discover the truth, and he chose to remained silent. Why? Is it the sheriff’s position – that it is better to hide the truth – thus avoiding the embarrassment, by quietly allowing a child to go to prison for 20 years? 14.) 8:30 Sheriff says the defendant was shot a "couple" of times, then remarks that the defendant was shot in the arm, the stomach, and the chest. In actuality, the defendant was shot 6 times, with one directly in the center of the back. We have the medical reports and the photos, and one such report shows the possibility of the defendant being shot while she was on the ground. Gunshot wound to Ms. Jackson’s back (warning picture is graphic) https://volusiaexposed.com/corrections/2023/jacksonnelsonhearing1272023a/gunshotpic.jpg 15.) 8:45 Again, the Sheriff did not supply the truth to the media nor to Volusia County residents when he repeats, "We were there from 7:30 to 9 P.M. and took fire the whole time ". In actuality, during that “time”, the children shot (2) light fixtures, a wall, a miss-fire, and window blinds. The rest of the gun fire during that 90 minutes were fired by the deputies. Again, Exhibit -F-Okay, we know we refer to this exhibit often ) https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitF.pdf 16.) 9:12 Sheriff states that the defendant stole puppies. As in plural. When in fact, it was one puppy, and she was 12 yrs old at the time. Once more, the sheriff claims the foster home was burned down by the defendant. But 8 panels of vinyl fencing do not a home make. Again, Exhibit -J https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitJ.pdf 17.) 9:48 "Tried to take the lives of 8 of his deputies," the sheriff says. 18.) 10:18 Sheriff Chitwood continues to spread false information when he says the children had "more ammunition than his deputies ". Factually, the FDLE investigative report lists the number of bullets fired by deputies at (66), and as we have seen, this was 11 times the number of shots fired by the children. Again, Exhibits -D- & -E https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitD.pdf https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitE.pdf 19.) 11:12 Again, Sheriff Chitwood claims deputies took multiple rounds. When is the sheriff going to advise the media, and public, and the Court, that he was providing them with multiple lies? 20.) 11:23 Sheriff states he picked up an empty AK-47 BANANA clip. Yes, it was empty because the children NEVER PLACED ANY bullets in it ! 21.) 11:29 Sheriff Chitwood claims how the children opened fire on his deputies. It is clear that the sheriff chose to believe the original verbal accounts, but as pointed out, did nothing to clear it up, when the truth was identified within the final investigative reports 22.) 12:50 Sheriff Chitwood stated that he didn't even know how to load and unload an AK-47 when he was these kids' ages. Well, sheriff, we don't know if the kids could load or unload an AK-47 either. That's because they never loaded or shot that AK-47. 23.) 13:14 Sheriff claims the kids yelled they were coming out to kill the deputies. Again, we ask, why is this not heard on any of the body cams like everything else? Again, we refer to Deputy Bello’s deposition. AGAIN: Exhibit-M- p, 17 https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitM.pdf 24.) 13:44 Sheriff Chitwood advises the media that he could not be prouder of his deputies, as they went above and beyond their duty. If shooting at a 14 and 12 year-old (66) times and hitting the defendant 6 times – with one shot striking the child dead center in her back, makes this sheriff proud of his deputies, we wonder if this sheriff should even be in control of anything to do with guns or a badge? 25.) 14:00 Another outrageous claim is when Sheriff Chitwood recklessly states the children did not just fire from one spot, but that they TRAVERSED the entire house while opening fire at deputies in different angles, not just one area. The law enforcement reports are clearly in support of the children. All the documents prove there was no traversing. There were no bullet or gun casings spread all over the home. NO SHELLS of any kind were found spread through the other rooms or in the garage, OTHER than the deputies. All bullet casings were in the Master Bedroom...Period! The ONLY TRAVERSING that took place was the sheriff's outlandish claims, as they are all over the map. If we all look at those Exhibits once more -E- & -F where it proves the deputies were all over the property, unlike the kids who were in the Master bedroom. Thus, there was NO traversing. https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitE.pdf