This is a word for word conversation between Sandy who lives in Colorado and Carrie who is in Lawrence. Who would have the authority to send them, the Federal Prosecutor or Police Chief? It appears the two officers going after Carrie drove a Crown Vic all the way from Lawrence to Colorado to Harass and intimidate a potential witness by the name of Annette.
In order to make the trip look legitimate, they claimed to be needing to personally interview Sandy( a former employee) that had not worked in the business for over 6 years, while current and more recent employees were totally ignored.
On the same day the officers went to Colorado to do their so called Sandy "interview", residents in Annettes Colorado apartment complex saw a Crown Vic with two men matching the two officer's unique descriptions drive through the parking lot, the one on the passenger side got out and slashed all four of Annettes tires.
Even though Carrie carefully documented everything, her attorney refused to use any of it at trial. In fact, he did not call a single witness. This is just another fact was ignored by Carrie's Attorney. This is just another incident in a very dirty investigation that Carrie's attorney refused to challenge at trial because Carrie's attorney told her "the police are not on trial, you are"!
10:32pmCarrie
hey sandy
how are you
10:37pmSandy
Hi Carrie
10:38pmCarrie
I had a friend that moved to Colorado
10:38pmSandy
What part?
10:38pmCarrie
She was a witness in our case
10:38pmSandy
yeah
10:39pmCarrie
The cops had been harassing her because of her ties to me so she moved to colorado to get away from the and sue the city
in 2006 she told me two guys matching Bialek and Rantz description with kansas plates slashed her tires!
10:40pmSandy
Are they cops?
10:40pmCarrie
I told her there was no way they would have drove to Colorado to flatten her tires. We had a big fight about it because I didnt believe her and accused her of lying
It was the two cops that came to see you
10:41pmSandy
yeah
Oh
10:41pmCarrie
They used you as a cover-up
10:41pmSandy
WHAT???
10:41pmCarrie
so they could drive to colorado and harass her!!!
10:41pmSandy
Oh Carrie, are you sure?
That don't sound right to me
10:42pmCarrie
THey never talked to any of my other x-employees and they worked after you quit
I saw Nate yesterday
He said he has never been questioned
10:42pmSandy
Who is Nate?
10:42pmCarrie
He replaced you
10:42pmSandy
oh
10:43pmCarrie
I knew when I saw that they had talked to you it was dirty
10:43pmSandy
What was dirty?
10:43pmCarrie
because you had been gone so long that the statute of limitations would have been up on any information you could have given them
10:43pmSandy
Yeah, I agree with that
10:44pmCarrie
They went to colorado to harass, slash and intimidate my friend Annette
10:44pmSandy
That's crazy
10:44pmCarrie
They got the City to pay by using you
I asked an Agent who would have even approved the funding for two cops to drive all the way to colorado to interview you on city $$$
10:45pmSandy
I wondered why they would drive all the way here to talk to me
10:45pmCarrie
The agent said that they had no jurisdiction to cross state lines
10:45pmSandy
I thought it was strange
10:46pmCarrie
I said when we find out who sent them then we know who is behind the conspiracy to get Annette
10:46pmSandy
I told them over the phone that I didn't know anything
10:46pmCarrie
Yep
10:47pmSandy
But why would they be harrassing your friend to that extent?
10:47pmCarrie
The agent said that the Federal U.S. Attorney was the only one with authority to send them, otherwise they would have had to do the interview on the phone or get a colorado cop to do the interview and send them the transcripts.
10:47pmSandy
Wow
10:48pmCarrie
Because she was threatening a law suit against the City for the harassment that involved the two cops that drove down there to talk to you.
Do you remember what they were driving?
10:48pmSandy
Not at all
10:48pmCarrie
I have a description of the car from a witness that saw them slash her tires
10:49pmSandy
I wish I had paid more attention
Sorry
10:49pmCarrie
It was Monday may 22 2006
They are very corrupt
10:50pmSandy
Damn, I don't even remember what year it was
Thats nuts Carrie
10:50pmCarrie
I feel so bad I didnt believe my friend
10:50pmSandy
I'm sure you do
10:51pmCarrie
It just sounded so outrageous at the time that they would have drove all the way to colorado just to slash her tires!!!
10:51pmSandy
That's what I'm thinkin
10:51pmCarrie
Its not what you would expect from cops that take an oath to protect and serve the community
10:51pmSandy
For sure
10:51pmCarrie
But they really did drive down there!
10:51pmSandy
yes they did
10:52pmCarrie
And I think the U.S. Attorney knew that the cops true intention was to intimidate and scare Annette.
10:52pmSandy
That poor girl
10:53pmCarrie
You see they spent all that money to interview you then they did not subpoena you...that makes no sense unless they were covering it up.
10:53pmSandy
They didn't get any useful info from me
10:53pmCarrie
Especially since they have subpoenad my mom, and Mike and heck they even subpoenaed John Cale...LOL
10:54pmSandy
Oh brother
10:54pmCarrie
Girl they havent even talked to John cale and he got a subpoena
10:54pmSandy
How much sense does that make?
10:54pmCarrie
They never even talked to Wynona and she is just over the bridge...much less gas...lol
10:54pmSandy
I KNOW
10:55pmCarrie
That is so bad! They have been so naughty!
10:55pmSandy
That confused me!!!
10:55pmCarrie
me too....until I put the pieces together
10:55pmSandy
lol.....you're right
10:55pmCarrie
Now it all makes sense!
10:55pmSandy
I guess so
10:56pmCarrie
This has been like a big puzzle..and there is always a motive..figure out the motive and you solve the puzzle
10:56pmSandy
But what did they gain by slashing her tires?
Just a fear factor?
10:56pmCarrie
They were trying to scare her so she wouldn't go after them
yep
10:56pmSandy
Stupid!!
10:57pmCarrie
fear..letting her see how much power they had
The entire case is a fraud.
10:57pmSandy
What power does it take to slach a tire?
Ass holes
10:57pmCarrie
Well I guess it was like a threat...next time it could be her..so to speak
10:58pmSandy
Yeah, I understand
10:58pmCarrie
It cost her a lot of money to replace the tires.
10:58pmSandy
Did it scare her?
10:58pmCarrie
She was really upset.
10:58pmSandy
Yes, I'm sure!!
10:59pmCarrie
I dont think she was scared, she was just mad. And I didn't help, because I thought she was just trying to get me to send her money..I didnt believe her
10:59pmSandy
I can't blame you though....it sounds pretty wild at first
10:59pmCarrie
Any way I thought you might get a kick out of knowing what those two cops were really up to.
11:00pmSandy
Well, it explains a lot
I thought it was very strange
11:00pmCarrie
Bialek was the short cop, according to witnesses he is the one that got out of the car and slashed the tires
Rantz was the red head, he stayed in the car.
11:00pmSandy
Bastards
11:00pmCarrie
yep!
11:01pmSandy
That poor girl
11:01pmCarrie
yea they put her through a lot
11:01pmSandy
Sounds like it
Are they leaving her alone now?
11:02pmCarrie
She has disappeared.
