PLEASE PRINT THIS PAGE FOR YOUR RECORDS.
The login and password below should be effective within the hour. You may use the PACER service now by clicking the OK button below. You will be issued a cookie that is valid as long as this browser remains open.
The password for cr3530 is s63rhig?
Note the following:
There is a charge for accessing case information in PACER, RACER, and CM/ECF. Access to web based PACER systems will generate a $.08 per page charge.
The per page charge applies to the number of pages that results from any search, including a search that yields no matches (one page for no matches.) The charge applies whether or not pages are printed, viewed, or downloaded.
Usage is billed on a quarterly basis and a summary statement is mailed only if the account balance is $10 or more.
If a credit card is provided at the time of registration, usage is billed on a quarterly basis automatically to the credit card submitted with this registration request for account balances more than $10. Balances less than $10 are deferred. These charges will be billed to the credit card mid February, May, August, and November. Electronic statements will be generated and sent via email. Paper statements will not be mailed.
Quarterly bills not paid by the due date will result in a disruption of service for all open accounts for a firm, company, or address.
If any part of the information provided to the PACER Service Center as part of this registration process is fraudulent, the account will be immediately disabled and all activity/ information may be turned over to law enforcement authorities.
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Power of the Prosecutor by Robert Jackson
The Federal Prosecutor
By Robert H. Jackson
Attorney General of the United States
April 1, 1940
It would probably be within the range of that exaggeration permitted in Washington to say that assembled in this room is one of the most powerful peace-time forces known to our country. The prosecutor has more control over life, liberty, and reputation than any other person in America. His discretion is tremendous. He can have citizens investigated and, if he is that kind of person, he can have this done to the tune of public statements and veiled or unveiled intimations. Or the prosecutor may choose a more subtle course and simply have a citizen’s friends interviewed. The prosecutor can order arrests, present cases to the grand jury in secret session, and on the basis of his one-sided presentation of the facts, can cause the citizen to be indicted and held for trial. He may dismiss the case before trial, in which case the defense never has a chance to be heard. Or he may go on with a public trial. If he obtains a conviction, the prosecutor can still make recommendations as to sentence, as to whether the prisoner should get probation or a suspended sentence, and after he is put away, as to whether he is a fit subject for parole. While the prosecutor at his best is one of the most beneficent forces in our society, when he acts from malice or other base motives, he is one of the worst.
These powers have been granted to our law-enforcement agencies because it seems necessary that such a power to prosecute be lodged somewhere. This authority has been granted by people who really wanted the right thing done—wanted crime eliminated—but also wanted the best in our American traditions preserved.
Because of this immense power to strike at citizens, not with mere individual strength, but with all the force of government itself, the post of Federal District Attorney from the very beginning has been safeguarded by presidential appointment, requiring confirmation of the Senate of the United States. You are thus required to win an expression of confidence in your character by both the legislative and the executive branches of the government before assuming the responsibilities of a federal prosecutor.
Your responsibility in your several districts for law enforcement and for its methods cannot be wholly surrendered to Washington, and ought not to be assumed by a centralized Department of Justice. It is an unusual and rare instance in which the local District Attorney should be superseded in the handling of litigation, except where he requests help of Washington. It is also clear that with his knowledge of local sentiment and opinion, his contact with and intimate knowledge of the views of the court, and his acquaintance with the feelings of the group from which jurors are drawn, it is an unusual case in which his judgment should be overruled.
Experience, however, has demonstrated that some measure of centralized control is necessary. In the absence of it different district attorneys were striving for different interpretations or applications of an Act, or were pursuing different conceptions of policy. Also, to put it mildly, there were differences in the degree of diligence and zeal in different districts. To promote uniformity of policy and action, to establish some standards of performance, and to make available specialized help, some degree of centralized administration was found necessary.
Our problem, of course, is to balance these opposing considerations. I desire to avoid any lessening of the prestige and influence of the district attorneys in their districts. At the same time we must proceed in all districts with that uniformity of policy which is necessary to the prestige of federal law.
Nothing better can come out of this meeting of law enforcement officers than a rededication to the spirit of fair play and decency that should animate the federal prosecutor. Your positions are of such independence and importance that while you are being diligent, strict, and vigorous in law enforcement you can also afford to be just. Although the government technically loses its case, it has really won if justice has been done. The lawyer in public office is justified in seeking to leave behind him a good record. But he must remember that his most alert and severe, but just, judges will be the members of his own profession, and that lawyers rest their good opinion of each other not merely on results accomplished but on the quality of the performance. Reputation has been called “the shadow cast by one’s daily life.” Any prosecutor who risks his day-to-day professional name for fair dealing to build up statistics of success has a perverted sense of practical values, as well as defects of character. Whether one seeks promotion to a judgeship, as many prosecutors rightly do, or whether he returns to private practice, he can have no better asset than to have his profession recognize that his attitude toward those who feel his power has been dispassionate, reasonable and just.
The federal prosecutor has now been prohibited from engaging in political activities. I am convinced that a good-faith acceptance of the spirit and letter of that doctrine will relieve many district attorneys from the embarrassment of what have heretofore been regarded as legitimate expectations of political service. There can also be no doubt that to be closely identified with the intrigue, the money raising, and the machinery of a particular party or faction may present a prosecuting officer with embarrassing alignments and associations. I think the Hatch Act should be utilized by federal prosecutors as a protection against demands on their time and their prestige to participate in the operation of the machinery of practical politics.
There is a most important reason why the prosecutor should have, as nearly as possible, a detached and impartial view of all groups in his community. Law enforcement is not automatic. It isn’t blind. One of the greatest difficulties of the position of prosecutor is that he must pick his cases, because no prosecutor can even investigate all of the cases in which he receives complaints. If the Department of Justice were to make even a pretense of reaching every probable violation of federal law, ten times its present staff would be inadequate. We know that no local police force can strictly enforce the traffic laws, or it would arrest half the driving population on any given morning. What every prosecutor is practically required to do is to select the cases for prosecution and to select those in which the offense is the most flagrant, the public harm the greatest, and the proof the most certain.
If the prosecutor is obliged to choose his cases, it follows that he can choose his defendants. Therein is the most dangerous power of the prosecutor: that he will pick people that he thinks he should get, rather than pick cases that need to be prosecuted. With the law books filled with a great assortment of crimes, a prosecutor stands a fair chance of finding at least a technical violation of some act on the part of almost anyone. In such a case, it is not a question of discovering the commission of a crime and then looking for the man who has committed it, it is a question of picking the man and then searching the law books, or putting investigators to work, to pin some offense on him. It is in this realm—in which the prosecutor picks some person whom he dislikes or desires to embarrass, or selects some group of unpopular persons and then looks for an offense, that the greatest danger of abuse of prosecuting power lies. It is here that law enforcement becomes personal, and the real crime becomes that of being unpopular with the predominant or governing group, being attached to the wrong political views, or being personally obnoxious to or in the way of the prosecutor himself.
