Advertisement

Archive for Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Longtime former KU employee accused of stealing from university

A longtime KU employee is suspected of stealing more than $31,000 of equipment from campus buildings.

November 11, 2008

Advertisement

Robert Sample

Robert Sample

A longtime Kansas University employee suspected of stealing more than $31,000 of equipment from various campus buildings faces multiple felony theft charges.

Robert Lee Sample, who worked at the university for nearly 18 years, is suspected in several criminal cases, a spokeswoman for Douglas County District Attorney Charles Branson said. The cases include the theft of expensive cameras, computers, cleaning items and musical instruments reported between June 22, 2004, and Aug. 15, 2008.

Sample's employment ended Sept. 5, 2008, said Jill Jess, a KU spokeswoman. The building systems technician senior began work at the university on Sept. 18, 1990.

According to prosecutors, Sample, who turned 56 Tuesday, is suspect in the following criminal cases:

¢ Several cleaning items, valued at $6,059, were taken from the Structural Biology Center. The theft occurred between March 20, 2008, and Aug. 13, 2008. The suspect returned these items to the KU Public Safety Office.

¢ Two Canon XT digital cameras, valued at $1,248, were stolen from an area in Stauffer-Flint Hall that had several other cameras in it that weren't taken. The theft occurred between Aug. 8, 2008, and Aug. 12, 2008.

¢ A $1,427.89 laptop computer was removed from a storage room from Dole Human Development Center between June 24, 2008, and Aug. 6, 2008.

¢ A new $1,399 iMac computer was removed from an office at the Art & Design Building between July 3, 2008 and July 31, 2008.

¢ A $2,000 15-inch Apple MacBook Pro laptop computer was removed from Stauffer-Flint Hall between July 1, 2008, and July 24, 2008.

¢ Camera equipment, valued at $4,895, was removed out of a storage room from the Art & Design Building between May 20, 2008, and June 12, 2008.

¢ Four laptop computers, valued at $5,000, were removed from a Strong Hall computer storage room between April 25, 2008, and April 29, 2008.

¢ A $1,299 Nikon D80 digital camera was removed from a metal cabinet at Moore Hall between July 20, 2007, and July 26, 2007.

¢ Musical instruments, valued at $3,050, were taken from a locked room in Nichols Hall between Sept. 23, 2004, and Nov. 19, 2004.

¢ A camera and camera lens, valued at $5,094, were removed from room 353 of Snow Hall between June 13, 2004, and June 22, 2004.

Police officers from the KU Public Safety Office arrested Sample Aug. 11 at his Lawrence home. He pleaded not guilty to three charges of felony theft on Oct. 23 in Douglas County District Court, court records said.

"Additional charges may be filed," said Cheryl Wright, Branson's spokeswoman.

The university didn't provide specifics about the circumstances of his arrest or employment termination.

Sample's next court date has been scheduled for Nov. 18 in front of District Court Judge Robert Fairchild.

Comments

hot2trot 5 years, 4 months ago

While i do understand everyones anger. And don't blame anyone for the way we feel. I no he did something even i would never do . And i do believe he deserves what ever he gets through a fare trial. I still no him deeply and no that hes a wonderful man who is truly sorry for what he has done. And the family that is involved also knows the real bob sample and believes that everyone makes mastakes and judgment is not for us but for God in the end .

0

freashpowder 5 years, 4 months ago

Holy Crap looks like this story is no longer search-able I wonder if the powers to be deemed this To hot to show because it ties some dirty things together

0

Pudgy1 5 years, 5 months ago

Shouldn't it be footballGUY49 ?

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

0

been_there 5 years, 5 months ago

Two guesses who footballguy49 is, which makes his claim of being a neighbor false. Nice try guys.

0

somebodynew 5 years, 5 months ago

Wow, somebody really drank the kool-aid.

0

footballguy49 5 years, 5 months ago

I understand that the city was involved in calls that were made to the liquor store next door to the yellow house, inquiring about the sale of that building. The city contacted the business owner at the liquor store pretending to be contacts from a Wendy's franchise who wanted to build a drive through business on that corner.The city of Lawrence had a plan in place to run the liquor store business out of town so the city could own the corner that is until they found out the business owner did not own the property. It sound like the government would not be harassing the business owners if they did not own the building at 1904 Mass. Sounds like the city is not happy about having a black owned business on Mass. street. The city official's have referred to the yellow house as a eye sore on several occasions, how sad is that , the business had been operating for more that 22-years in Lawrence, and I will guarantee the pawn shops have way more stolen property show up in their business than in the yellow house. People will believe what they will, so far next month will mark the 4th year this prosecution has continued and I would say the evidence points to the conspiracy the Neighbors have claimed from the beginning.

