1) Was Michael Williamson afforded a fair trial and right to confront his
accusers or right to witnesses in his favor when the trial court excluded
logan Blakely and Michael Williamson Jr. as witnesses after admitting
prejudicial out of court hearsay statements from Sally Weindorf? California
v. Green , 399 U.S. 149; In re Murchison. 349 U.S. 133.

2) Was Michael Williamson afforded a fair trial and right to witnesses in
his favor when the trial court excluded the admitted offender, Mark
Neiswonger, from testifying at trial? Washington v. Texas , 388 U.S. 14,
19 (1967); Chambers v. Mississippi , 420 U.S. 284, 302 (1973); Brady v.
Maryland . 373 U.S. 83; In re Murchison , 349 U.S. 133.

3) Did the carbon-copy, duplicious 12 count indictment deny Michael Williamson
a fair trial and protection from double jeopardy? And does the rtenial
of the district and circuit courts' conflict with Valentine y. Ronteh ,
395 F. 3d 626 (6th Cir. 2005)?

Was Michael Williamson afforded a fair trial and right to confront his accusers or right to witnesses in his favor