In times of fear or hysteria political, racial, religious, social, and economic groups, often from the best of motives, cry for the scalps of individuals or groups because they do not like their views. Particularly do we need to be dispassionate and courageous in those cases which deal with so-called “subversive activities.” They are dangerous to civil liberty because the prosecutor has no definite standards to determine what constitutes a “subversive activity,” such as we have for murder or larceny. Activities which seem benevolent and helpful to wage earners, persons on relief, or those who are disadvantaged in the struggle for existence may be regarded as “subversive” by those whose property interests might be burdened or affected thereby. Those who are in office are apt to regard as “subversive” the activities of any of those who would bring about a change of administration. Some of our soundest constitutional doctrines were once punished as subversive. We must not forget that it was not so long ago that both the term “Republican” and the term “Democrat” were epithets with sinister meaning to denote persons of radical tendencies that were “subversive” of the order of things then dominant.
In the enforcement of laws which protect our national integrity and existence, we should prosecute any and every act of violation, but only overt acts, not the expression of opinion, or activities such as the holding of meetings, petitioning of Congress, or dissemination of news or opinions. Only by extreme care can we protect the spirit as well as the letter of our civil liberties, and to do so is a responsibility of the federal prosecutor.
Another delicate task is to distinguish between the federal and the local in law-enforcement activities. We must bear in mind that we are concerned only with the prosecution of acts which the Congress has made federal offenses. Those acts we should prosecute regardless of local sentiment, regardless of whether it exposes lax local enforcement, regardless of whether it makes or breaks local politicians.
But outside of federal law each locality has the right under our system of government to fix its own standards of law enforcement and of morals. And the moral climate of the United States is as varied as its physical climate. For example, some states legalize and permit gambling, some states prohibit it legislatively and protect it administratively, and some try to prohibit it entirely. The same variation of attitudes towards other law-enforcement problems exists. The federal government could not enforce one kind of law in one place and another kind elsewhere. It could hardly adopt strict standards for loose states or loose standards for strict states without doing violence to local sentiment. In spite of the temptation to divert our power to local conditions where they have become offensive to our sense of decency, the only long-term policy that will save federal justice from being discredited by entanglements with local politics is that it confine itself to strict and impartial enforcement of federal law, letting the chips fall in the community where they may. Just as there should be no permitting of local considerations to stop federal enforcement, so there should be no striving to enlarge our power over local affairs and no use of federal prosecutions to exert an indirect influence that would be unlawful if exerted directly.
The qualities of a good prosecutor are as elusive and as impossible to define as those which mark a gentleman. And those who need to be told would not understand it anyway. A sensitiveness to fair play and sportsmanship is perhaps the best protection against the abuse of power, and the citizen’s safety lies in the prosecutor who tempers zeal with human kindness, who seeks truth and not victims, who serves the law and not factional purposes, and who approaches his task with humility.
By Robert H. Jackson
Attorney General of the United States
April 1, 1940
It would probably be within the range of that exaggeration permitted in Washington to say that assembled in this room is one of the most powerful peace-time forces known to our country. The prosecutor has more control over life, liberty, and reputation than any other person in America. His discretion is tremendous. He can have citizens investigated and, if he is that kind of person, he can have this done to the tune of public statements and veiled or unveiled intimations. Or the prosecutor may choose a more subtle course and simply have a citizen’s friends interviewed. The prosecutor can order arrests, present cases to the grand jury in secret session, and on the basis of his one-sided presentation of the facts, can cause the citizen to be indicted and held for trial. He may dismiss the case before trial, in which case the defense never has a chance to be heard. Or he may go on with a public trial. If he obtains a conviction, the prosecutor can still make recommendations as to sentence, as to whether the prisoner should get probation or a suspended sentence, and after he is put away, as to whether he is a fit subject for parole. While the prosecutor at his best is one of the most beneficent forces in our society, when he acts from malice or other base motives, he is one of the worst.
These powers have been granted to our law-enforcement agencies because it seems necessary that such a power to prosecute be lodged somewhere. This authority has been granted by people who really wanted the right thing done—wanted crime eliminated—but also wanted the best in our American traditions preserved.
Because of this immense power to strike at citizens, not with mere individual strength, but with all the force of government itself, the post of Federal District Attorney from the very beginning has been safeguarded by presidential appointment, requiring confirmation of the Senate of the United States. You are thus required to win an expression of confidence in your character by both the legislative and the executive branches of the government before assuming the responsibilities of a federal prosecutor.
Your responsibility in your several districts for law enforcement and for its methods cannot be wholly surrendered to Washington, and ought not to be assumed by a centralized Department of Justice. It is an unusual and rare instance in which the local District Attorney should be superseded in the handling of litigation, except where he requests help of Washington. It is also clear that with his knowledge of local sentiment and opinion, his contact with and intimate knowledge of the views of the court, and his acquaintance with the feelings of the group from which jurors are drawn, it is an unusual case in which his judgment should be overruled.
Experience, however, has demonstrated that some measure of centralized control is necessary. In the absence of it different district attorneys were striving for different interpretations or applications of an Act, or were pursuing different conceptions of policy. Also, to put it mildly, there were differences in the degree of diligence and zeal in different districts. To promote uniformity of policy and action, to establish some standards of performance, and to make available specialized help, some degree of centralized administration was found necessary.
Our problem, of course, is to balance these opposing considerations. I desire to avoid any lessening of the prestige and influence of the district attorneys in their districts. At the same time we must proceed in all districts with that uniformity of policy which is necessary to the prestige of federal law.
Nothing better can come out of this meeting of law enforcement officers than a rededication to the spirit of fair play and decency that should animate the federal prosecutor. Your positions are of such independence and importance that while you are being diligent, strict, and vigorous in law enforcement you can also afford to be just. Although the government technically loses its case, it has really won if justice has been done. The lawyer in public office is justified in seeking to leave behind him a good record. But he must remember that his most alert and severe, but just, judges will be the members of his own profession, and that lawyers rest their good opinion of each other not merely on results accomplished but on the quality of the performance. Reputation has been called “the shadow cast by one’s daily life.” Any prosecutor who risks his day-to-day professional name for fair dealing to build up statistics of success has a perverted sense of practical values, as well as defects of character. Whether one seeks promotion to a judgeship, as many prosecutors rightly do, or whether he returns to private practice, he can have no better asset than to have his profession recognize that his attitude toward those who feel his power has been dispassionate, reasonable and just.