0

footballguy49 5 years, 5 months ago

Just to keep the record straight the yellow house business owners NEVER agreed to a plea, they agreed to proffer because of two reasons 1st- terrible advice from a stupid attorney Aaron Mckee2nd it's my understanding the business owners felt like they had nothing to hide because they were Not guilty. I was informed the business owners met with the LPD for almost a week answering all of the questions the police had and the police reported to the prosecuting attorney the business owners had been very forth coming and all parties were very happy. The government promised the so called drug charges would be placed in state court (where they should have been in the first place based on what I saw come out of the business owners house).The police dept. violated the proffer agreement by contacting the business owners trying to get more information about certain people without the business owner's attorney present, soon after this contact it's my understanding that the business owners figured out that the Attorney Mckee was working with the police (not sure what happened here) but at this point the business owners fired him and I saw the document in a angry letter posted on line where Mckee wrote to the prosecutor telling her the Neighbors had refused to work with the government anymore. The problem the police dept. had was they read the blog's the business owners wrote and in one of those blogs it referenced to the plea when it should have said proffer and the cops thought the Neighbors were taking a plea and the word is at this point the evidence started to disappear, the gun collection was gone, the tool kits seized from the business gone home for Christmas, laptops went missing and there was talk around the police dept. water cooler about using the yellow house building as a satellite office after the federal government seized the business owners property .

0

Multidisciplinary 5 years, 5 months ago

KansasPersonVery good!Thanks for the out loud giggles, I needed that to start my computer work this afternoon.very good indeed.(not often when the joke may be on me, and someone then makes a joke on me with it!)You may move ahead four spaces and draw a card.

0

somebodynew 5 years, 5 months ago

Well, freash_ , I admit I could be mistaken. It will take until Monday to contact people who know the answers, but I promise you that I will respond when I know for sure. I admit I am thinking about State panels, and will need to do some checking. But right or wrong, I will respond when I know. (and no I did not go to your link, just wait for a little.)If nothing else, I will be honest and will own up if I posted wrong info.

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

somebody(something)Even federal prosecutors have ethic standards and commissions if they do something wrong.--------------------------------------------------------------------Please would you be as so kind to enlighten us as to who this commission is, a name, a phone number, email address ? If you are not able to provide us this information I will assume there is no commission that overlooks federal prosecutors. I will also assume you are thinking about local state level prosecutions, which do not pertain to this case since it is federal. Here is a response from 7 different agencies when guy asked them to review what the prosecutor is doing.http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dgpr72qd_497g2ppzmfp

0

Brad Maestas 5 years, 5 months ago

Well it looks as though Mr. Samples had good taste in gear, jeez. I wonder what instruments were being kept in Nichols Hall? This is one big mess!

0

somebodynew 5 years, 5 months ago

Well, my only question to was_(something) is if these charges were DROPPED why are they still in court ???? Even federal prosecutors have ethic standards and commissions if they do something wrong. No charges/allegations against the prosecutors???? Oh, and by the way, I am not a lawyer, but seem to think there is no Federal law for "Fencing". Have a good time in prison (BTW- your time would have probably been up by now had you stood by the plea deal you started to accept and then backed out on).

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

By the way the indictment states the Gov wants in restitution The indictment seeks a $525,000 money judgement, representing the proceeds from the alleged crimes.http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:zFf01C2zCR4J:justice.gov/usao/ks/press/Sept07/09_12.html+carrie+neighbors&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=us&client=firefox-aSo the LPD thought that the yellow house store on 1904 mass street had a gross profit of $525,000.00 in 2005 from illegal activities..........HAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH HAHAH A AH HAH AHAHA if the neighbors made 1/2 a million dollars that year then why did they still drive them selfs to work, hell why did they even keep going to work, IF you made that much money you could hire employees. IF they had THAT much money why didn't they remodel the store ? OH wait they didn't make that much money.... the IRS cleared them of that lie from the LPD. Focus people the LPD has based everything they are doing to the neighbors on the fact the LPD thinks the neighbors are a (and I will Quote) "The largest fencing operation in Lawrence's History "Yet After 4 years they still have not been charged with Fencing even a piece of candy. What has happened though is many abusers of power have been brought to light many public employees and law enforcement personal have been disciplined and the chief of police had problems with the IRS through misappropriation of public funds which was kept hush hush. The longer this case goes on the more corruption on the state/city level will be seen.

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

One of the motions Carrie neighbors filed in the previous case led to the case being dismissed. Why does Carrie Neighbors have to file these motions her self why is it that someone who is not a lawyer and who is not trained in the law filed her Own motion which led to the dismissal of the charges a year ago ? shouldn't the lawyers be smart enough to handle this considering they have all the training ??Here is one of the motions that were filed in the Previous which led to the charges being dropped.judge John W. Lungstrum a federal judge order the charges dropped.http://www.websupp.org/data/DKS/2:07-cr-20073-33-DKS.pdfIF a federal judge orders your charges dropped why in the world would a prosecutor bring the same charges back AGAIN ? IN front of the same court with the same judges that dismissed the case in the first place?

0

been_there 5 years, 5 months ago

You would think KU would mark their stuff "property of Kansas University".Somebodynew-I've gotten of few of those from them myself.