https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitF.pdf Well, there you have it, a display of untruthful claims told by a man named Michael Jude Chitwood. Jude is clearly short for Judas, who, as we know, turned his back on Jesus. Here, we have our own Judas who turned his back on a 14-year-old neglected girl. But our modern day Judas didn’t stop there, he went on to betray his office, his profession, justice in general, the citizens of Volusia County, Florida, as well as to this Court. And as we now know, he didn’t do it alone. The sheriff had his co-conspirators within the State Attorney’s and the Public Defender’s offices. As we write this, it is clear that the sheriff had ample time to correct his statements to the media and others, yet he chose to remain silent, at least about the truth. A sad commentary on who this man really is. A stated earlier, we the supporters of Ms. Jackson realize this Court was never told of these documents, and clearly is not part of the cabal of fraudsters. NOTE: The supporters have fully looked into all aspects of this incident. We have found through evidence, that not all the sheriff deputies were in dereliction of their duties. There were a couple of honest ones, but one deputy stood out. Deputy Omar Bello, has shown true professionalism. We commend him. ISSUE #3: DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL FAILED TO SUBMIT THE ABOVE EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE DURING THE CRITICAL STAGE OF SENTENCING As provided within the many of our exhibits, Defense counsels Larry Avallone, Jessica Roberts, and Alyson Hughes failed to submit to this Court the required exculpatory and mitigating evidence during the ex-parte, plea negotiation and sentencing hearing. This evidence would have been favorable to Ms. Jackson, specifically during her sentencing. One look at the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) and Sheriff’s office investigative reports proves that Ms. Jackson clearly DID NOT have a "shoot out " with sheriff deputies. In fact, the children were themselves were trapped within the cross fire of the deputies’ friendly fire fiasco. Thus, the question: Should a Judge be obligated to be an independent investigator with regards to the evidence, or have to comb through the hundred-plus pages of Discovery which was part of this case. The answer is, of course, NO. The problem is that the State Attorney and Public Defender offices were well aware that the defendant did not engage in a ‘gunfight’ with law enforcement, as was embellished by the sheriff. The failure by defense counsel to advise the Court of the sheriff’s false narrative, clearly shows, not only ineffective counsel, but deceptive counsel. It is clear, that all the identified agencies and individuals participated in this orchestrated obstruction of justice. The Court does have a post-conviction responsibility – that upon request by the defendant’s current counsel, who did filed a timely post conviction motion (Fl. Rules of Criminal Procedures 3.850) – to evaluate whether the defendant’s trial legal team provided her with competent and effective legal counsel. ISSUE #4. DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL FAILED TO PRODUCE EXCULPATORY and MITIGATING EVIDENCE PROVING THE DEFENDANT DID NOT COME OUT OF THAT HOME FIRING! (The deputy depositions were done a year after the original reports that were stated in the FDLE and Sheriff reports. These depositions prove that Nicole Jackson did not fire or make verbal threats as she exited the garage ) Yes, these exhibits have been submitted above however, this is an adjoining issue of facts. Those deputies that are submitted herein are: Deputies Omar Bello, who states he never heard the defendant scream or yell anything as she exited the house, let alone making any threats like Sheriff Chitwood claimed. Exhibit -M- p,17-18 of Omar Bello https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitM.pdf Exhibit -N- p,18-19 of Donald Gray Exhibit https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitN.pdf O- p, 15 of Nicole Richardson https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitO.pdf Deputy Zimmerer states he fired a “couple of shots” at the defendant. However, as shown earlier in the exhibits, Zimmerer clearly is lying as he fired (14) shots. Again: Exhibit - E, page 3 https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitE.pdf Think about that...