The federal prosecutor has now been prohibited from engaging in political activities. I am convinced that a good-faith acceptance of the spirit and letter of that doctrine will relieve many district attorneys from the embarrassment of what have heretofore been regarded as legitimate expectations of political service. There can also be no doubt that to be closely identified with the intrigue, the money raising, and the machinery of a particular party or faction may present a prosecuting officer with embarrassing alignments and associations. I think the Hatch Act should be utilized by federal prosecutors as a protection against demands on their time and their prestige to participate in the operation of the machinery of practical politics.
There is a most important reason why the prosecutor should have, as nearly as possible, a detached and impartial view of all groups in his community. Law enforcement is not automatic. It isn’t blind. One of the greatest difficulties of the position of prosecutor is that he must pick his cases, because no prosecutor can even investigate all of the cases in which he receives complaints. If the Department of Justice were to make even a pretense of reaching every probable violation of federal law, ten times its present staff would be inadequate. We know that no local police force can strictly enforce the traffic laws, or it would arrest half the driving population on any given morning. What every prosecutor is practically required to do is to select the cases for prosecution and to select those in which the offense is the most flagrant, the public harm the greatest, and the proof the most certain.
If the prosecutor is obliged to choose his cases, it follows that he can choose his defendants. Therein is the most dangerous power of the prosecutor: that he will pick people that he thinks he should get, rather than pick cases that need to be prosecuted. With the law books filled with a great assortment of crimes, a prosecutor stands a fair chance of finding at least a technical violation of some act on the part of almost anyone. In such a case, it is not a question of discovering the commission of a crime and then looking for the man who has committed it, it is a question of picking the man and then searching the law books, or putting investigators to work, to pin some offense on him. It is in this realm—in which the prosecutor picks some person whom he dislikes or desires to embarrass, or selects some group of unpopular persons and then looks for an offense, that the greatest danger of abuse of prosecuting power lies. It is here that law enforcement becomes personal, and the real crime becomes that of being unpopular with the predominant or governing group, being attached to the wrong political views, or being personally obnoxious to or in the way of the prosecutor himself.
In times of fear or hysteria political, racial, religious, social, and economic groups, often from the best of motives, cry for the scalps of individuals or groups because they do not like their views. Particularly do we need to be dispassionate and courageous in those cases which deal with so-called “subversive activities.” They are dangerous to civil liberty because the prosecutor has no definite standards to determine what constitutes a “subversive activity,” such as we have for murder or larceny. Activities which seem benevolent and helpful to wage earners, persons on relief, or those who are disadvantaged in the struggle for existence may be regarded as “subversive” by those whose property interests might be burdened or affected thereby. Those who are in office are apt to regard as “subversive” the activities of any of those who would bring about a change of administration. Some of our soundest constitutional doctrines were once punished as subversive. We must not forget that it was not so long ago that both the term “Republican” and the term “Democrat” were epithets with sinister meaning to denote persons of radical tendencies that were “subversive” of the order of things then dominant.
In the enforcement of laws which protect our national integrity and existence, we should prosecute any and every act of violation, but only overt acts, not the expression of opinion, or activities such as the holding of meetings, petitioning of Congress, or dissemination of news or opinions. Only by extreme care can we protect the spirit as well as the letter of our civil liberties, and to do so is a responsibility of the federal prosecutor.
Another delicate task is to distinguish between the federal and the local in law-enforcement activities. We must bear in mind that we are concerned only with the prosecution of acts which the Congress has made federal offenses. Those acts we should prosecute regardless of local sentiment, regardless of whether it exposes lax local enforcement, regardless of whether it makes or breaks local politicians.
But outside of federal law each locality has the right under our system of government to fix its own standards of law enforcement and of morals. And the moral climate of the United States is as varied as its physical climate. For example, some states legalize and permit gambling, some states prohibit it legislatively and protect it administratively, and some try to prohibit it entirely. The same variation of attitudes towards other law-enforcement problems exists. The federal government could not enforce one kind of law in one place and another kind elsewhere. It could hardly adopt strict standards for loose states or loose standards for strict states without doing violence to local sentiment. In spite of the temptation to divert our power to local conditions where they have become offensive to our sense of decency, the only long-term policy that will save federal justice from being discredited by entanglements with local politics is that it confine itself to strict and impartial enforcement of federal law, letting the chips fall in the community where they may. Just as there should be no permitting of local considerations to stop federal enforcement, so there should be no striving to enlarge our power over local affairs and no use of federal prosecutions to exert an indirect influence that would be unlawful if exerted directly.
The qualities of a good prosecutor are as elusive and as impossible to define as those which mark a gentleman. And those who need to be told would not understand it anyway. A sensitiveness to fair play and sportsmanship is perhaps the best protection against the abuse of power, and the citizen’s safety lies in the prosecutor who tempers zeal with human kindness, who seeks truth and not victims, who serves the law and not factional purposes, and who approaches his task with humility.
Saturday, July 26, 2008
FBI swarms into Lawrence Kansas
| Get free hit counter code here. |
Sources have told us that the Chief of Police Ron Olin was indicted on Wednesday 23, along with 3 top officials (Captains).
The sources also tell us that Lawrence Kansas city Hall was full of FBI agents in FBI gear, and the fourth floor of the legal dept. was shut down by the FBI no coming or going. It was also believed that the FBI were guarding the evidence storage areas and only authorized personel could come or go.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Plea Agreement accuses YH of being a co-conspirator
IN RESPONSE TO STACY BARNS PLEA DEAL:
I think we need to file a motion for obstruction of justice, and bribery of a witness against Parker, if she allows Stacy to have one day off her sentence for this ridiculous testimony.
Yes Stacy sold me some instruments. Some of them were used. I had no idea that they were stolen at the time I bought them.
After she sold me a few instruments I got suspicious. When she tried to sell an expensive violin that still had Keller Strings tag on it and Price tag of about $1500. I told her no way. She then showed me a reciept and said it wasn't stolen, it had been paid for.
I refused to purchase it and she left. I then got on the phone and called the owner of Keller Strings.
I warned her that I thought her business might be getting scammed in some kind of way. She got very upset and by her voice I would say she was nearly in tears.
Does that sound like a call a co-conspirator would have made?
If I was doing what they say I could have easily purchased the violin and sold it on ebay or amazon or Craigs list without a hitch! I am sure that the owner of Keller Strings remembers my call to her, and we could subpoena her if needed.
I talked to Stacy's ex-husband Scott Catlett when he came in to the store with their daughter Amber about what had happened. He told me he was so disgusted with what Stacy had been doing. He said Stacy was working at a hotel at the time, and somehow getting a hold of customers credit card numbers. She was using the numbers to buy meat, gas cards, phone cards and whatever and selling to people all over the place.
(I know he would also be willing to testify that I was not involved or conspiring with Stacy.)
Parker has been around enough to know and see by the context of Stacy's crime that I was not a conspirator of Stacy. If she is willing to make a deal with this little slime bag, then she is no better than Stacy in my book.