0

littleone 5 years, 5 months ago

My guess it's dragging on, is because YH is sitting there turning people in that they bought stolen things from to get a lesser sentence. Im just wondering if this guy had an agreement with YH that they would buy all this stuff from...hmmmmm

0

gl0ck0wn3r 5 years, 5 months ago

THis thread is spamtastic. Good to see the YH case has hijacked yet another forum thread.

0

KansasPerson 5 years, 5 months ago

multidisciplinary said:"Let me guess, you all knew about this, and I'm the only one who didn't have a clue, right?"Hi MD! Did you mean to post on this thread?.....http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/nov...grin-- KP (cold day here in Lawrence!)

0

somebodynew 5 years, 5 months ago

been_there - belive me I expect another hate filled, bile spewing e-mail as soon as he/they get around to reading this. It seems to happen anytime someone disagrees with the BS they put out, and points out facts. One of these days they may actually figure out that I really don't care.

0

been_there 5 years, 5 months ago

Alex must not be up yet or he would be after somebodynew and duramaster like a dog on a bone. Somebodynew does make a good point as to why the case is dragging on, makes sense.

0

duramater 5 years, 5 months ago

They may have raised a family and done foster care, but that's no excuse. I lived next door to these people for nearly a year and a half, and yes, they were kind and seemed to be genuine people. However, that doesn't mean that you can just steal and think it's okay because you have a reason. We liked them, however, now that we know of this, we have began to wonder if the strange things that went on while we were there are all connected. I know any time you went to their door, they'd stand in the doorway and never invited you in, and pretty much would block you from seeing into the house. We also had our home broken into a couple of times while living next door to them. Each time we were home in bed upstairs, and we'd hear the noise. We'd run downstairs, find the doors wide open, nothing taken, and no sign of a person anywhere. We never could figure that out, but well, if a neighbor was doing it, they could get inside before you got a chance to see someone running. And of course, who better to know what sort of nice things you have in your house than a neighbor who sees you come and go, and has been in your home?I'm not saying that he did it, but it's just these sort of things that make you wonder, and now my husband and I both wonder if this family was what they seemed, or if the kindness was a cover up for the inside operation.

0

somebodynew 5 years, 5 months ago

Well, Mr. Footballguy, not to try to respond to all of your questions, but I also find it interesting that the Neighbors' own attorneys (note plural as they keep firing them) don't file motions in this case. Hhhmmmm - do you think it is because there is no good legal basis for them???? Or could it be that when the Neighbors file their own motions (which obviously do not stand up since the charges are still pending) they circumvent their own legal experts.Oh, and the comments about how they raised not only their kids, but have been doing foster care - - Uh, yeah, along with a grow operation in the same house. (Sas the evidence of that on TV while the reporter was interviewing their "attorney of the day". Which, by the way, can be one reason this case is still dragging on. Each time a new attorney comes on board they have the right to take time to study the case.BTW - I saw on another blog that YH posted a sincerely nice poem. Wish she would come back here.

0

duramater 5 years, 5 months ago

Holy Poop, this was my neighbor before we moved to KCMO last May! We lived next to door to him for over a year and a half and had no clue!!!!

0

Pudgy1 5 years, 5 months ago

"......................I do not understand why the Neighbors attorneys have not filed motions in the case."Uhhhh, perhaps because the attorneys know more about the Law than the Neighbors' do???

0

footballguy49 5 years, 5 months ago

I live across the street from Guy and Carrie and I will tell you it was sad seeing their house closed up for the 12 days they were in federal prison. These guys are nice people who have raised not only their own 3 kids but they have been doing foster care for years. I do not understand how the Neighbors could be arrested and charged in federal court when Mr. Sample is charged in state court. This whole case just does not add up. The government has been after these people for 4-yrs come Dec. 2nd. I have read some of the motions filed in court and the Neighbors have done their home work. After reading some of the motions I do not understand how this case can continue, I do not understand why the Neighbors attorneys have not filed motions in the case.

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

there are about 10+ motions that the neighbors filed you can view them here http://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

evidentiary hearing on the vindictive prosecution claim. SeeAdams, 870 F.2d at 1145-46 (holding that defendants wereentitled to discovery on their vindictive prosecution claim andstating that .where there has been a prima facie showing of .arealistic likelihood of vindictiveness,. it is incumbent uponthe district court to .conduct an evidentiary hearing where thegovernment's explanations can be formally presented andtested..) (quoting United States v. Andrews, 633 F.2d 449, 453(6th Cir. 1980) (en banc)). To be entitled to such discovery, adefendant must come forward with .some evidence. of each of theelements of the defense. See United States v. Armstrong, 517U.S. 456, 465 (1996).The Neighbors have done this and the discoveryThey seek in particular all documentation of police reports, theft reports in connection to any property that was seized during the searches that had been reported stolen, witness statements, physical evidence, documentation, video evidence and Grand Jury minutes, held by the prosecutor and the Justice Department -- will bolster theirclaims that they are being targeted for prosecution because ofprosecutorial vindictiveness. Cf. Adams, 870 F.2d at 1146 (.Itis hard to see, indeed, how the defendants could have gone muchfarther than they did without the benefit of being able to see, copy or investigate the discovery and evidence being used against them. CONCLUSION This case has gone on for nearly four years. It has entailed filing charges, dismissing charges, refilling charges, having the same charges dismissed again. Unwarranted searches, illegal forfeiture allegations, false arrest, public false allegations against the defendants, incarceration, violations of speedy trial law, and the violations of basic Constitutional rights that should be afforded to every American citizen including the Neighbors. This case has gone on long enough and due to its vindictive nature the Neighbors respectfully request the courts dismiss all pending Indictments with prejudice. Dated October 20, 2008.