(14) bullets at a 12 and 14 year- old children and our sheriff is proud of him. Exhibit -P- p, 12 of Deputy Zimmerer https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitP.pdf Exhibit -Q- p,15 & 17. Anthony Ray Jr. https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitQ.pdf These were false claims that the press ate up from Sheriff Chitwood’s repeated media interviews. Clearly, it was Sheriff Chitwood’s false statements that was the catalyst for the high media attention, and not any actions or statements from the defendant’s current supporters. True, there were some “rogue supporters” at the very beginning, who disrespected this situation, but their attention was only short lived. Furthermore, one of the current supporters (Matt Shortt) didn’t even get involved for over a year after the incident. During the January 2023 ex-parte hearing, the Court should recall advising the defendant that her supporters had jeopardized her right to a fair trial by them submitting accounts to the media of what exactly had transpired during the shooting incident. In actuality, the records, and the timeline, will clearly show that this shooting incident quickly became a “media circus” shortly after Sheriff Chitwood’s initial faux media briefings – which all transpired long before any of the defendant’s current supporters made any statements regarding the incident. See Exhibit -R- hearing transcripts page 33, line 4 thru 16. https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitR.pdf Remember, in the sheriff's own words. "The kids fired NOT ONCE...NOT TWICE ...But MULTIPLE TIMES. The sheriff has an obligations to provide this Court with accurate facts, and NOT the hyperbolic facts he fed to the media, in order to solidify his law enforcement or political prowess. Five (5) deputies’ depositions appear to support that the deputies fired first. Therefore, the deputy depositions are vital in the proper defense of the defendant. Defense counsels’ failure to produce such exculpatory and mitigating evidence is blatant ineffectiveness of counsel, and possibly unethical behavior by these counselors. These failures and behaviors by counsel are causes to justify the withdrawal of the defendant’s nolo contendere plea. A plea that was based on concealed evidence, and false or misleading statements given to this Court. The 15-year-old defendant (at the time of sentencing) had the constitutional right of having all the Discovery that was in her favor presented to the Court, prior to the Court accepting her plea, and sentencing her. ISSUE #5. DEFENDANTS' COUNSEL COMMITTED PERJURY WHEN HE TOLD THE COURT HE DID NOT HAVE ANY FOOTAGE OF THE SHOOTING Defendants' counsel Larry Avallone, lied to this Court during the ex-parte and sentencing hearing when he failed to produce the footage of Nicole being shot by the deputies. Here, Mr. Avallone committed perjury when he stated, "That doesn’t exist". This is more than misleading, as it defines a pure act of bald-faced lying towards this Court. Thus, perjury. Supporters can claim this is a blatant lie by defense counsel, as the supporters have that footage. SEE Exhibit -S- page, 34, Lines 3 through 25 & page, 35, Lines 1 through 19. https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitS.pdf We, the supporters, are certain this Court will want to see such shooting footage and, we shall provide this footage to the Court when an evidentiary hearing is heard. However, perhaps the most interesting element to this issue is where and by whom did we (the Supporters) receive the copy of that footage. It was from Larry Avallone himself who left the files at the front desk of the Public Defenders' Office to be picked up by a supporter who lives close by. (This was before the sentencing) At first, we supporters believed Mr. Avallone was sending us a message that this fiasco was OUT OF HIS HANDS. However, with the benefit of hindsight, and the knowledge that Mr. Avallone was employed as a Volusia County sheriff deputy prior to becoming a member of the public defender’s office, provides us pause, that Mr. Avallone’s allegiance may have been more towards his former employer, than to his client (conflict of interest). And upon further reflection, we supporters believe that Mr. Avallone will no doubt cave when asked by the sheriff and the state in future criminal court cases. THOSE WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS CHARADE CLEARLY DEMONSTRATED AN OBVIOUS SHOWING OF DISRESPECT TO THE LAW, THE DEFENDANT, AND THIS COURT COLLECTIVELY, several of the individuals listed herein, participated in a well planed scenario to deny Ms. Jackson her due process, by knowingly withholding exculpatory & mitigating evidence from this Court. In addition, the supporters can claim that the elected State Attorney, R.J.Larizza, and Public Defender Matt Metz knew or