Parker is a mentally disturbed coward and needs a mental evaluation if she is truly allowing these lowlife felons to make deals that would lesson their time just to have a shot at me and Guy.
new road sign for the corrupt prosecutor:
I think we need to file a motion for obstruction of justice, and bribery of a witness against Parker, if she allows Stacy to have one day off her sentence for this ridiculous testimony.
Yes Stacy sold me some instruments. Some of them were used. I had no idea that they were stolen at the time I bought them.
After she sold me a few instruments I got suspicious. When she tried to sell an expensive violin that still had Keller Strings tag on it and Price tag of about $1500. I told her no way. She then showed me a reciept and said it wasn't stolen, it had been paid for.
I refused to purchase it and she left. I then got on the phone and called the owner of Keller Strings.
I warned her that I thought her business might be getting scammed in some kind of way. She got very upset and by her voice I would say she was nearly in tears.
Does that sound like a call a co-conspirator would have made?
If I was doing what they say I could have easily purchased the violin and sold it on ebay or amazon or Craigs list without a hitch! I am sure that the owner of Keller Strings remembers my call to her, and we could subpoena her if needed.
I talked to Stacy's ex-husband Scott Catlett when he came in to the store with their daughter Amber about what had happened. He told me he was so disgusted with what Stacy had been doing. He said Stacy was working at a hotel at the time, and somehow getting a hold of customers credit card numbers. She was using the numbers to buy meat, gas cards, phone cards and whatever and selling to people all over the place.
(I know he would also be willing to testify that I was not involved or conspiring with Stacy.)
Parker has been around enough to know and see by the context of Stacy's crime that I was not a conspirator of Stacy. If she is willing to make a deal with this little slime bag, then she is no better than Stacy in my book.
Parker is a mentally disturbed coward and needs a mental evaluation if she is truly allowing these lowlife felons to make deals that would lesson their time just to have a shot at me and Guy.
new road sign for the corrupt prosecutor:
Copy of Stacy Barnes Catlett DOJ press release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
News releases are available at www.usdoj.gov/usao/ks/press.html
Contact: Jim Cross
PHONE: 316-269-6481
FAX: 316-269-6420
July 23, 2008
LAWRENCE WOMAN PLEADS GUILTY TO WIRE FRAUD, ID THEFT
KANSAS CITY, KAN. – Stacy Lyn Barnes-Catlett, 42, Lawrence, Kan., pleaded guilty this week to one count of wire fraud and one count of aggravated identity theft.
In a plea entered Monday in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Kan., Barnes-Catlett admitted that she and others participated in a scheme from Aug. 12 to Aug. 30, 2005, to unlawfully make use of credit cards to purchase merchandise without the cardholders’ knowledge.
According to the plea, Barnes-Catlett and others concealed the use of the credit cards from the cardholders by placing calls to merchants to order merchandise to be given to the caller’s so-called “niece.” Barnes-Catlett would pick up the merchandise and deliver it to other conspirators, all without the knowledge of the cardholders.
In this manner, Barnes-Catlett and her co-conspirators obtained more than $7,000 worth of merchandise from Keller Strings, Hume Music and other businesses in Douglas County, Kan.
Barnes-Catlett is set for sentencing Oct. 20, 2008. She faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in federal prison and a fine up to $250,000 on the wire fraud charge. On the identity theft charge, she faces a mandatory 2 years that must run consecutively to penalties on other counts.
U.S. Attorney Eric Melgren commended the United States Postal Service and Assistant U.S. Attorney Marietta Parker for their work on the case.
News releases are available at www.usdoj.gov/usao/ks/press.html
Contact: Jim Cross
PHONE: 316-269-6481
FAX: 316-269-6420
July 23, 2008
LAWRENCE WOMAN PLEADS GUILTY TO WIRE FRAUD, ID THEFT
KANSAS CITY, KAN. – Stacy Lyn Barnes-Catlett, 42, Lawrence, Kan., pleaded guilty this week to one count of wire fraud and one count of aggravated identity theft.
In a plea entered Monday in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Kan., Barnes-Catlett admitted that she and others participated in a scheme from Aug. 12 to Aug. 30, 2005, to unlawfully make use of credit cards to purchase merchandise without the cardholders’ knowledge.
According to the plea, Barnes-Catlett and others concealed the use of the credit cards from the cardholders by placing calls to merchants to order merchandise to be given to the caller’s so-called “niece.” Barnes-Catlett would pick up the merchandise and deliver it to other conspirators, all without the knowledge of the cardholders.
In this manner, Barnes-Catlett and her co-conspirators obtained more than $7,000 worth of merchandise from Keller Strings, Hume Music and other businesses in Douglas County, Kan.
Barnes-Catlett is set for sentencing Oct. 20, 2008. She faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in federal prison and a fine up to $250,000 on the wire fraud charge. On the identity theft charge, she faces a mandatory 2 years that must run consecutively to penalties on other counts.
U.S. Attorney Eric Melgren commended the United States Postal Service and Assistant U.S. Attorney Marietta Parker for their work on the case.
Stacy Barnes Catlett pleads guilty in Federal court
I see in todays press release that Stacy Barnes has plead guilty and Marietta Parker was prosecuting her.
She is SBC on our indictment.
I was really shocked that the dept of justice did not give me another public lashing and accuse me of being her co-conspirator working to conceal her crimes, again on her press release like they did with Jim Ludwig and Louis Parsons. It looks like anybody that is willing to say "Yellow house made me do it" is getting a deal! No matter how ridiculous the story is!
She is SBC on our indictment.
I was really shocked that the dept of justice did not give me another public lashing and accuse me of being her co-conspirator working to conceal her crimes, again on her press release like they did with Jim Ludwig and Louis Parsons. It looks like anybody that is willing to say "Yellow house made me do it" is getting a deal! No matter how ridiculous the story is!
Monday, July 21, 2008
Conspiracy shows duing this hearing
Today in court was very different than friday. Everybody seemed to be against us. The Judge had no questions for the witnesses.
Our attorneys refused to ask pertinanat questions that would show the witnesses were full of crap and lying. FBI Agent Bob Shaefer got on the stand and said his real name was Walter Shaefer.
He claimed he could investigate anywhere in the State of Kansas, And that there was a investigation but the files were at the FBI still. His testimony was ridiculous and unchallenged! Why would he come to this hearing and not bring his file when he knows we alleged there was no file, and no one challenged it! The FBI told the Defendants that the FBI in Kansas City does not and never will investigate anything in Lawrence, still his testimony went unchallenged.
At the end of the hearing which was a joke, the Judge accused Guy and Carrie Neighbors of being mentally ill and incompetent to stand trial.
He accused them of being crazy, and lectured them that they have totally lost their minds and need mental evaluations. This is the same thing the Attorneys were trying to say last week. Obviously this was a conspired move.