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

As in other cases where courtshave dismissed indictments due to prosecutorial vindictiveness,the prosecutors have repeatedly responded more harshly and vindictively in response to the Neighbors continued assertion of their statutory rights.. See Groves, 571F.2d at 453-54; DeMarco, 550 F.2d at 1227-28; see also Spiesz,689 F.2d at 1328 (.A claim for vindictive prosecution ariseswhen the government increases the severity of alleged charges inresponse to the exercise of constitutional or statutory rights..). The result in this case ought not to be different.As if the fact that the prosecutors have continuously retaliated with harsh treatment, staged an FBI investigation, interfered with the Defendants ability to make a living, and had the Neighbors repeatedly arrested and subjected to searches while represented by counsel were not enough, there is additional direct evidence that the prosecutors in this case are continuing to be vindictiveagainst the defendants by filing yet a third Indictment based on an arrest for Obstruction of Justice under a statute which the charges do not fall under, based on a State investigation which should not have merited Federal Charges, after a hearing August 11th, 2008 revealed no evidence of wrong doing by the defendants .In Wright v. United States, 732 F.2d 1048 (2d Cir. 1984), the courtestablished that a defendant has a constitutional right to a.disinterred prosecutor. and that a prosecutor .is not disinterestedif she has, or is under the influence of others whohave, an axe to grind against the defendant. .... Id. at 1055.The prosecutor here as acted as a .stalking horse against the Neighbors. and is in no way disinterested. DEFENDANT NEIGHBORS IS ENTITLED TO DISCOVERY IN CONNECTION TO THIS VINDICTIVE PROSECUTION CLAIM AND TO ANEVIDENTIARY HEARING although The Neighbors believe that the prosecutor's behavior and admissionsregarding the reasons for this prosecution and the new charges,standing alone, requires that the Indictment bedismissed, they respectfully request, in the alternative, for discovery to be handed over for examination and to allow defendant to properly prepare for trial and be able to actively participate in their own defense, and an

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF INDICTMENT BECAUSE THIS PROSECUTION IS VINDICTIVE This case involves all forms of prosecutorial vindictivenesscondemned by the courts.First, as the prosecutor's ownwords reveal, this ongoing prosecution of Guy and Carrie Neighbors ismotivated by vindictiveness against the Neighbors for their continued exerciseof First Amendment rights. The Prosecutor has freely admitted that the Neighbors have brought this on themselves because of their continued complaints against the Government. Their public blogging which during a hearing in front of the Honorable Judge Murguia, Terra Morehead had an emotional mental breakdown and pleaded with the Judge to gag the Neighbors because their public blogging had caused her cases to be under investigation 5 years back. It is the right of these defendants to be tried by an impartial prosecutor by a jury of their peers. This cannot possibly be accomplished with the current prosecutors handling this case.As it was decided earlier by this court the defendants had a right to speak freely about the prosecution of their case. Piling on additional charges and Indictments against a defendant for exercising this right constitutes a paradigmaticexample of vindictive prosecution. Cf. United States v. P.H.E.,Inc., 965 F.2d 848, 853 (10th Cir. 1992) (holding that aprosecution motivated by a desire to discourage expressionprotected by the First Amendment is barred and must be enjoinedor dismissed, irrespective of whether the challenged actioncould possibly be found to be unlawful) (citations omitted);United States v. Adams, 870 F.2d 1140, 1145 (6th Cir. 1989) The broad discretion accorded prosecutors in deciding whom toprosecute is not .unfettered,. and a decision to prosecute maynot be deliberately based upon the exercise of protectedstatutory rights..) (citations omitted); Brooks v. UnitedStates, 450 U.S. 927 (1981) stating that a court must reconcilethe rule that a prosecutor has broad discretion to file charges where there is probable cause with the rule that vindictiveconduct by prosecutors is unacceptable and requires control);see also City of Houston v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451, 462-63 (1987)(.The freedom of individuals verbally to oppose or challengepolice action without thereby risking arrest is one of theprincipal characteristics by which we distinguish a free nationfrom a police state..). If there is any doubt from the prosecutor's words or actions thatthis prosecution is vindictive, the sequence of ongoing events since 2005 confirms this.