11:02pmSandy
OMG
11:02pmCarrie
because of the harassment the lawsuit was sealed
11:03pmSandy
What a big fat mess!!
11:03pmCarrie
She was on my facebook until a couple of months ago
then she was just gone.
11:03pmSandy
Dang
I hope she's okay
11:03pmCarrie
yea I hope so too, but its out of my hands.
I think she has just gone into hiding
11:04pmSandy
Probably
11:04pmCarrie
Hopefully she got her money
11:04pmSandy
Money?
11:04pmCarrie
she said she had a huge lawsuit going..that is why they were harassing her
11:05pmSandy
Oh, I see
11:05pmCarrie
I hope that doesnt make you feel any less important...lol
11:05pmSandy
Will she still be a witness for you?
11:05pmCarrie
having them drive all the to colorado for you and all!
11:05pmSandy
I feel better actually
Not about the poor girl of course
11:06pmCarrie
Only if she can be found..and I dont think that is going to happen. BUt its definately not going to look good to the jury
THe fact they didnt subpoena you just makes the fact that the trip to CO was actually to harass Annette more stronger
And it shows how manipulative they are
11:08pmSandy
I think they knew they were'nt going to find out anything from me before they made the trip
They were insistant
11:09pmCarrie
Of course they did, like I said even if you had some big time goods on me, you hadnt worked for me in 5 years, any info you had would have been beyond the statute of limitations and useless to them anyway.
11:09pmSandy
Yep
11:09pmCarrie
You should have sued them for harassing you!!
11:10pmSandy
lol
11:10pmCarrie
seriously! That was harassment!
11:10pmSandy
I didn't really feel harassed
Just confused
11:11pmCarrie
I know you weren't happy
11:11pmSandy
No I wasn't
11:11pmCarrie
I could tell by your voice.
You were very confused why they were there
11:11pmSandy
Yeah
11:11pmCarrie
I wish you remember something about the car they were driving.
That would supprt the witness'es account
11:12pmSandy
Let me ask Don if he remembers
11:12pmCarrie
cool
11:13pmSandy
It was a gray or brown Crown Vic
11:13pmCarrie
That is exactly what the witness said! WOW
A crown vic!!!!!
11:13pmSandy
Yep
11:13pmCarrie
COOL! Thanks!!!
11:14pmSandy
You're very welcome
11:14pmCarrie
I will tell my attorney
11:14pmSandy
Okay
Monday, March 15, 2010
Friday, February 26, 2010
BILL OF RIGHTS
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241
Conspiracy Against Rights
This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).
It further makes it unlawful for two or more persons to go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another with the intent to prevent or hinder his/her free exercise or enjoyment of any rights so secured.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years, or both; and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years, or for life, or may be sentenced to death.
Conspiracy Against Rights
This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).
It further makes it unlawful for two or more persons to go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another with the intent to prevent or hinder his/her free exercise or enjoyment of any rights so secured.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years, or both; and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years, or for life, or may be sentenced to death.
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.
This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her color or race.
Acts under "color of any law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under "color of any law," the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.
This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her color or race.
Acts under "color of any law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under "color of any law," the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
Monday, February 15, 2010
| Get free hit counter code here. |
Time since Sunday, December 11, 2005 at 5:24:44 AM (Topeka time)
1527 days
36665 hours
2199903 minutes
131994194 seconds
Alternative version
It is 1527 days, 17 hours, 3 minutes and 14 seconds since Sunday, December 11, 2005 at 5:24:44 AM (Topeka time)
Current time is
Monday, February 15, 2010 at 10:27:58 PM CST (local time in Topeka)
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Kofi,
I called and made an appointment to get a consultation from your friend. I will see him at 4:30 on Tues the 16Th. I wanted to thank you for meeting with me today, I am excited to have you on my team. Your analytic skills will be a tremendous asset for me as an expert witness at trial! Your expertise to oversee the dynamics of the case, and give your impartial, educated expert overview and opinion will be priceless and very impressive to the Jury.
I wanted to tell you a little about one aspect of the case.
Back in 2006 a friend of mine, Annette Miller, was harassed by the officer in charge of our case Jay Bialek. He went to her work and demanded to search her car, because he discovered documents during the search of my store that showed I had given Annette the car 6 months earlier.(I had her daughter in foster care and when she got the kid back she didnt have a car)
I told her what the cop did was wrong and encouraged her to file a complaint against him. She filed the complaint, and this is where things get weird.
I wanted to help her find an attorney, but before I could get her an attorney one came into her work (KWIK shop) and offered to represent her.
He then told her that in order to proceed with her lawsuit she would need to get out of Lawrence, and move to Colorado. There she was introduced to another attorney that would be handling the case in Colorado.
This is where I become speculative, because she has never been straight up with me about the true identity of the people she was getting her information from, or how much she was actively involved in the conspiracy against me. She has indicated to me that she had to cooperate because they were threatening to deport her Mexican boyfriend if she didn't.
For the next two years, she called me and Guy daily with updates, telling us her attorney Mike Sawaya had hired a private investigator that was going to come to Lawrence and expose the corruption in the Lawrence Police dept. and US Attorney's office that was driving the Yellow House case. She said that because she hadn't actually won the lawsuit yet, her attorney was expecting her to pay the expenses of the investigator (who originally was going to be in Lawrence for one week.) Annette asked if me and Guy would help her. We agreed.
I don't know for sure who this person posing as her attorney was. I have suspected it was an agent for the IRS, hired by the US Attorney to try and build a case against me for income tax evasion by getting me to send Annette enough money, as a back up indictment.
For two years she called us everyday to give us the updates on the reports about what the investigator had found out. These updates came to her through her attorney.
A lot of the information that Annette was giving us was backed up by information I was getting from other sources. Like; Annette said the FBI & IRS was investigating the Police dept. was backed up by at least three people I knew. My friend Jennier who claimed that cops coming in her store had told her the police Dept was under investigation, and every officer was being questioned by the FBI. ETC...
One day I called Annettes attorneys office, they denied she was a client. I called her and demanded some answers. A few days of going back and forth and some angry words, and Annette disappeared. My private investigator found her through phone records 2 months later hiding out in Mexico.
I told my Investigator Dan and my Attorney about Annettes Investigator that was investigating the police dept. I told them I had been sending money to Annette through Western Union to help her pay the Investigator.
They went to court and presented to Judge Murguia what had been going on with Annette. The Prosecutor claimed I had been laundering money to Annette and that they were going to Subpoena Western Union, because they were sure the amount I was claiming to have sent her was less than what had actually been sent, and that they were going to indict me for Income Tax evasion.
That was an indication to me that the Prosecutor must have been involved. how would she know there should have been more money? Especially because she was right, in a way.
You see back in Aug. 2008 I had refused to send Annette anymore money. But Annette did not tell her attorney. Instead she began to embezzle money from the Apartment complex she worked at, and continued to give her attorney the money to pay the investigator, leaving them to believe the money was still coming from me. (Kinda like she played the players! LOL)
My attorney told me the amount I sent to Annette over the two year period did not meet the $100,000. threshold needed for the Prosecutor to indict me on a Federal level for Income Tax evasion.