should have known, and most probably even endorsed this charade upon the Court. A critical stage of any defendant's court proceedings is the plea and sentencing hearing. Perhaps more so in Volusia County, where the plea rate is 96.2 %. However, these Public Defenders hid important information from this Court at a juncture in time when Ms. Jackson was completely confused. (See the issue raised by her current attorney, Daniel Ripley, in his 3.850 motion ) One reading of the entire ex-parte hearing and sentencing transcript proves that the defendant was lost. Bold proof of that, is when the defendant thought she might be going home very soon. SEE: Exhibit -T- p-122 line, 2 through 5. https://volusiaexposed.com/nicolejacksonmaldonado/122025/exhibits/exhibitT.pdf Here (see above linked exhibit) Nicole asks the Court if she would be “released on June 1st or will it be January 27th.” This statement proves defendant had NO IDEA what was going on. It is abundantly clear from the filed 3.850 motion by her retained counsel (compliments of the Supporters) that the issue presented, clearly shows Nicole's lack of “understanding and competency” at this point. At no time should anyone, least of all a 15-year-old child, be pressured into a plea agreement based on claims of criminal actions that never existed. Yet her trial counsel did do just that. Here is that list in a short, condensed way. 1. There was NO AK-47 ever fired. 2. There were NO multiple firings by the defendant at deputies. 3. There was NO Traversing” within the home. 4. There was NO double-barreled shotgun. 5. There were no 200 ammunition rounds found in the possession of the children. 6. There was no firing by Defendant Jackson as she exited the home. 7. There were NO verbal threats to kill the deputies by the defendant. The Nicole Jackson supporters could provide even a larger laundry list of false claims and allegations against Ms. Jackson – proofed by the additional Discovery documents not yet provided to the Court, or the public. If Sheriff Chitwood would do this to a 14-year-old girl, imagine what he does to adults. This sheriff, this “carnival barker” is a detraction from the truth and justice in so many ways. It’s time for Volusia County, including citizens, and justice practitioners to either stand up – speak out – and insisting that only facts and equal justice prevails, OR to sit down, shut-up and wait to be railroaded by this rogue justice system. The defendant in this instant case, Ms. Nicole Jackson, a young girl of 15 years at the time of her ex-parte and sentencing hearings, was coerced to plead nolo contendere, in the prosecution held together with a pack of lies and withheld evidence, something that goes against everything that American justice stands for. This unethical, disgusting behavior is what most Americans would expect to see within the courtrooms of Russia, North Korea, and China. How dare we claim to live in the land of the free, and home of the brave, when this young girl’s “defenders” can turn their backs on her, and all done to satisfy the narcissistic appetite of a tyrannical sheriff? We, the Jackson supporters chose to stand-up, and speak out, until justice finally prevails. On February 26, 2025, Nicole Marie Jackson financially retained attorney Daniel Ripley filed a motion 3.850 in where he presented his legal arguments supported with an abundance of strong case law, all in the favor of Ms. Jackson. This Court is not obligated to make a ruling on this ‘open letter’ herein presented, but the Court is obligated to address Mr. Ripley’s 3.850 motion. It is the issues raised within Mr. Ripley’s motion that this Court must review and provide relief for the defendant. While Mr. Ripley makes several strong legal arguments, for us the issue detailing the lack of competency and understanding by the defendant is overwhelmingly strong. The supporters hope that the defendant is given an opportunity to withdraw her plea, and that justice prevails, and this tragedy that began with deception and lies be peoperly rectified, and a juvenile sentence like Travis received should follow. Respectfully submitted by The supporters of Nicole Marie Jackson We supporters state that correct copies have been delivered by hand to all the above named except for Sheriff Chitwood and former assistant states attorney’s Sarah Thomas and Mark Anthony Interlicchio Jr., who will have such e-mailed to them. cc: State Attorney’s Office Public Defender’s Office bcc: media organizations, and other appropriate individuals and agencies Sheriff Mike Chitwood Says The Public Doesn't Care OPEN LETTER & RESPONSE TO & BY SHERIFF MIKE CHITWOOD |