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

Once the defendant shows that charges have been increased after theyhave exercised a constitutional or statutory right, the defendanthas demonstrated an .appearance of vindictiveness. on the partof the prosecutor. United States v. Shaw, 655 F.2d 168, 171(9th Cir. 1981) (citing United States v. Groves, 571 F.2d at453). With this prima facie showing, or other evidence of .arealistic likelihood of vindictiveness. Vindictiveness ispresumed and the burden shifts to the government to prove thatthe increase in the severity of the charge was not based on avindictive motive. See United States v. Spiesz, 689 F.2d 1326,1328 (9th Cir. 1982); Shaw, 655 F.2d at 171; United States v.Burt, 619 F.2d 531, 536 (9th Cir. 1980); see also Ruesga-Martinez, 534 F.2d at 1369 (when prosecution reindictsthe accused after he exercises a procedural right, the prosecution.bears a heavy burden of proving that any increase in theseverity of the alleged charges was not motivated by avindictive motive.). .An indictment must be dismissed ifthere is a finding of .actual. vindictiveness, or if there is apresumption of vindictiveness that has not been rebutted byobjective evidence justifying the prosecutor's action,. TheIndictment must be dismissed. United States v. Johnson, 171F.3d 139, 140 (2d Cir. 1999) (per curium); see Spiesz, 689 F.2dat 1328.

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

LEGAL STANDARDS.To punish a person because he has done what the lawplainly allows him to do is a due process violation of the mostbasic sort.. Bordenkircher v. Hayes, 434 U.S. 357, 363 (1978).Although a prosecutor has broad discretion in his chargingdecisions, there are two important limitations on thisauthority. First, a prosecutor may not bring charges with avindictive motive, since ..penalizing those who choose toexercise. constitutional rights, .would be patentlyunconstitutional... North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 724(1969), overruled on other grounds by Alabama v. Smith, 490 U.S.794 (1989) (quoting United States v. Jackson, 390 U.S. 570, 581(1968)); see Guam v. Fegurgur, 800 F.2d 1470, 1473 (9th Cir.1986). Nor may a prosecutor selectively enforce the law basedon race, religion or some other arbitrary classification,including the exercise of rights under the First Amendment.Guam, 800 F.2d at 1473; United States v. P.H.E., Inc., 965 F.2dThough similar, vindictive prosecution and 1 selective prosecutionare distinct claims governed by different legal standards.See United States v. DeTar, 832 F.2d 1110, 1112 (9thCir. 1987). A motion to dismiss on grounds of selectiveprosecution is filed herewith.848, 849 (10th Cir. 1992).1No evidence of actual bad faith is necessary to establish theClaim of Prosecutorial Vindictiveness. Blackledge v. Perry, 417 U.S. 21, 28 (1974); United States v. Groves, 571 F.2d 450, 454 n.1 (9th Cir. 1978); UnitedStates v. DeMarco, 550 F.2d 1224, 1227 (9th Cir. 1977); see alsoUnited States v. Ruesga-Martinez, 534 F.2d 1367, 1369 (9th Cir.1976) (.the mere appearance of vindictiveness is enough to placethe burden on the prosecution.) .

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

Guy and Carrie Neighbors arrested 8-8-08 for "Obstruction of Justice," by Postal Inspector David Nitz because Guy Neighbors informed KU Detective Mike Riner that he needed his attorney present before making any statements or turning over any paperwork in connection to an investigation which Mr. Neighbors and his wife were fully cooperating with. This arrest ended up with the Neighbors spending 12 days incarcerated at Leavenworth Maximum security detention Prison. During a detention hearing Aug. 11th , It was established that the PMB "mail box" used by the defendants in connection with the Ebay site was in the defendants true name and also included the names of the other people who would be receiving mail there as required by law. The hearing also established the shared bank account the defendant used in connection with the eBay site also had the defendants name as a signer on the account since 2006.Evidence was also presented to the courts to show that Robert Samples the seller of the Laptop had indeed signed the sellers form and the information on the sellers form including the number of laptops sold that day and the amount of $1,000 matched the information Mr. Samples had given the investigating officer. The investigating officer also stated under oath that Mr Samples had stated to the detective that the Neighbors did not know the laptop was stolen when they purchased it from him. Therefore the Government failed to present any evidence of wrong doing or fraudulent activity by the Neighbors. On Aug 18th, after spending 12 days in prison the Neighbors were released from Federal custody and the case was closed - Terminated 08-19-08.On 08-20-08 Based on the August 8th, arrest, a One count INDICTMENT In Federal Court is filed against the Neighbors by the Governments Prosecutor Terra Morehead.United States Of America vs. Guy & Carrie Neighbors case no.08-20105-cm-jpO for violation of Title 18 section 1343 for wire fraud and Title 18, sections 1512 (c) and 2. Even though no evidence of fraud could be provided by the Government during the Aug. 11 hearing.

