KBI Investigations
In regards to:
The Yellow House Store Ongoing investigation
It is our belief that the Lawrence police dept. has violated the Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct.
the mishandling of our seized evidence, starting with the chain of custody. Effectively failing to keep detailed records, accounting for the location of each item from the beginning of the search until now.
Our initial complaint stems from the Dec. 2nd, 2005, search warrant that was conducted upon The Yellow House quality Appliances Inc. 1904 Massachusetts, and the Owners of the business Guy and Carrie Neighbors home at 1104 Andover, both located in Lawrence Kansas.
The initial search warrant was specifically for 20 SPECIFIED new items, Computers, and various records. Upon entering the Neighbors home at 1104 Andover several plants were recovered in a small Flower starting nursery.
In another area of the home, in the master bedroom inside a closet secured to the wall Agents found a solid metal Locked Gun case. After requesting a key from the home owners, agents recovered a collection of high end collector firearms, several have never been fired. All firearms were unloaded and without any ammunition in the vicinity. These unloaded firearms locked in the cabinet posed no threat to the officers.
The officers seized the entire collection of firearms from the home owners and failed to provide the owners with a detailed list, make, model or serial numbers, receipt/documentation for any of the guns taken. 12 guns were seized.
11 guns were later accounted for on a one count indictment list.
Other items seized from the home without documentation, detailed receipt, or accountability was the home owner’s expensive Diamond and gold jewelry that included family heirlooms taken from the Armoire located in the master bedroom.
In July 2006 Officers invited Guy and Carrie Neighbors along with attorney Sarah Swain, to come down to the police station and recover some of the seized items.
During the meeting the Neighbors requested several used high end laptop computers should also be returned. Officer Bialek at first stated that they did not have the computers, then after looking through his notes agreed. Guy and Carrie stated the fact that the one computer was proven not stolen property and should not be held as evidence. They also stated that they had the original receipt from Best Buy and were personal friends with the original owners of the computer.
At this point officer Bialek instructed another officer to go retrieve the one computer from the evidence room. After repeated trips to the evidence room and about 10-15 minutes of searching it was determined that the laptop computer was missing from the Lawrence Police dept. evidence room. In violation of the Lawrence Police Procedure Manual pg. 43 section 00-16(a)(c)(e)
Officer Bialek at that point assured the Neighbors the computer would be found and returned to them within two weeks. That was 6 months ago. Failure to do so was in violation of Police procedure Manual section 00-16 (G).
On October 19, 2006, Lawrence Officer's Bialek and Rantz stopped into the Yellow House store to question the Neighbors, absent of their attorney about some details of the investigation, in violation of the terms of the proffer agreement stating that the defendants have the right to counsel during questioning.
Officers Bialek and Rantz also had with them a sony cyber-shot DSC-P200 7.2 megapixel digital camera valued at $350, that had been seized during one of the search warrants. Officer Bialek stated that the officers had failed to properly document the camera and log it into evidence, therefore forgoing any need for customary paperwork or documentation involving the return of the item.
In conclusion we feel the acts of Law enforcement during the course of our ongoing investigation, have been unlawful, and were capable of infecting the proceedings as abusive of the Courts process. Thus amounting to a deliberate violation of Guy and Carrie Neighbors right to legal privilege were such an affront to the integrity of the justice system, and therefore the rule of law, that the prosecution was rendered abusive and ought not to be countenanced by the Court. Thus concluding the illegal conduct of the police has undermined the rule of law itself. Instigating a need for a full investigation into this matter focusing on a full disclosure of where the abuse of process application has been made.
Regards, Guy and Carrie Neighbors
1904 Massachusetts
1-785-842-2785
No comments:
Post a Comment