After the Judges lecture to the Neighbors accusing them of being totally incompetent and mentally ill and stupid it was revealed what was really up. If they agree to the mental evaluations and they get found to have mental problems, then the State can finally have a reason to lock them up without having to go through a trial and convict them of a crime!
Our attorneys refused to ask pertinanat questions that would show the witnesses were full of crap and lying. FBI Agent Bob Shaefer got on the stand and said his real name was Walter Shaefer.
He claimed he could investigate anywhere in the State of Kansas, And that there was a investigation but the files were at the FBI still. His testimony was ridiculous and unchallenged! Why would he come to this hearing and not bring his file when he knows we alleged there was no file, and no one challenged it! The FBI told the Defendants that the FBI in Kansas City does not and never will investigate anything in Lawrence, still his testimony went unchallenged.
At the end of the hearing which was a joke, the Judge accused Guy and Carrie Neighbors of being mentally ill and incompetent to stand trial.
He accused them of being crazy, and lectured them that they have totally lost their minds and need mental evaluations. This is the same thing the Attorneys were trying to say last week. Obviously this was a conspired move.
After the Judges lecture to the Neighbors accusing them of being totally incompetent and mentally ill and stupid it was revealed what was really up. If they agree to the mental evaluations and they get found to have mental problems, then the State can finally have a reason to lock them up without having to go through a trial and convict them of a crime!
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Hearing for Motion to revoke bond may be withdrawn By Federal Prosecutor Marietta Parker
Our sources have informed us that the Federal Prosecutor Marietta Parker is not happy with the way the hearing on Friday was going, and is possibly planning to withdraw her motion to revoke the bond of the Yellow House owners in order to bring a halt to the testimony that is scheduled to resume on Monday.
So far there has been testimony by Lawrence Police Officer's Micky Rantz and Detective Mike McAtee.
Information about the rumors of Detective Mike McAtee's alleged illegal drug activity has been addressed in the hearing, and Mr. McAtee has admitted during the testimony that he has been approached by two different people within the police Department about rumors floating around about his alleged illegal drug activity. He also admitted under oath that he had been questioned by a Federal Prosecutor about the rumors of his alleged drug activity in another case.
Both officers have been drilled by the defense and have not been totally forthcoming with their testimony or are having difficulty recalling facts about issues concerning Internal Affairs complaints.
Exhibits that have been made available during the hearings, including a criminal complaint that Mike McAtee claimed to have filed against the defendant that did not include his name or signature, will also be available as a matter of public record at the completion of the hearing.
The Federal Judge overseeing the hearing, has stated that the transcripts from this hearing will be made available as a matter of public record along with the exhibits.
Detective Mike McAtee is scheduled to continue his testimony on Monday. Officer Matt Sarna and FBI Special Agent Bob Shaefer are also scheduled to begin testimony on Monday if the Prosecutor does not withdraw the motion.
So far there has been testimony by Lawrence Police Officer's Micky Rantz and Detective Mike McAtee.
Information about the rumors of Detective Mike McAtee's alleged illegal drug activity has been addressed in the hearing, and Mr. McAtee has admitted during the testimony that he has been approached by two different people within the police Department about rumors floating around about his alleged illegal drug activity. He also admitted under oath that he had been questioned by a Federal Prosecutor about the rumors of his alleged drug activity in another case.
Both officers have been drilled by the defense and have not been totally forthcoming with their testimony or are having difficulty recalling facts about issues concerning Internal Affairs complaints.
Exhibits that have been made available during the hearings, including a criminal complaint that Mike McAtee claimed to have filed against the defendant that did not include his name or signature, will also be available as a matter of public record at the completion of the hearing.
The Federal Judge overseeing the hearing, has stated that the transcripts from this hearing will be made available as a matter of public record along with the exhibits.
Detective Mike McAtee is scheduled to continue his testimony on Monday. Officer Matt Sarna and FBI Special Agent Bob Shaefer are also scheduled to begin testimony on Monday if the Prosecutor does not withdraw the motion.
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Ineffective Defense Counsel Prosecutorial misconduct ongoing in Yellow House 3 yr. long case
The Yellow House case has been active since 2005. appx. 6 months after the first search warrant, the Yellow House owners were called down to the Lawrence Kansas Police station to pick up some of the siezed items.
At that time the evidence custodian (After a 20 min. search) could not find three expensive laptop PC's that had apparently gone missing from the LKPD property room. Missing evidence is grounds for a case to be dismissed. Yet instead it sent the Yellow House case into high gear!
So the case continued....
The Yellow House owners have been represented by a total of 9 attorneys during the course of this case. At least 3 of those attorneys have been threatened with "money laundering" charges by the Federal Prosecutors in the case.
The case was dropped by the prosecutor then one month later the same charges refiled, in a vindictive move to have the defendants forcefully rearrested and illegally searched. This would be called a Fishing expedetion in legal terms.
During the nearly 3 years this case has continued, not one motion has been filed on behalf of the defendants by an attorney.
One motion filed to have the charges dismissed because of the speedy trial violation was filed by the defendant "pro-se" because the attorney refused to do it. That motion resulted in the Judge calling an evidence hearing and dropping the said charges. In his opinion ruling he referred to the entire case as egregious.
During this 3 year long case not one defense attorney has ever filed a motion to view, photograph or document the evidence!!
Even though the defendants in this case have repeatedly filed formal complaints that the rules of evidence laws have been violated in this case, two guns missing from the LKPD property room was recovered in the 23rd street Pawn Shop, siezed laptop computers are documented to be missing, video evidence was altered, and an inventory list left with the defendants was altered and falsified to cover-up for missing guns. All grounds for a motion to have the case to be dismissed, or at the very least to call an evidence hearing!
Not one attorney in this 3 year long case has ever filed a motion for an evidence hearing!
The Prosecutors have filed frivalous motion after motion, that have nothing to do with the actual case or charges! While the defense attorneys sit back and fail to file any motions at all!
The Prosecutor has filed a motion to have the defendants gagged by a Federal Judge, in order to stop them from the continued internet postings about the case. After a hearing the motion was denied.
The Prosecutor has filed a supseding indictment to moot a motion to lift an illegal lis pendens placed against the defendants property absent of the required 60 day notice in anticipation of a money judgement. A move that has been ruled impermissable in the 10th circut court.
The Prosecutor has filed a motion to revoke the Bond of the defendants, because they have continued to exersize their Constitutional right of Freedom Of Speech by posting comments and blogs on the internet.
In three years of hearings and motions brought by the Prosecutor, the actual charges have yet to be addressed!
The Federal Indictments in this case are based on hearsay testimony from convicted felons that were bribed by the prosecutor to present perjured testimony to a Grand Jury in exchange for favors.
In three years of arrests, motions, hearings, investigations and charges against the defendants, the Federal Prosecutors Marietta Parker and AUSA Terra Morehead along with the Lawrence Kansas Police have failed to present one piece of solid evidence of any wrong doing by the defendants before the court!