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

Giving testimony to the grand jury that was "patently false and misleading in material respects and undoubtedly led to the erroneous indictment The use of false and perjured testimony cannot be reasonably explained or justified, and the use of such evidence is an affront to our justice system and a deprivation of the most basic and inalienable rights due each of us! Defendants Carrie and Guy Neighbors therefore move, pursuant to Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, that the Court should dismiss the indictment due to the government's misconduct in knowingly and/or recklessly presenting false, misleading, and material testimony before the grand jury. As stated previously, the Government has failed to investigate and indicted this case by making deals and failing to responsibly and carefully examine each individual's actions and each individual's words. While the law of conspiracy may be broad in scope, its breadth is not limitless, and the Government must show each individual's willful and knowing involvement in an unlawful agreement with convincing, reliable and honest evidence beyond mere hearsay and speculation. The United States Supreme Court has recognized that prosecutorial misconduct can justify the dismissal of an indictment "'if it is established that the violation substantially influenced the grand jury's decision to indict,' or if there is 'grave doubt' that the decision to indict was free from the substantial influence of such violations." Bank of Nova Scotia v. United States, 487 U.S. 250, 256, 108 S. Ct. 2369, 2374 (1988) (quoting United States v. Mechanik, 475 U.S. 66, 78, 106 S. Ct. 928, 945-46 (1986)).5 See also United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36, 46 & n.6, 112 S. Ct. 1735, 1741 & n.6 (1992) (district court's supervisory power can be used to dismiss indictment because of misconduct before grand jury, at least where that misconduct amounts to violation of one of those few, clear rules which were promulgated by Supreme Court and Congress to ensure integrity of grand jury's functions, such as prohibitions against false declarations before grand jury and subornation of perjury) (citing, inter alia, Bank of Nova Scotia); United States v. Vallie, 284 F.3d 917, 921 (8th Cir. 2000) ("An indictment cannot be based on perjured testimony, and the government may not use perjured testimony at trial if there is a reasonable chance that it would affect the jury's judgment[.]") (citations omitted). The Court should in the name of Justice and respect for the integrity of the courts and Justice system as a whole dismiss the Indictments based on the government's misconduct in knowingly and/or recklessly presenting false and misleading testimony to the grand jury.

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

When a forfeiture proceeding against property is proceeded against before a person is held guilty and condemned, and therefore causes hardship, "punishment" and prejudice against that person, then it does constitute a civil action against that person as a 'punishment." The Fifth Amendment clearly states that forfeiture cannot be used as punishment for the criminal offense.282 U.S. at 581. When the Government places actions against the defendants of cruel and unusual punishment during an arrest, then clearly the defendant has been pre-punished for a pending crime, and therefore any punishments placed upon the defendants in the future for the same alleged crime would constitute a violation of the Fifth Amendment rights of the defendant. The prosecutor Marietta Parker has knowingly presented the courts with false information, hearsay evidence by convicted felons in exchange for a deal was presented before a Grand Jury in USA v. Neighbors 07-cr-20124-cm-JPO It was established through an earlier evidence hearing before the Honorable Federal Judge John Lungstrum that testimony by Patrick Nieder before the Grand Jury was egregious and riddled with false accusations. The perjured testimony presented to the Grand Jury should have rendered the original indictment itself not constitutionally valid. To be constitutionally valid, an indictment "must allege lucidly and accurately all the essential elements of the offense endeavored to be charged." State v. Greer, 238 N.C. 325, 327, 77 S.E.2d 917, 919 (1953). The purpose of the evidence presented before a Grand Jury is to determine if a reasonably minded jury could accept the relevant evidence as adequate and sufficient to support the conclusion of defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v. Parr, supra at 463-64; see also, United States v. Goss, 650 F.2d 1336, 1341-42 (5th Cir. 1981). To comport with our Criminal Procedure Act, an indictment must "assert facts supporting every element of a criminal offense and the defendant's commission thereof with sufficient precision clearly to apprise the defendant . . . of the conduct which is the subject of the accusation." N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-924(a)(5)(2006). ------------------------------------------------------ 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (1976) provides: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact, or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations, or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