Here is the time line of events I documented each day when Annette would call me with the Investigators updates:
Sun, 16 Sep 2007
My friend Annette hired a private investigator that has flown down here from(Colorado) and is digging into the corruption that is fueling our case.
Tue 9/18/07
Annettes attorney Mike sent down an investigator, he was only supposed to be down here for a week, but there is so much stuff to look into he has been staying on to get to the bottom of things.
Tue, 18 Sep 2007
It rained really hard today.
Annettes private detective noticed he was being followed in the pouring rain, so he decided to drive around the block a few times.
Then he pulled up to the light, as it turned yellow he quickly made a turn...The person following him attmepted to quickly turn too....and hit another car...He will need to get a different rental car tomorrow.
Wed, 19 Sep 2007
The FBI from Topeka; Agent’s Scott Gentine and Denton Murray has recovered 2 guns in the pawn shop on 23rd street missing from the LKPD evidence room. (The guns were owned by David Bryant) Dave came in the store really upset because his guns that the police have not been able to find in the evidence locker was in the Pawn shop for sale. So I called Agent Gentine, he and FBI Agent Murray went to the Pawn shop and got the gun.
FBI agent BOB Schaefer called Annette's Investigator Today and has agreed to meet with him tomorrow.
The investigator had to get another rental car because he has been made in the one he is using...(he says he's been getting followed, so he needs a different one now) and Annette said if I send a little extra money he will be able to get a motel for the weekend.
Annette said the investigator is low on money and has been living out of the back of his car.
Thu 9/20/07
Annettes investigator went to Topeka today to talk to the FBI agent Scott Gentine and Denton Murray again.
They told him they have launched an investigation to try and determine why items from the evidence room have surfaced in both pawn shops!
The investigator asked them why they did not investigate this sooner, since this has been going on for a while. Agent Gentine told the investigator that this was the first time anyone has complained! The investigator says he is not sure that the Topeka FBI is on the level, he said he may need to contact the FBI in Washington to look into this further.
The Investigator also went to see FBI Agent BOB Shaefer in K.C. he was supposed to be investigating our complaints aganst the Lawrence Police Dept...but BOB was out sick today.
Bob couldn't meet the investigator but he did call me back today! left a message on the phone, while we were in court. I told the Topeka FBI that I believed that Agent Bob Shaefer had faked the investigation into our complaints. Agent Gentine told me that the Prosecutor Marietta Parker was the one that had sent Agent Shaefer to Lawrence.
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007
Guy went to Topeka and talked to the FBI yesterday (Agent Gentine and Murray) about our complaints and they are going to investigate the fact that our last complaint was investigated by a fake FBI agent. They had the Human Rights agency call us and make a meeting for Friday. Guy showed them some of our documents and complaints. He gave them copies to keep.
In the mean time Annettes investigator took a plane to Washington today to meet with the FBI Headquarters down there in the morning and show them the videos and recordings he has, and see if they will come down for a real investigation.
Date: Wed, 26th, Sep 2007
The investigator is in Washington D.C. today. He has been treated like royalty down there and everything is going well.
He met with the Justice Depts. Prosecuting District attorney, 4 Special Prosecutors that will be handling the case against any officials, and the Director of the FBI also attended the meeting.
The meeting started at 8 am and they finally finished up about 3pm. It was a long day; they are not quite half way through the information.
The investigator and his partner have about 8 hours of surveillance video plus all of the voice recordings and tons of notes. They mostly went through the information about the police dept. today.
The FBI guys found the video of Officer Bialek meeting the girl at the motel while on duty particularly interesting.
The FBI director told the investigator he is very thorough. Tomorrow the investigator is going to meet with them again.
Another interesting tid-bit...One of the investigators still here in town (just for fun,) called the Prosecutor Marietta Parkers office today and told her she wanted to talk to her about Bob Shaefer.
Marietta Parker told the investigator she doesn’t know anybody named Bob Shaefer!
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007
Well, Annette has not gotten her money from the lawsuit yet. The city is stalling, Annette says its because they think if they get me taken down they will get out of paying her. But her attorney says the amount goes up (a penalty thing) every week the money is late. so its up to $750,000 now.
The FBI from Washington called the investigator back this week, and asked him to come back to Washington a second time to go over some more things. Then they even bought him a 1st class plane ticket!
Oct 3, 2007
The Investigator flew back to Washington yesterday and met with the FBI all day today. He says they met in a big room around a big table. He says there was a whole room full of FBI agents looking at our case, he says the head of the FBI in Washington was in the meeting, and 4 Special prosecutors were also in the meeting, and he was told by the Director of the FBI that a Supreme court Judge will be monitoring our case and overseeing the color of law prosecutions of the Public corruption that is uncovered during the investigation!
Oct. 7, 2007
4 agents in suits showed up at LKPD carrying brief cases today from the FBI. They had some kind of meeting in the main Police dept building.
Officer Bialek pulled up about 30 minutes after they arrived in his personal vehicle in regular clothes.
Two Agents in Suits met Bialek out in the parking lot. They walked up to him, handed him some kind of paperwork, shook his hand and escorted him into the Police Dept. building.
Bialek spent about 2 hours with them inside the building. He was then escorted from the building by the same agents in suits.
According to the investigator, who stayed outside... Bialek looked like he was upset!
According to a police officer that a friend of mine knows, the FBI has interviewed every officer on the force 3 times. first in small groups, and also individually. They are asking officers questions about the Yellow House investigation and they are also being questioned about our missing evidence.
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007
The FBI sent down an agent from Washington today. The agent is going to meet with Annettes investigator and he is going to look into the Lawrence Police dept.
Thurs. 10/11/07
The FBI is still here investigating!!! More Agents flew in from Washington!
Today they are going to be auditing the evidence room. They are also bringing in some IRS Agents to help with the Investigation.
The Investigator has met a Paralegal student that agreed to be his informant and he is getting the Investigator some inside information about things going on in the Dept of Justice!
According to the investigator Agents have spent the last 3 days searching and investigating the prosecutors office.
Fri 11/02/07
Annettes investigator said,
A group of guys in suits went to the Kansas City Justice dept today and were questioning people in the prosecutors office one at a time.
He was told they were investigators from the Kansas Bar Association. And they are investigating Parkers office.
We go back to court on monday at 4:30 to get Judge Lungstrums ruling on our motion to dismiss our case.
Tue 11/06/07
Annettes investigator is investigating the Pawn Shops. He has found a connection that they are not only tied into the police, they are also tied into some kind of money laundering and drug dealing schemes with the strip club calle the Flamingo in North Lawrence.
The Pawn shop on 23rd had 3 big Pensky moving trucks parked out back. It appeared the FBI has been loading them with merchandise from the Pawn Shop. There have been Police Crown Vic's parked outside the Pawn Shop all day.
This Pawn shop had the guns from he Evidence room up in there for sale.
11-10-2007
Annettes Investigator hooked up with one of the Dancers from the Flamingo in North Lawrence. she is giving him inside info. she says that the owner is tied into the Pawn shop. That he uses the girls to do money drops, because they run the money from the dance club through the pawn shops to "clean it up."