At that time the evidence custodian (After a 20 min. search) could not find three expensive laptop PC's that had apparently gone missing from the LKPD property room. Missing evidence is grounds for a case to be dismissed. Yet instead it sent the Yellow House case into high gear!
So the case continued....
The Yellow House owners have been represented by a total of 9 attorneys during the course of this case. At least 3 of those attorneys have been threatened with "money laundering" charges by the Federal Prosecutors in the case.
The case was dropped by the prosecutor then one month later the same charges refiled, in a vindictive move to have the defendants forcefully rearrested and illegally searched. This would be called a Fishing expedetion in legal terms.
During the nearly 3 years this case has continued, not one motion has been filed on behalf of the defendants by an attorney.
One motion filed to have the charges dismissed because of the speedy trial violation was filed by the defendant "pro-se" because the attorney refused to do it. That motion resulted in the Judge calling an evidence hearing and dropping the said charges. In his opinion ruling he referred to the entire case as egregious.
During this 3 year long case not one defense attorney has ever filed a motion to view, photograph or document the evidence!!
Even though the defendants in this case have repeatedly filed formal complaints that the rules of evidence laws have been violated in this case, two guns missing from the LKPD property room was recovered in the 23rd street Pawn Shop, siezed laptop computers are documented to be missing, video evidence was altered, and an inventory list left with the defendants was altered and falsified to cover-up for missing guns. All grounds for a motion to have the case to be dismissed, or at the very least to call an evidence hearing!
Not one attorney in this 3 year long case has ever filed a motion for an evidence hearing!
The Prosecutors have filed frivalous motion after motion, that have nothing to do with the actual case or charges! While the defense attorneys sit back and fail to file any motions at all!
The Prosecutor has filed a motion to have the defendants gagged by a Federal Judge, in order to stop them from the continued internet postings about the case. After a hearing the motion was denied.
The Prosecutor has filed a supseding indictment to moot a motion to lift an illegal lis pendens placed against the defendants property absent of the required 60 day notice in anticipation of a money judgement. A move that has been ruled impermissable in the 10th circut court.
The Prosecutor has filed a motion to revoke the Bond of the defendants, because they have continued to exersize their Constitutional right of Freedom Of Speech by posting comments and blogs on the internet.
In three years of hearings and motions brought by the Prosecutor, the actual charges have yet to be addressed!
The Federal Indictments in this case are based on hearsay testimony from convicted felons that were bribed by the prosecutor to present perjured testimony to a Grand Jury in exchange for favors.
In three years of arrests, motions, hearings, investigations and charges against the defendants, the Federal Prosecutors Marietta Parker and AUSA Terra Morehead along with the Lawrence Kansas Police have failed to present one piece of solid evidence of any wrong doing by the defendants before the court!
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Yellow House uncovers Shoe Stores Insurance scam, Police fail to investigate
The Police claim to have found thousands of dollars worth of stolen property and even show in the Press video all the boxes of shoes being pulled out of the Yellow House owners garage. Here is the story of those shoes!
Back in 2005 a guy entered the Topeka store, he presented himself as a guy that people pay to haul off large loads of trash and do clean-ups.
He explained that he had been hired by a shoe store in Kansas City to clear out some pallets of athletic shoes that were stored in some storage units. The shoe store had actually hired him to clear out the shoes and haul them to the dump. But they were all new in the boxes and he could see no point in throwing them away. So he took all five pallets of shoes to his barn.
He soon found the market for these ugly outdated shoes from the 1980's for baseball, shotput and track was quite bad. He was selling them for the bargain price of one dollar a pair. The Yellow House offered to buy about 12 boxes full of shoes. But they too found the shoes had no value and were not marketable even on Ebay.
When the Police searched the Yellow House owners home, they found the boxes of worthless shoes in the garage and paraded them in front of the press to make it look like lots of stolen property was being confiscated. (lo)
The uncovered Insurance scam:
During the Proffer the Yellow House owners informed the police officers where the shoes came from and that they were not stolen.
The officers then said they had contacted the shoe store and the shoe store had confirmed the shoes had been reported stolen!
The scam then became clear to the Yellow House but not the Police!
These shoes were old and had no value. So why would this old man that owns a hauling business take the time to break into these storage units and bust his ass to haul 5 pallets of worthless shoes? Then openly bring people out to his barn to sell them!
And even though the police claimed the shoes were stolen, they refused to contact the man and interview him, even after the Yellow House owners gave them his phone number, and contacted the man and arranged for him to give them his statement.
What makes more sense here is the shoe store put the shoes in storage units and then insured them. They then hired the old mans business to haul them to the dump. Once they were gone the shoe store staged the theft, filed the police report and claimed the loss against the insurance!
Did the Lawrence Police ever look into that scenerio...NO!
They just confiscated the shoes and now 3 years later still have them, I am sure they are still in the property room because its highly unlikely anybody has STOLEN them! lo!!
The police never interviewed the guy that the Yellow House owners got the shoes from, he talked to the Yellow House owners several times about the situation, and gladly said he would give the police his statement.
see the video of the police loading all those boxes of worthless shoes:
Back in 2005 a guy entered the Topeka store, he presented himself as a guy that people pay to haul off large loads of trash and do clean-ups.
He explained that he had been hired by a shoe store in Kansas City to clear out some pallets of athletic shoes that were stored in some storage units. The shoe store had actually hired him to clear out the shoes and haul them to the dump. But they were all new in the boxes and he could see no point in throwing them away. So he took all five pallets of shoes to his barn.
He soon found the market for these ugly outdated shoes from the 1980's for baseball, shotput and track was quite bad. He was selling them for the bargain price of one dollar a pair. The Yellow House offered to buy about 12 boxes full of shoes. But they too found the shoes had no value and were not marketable even on Ebay.
When the Police searched the Yellow House owners home, they found the boxes of worthless shoes in the garage and paraded them in front of the press to make it look like lots of stolen property was being confiscated. (lo)
The uncovered Insurance scam:
During the Proffer the Yellow House owners informed the police officers where the shoes came from and that they were not stolen.
The officers then said they had contacted the shoe store and the shoe store had confirmed the shoes had been reported stolen!
The scam then became clear to the Yellow House but not the Police!
These shoes were old and had no value. So why would this old man that owns a hauling business take the time to break into these storage units and bust his ass to haul 5 pallets of worthless shoes? Then openly bring people out to his barn to sell them!
And even though the police claimed the shoes were stolen, they refused to contact the man and interview him, even after the Yellow House owners gave them his phone number, and contacted the man and arranged for him to give them his statement.
What makes more sense here is the shoe store put the shoes in storage units and then insured them. They then hired the old mans business to haul them to the dump. Once they were gone the shoe store staged the theft, filed the police report and claimed the loss against the insurance!