1.Because there have been no guilty pleas, or convictions as required by the 10th circuit court for lis pendens or forfeitures, the actions of the Government have placed "punishment" upon the defendants in connection with the forfeiture and lis pendens actions. According to Kansas law, a forfeiture proceeding under K.S.A. 65-4171 is civil in nature, and the statutory scheme is not so punitive as to negate legislative intention to establish a civil remedial mechanism. However the Prosecutor Marietta Parker in this case, against Kansas statutes, has used the forfeiture proceeding as a form of punishment. The lis pendins placed against the defendant's property, absent of the required notification of the lis pendens within 60 days of the filing and in violation of the "10th circuit court statutes" has placed a heavy burden upon the defendants, has interfered with the sale of the property, and has prejudiced the defense by creating a tremendous financial burden upon the defendants. The government's response to the defendant's motion to remove the lis pendens was to file a superseding indictment including another forfeiture allegation against the same property; just two days after the defendants filed the motion to release the lis pendens. Creating more prejudice and punishments upon the defendants. The actions by the Government in this case have amounted to a penalty associated to a pending case without a plea or conviction in place. There is a question of law, where this court's review is unlimited. See Memorial Hospital Ass'n, Inc. v. Knutson, 239 Kan. 663, 668, 722 P.2d 1093 (1986). The Neighbors have been subjected to "multiple punishments" for the same alleged offense in this case. See State v. Cady, 254 Kan. 393, 396, 867 P.2d 270 (1994) (citing Brown v. Ohio, 432 U.S. 161, 165, 53 L. Ed. 2d 187, 97 S. Ct. 2221 [1977]). The United States Supreme Court consolidated two United States Court of Appeals cases from the Ninth and Sixth Circuits. Both circuits held that the Double Jeopardy Clause prohibited the government from both punishing the defendant for a criminal offense and forfeiting defendant's property for the same offense in a separate civil action. (As is what has taken place here in this case)

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

Case 2:07-cr-20073-CM Document 36 Filed 12/21/2007 Page 4 of 22 On June 25, 2007, defendants were rearrested at their home and a search incident absent of a search warrant to arrest was performed. They were not given the option to self surrender, and the government pointed out they were not treated any differently than any other defendants. Mr. Neighbors was taken under arrest on the first floor of the house while two female officers went upstairs and, after watching Ms. Neighbors dress, handcuffed her and placed her under arrest. They were taken in police vehicles to court that day and counsel was appointed for them. They were held in custody for about four to six hours. Mr. Neighbors testified that no one asked him about his former counsel, James George, and he was not allowed to call Mr. George. The court originally appointed Alex McCauley to represent him. Mr. McCauley subsequently withdrew from the case due to a conflict of interest because he had formerly represented an informant in this case. Prior to his withdrawal from the case Mr. McCauley spent approximately 4 hours in his office going over the prosecutions discovery with Mr. Neighbors, During the meeting Mr. McCauley highlighted and took notes on the discovery. Before contacting his client Mr. Neighbors, Mr. McCauley filed a motion to stop the speedy trial clock without notifying his client Guy Neighbors, or Phil Gibson Carrie Neighbors attorney, then withdrew from the case and turned over the discovery along with the notes and highlights back to the Prosecutor. The documents in the discovery given to Mr. Neighbor's new attorney Dionne Sheriff did not match the documents that Mr. Neighbors had gone over with his former attorney Mr. McCauley. Vindictive prosecution" occurs when a prosecutor brings additional charges solely to punish the defendant for exercising a constitutional or statutory right, such as a defendant's right to a jury trial. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 6 U.S. v. VanDoren, 182 F.3d 1077. Feb 27, 2008 Marietta Parker files a Superseding Indictment USA v. Neighbors 07-cr-20124-CM-JPO without any new incidents, in response to moot a motion by defendants attorney Phil Gibson to remove a Lis Pendens against the Neighbors home at 1104 Andover, and the Business Property at 1904 Massachusetts in violation of the 10th circuit courts statutes.

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

Both defendants having had no criminal background, or drug histories would not fall under the vague definition of "unlawful user". With indictment under District Court for the District of Kansas case number 06-2071-01/02-CM/JPO. Initiated in conjunction with misuse of the legal process, in retaliation for the defendants filing a complaint alleging police misconduct, violations of the chain of custody rule, and sending out E-mails and public internet postings along with blog sites, All fall within an exercise of The First Amendment assuring the Fundamental Right to Free Speech.Making the circumstances of the indictment and arrest a case of Prosecutorial Misconduct. The fact both defendants were denied food while being held in a cell for 8 hours December 8th, 2006. Clearly was an act of retaliation by the prosecution, and a violation of Guy and Carrie Neighbors protected Fourteenth Amendment constitutional and civil rights. In violation of the Eighth Amendment. Forbidding "cruel and unusual punishments" clearly this shows "deliberate indifference" by the responsible officials.Attorney Jim George was informed by prosecution team member Terra Moorehead that the arrest and Indictment was handled in this cruel manner to quote "Show Guy and Carrie Neighbors who is boss". (Clearly this establishes retaliation and Malice by the prosecution.) Genito v. Rabinowitz, 92 N.J. Super. 225 (App. Div. 1966). Guy and Carrie Neighbors were first indicted with being users of a controlled substance in possession of firearms on December 7, 2006, in a prior case in this court, United States v. Neighbors, Case No. 06-20171-CM. After substantial time on the speedy trial clock had run, the government filed a motion to dismiss the indictment in that case on May 4, 2007, based on additional evidence that the government argued it had discovered during an ongoing investigation. The Honorable Carlos Murguia, United States District Judge, granted the government's motion and dismissed the first indictment without prejudice.On June 20, 2007, the government re-indicted Mr. and Mrs. Neighbors. The second indictment included the same charge as the first indictment (as Count 2) as well as additional charges of conspiring to manufacture marijuana and two counts of knowingly and intentionally manufacturing marijuana.The second indictment was filed absent of any new incidents or additional evidence. On September 11, 2007, counsel for Ms. Neighbors filed a motion to dismiss Count 2 (doc. #24) in which Mr. Neighbors subsequently joined (doc. #28) based on a violation of the Speedy Trial Act. This court granted the motion but reserved the determination of whether to dismiss Count 2 with or without prejudice until after an evidentiary hearing. That hearing was held on November 27, 2007.