There is a lot of drug dealing going on inside the Bird. Mostly cocaine. It is the drug of choice for the dancers and the patrons. They are tied into the police and dont have to worry about being harassed.
The owner of the strip club, also owns some limo's.
He is tied in with the corrupt city officials, and offers business men rides in the limo's with the girls. The investigator hired a young guy that works for an investigator in KC. He has him pretending to be the boyfriend of the dancer. He wants to provide her with the protection while she is providing information. He said that after just a couple of days they were already referring to him as family and offering him drugs inside the club.
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007
Due to the fact that Guns from the evidence room were found in the Pawn shop on 23rd street, Both the Pawn Shops are under investigation by the FBI now! Both Pawn shops are not buying right now.
They can't buy anything until the investigation is wrapped up!
We sent a person over offering to sell an expensive gold necklace to test them! They are telling customers they won't be able to buy for about 2 weeks!
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007
.The Federal Unlawful User with Firearm Indictment against us were officially dropped on friday. We will have an evidentiary hearing to determine if it's "with Prejudice" or "without Prejudice" next month.
My attorney Phil Gibson said he was worried about what the results of the hearing would be, he said he worried; as a result of his motion, that our old attorneys could be in trouble for not properly preparing for trial the first time.
Annette says the investigator says the Washington FBI called a hearing before a Judge last Friday.
The FBI wants the Judge to go over the information and evidence they gathered during the investigation. They have a list of Government Officials names they will be presenting to the Judge for possible Indictments.
The Investigator has been working closly with one of the FBI Agents from Washington.
The Investigator said some of the people the FBI were seeking Indictments on; were Morehead, Bialek, Chief Olin, Rantz, McAtee, and some names I didn't know.
The Investigator said the FBI agent he has befriended came into our store today undercover. I told her we saw him, he was driving a fancy rental car from Missouri and dressed way too fancy to be one of our customers, so I saved the surveillance video of him walking through the store.
http://s162.photobucket.com/albums/t273/yellowhouse_photos/FBI/?action=view¤t=DSCN7925.flv
The FBI had a judge come down from Manhattan Kansas to oversee the hearing. They had the Judge from Manhattan come down because they wanted to be sure that the Judge overseeing the hearing was impartial.
There were 15 names on a list the fbi agents want the Judge to consider indictments for. They are the officials that have been prosecuting us and are involved in the corruption going on at the Police Dept.
The city appealed Annettes lawsuit. No big money yet...Her attorney said they can appeal up to three times. Her atttorney says she could have a settlement in 2 months, or it could drag on for at least six more months.
Sun 2/03/08 .
Annette is going back to court in two weeks. Her attorney thinks the City of Lawrence might be ready to settle with her.
Mr Antenelli from Police Abuse org. contacted us today. They agreed to investigate our case for us.
He said they have been trying to get our files from Lkpd. He said the police have not been cooperating with them.
He says that typically a police dpt. will be very cooperative or not cooperative at all. And Lawrence is not at all, and that tells them the dept is dirty.
Feb. 10,2010
Annette has been told by her informants, that the FBI are trying to get her picked up for questioning on my behalf. So she shut down her facebook and is no longer communicating with me.
I will stop here.
Of course this is all confidential until my case is closed. After that I have lots more that you will be able to incorporate into one heck of a book!
I called and made an appointment to get a consultation from your friend. I will see him at 4:30 on Tues the 16Th. I wanted to thank you for meeting with me today, I am excited to have you on my team. Your analytic skills will be a tremendous asset for me as an expert witness at trial! Your expertise to oversee the dynamics of the case, and give your impartial, educated expert overview and opinion will be priceless and very impressive to the Jury.
I wanted to tell you a little about one aspect of the case.
Back in 2006 a friend of mine, Annette Miller, was harassed by the officer in charge of our case Jay Bialek. He went to her work and demanded to search her car, because he discovered documents during the search of my store that showed I had given Annette the car 6 months earlier.(I had her daughter in foster care and when she got the kid back she didnt have a car)
I told her what the cop did was wrong and encouraged her to file a complaint against him. She filed the complaint, and this is where things get weird.
I wanted to help her find an attorney, but before I could get her an attorney one came into her work (KWIK shop) and offered to represent her.
He then told her that in order to proceed with her lawsuit she would need to get out of Lawrence, and move to Colorado. There she was introduced to another attorney that would be handling the case in Colorado.
This is where I become speculative, because she has never been straight up with me about the true identity of the people she was getting her information from, or how much she was actively involved in the conspiracy against me. She has indicated to me that she had to cooperate because they were threatening to deport her Mexican boyfriend if she didn't.
For the next two years, she called me and Guy daily with updates, telling us her attorney Mike Sawaya had hired a private investigator that was going to come to Lawrence and expose the corruption in the Lawrence Police dept. and US Attorney's office that was driving the Yellow House case. She said that because she hadn't actually won the lawsuit yet, her attorney was expecting her to pay the expenses of the investigator (who originally was going to be in Lawrence for one week.) Annette asked if me and Guy would help her. We agreed.
I don't know for sure who this person posing as her attorney was. I have suspected it was an agent for the IRS, hired by the US Attorney to try and build a case against me for income tax evasion by getting me to send Annette enough money, as a back up indictment.
For two years she called us everyday to give us the updates on the reports about what the investigator had found out. These updates came to her through her attorney.
A lot of the information that Annette was giving us was backed up by information I was getting from other sources. Like; Annette said the FBI & IRS was investigating the Police dept. was backed up by at least three people I knew. My friend Jennier who claimed that cops coming in her store had told her the police Dept was under investigation, and every officer was being questioned by the FBI. ETC...
One day I called Annettes attorneys office, they denied she was a client. I called her and demanded some answers. A few days of going back and forth and some angry words, and Annette disappeared. My private investigator found her through phone records 2 months later hiding out in Mexico.
I told my Investigator Dan and my Attorney about Annettes Investigator that was investigating the police dept. I told them I had been sending money to Annette through Western Union to help her pay the Investigator.
They went to court and presented to Judge Murguia what had been going on with Annette. The Prosecutor claimed I had been laundering money to Annette and that they were going to Subpoena Western Union, because they were sure the amount I was claiming to have sent her was less than what had actually been sent, and that they were going to indict me for Income Tax evasion.
That was an indication to me that the Prosecutor must have been involved. how would she know there should have been more money? Especially because she was right, in a way.
You see back in Aug. 2008 I had refused to send Annette anymore money. But Annette did not tell her attorney. Instead she began to embezzle money from the Apartment complex she worked at, and continued to give her attorney the money to pay the investigator, leaving them to believe the money was still coming from me. (Kinda like she played the players! LOL)
My attorney told me the amount I sent to Annette over the two year period did not meet the $100,000. threshold needed for the Prosecutor to indict me on a Federal level for Income Tax evasion.
Here is the time line of events I documented each day when Annette would call me with the Investigators updates:
Sun, 16 Sep 2007
My friend Annette hired a private investigator that has flown down here from(Colorado) and is digging into the corruption that is fueling our case.