Did the Lawrence Police ever look into that scenerio...NO!
They just confiscated the shoes and now 3 years later still have them, I am sure they are still in the property room because its highly unlikely anybody has STOLEN them! lo!!
The police never interviewed the guy that the Yellow House owners got the shoes from, he talked to the Yellow House owners several times about the situation, and gladly said he would give the police his statement.
see the video of the police loading all those boxes of worthless shoes:
Friday, July 11, 2008
Yellow House Store owners back to court on July 15, 2008 bond revokation hearing
The Yellow House owners will be back in Federal court on July 15th, 2008 for a hearing in Federal Court to hear how the Federal Judge will rule on the Prosecutors motion to revoke the Bond release and have the owners of the Yellow House Guy and Carrie Neighbors locked up in the Fort Leavenworth Federal Prison for Blogging the truth about the Governments corrupt actions!
Boy if that happens don't nobody get near my butt, because according to our sources the Leavenworth Prisoners don't get clean underwear or showers when they are bad!
The other alternative to locking up the two defendants would be if they agree to not do the Blah Blah blah thing all over the Internet.
Well that would just be another violation of their Freedom of Speech 1st Amendment Constitutional rights and that would just be wrong! And that just won't work either!
Why should the Yellow House owners agree; or be subjected to have any more of their constitutional rights violated? When the Government has failed to prove there has even been a crime committed!
They are already being prosecuted in Federal Court under statutes that they do not qualify for, they have been subjected to humiliating random drug tests for going on 2 years, they have had numerous restrictions placed on their business, they have had an illegal lis pendens placed against their property without a conviction, they have been the target of the Lawrence Kansas Police and Federal Prosecutors repeated misconduct and abuse!
And now this! Another hearing on a ridiculous motion to waist more of the tax payers money and the courts time!
I am so mad I just can't even type anymore! This is just wrong I tell you its wrong and its UN-American!
Please remember us in your prayers, because we are not going to back down from the rights are soldiers are willing to fight and die for us to have!
" />
Boy if that happens don't nobody get near my butt, because according to our sources the Leavenworth Prisoners don't get clean underwear or showers when they are bad!
The other alternative to locking up the two defendants would be if they agree to not do the Blah Blah blah thing all over the Internet.
Well that would just be another violation of their Freedom of Speech 1st Amendment Constitutional rights and that would just be wrong! And that just won't work either!
Why should the Yellow House owners agree; or be subjected to have any more of their constitutional rights violated? When the Government has failed to prove there has even been a crime committed!
They are already being prosecuted in Federal Court under statutes that they do not qualify for, they have been subjected to humiliating random drug tests for going on 2 years, they have had numerous restrictions placed on their business, they have had an illegal lis pendens placed against their property without a conviction, they have been the target of the Lawrence Kansas Police and Federal Prosecutors repeated misconduct and abuse!
And now this! Another hearing on a ridiculous motion to waist more of the tax payers money and the courts time!
I am so mad I just can't even type anymore! This is just wrong I tell you its wrong and its UN-American!
Please remember us in your prayers, because we are not going to back down from the rights are soldiers are willing to fight and die for us to have!
" />
Sunday, July 6, 2008
Federal Prosecutor Terra Morehead's Corrupt contract all Public Defenders must sign
In federal court the conviction rate is 98%. That means even if you are wrongly charged and innocent you only have a 2% chance of being found "Not Guilty".
In Federal Court the Prosecutors have quota's they must make, not only for convictions but also for forfeitures of property.
The Prosecutors (AUSA's) in Federal court have a lot of power!
They control attorneys, the Marshall's, Agents in the FBI, the Warden at the Prison, the Judges, the detectives bringing them the cases, and even the defendants.
With all that power one might even wonder if there is really a 2% chance for the wrongly accused to be found "not guilty"?
What if you also add in the potential for corrupt behavior that can develop with so much power? Years of working with; and controlling the same attorneys and affiliates begins to create a network of individuals that owe each other favors, scratch each others backs, and even allows for situations where blackmail and kickbacks can enter into the picture.
In Federal court the charges are much more serious and the rules are broader for conviction.
If you are a defendant in Federal court with only a 2% chance, would you want your attorney to have to sign a contract with the prosecutor promising not to show you your discovery?
Would you feel comfortable putting your life, your freedom, your reputation and everything you own in the hands of an attorney that is willing to sign an agreement with the Prosecutor not to show you any of the evidence against you, and not to allow you to have in your possession any of the evidence being held against you?
You see nothing!
What if all the evidence is just fabricated garbage, and in reality the prosecutor has no evidence against you? What if she is just needing to do a favor for someone, or helping someone teach you a lesson because you pissed someone off in the Lawrence Kansas police department? What if in return for the favor of putting you away, she gets to keep the Property that she has liens and forfeitures against?
This sounds more like racketeering rather than Justice!
Kansas Department Of Justice Prosecuting attorney Terra Morehead has found a way to control the attorneys in order to accomplish just that! We have not found another Prosecutor at a Federal level outside of this Justice Department making attorneys sign such a contract.
By getting attorneys to agree to her contract she can control them and their clients. Here is the signature Page of the contract that a Public Defender that will be defending a client against Terra Morehead in Federal court must sign! To protect the identity of the source of this contract the names have been blackened out. I wonder if anybody has ever been found "not guilty" in this Corrupt Department of Justice?
US Attorney Federal Prosecutor eaves drops on Private email between client & attorney
| Get free hit counter code here. |
It appears that U.S. Attorney Marietta Parker not only was using the passwords obtained through a search warrant against Sunflower cable to log into the blogs, she was also using them to read the attorney-client emails.
In one such email defendant Carrie Neighbors tells her attorney that she has a secret the Prosecutor was unaware of.
She goes on to inform her attorney that she did not think the Prosecutor had been told by the Lawrence Police that she was never alone in the Yellow House Store. Her husband Guy was always concerned about her safety while he ran the Yellow House store in Topeka, and had his retired friend Mike stop in the store and sit in the chair just to hang out and make sure she was never alone. When Mike could not make it in, Carries mom would come in and hang out with her, and in reality they both had a really good time. Mike and Carries mom would work out their times so that Carrie was never alone.
of these witnesses were always at the front counter with carrie and witnessed every transaction. They are both credible witnesses that can testify there was never a time that Carrie was being innapropriate customers, or conspiring with customers in regards to any kind of illegal activity.
Within 4 days of Carrie sending this email to her attorney Phil Gibson, the Prosecutor sent Mike and Carries mom a Subpoena.
Friday, July 4, 2008
Analytics show that very important agencies are reading this blog
_0001.jpg)
According to the analytics that are connected to this blog there are some very important people, and agencies interested in following the information shared in this site, and possibly looking into the obstruction of justice, corruption and conspiracy of the Lawrence Kansas Police Department and the Kansas Department of Justice, in connection with the Yellow House case.
