Wednesday, March 19, 1997 | 11:59 a.m.
A "fatally flawed" grand jury process should result in the dismissal of a murder charge against Ron Mortensen, the attorney for the former Metro Police officer contends.
In court documents filed recently, attorney Frank Cremen has alleged that Mortensen's friend and former colleague, Christopher Brady, was given special treatment for his role in the Dec. 28 shooting death of gang member Daniel Mendoza.
Brady admitted he was the driver who took Mortensen into gang turf on McKellar Circle during a drunken spree and then raced away after six shots peppered a home.
Brady also admitted that he pulled his own pistol in the last of a series of five incidents where the pair had harassed drug dealers and gang members.
Although Brady voluntarily came forward to tell his story to Metro brass, it wasn't until 36 hours had passed.
Despite his admitted involvement and the time lapse, the Clark County district attorney's office chose not to prosecute Brady and, in fact, declared that he had done nothing wrong and was just a witness.
In his motion to dismiss the murder charges, Cremen said the prosecution's decision has become "a serious public issue."
The grand jury, he said, should have been given the option of also indicting Brady as an accomplice in the death of the 21-year-old victim.
The issue of whether Brady is an "accomplice" is important because the law states that a person can't be convicted on the word of an accomplice without independent corroborating evidence.
One of the gang members identified Mortensen in a lineup as the shooter but two others picked another person. Mortensen's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon, but it was recovered only because of Brady's admissions.
A hearing on the issue has been rescheduled for April 3 before District Judge Joseph Pavlikowski. It was postponed on Tuesday.
Deputy District Attorney John Lukens gave Brady's attorney a letter declaring the officer "committed no act for which he could be prosecuted and is simply a witness who came forward with information that led to solving a crime."
Cremen said the issue of Brady's possible prosecution "is a question that was not his, but the grand jury's, to make."
He added that prosecutors also erred in implying that Brady is a credible witness, contrary to Nevada Supreme Court rules, and in letting Brady's attorney, Steve Stein, testify about how distraught his client was over the incident.
Stein was then allowed to remain with Brady during the officer's grand jury testimony in violation of Nevada law, Cremen charged.
"The case against Mortensen depends almost entirely upon the credibility of Brady," Cremen stated in court documents. "The state did everything it could to shore up that credibility."
"The state never advised the grand jury of its obligation to determine whether or not Brady was an accomplice," he said, noting that despite the high-profile nature of the case, only two grand jurors asked questions of Brady.
The indictment, Cremen said, "is defective and should be dismissed."
In addition to the grand jury issue, Pavlikowski will be asked to determine what information about the case can be subpoenaed from Metro's internal records.
This, however, will not be Cremen's first court battle over access to evidence in the case.
Incensed over alterations to the truck used in the drive-by shooting, Cremen already had been given permission to take a sworn deposition from Brady about the new paint job and remodeled interior on the 1974 pickup.
Although police criminalists processed the truck and gathered fingerprints from the passenger side, the vehicle was not impounded as evidence. Instead, it was returned to Brady, who had it painted and changed the seats and carpeting.
Mortensen, who is being held on $500,000 cash bail, is set to stand trial April 28.
archive