Tue 9/18/07
Annettes attorney Mike sent down an investigator, he was only supposed to be down here for a week, but there is so much stuff to look into he has been staying on to get to the bottom of things.
Tue, 18 Sep 2007
It rained really hard today.
Annettes private detective noticed he was being followed in the pouring rain, so he decided to drive around the block a few times.
Then he pulled up to the light, as it turned yellow he quickly made a turn...The person following him attmepted to quickly turn too....and hit another car...He will need to get a different rental car tomorrow.
Wed, 19 Sep 2007
The FBI from Topeka; Agent’s Scott Gentine and Denton Murray has recovered 2 guns in the pawn shop on 23rd street missing from the LKPD evidence room. (The guns were owned by David Bryant) Dave came in the store really upset because his guns that the police have not been able to find in the evidence locker was in the Pawn shop for sale. So I called Agent Gentine, he and FBI Agent Murray went to the Pawn shop and got the gun.
FBI agent BOB Schaefer called Annette's Investigator Today and has agreed to meet with him tomorrow.
The investigator had to get another rental car because he has been made in the one he is using...(he says he's been getting followed, so he needs a different one now) and Annette said if I send a little extra money he will be able to get a motel for the weekend.
Annette said the investigator is low on money and has been living out of the back of his car.
Thu 9/20/07
Annettes investigator went to Topeka today to talk to the FBI agent Scott Gentine and Denton Murray again.
They told him they have launched an investigation to try and determine why items from the evidence room have surfaced in both pawn shops!
The investigator asked them why they did not investigate this sooner, since this has been going on for a while. Agent Gentine told the investigator that this was the first time anyone has complained! The investigator says he is not sure that the Topeka FBI is on the level, he said he may need to contact the FBI in Washington to look into this further.
The Investigator also went to see FBI Agent BOB Shaefer in K.C. he was supposed to be investigating our complaints aganst the Lawrence Police Dept...but BOB was out sick today.
Bob couldn't meet the investigator but he did call me back today! left a message on the phone, while we were in court. I told the Topeka FBI that I believed that Agent Bob Shaefer had faked the investigation into our complaints. Agent Gentine told me that the Prosecutor Marietta Parker was the one that had sent Agent Shaefer to Lawrence.
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007
Guy went to Topeka and talked to the FBI yesterday (Agent Gentine and Murray) about our complaints and they are going to investigate the fact that our last complaint was investigated by a fake FBI agent. They had the Human Rights agency call us and make a meeting for Friday. Guy showed them some of our documents and complaints. He gave them copies to keep.
In the mean time Annettes investigator took a plane to Washington today to meet with the FBI Headquarters down there in the morning and show them the videos and recordings he has, and see if they will come down for a real investigation.
Date: Wed, 26th, Sep 2007
The investigator is in Washington D.C. today. He has been treated like royalty down there and everything is going well.
He met with the Justice Depts. Prosecuting District attorney, 4 Special Prosecutors that will be handling the case against any officials, and the Director of the FBI also attended the meeting.
The meeting started at 8 am and they finally finished up about 3pm. It was a long day; they are not quite half way through the information.
The investigator and his partner have about 8 hours of surveillance video plus all of the voice recordings and tons of notes. They mostly went through the information about the police dept. today.
The FBI guys found the video of Officer Bialek meeting the girl at the motel while on duty particularly interesting.
The FBI director told the investigator he is very thorough. Tomorrow the investigator is going to meet with them again.
Another interesting tid-bit...One of the investigators still here in town (just for fun,) called the Prosecutor Marietta Parkers office today and told her she wanted to talk to her about Bob Shaefer.
Marietta Parker told the investigator she doesn’t know anybody named Bob Shaefer!
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007
Well, Annette has not gotten her money from the lawsuit yet. The city is stalling, Annette says its because they think if they get me taken down they will get out of paying her. But her attorney says the amount goes up (a penalty thing) every week the money is late. so its up to $750,000 now.
The FBI from Washington called the investigator back this week, and asked him to come back to Washington a second time to go over some more things. Then they even bought him a 1st class plane ticket!
Oct 3, 2007
The Investigator flew back to Washington yesterday and met with the FBI all day today. He says they met in a big room around a big table. He says there was a whole room full of FBI agents looking at our case, he says the head of the FBI in Washington was in the meeting, and 4 Special prosecutors were also in the meeting, and he was told by the Director of the FBI that a Supreme court Judge will be monitoring our case and overseeing the color of law prosecutions of the Public corruption that is uncovered during the investigation!
Oct. 7, 2007
4 agents in suits showed up at LKPD carrying brief cases today from the FBI. They had some kind of meeting in the main Police dept building.
Officer Bialek pulled up about 30 minutes after they arrived in his personal vehicle in regular clothes.
Two Agents in Suits met Bialek out in the parking lot. They walked up to him, handed him some kind of paperwork, shook his hand and escorted him into the Police Dept. building.
Bialek spent about 2 hours with them inside the building. He was then escorted from the building by the same agents in suits.
According to the investigator, who stayed outside... Bialek looked like he was upset!
According to a police officer that a friend of mine knows, the FBI has interviewed every officer on the force 3 times. first in small groups, and also individually. They are asking officers questions about the Yellow House investigation and they are also being questioned about our missing evidence.
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007
The FBI sent down an agent from Washington today. The agent is going to meet with Annettes investigator and he is going to look into the Lawrence Police dept.
Thurs. 10/11/07
The FBI is still here investigating!!! More Agents flew in from Washington!
Today they are going to be auditing the evidence room. They are also bringing in some IRS Agents to help with the Investigation.
The Investigator has met a Paralegal student that agreed to be his informant and he is getting the Investigator some inside information about things going on in the Dept of Justice!
According to the investigator Agents have spent the last 3 days searching and investigating the prosecutors office.
Fri 11/02/07
Annettes investigator said,
A group of guys in suits went to the Kansas City Justice dept today and were questioning people in the prosecutors office one at a time.
He was told they were investigators from the Kansas Bar Association. And they are investigating Parkers office.
We go back to court on monday at 4:30 to get Judge Lungstrums ruling on our motion to dismiss our case.
Tue 11/06/07
Annettes investigator is investigating the Pawn Shops. He has found a connection that they are not only tied into the police, they are also tied into some kind of money laundering and drug dealing schemes with the strip club calle the Flamingo in North Lawrence.
The Pawn shop on 23rd had 3 big Pensky moving trucks parked out back. It appeared the FBI has been loading them with merchandise from the Pawn Shop. There have been Police Crown Vic's parked outside the Pawn Shop all day.
This Pawn shop had the guns from he Evidence room up in there for sale.
11-10-2007
Annettes Investigator hooked up with one of the Dancers from the Flamingo in North Lawrence. she is giving him inside info. she says that the owner is tied into the Pawn shop. That he uses the girls to do money drops, because they run the money from the dance club through the pawn shops to "clean it up."
There is a lot of drug dealing going on inside the Bird. Mostly cocaine. It is the drug of choice for the dancers and the patrons. They are tied into the police and dont have to worry about being harassed.
