Justice for Stanley Maday
$600 raised
3% of $20k goal
5 contributors
192 Days running

Stan Maday is an ordinary man who was living an ordinary life until his world crumbled due to a false accusation. Stan has been imprisoned because of a horrific injustice and complete misrepresentation at the hands of a court appointed attorney.  Stanley's family and close friends are raising funds to pay for an attorney that will review the case and make certain Stanley gets a second chance at a fair trial in which it is certain he will be exonerated of all charges.  Please read the account of Stanley's case in the following text "A Stolen Life"

A Stolen Life

Stan Maday’s life changed forever in 2011.  He was accused of a crime he did not commit.  Stan was accused of sexual assault.  He has been in prison ever since.  Stan soon learned that being falsely accused of sexual assault comes with ramifications with the accusation itself.  It is a crime, where many times “innocent until proven guilty” does not exist.   Many people jumped to judgement without hearing the details.  The cards seemed stacked against him from the beginning. 

Stan was found guilty during his original trial in 2013.  In 2015, the Wisconsin State of Appeals court unanimously reversed the guilty verdict; they found that Stan deserved a new trial.  The Wisconsin Supreme Court issued a ruling contrary to clearly established federal law.  There also was an unreasonable determination of facts in light of the evidence presented. He has now filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus.  This means he is trying to prove that his imprisonment is in violation of his constitutional rights.  At this level, he is not guaranteed legal representation.  He needs to raise money and pay for an attorney himself. 

 Even more heinous than being falsely accused, is that Stan trusted in his legal representation, as well as in the system and he was betrayed by them both.  The attorney assigned to him by the court did not have Stan’s best interest at heart.  He did not represent him to the best of his abilities.  He also had a conflict of interest in the case.  Stan’s attorney admitted in court, on the record, that he was a victim of sexual abuse.  The judge should have called a recess at that point to determine whether or not a conflict of interest existed, but the judge did not do this. 

The attorney lied to Stan throughout his representation.  Stan made requests to get text messages, phone records, testimony, and even computer and social media posts that showed key evidence in Stan’s innocence.  The attorney made no attempt to get this evidence; he even told Stan that the phone company only kept text messages going back a year.  Phone companies keep cell phone records for seven years.  When he submitted a subpoena requesting Stan’s timesheets he failed to properly check the information he received which led to the introduction of inadmissible and irrelevant evidence. He then withdrew his objection to the state introducing the irrelevant evidence which allowed the state to refer to it during closing arguments in an attempt to prejudice the jury.  The attorney failed to file a motion to request permission for Stan to leave the state to attend his son’s graduation from the Naval Academy in Chicago.  The attorney lied to Stan, telling him he filed the motion.  However, after Stan got back from Chicago, Stan asked to thank the court for the permission to leave, the attorney told him not to:  later explaining he never filed the motion.

Stan’s attorney also failed to gather medical evidence that would have proven that Stan was physically incapable of getting any sexual gratification from the incidents.  He also failed to call Stan’s ex-wife as a witness; she could have corroborated the medical records.  Stan’s ex-wife has also been one of his biggest advocates; having her called as a witness would have been key in exposing the false accusations and proving Stan’s innocence.  She knows both parties extremely well.  So in review he failed to investigate a defense, failed to collect evidence, failed to call witnesses and failed to object to two instances of impropriety during trial.  Stan’s attorney was either grossly incompetent, or had a severe conflict of interest in representing him. 

The evidence also shows key behaviors from Stan’s accuser that is not normal victim behavior.  The evidence shows that the accuser went out of her way to request to spend the night at Stan’s house; even after the first alleged event took place.  Even after the last incident was supposed to have taken place, she gave Stan a hug in front of his kids.  The accuser also changed her story three times after the police found that Stan had been working during two of the alleged events.  The prosecution fought relentlessly to get the video of the interview with the accuser entered into evidence, until they found out Stan was at work during two alleged events.  When they found this out, they withdrew their request altogether.  After changing the timeline of her story, she also changed details.

 The accuser said there was someone else watching the assault take place during one of the alleged incidents, but later retracted that statement.   Evidence discovered in 2015 raises reasonable doubt about her recollection of the events.  When a traumatic event occurs, the details are instilled in a person’s memory.  This is why we all remember where we were and what we were doing during 9/11 or the Kennedy assassination.  Basically there is a genetic imperative for an individual to recall exactly what happened during a time of crisis so that it may learn from the experience and preserve the self or the species.  The accuser changed her story and could not recall the same details of her earlier “recollection.”

The state also failed to disclose the transcripts of an interview the investigating detective conducted with Stan after the accusation first was filed.  Stan was willing to offer his full support and cooperation to prove his innocence.  Stan instantly offered to take a lie detector test.  Stan immediately offered samples of his DNA, but the detectives never collected a sample.  When asked, he also gave investigators immediate access to his smartphone and computer.  The state also never conducted a SANE exam.  SANE stands for Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner, and is used to determine if a sexual assault actually took place. 

In Stan’s own words, this is why he needs help raising money for an attorney:

“I cashed out my retirement to pay my lawyer and he screwed me over bad. I paid off some bills and was essentially left with nothing. The appellate attorneys I was given through the public defender’s office left me to figure out how to proceed on my own after the WI supreme court's ruling. I am stuck in South Dakota with limited access to the legal resources (Wisconsin law) I need to mount a collateral attack on my conviction. The system is overwhelmingly rigged against inmate petitioners who are trying to correct their illegal convictions. Because of the Anti-terrorist and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) I only have one year after my conviction became final to file my federal petition for a writ of habeas corpus. According to federal law I am limited to only one filing unless I can show cause on why I should be allowed a subsequent filing.”

There are enormous holes in ethics, procedure, and justice in this case.  Stan Maday is innocent.  Please help us raise the funds to get him an attorney.  In this day and age, this subject is sensitive and important, but this is a case where the accusations are false.  However this case makes you feel, he has a constitutional right to a fair trial with fair representation.  He has not received either yet.  Getting him an attorney would, in the very least, level the playing field.  At the very most, an innocent man is in prison, and you can help set him free. 


Thank you for your support!


Activity highlights See all5
Follow this campaign to receive updates by email.
Recent contributions