Here is a list of some of the visitors that have visited this blog.
Various law firms
The Pentagon
U.S. Department of Justice in 4 States including Washington D.C.
U.S. Marshalls service Dept. Of Justice division of Investigations in Arlington VA.
Police Departments all accross the U.S., including Spokane Washington, New Mexico, California, TX.
Department of the Administration of U.S. Courts in Several States
Prosecutors offices from 4 different States
Various News agencies, and TV producers such as TimeWarner, WebTv,
Bureau of Indian Affairs
U.S. Postal Service Investigations in several states
I.R.S. division of Investigations in several different states
Senators, House of Representatives
and thousands of un-traceable or hidden I.P. Addresses from all accross the United States and even other Countries.
Nobody in their right mind would be posting untrue information, having the knowledge that all these agencies are reading and investigating the allegations.
Our life is an open book, we have had every aspect of our finances and business practices investigated and examined and scrutinized through the various agencies the Police Dept. called in to help, and in the press!
We have been tested over and over, by snitches and law enforcement stings attempting to trip us up, or get us to do or say something on a wire or video they can use against us later. We even have had people bribed with favors to lie against us in court before a Grand Jury or through plea bargains.
Through it all we have maintained "WE HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE!"
We have met with several FBI Special Agents from Topeka and given them copies of our files, all our financial transactions have been audited 5 years back by the IRS, and at one point we even gave the Prosecutor permission to bug our phones!
We have offered over and over to cooperate fully with the investigation, even going as far as entering into a contract with the Government for week long Proffering session. That resulted in nothing except more of our civil rights being violated.
All we ever ask through this entire ordeal is that we are treated fairly, without discrimination because of our race or social status and that our Constitutional rights were protected....Aparently in Lawrence Kansas if you are the Yellow House owners that is asking too much!
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Corruption by Local Lawrence Kansas Police Chief Ron Olin handled with the same standards?
| Get free hit counter code here. |
smitty (Anonymous) says…
Does the FBI apply the same standards to law enforcement corruption by a local police chief (Olin) who claims terrorist expertise? I would say this man has terrorized the public and some of his staff for many years and is currently being challenged by a local small business for his illegal actions within the LPD.
I just stopped at the barber shop to ask Amyx if there was anything to the rumor of an on going and current investigation by a higher law enforcement authority. He avoided an answer, I asked it another way, he hemmed and hawed, I asked it another way…
Mike Amyx said ” It(Olin and his department) is being handled as a personnel matter by the city manager's office.”
In other words, yes there is an investigation/situation involving the police chief, Ron Olin, that is being kept from the public.
Contact your city commissioners to question why this hasn't been made public information. I'm not asking for the details that are private but an investigation of personnel matter with the chief of police and his highest internal contacts is worthy of some sort of public exposure.
Or is it only the common citizens that get profiled and investigated by the corrupt police who have the power to hide their illegal actions as a “personnel problem” behind closed doors?
Mayor
Michael Dever mdever@sunflower.com (785) 865-4202 2011
Vice-Mayor
Robert Chestnut robchestnut@sunflower.com (785) 764-3220 2011
Commissioner
Mike Amyx mikeamyx515@hotmail.com Home (785) 843-3089
Work (785) 842-9425 2009
Commissioner Sue Hack suehack@sunflower.com (785) 842-6608 2009
Commissioner Boog Highberger boog@lawrence.ixks.com (785) 843-0995 2009
Olin needs to be convicted of his crimes just as any citizen. Please contact your commissioners to voice your concerns.
Of course they all know what's up and are handling Olin and staff's law breaking as a personnel matter. As with Deciphera, this is a matter of that needs to see the light. Question the city commissioners as to their duty to the city's populace(not how to protect our city coffers from a major civil suit by hiding the truth) if we have a personnel matter that involves law breaking by the chief and his boys and girls.
Refresher course for those who don't recall………Olin and the city manager attempt to circumvent Kansas law when on of the LPD was convicted of domestic violence. There are several officers that are still on the LPD that have broken the law such as drunken driving accidents, drunken accidents where the drunk officer took the victim he struck with his vehicle to the hospital while drunk. All except the officer convicted of DV are still on the LPD, all owing big favors to their man in charge. The murder and cover up of a young native man that Olin organized which includes the involvement of ex-DA Jim Flory, and Coroner Carol Moddrell, and perjury by officers under oath at the inquest, and alterations of official documents.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Federal Prosecutor Terra Morehead & Det. Mike McAtee are looking for liars to testify in Federal Court Yellow House case
We have been informed that Federal Prosecutor Terra Morehead and Lawrence Police Detective Mike McAtee approached a Federal Prisoner by the name of Marcus Crawford, and in exchange for a deal asked him to lie in court and say he sold guns and merchandise stolen from Walmart to the Yellow House Store.
That way the Prosecutor can have more inadmissable hearsay to present in Federal Court.
We feel sorry for this Prosecutor having to work so hard to get people to lie for her in this corrupt Federal case so we decided to make some signs up to help her out.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
CNN's TRUTV "In Session" Court projected coverage of Yellow House Case
The Producers of "in session" TruTv's coverage of courtroom trials and cases that formerly was courtTV, has expressed an interest in covering the Yellow House case September Federal trial on nationwide TV!
TruTv is a Turner Entertainment Network owned by CNN.com/crime coverage. With 1,426,000 viewers this reality tv show is one of the most viewed court coverage tv shows in the country.
Currently seen in 91 million U.S. households and enjoying more than a year of solid and consistent ratings growth, truTV features high-stakes, action-packed originals that give viewers access to places and situations they can't normally experience.
There is a possibility the Yellow House story could also be featured as a documentary on one of truTV's primetime fan favorites original series Dominick Dunne's Power, Privilege and Justice and The Real Hustle. During the daytime, the channel features expert trial coverage under the name In Session.
Please stay tuned!
For more information contact
Contact Info:
Karen Cassell
Turner Entertainment Networks
(404) 885-4238
karen.cassell@turner.com
TruTv is a Turner Entertainment Network owned by CNN.com/crime coverage. With 1,426,000 viewers this reality tv show is one of the most viewed court coverage tv shows in the country.
Currently seen in 91 million U.S. households and enjoying more than a year of solid and consistent ratings growth, truTV features high-stakes, action-packed originals that give viewers access to places and situations they can't normally experience.
There is a possibility the Yellow House story could also be featured as a documentary on one of truTV's primetime fan favorites original series Dominick Dunne's Power, Privilege and Justice and The Real Hustle. During the daytime, the channel features expert trial coverage under the name In Session.
Please stay tuned!
For more information contact
Contact Info:
Karen Cassell
Turner Entertainment Networks
(404) 885-4238
karen.cassell@turner.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)