The owner of the strip club, also owns some limo's.
He is tied in with the corrupt city officials, and offers business men rides in the limo's with the girls. The investigator hired a young guy that works for an investigator in KC. He has him pretending to be the boyfriend of the dancer. He wants to provide her with the protection while she is providing information. He said that after just a couple of days they were already referring to him as family and offering him drugs inside the club.
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007
Due to the fact that Guns from the evidence room were found in the Pawn shop on 23rd street, Both the Pawn Shops are under investigation by the FBI now! Both Pawn shops are not buying right now.
They can't buy anything until the investigation is wrapped up!
We sent a person over offering to sell an expensive gold necklace to test them! They are telling customers they won't be able to buy for about 2 weeks!
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007
.The Federal Unlawful User with Firearm Indictment against us were officially dropped on friday. We will have an evidentiary hearing to determine if it's "with Prejudice" or "without Prejudice" next month.
My attorney Phil Gibson said he was worried about what the results of the hearing would be, he said he worried; as a result of his motion, that our old attorneys could be in trouble for not properly preparing for trial the first time.
Annette says the investigator says the Washington FBI called a hearing before a Judge last Friday.
The FBI wants the Judge to go over the information and evidence they gathered during the investigation. They have a list of Government Officials names they will be presenting to the Judge for possible Indictments.
The Investigator has been working closly with one of the FBI Agents from Washington.
The Investigator said some of the people the FBI were seeking Indictments on; were Morehead, Bialek, Chief Olin, Rantz, McAtee, and some names I didn't know.
The Investigator said the FBI agent he has befriended came into our store today undercover. I told her we saw him, he was driving a fancy rental car from Missouri and dressed way too fancy to be one of our customers, so I saved the surveillance video of him walking through the store.
http://s162.photobucket.com/albums/t273/yellowhouse_photos/FBI/?action=view¤t=DSCN7925.flv
The FBI had a judge come down from Manhattan Kansas to oversee the hearing. They had the Judge from Manhattan come down because they wanted to be sure that the Judge overseeing the hearing was impartial.
There were 15 names on a list the fbi agents want the Judge to consider indictments for. They are the officials that have been prosecuting us and are involved in the corruption going on at the Police Dept.
The city appealed Annettes lawsuit. No big money yet...Her attorney said they can appeal up to three times. Her atttorney says she could have a settlement in 2 months, or it could drag on for at least six more months.
Sun 2/03/08 .
Annette is going back to court in two weeks. Her attorney thinks the City of Lawrence might be ready to settle with her.
Mr Antenelli from Police Abuse org. contacted us today. They agreed to investigate our case for us.
He said they have been trying to get our files from Lkpd. He said the police have not been cooperating with them.
He says that typically a police dpt. will be very cooperative or not cooperative at all. And Lawrence is not at all, and that tells them the dept is dirty.
Feb. 10,2010
Annette has been told by her informants, that the FBI are trying to get her picked up for questioning on my behalf. So she shut down her facebook and is no longer communicating with me.
I will stop here.
Of course this is all confidential until my case is closed. After that I have lots more that you will be able to incorporate into one heck of a book!
speedy trial rulling
US v. Toombs, No. 08-3278
August 3, 2009 4:23 PM | No TrackBacks
In a drug and firearm prosecution, a denial of defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment under the Speedy Trial Act is affirmed in part where defendant's defense was not hindered by the delays that occurred. However, the ruling is reversed in part where the district court failed to make a record upon which adequate findings could be based with respect to defendant's Speedy Trial Act claim.
Read US v. Toombs, No. 08-3278
Appellate Information
Filed August 3, 2009
Judges
Opinion by Judge Murphy
Counsel
For Appellant:
Melanie Morgan, Morgan Pilate LLC, Olathe, KS
For Appellee:
Terra D. Morehead, Assistant United States Attorney, Kansas City, KS
Marietta Parker, Acting United States Attorney, Kansas City, KS
August 3, 2009 4:23 PM | No TrackBacks
In a drug and firearm prosecution, a denial of defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment under the Speedy Trial Act is affirmed in part where defendant's defense was not hindered by the delays that occurred. However, the ruling is reversed in part where the district court failed to make a record upon which adequate findings could be based with respect to defendant's Speedy Trial Act claim.
Read US v. Toombs, No. 08-3278
Appellate Information
Filed August 3, 2009
Judges
Opinion by Judge Murphy
Counsel
For Appellant:
Melanie Morgan, Morgan Pilate LLC, Olathe, KS
For Appellee:
Terra D. Morehead, Assistant United States Attorney, Kansas City, KS
Marietta Parker, Acting United States Attorney, Kansas City, KS
Monday, February 8, 2010
ASKED MY ATTORNEY HOW MUCH TIME LEFT ON MY SPEEDY TRIAL?
Re: speedy trial
From: John Duma (john@dumalaw.com)
Sent: Mon 2/08/10 6:16 PM
To: charlie R. (studio64dude@hotmail.com)
The answer to that question is not as easy as trying to calculate a certain number. Currently all time is not being counted on the speedy trial clock because of the pending mental eval of your husband. There is a recent 10th Circuit case, United States v. Toombs that deals with speedy trial issues. The case was sent back to Judge Murgia for a ruling and Judge Murgia recently did not dismiss the case but re set it for trial. You can find these on the District court web site. This will help you see how complicated the speedy trial issue really is.
Thanks
John
On 2/3/10 11:54 AM, "charlie R." wrote:
John,
I was just wondering if you could tell me how much time is left on my speedy trial clock?
Thanks Carrie
From: John Duma (john@dumalaw.com)
Sent: Mon 2/08/10 6:16 PM
To: charlie R. (studio64dude@hotmail.com)
The answer to that question is not as easy as trying to calculate a certain number. Currently all time is not being counted on the speedy trial clock because of the pending mental eval of your husband. There is a recent 10th Circuit case, United States v. Toombs that deals with speedy trial issues. The case was sent back to Judge Murgia for a ruling and Judge Murgia recently did not dismiss the case but re set it for trial. You can find these on the District court web site. This will help you see how complicated the speedy trial issue really is.
Thanks
John
On 2/3/10 11:54 AM, "charlie R."
John,
I was just wondering if you could tell me how much time is left on my speedy trial clock?
Thanks Carrie
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
defemation note
Since the articles raise both criminal allegations and unethical professional practices, they fall within per se categories of defamation. While the stories were pulled from the Internet, there does not appear to have been a retraction or correction — which can limit damages.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Proffer
John,
I was never given the actual proffer contract to sign. My attorney told me I had to meet him at the Dept of Justice and that everyone would be there. I did not know what was going on. We waited for almost two hours at the Dept. of Justice for Guys attorney Sarah Swain to show up. She never showed. We found out later her and Arron McKee were not in agreement over the meeting, and by not showing she protected Guy from being interviewed.
They told me I had to go to the back and talk to them. We went into a big conference room. Nitz, Bialek, Rantz, Jackson, Terik, McKee, Parker and me. We sat at a big table and they started to ask me questions. My attorney said he would tell me what I could and couldn't answer. Terik didn't like my answers and started to yell at me. Parker told Terik to settle down. During the meeting Terik yelled at Parker they got mad at each other. Parker told him she wanted him off the case and he got mad and told her she don't know who he is, he said this was his case. Anyway Parker was mad and told him he was done.
Parker said because I was answering the questions it was called a proffer. Parker told me if I was honest and gave them good information that the drug and gun charge would remain at a state level. T. I asked what about the ebay case? She said there would definately be special considerations. It sounded good, I figured they wouldn't indict me on that either if I cooperated, and I knew that the D.A. already had told my attorey Sarah Swain that he wasnt taking the drug and gun case so at least that would be done. So I said okay ask me some questions.
Parker said I would have to sign something first. She left and came back with paper. She said this was just a generaic proffer agreement she had in her office, I should sign just to talk to them that day. She said she would have to type up the actual contract later. My attorney had me sign it.
I was never given, shown or asked to sign the actual proffer contract agreement for my case.
But according to Kansas Law even an oral contract can be binding.
I fulfilled my end of the contract, including the sting.
1. The Government has violated the contract,
2. They used the information from the proffer to build the case.
3. They did not fulfill the promise to not indict on the guns & Marijuana
4. They violated by attempting to question me without my attorney
5. They violated by informing informants about my cooperation
6. They have not given me or Guy any special considerations, in fact they had us strong armed arrested instead being allowed to turn ourselves in and held us in a cell for 8 hours without food as a punishment.
We finished up that day and the cops said to fulfill the deal me and Guy would need to continue meeting with them at police dept. When Sarah heard what was going on she withdrew from the case and Guy hired James George to represent him. I proffered at the Police station for about 5 days and Guy for 4..
We refused to continue to proffer after the cops violated the proffer agreement by attempting to question me in my store without my attorney present.
I was never given the actual proffer contract to sign. My attorney told me I had to meet him at the Dept of Justice and that everyone would be there. I did not know what was going on. We waited for almost two hours at the Dept. of Justice for Guys attorney Sarah Swain to show up. She never showed. We found out later her and Arron McKee were not in agreement over the meeting, and by not showing she protected Guy from being interviewed.
They told me I had to go to the back and talk to them. We went into a big conference room. Nitz, Bialek, Rantz, Jackson, Terik, McKee, Parker and me. We sat at a big table and they started to ask me questions. My attorney said he would tell me what I could and couldn't answer. Terik didn't like my answers and started to yell at me. Parker told Terik to settle down. During the meeting Terik yelled at Parker they got mad at each other. Parker told him she wanted him off the case and he got mad and told her she don't know who he is, he said this was his case. Anyway Parker was mad and told him he was done.
Parker said because I was answering the questions it was called a proffer. Parker told me if I was honest and gave them good information that the drug and gun charge would remain at a state level. T. I asked what about the ebay case? She said there would definately be special considerations. It sounded good, I figured they wouldn't indict me on that either if I cooperated, and I knew that the D.A. already had told my attorey Sarah Swain that he wasnt taking the drug and gun case so at least that would be done. So I said okay ask me some questions.
Parker said I would have to sign something first. She left and came back with paper. She said this was just a generaic proffer agreement she had in her office, I should sign just to talk to them that day. She said she would have to type up the actual contract later. My attorney had me sign it.
I was never given, shown or asked to sign the actual proffer contract agreement for my case.
But according to Kansas Law even an oral contract can be binding.
I fulfilled my end of the contract, including the sting.
1. The Government has violated the contract,
2. They used the information from the proffer to build the case.
3. They did not fulfill the promise to not indict on the guns & Marijuana
4. They violated by attempting to question me without my attorney
5. They violated by informing informants about my cooperation
6. They have not given me or Guy any special considerations, in fact they had us strong armed arrested instead being allowed to turn ourselves in and held us in a cell for 8 hours without food as a punishment.
We finished up that day and the cops said to fulfill the deal me and Guy would need to continue meeting with them at police dept. When Sarah heard what was going on she withdrew from the case and Guy hired James George to represent him. I proffered at the Police station for about 5 days and Guy for 4..
We refused to continue to proffer after the cops violated the proffer agreement by attempting to question me in my store without my attorney present.
Police Interview witnesses
INFORMATION NOT VERIFIABLE:
POLIC/GOV. PRESS RELEASES HAVE REPEATEDLY IRREVERSIBLY PREJUDICED THE DEFENSE
No information was held back from the press to verify if information from witnesses was genuine. In fact false information inflating merits of the crime were and have continued to be released to the press. Further tainting the anticipated testimony of the witnesses and irreversibly prejudicing the defense.
No alleged thieves or victims were interviewed prior to the raids or press release.
The only evidence of possible stolen property at the Yellow House presented prior to the search warrants, was of police bringing in items from Target and those items were not stolen.
No victims or witnesses found during the investigation to establish that the Yellow House during the course of dealing with buying from the public was knowingly engaged in criminal activity.
(In fact witnesses used ( "NB" Nicole Beach, MA Michael Aldrich, PN Pat Nieder) had all been banned from the store prior to the first search warrant in 2005 (as the evidence shows) yet police corruptly continued to use them, Pat Nieder even served time in jail after Carrie Neighbors cooperated in an investigation against him.)
All the witnesses had a chance and continue to be influenced by the information released to the press by the Government.
Witnesses and cops repeatedly negotiate deals during the recorded interviews in exchange for "telling the cops what they wanted to hear".
The cops fed information to the witnesses during interviews and told them what they wanted them to say. Often badgering them to change their stories.
Cops intentionally attempt to put Carrie Neighbors in danger by telling witnesses she is to blame for thier troubles.
Every witness starts out the interrogation insisting the items they sell to the Yellow House were not stolen. Or want to negotiate a deal for them self first.
Yellow House doesn't have an interrogation room or two hours to badger a witness or make deals to change their story. Carrie has less than 5 minutes to hear a persons story and determine whether to buy the item or not.
Within the first 5 minutes the police have heard what Carrie hears.
The rest of the statements made under duress, badgering, dealing or "police suggestion" would therefore be without merit.
POLIC/GOV. PRESS RELEASES HAVE REPEATEDLY IRREVERSIBLY PREJUDICED THE DEFENSE
No information was held back from the press to verify if information from witnesses was genuine. In fact false information inflating merits of the crime were and have continued to be released to the press. Further tainting the anticipated testimony of the witnesses and irreversibly prejudicing the defense.
No alleged thieves or victims were interviewed prior to the raids or press release.
The only evidence of possible stolen property at the Yellow House presented prior to the search warrants, was of police bringing in items from Target and those items were not stolen.
No victims or witnesses found during the investigation to establish that the Yellow House during the course of dealing with buying from the public was knowingly engaged in criminal activity.
(In fact witnesses used ( "NB" Nicole Beach, MA Michael Aldrich, PN Pat Nieder) had all been banned from the store prior to the first search warrant in 2005 (as the evidence shows) yet police corruptly continued to use them, Pat Nieder even served time in jail after Carrie Neighbors cooperated in an investigation against him.)
All the witnesses had a chance and continue to be influenced by the information released to the press by the Government.
Witnesses and cops repeatedly negotiate deals during the recorded interviews in exchange for "telling the cops what they wanted to hear".
The cops fed information to the witnesses during interviews and told them what they wanted them to say. Often badgering them to change their stories.
Cops intentionally attempt to put Carrie Neighbors in danger by telling witnesses she is to blame for thier troubles.
Every witness starts out the interrogation insisting the items they sell to the Yellow House were not stolen. Or want to negotiate a deal for them self first.
Yellow House doesn't have an interrogation room or two hours to badger a witness or make deals to change their story. Carrie has less than 5 minutes to hear a persons story and determine whether to buy the item or not.
Within the first 5 minutes the police have heard what Carrie hears.
The rest of the statements made under duress, badgering, dealing or "police suggestion" would therefore be without merit.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Government violated the Proffer agreement
plea agreement- proffer
Eleventh Circuit’s decision in U.S.
v. Pielago, 145 F.3d 364 (11th Cir. 1998).
In Pielago, part of which the Government relies upon in its Reply, the
Eleventh Circuit held that “any ambiguities in the terms of a proffer
agreement should be resolved in favor of the criminal defendant.” The Pielago
court, in the same breath, noted that proffer agreements, though generally
interpreted using contract law principles, should not be given “a hypertechnical
reading . . ..” This Court holds that a proffer agreement may not
be given such a technical reading as to effectively defeat the purpose it is
designed, on its face, to serve.
http://www.revolvermaps.com/?target=enlarge&i=0Zqs7wRKNe4&wid=1&nostars=false&color=ff0000&m=0&ref=http%3A%2F%2Ffreetheyellowhouse.blogspot.com%2F
Eleventh Circuit’s decision in U.S.
v. Pielago, 145 F.3d 364 (11th Cir. 1998).
In Pielago, part of which the Government relies upon in its Reply, the
Eleventh Circuit held that “any ambiguities in the terms of a proffer
agreement should be resolved in favor of the criminal defendant.” The Pielago
court, in the same breath, noted that proffer agreements, though generally
interpreted using contract law principles, should not be given “a hypertechnical
reading . . ..” This Court holds that a proffer agreement may not
be given such a technical reading as to effectively defeat the purpose it is
designed, on its face, to serve.
http://www.revolvermaps.com/?target=enlarge&i=0Zqs7wRKNe4&wid=1&nostars=false&color=ff0000&m=0&ref=http%3A%2F%2Ffreetheyellowhouse.blogspot.com%2F
breach of contract, intentional and negligent misrepresentation, breach of warranty, and breach of the implied covenant of good faith.
fraud is established when a misrepresentation is knowingly made with the intent to induce reliance, and justifiable reliance results, see: Crocker-Citizens National Bank v. Control Metals Corp., 566 F.2d 631, 636-37 (9th Cir. 1978);
fraud is properly inferred from the immediate failure to perform a promise.
fraud is established when a misrepresentation is knowingly made with the intent to induce reliance, and justifiable reliance results, see: Crocker-Citizens National Bank v. Control Metals Corp., 566 F.2d 631, 636-37 (9th Cir. 1978);
fraud is properly inferred from the immediate failure to perform a promise.
Where it is proposed by the prosecution to give evidence of a confession in court, and the defence makes a representation to the court that the confession was or may have been obtained by;
oppression or
in consequence of anything said or done which, in the circumstances existing at the time the confession was made, render any confession made unreliable,
the court shall not allow the confession, unless the prosecution can prove beyond reasonable doubt that the circumstances alleged did not exist (i.e., the onus rests with the prosecution to negate allegations of oppression or unreliability).
Oppression - is defined in S.76(8) as including, “torture, inhuman or degrading treatment and the use of or threat of violence”.
This definition has been widened by R v Fulling to include the “burdensome or harsh exercise of authority”.
Oppression may also cover bullying of a suspect (but not swearing at him/her). It should be noted that allegations of oppression are very unlikely to be accepted if the suspect was interviewed with his/her lawyer present.
Unreliability - Case law has offered examples of the scope of conditions etc. found to make confessions unreliable, and such circumstances include:
Prolonged periods of confinement.
Inducements offered, e.g., “if you confess, we will drop the corporate manslaughter charge” etc.
Confessions made to shield someone else.
Confessions made by suspects with a low IQ or fragile mental condition.
Where there were breaches of the PACE Codes of Practice.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oppression is the subjugation of one group by another, carried out under conditions of unequal power, and often enforced by threats of or by actual violence. According to Webster’s Third International Dictionary (1993), oppression is the “unjust or cruel exercise of authority or power esp. by the imposition of burdens; esp. the unlawful, excessive or corrupt exercise of power other than by extortion by any public officer so as to harm anyone in his rights, person, or property while purporting to act under color of governmental authority”.
oppression or
in consequence of anything said or done which, in the circumstances existing at the time the confession was made, render any confession made unreliable,
the court shall not allow the confession, unless the prosecution can prove beyond reasonable doubt that the circumstances alleged did not exist (i.e., the onus rests with the prosecution to negate allegations of oppression or unreliability).
Oppression - is defined in S.76(8) as including, “torture, inhuman or degrading treatment and the use of or threat of violence”.
This definition has been widened by R v Fulling to include the “burdensome or harsh exercise of authority”.
Oppression may also cover bullying of a suspect (but not swearing at him/her). It should be noted that allegations of oppression are very unlikely to be accepted if the suspect was interviewed with his/her lawyer present.
Unreliability - Case law has offered examples of the scope of conditions etc. found to make confessions unreliable, and such circumstances include:
Prolonged periods of confinement.
Inducements offered, e.g., “if you confess, we will drop the corporate manslaughter charge” etc.
Confessions made to shield someone else.
Confessions made by suspects with a low IQ or fragile mental condition.
Where there were breaches of the PACE Codes of Practice.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oppression is the subjugation of one group by another, carried out under conditions of unequal power, and often enforced by threats of or by actual violence. According to Webster’s Third International Dictionary (1993), oppression is the “unjust or cruel exercise of authority or power esp. by the imposition of burdens; esp. the unlawful, excessive or corrupt exercise of power other than by extortion by any public officer so as to harm anyone in his rights, person, or property while purporting to act under color of governmental authority”.
Police demand that witnesses rehearse testimony
IN THE YELLOW HOUSE CASE A SUBPOENA SENT OUT FOR APPEARANCE AT TRIAL INCLUDED A HANDWRITTEN Note by the officers, (added after the Judge signed the subpoena) with a date and time for witnesses to appear at the police station to practice and go over trial testimony.
The witness is expected to have a clear recollection of such events, a copy of which the advocate will have in front of him/her (i.e., in a witness statement document). The reason being that it is the oral evidence given in court that is the evidence, and not the document.
The witness is expected to have a clear recollection of such events, a copy of which the advocate will have in front of him/her (i.e., in a witness statement document). The reason being that it is the oral evidence given in court that is the evidence, and not the document.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)