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

In November 2006 the Neighbors turned in a formal complaint to LKPD Internal Affairs that Officer Jay Bialek and Micky Rantz had violated their rights and the Officers had violated the proffer agreement by entering their business and attempting to question them without their attorney present, and that the officers had violated the chain of evidence rule by returning a Sony digital camera that had been seized during a search warrant and never logged into the evidence custodian. In response to Guy and Carrie Neighbors exercising their Constitutional right to regress the Government through complaints, the AUSA Marietta Parker informed Carrie Neighbors attorney Aaron McKee that she intended to file an Indictment immediately against the Neighbors in Federal Court for the drugs and guns. James George Guys attorney unaware of this development contacted Guy and informed him the Government was happy with his cooperation. On December 7, 2006 AUSA's Marietta Parker and Terra Morehead followed through with the threat and had the Neighbors strong armed arrested in their home, instead of allowing them by way of counsel to turn themselves in. USA v. Neighbors case 06-20171-01/02-CM1 JPO. Charged with being "unlawful users with firearms. The Neighbors were taken into custody at 8am and held nearly 8 hours before being given anything to eat. When defense attorney James George questioned AUSA Terra Morehead about the harsh treatment of his clients, her response was quote "The Neighbors needed to be shown who was boss." end quote. It would have been constitutionally challenging for a federal court to convict the Neighbors of being an unlawful user in violation of 18 U.S.C. & 922(g)(3). Case USA v. Neighbors 06-20171-01/02-CM1 JPO. Based upon the constitutionality of the definition.A conviction would be a violation of due process because the definition of "unlawful user is too vague to supply the defendants with adequate notice that their conduct was prohibited. United States v. Cooper, 173 F.3d 1192, 1202 (9th Cir. 1999). Specifically noted, In determination of the definition of the term "unlawful user" should be supported by "the statutory history," Which indicated that § 922 was enacted "to keep firearms out of the hands of those not legally entitled to possess them because of ...their criminal background" Id. at 1365-66. Specifically, it is noted that § 922 explicitly included unlawful drug users as an individual having a "criminal background".

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

Because it is a crime for a Police officer to impersonate an FBI agent and would constitute coercion, a constitutional violation of Fifth and fourteenth Amendment rights in violation 42. U.S.C. § 1983. Therefore all evidence derived from the Investigation thereafter would be an extension of the exclusionary rule and inadmissible "Fruits from the Poisonous tree" Including all search warrants. Silverthorne Lumber Co. v United States. STATEMENT OF FACTS The Investigation by the Lawrence Kansas Police Department into the Business Yellow House Store Incorporated began in December in 2005.During a pre-indictment hearing at the Kansas Department of Justice U.S. Assistant Attorney Marietta Parker accused the Neighbors of bringing this on ourselves when they filed complaints accusing the officers of posing as FBI agents. She told them the investigation had cost a lot of money and therefore she was going to forfeit the Yellow House building regardless of the outcome of any plea agreements reached by both parties. In August 2006, the Neighbors at the request of AUSA Marietta Parker and through the advice of counsel agreed to a Proffer. In exchange for the proffer the Prosecutor indicated the drug and gun charge would not be prosecuted in Federal Court and would be referred back to the State for prosecution as a misdemeanor. And depending on the level of cooperation; there would also be considerations made in the other case at sentencing.

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

this Was taken from the Pacer government Site (it cost me .05 cents to get it) where a motion the neighbors filed in the court was posted so I am reposting it here.BACKGROUND In response to Guy and Carrie Neighbors in March 2006 by way of their counsel; Defense Attorney Sarah Swain, turning in a formal complaint to LKPD Internal Affairs Sgt. Dan Ward that Lawrence Kansas Police officers Jay Bialek and Micky Rantz were posing as FBI agents and Indicating to witnesses that FBI Agents were involved in the Yellow House case as a means of coercion intimidating witnesses during the Investigation of the Yellow House case.In response to the complaints On April 20, 2006 LKPD Chief Ronald Olin wrote to Ms. Swain that quote "I believe Sergeant Mike Pattrick from this department as well as Special Agent Bob Shaefer with the FBI has spoken with you in person about these very issues" end quote.Kansas City Special Agent Bob Shaefer testified under oath in Federal Court during a hearing August 11th, 2008 before Judge O'Hara. That his actual name is Walter Robert Schaefer, and his jurisdiction is the Western District of Missouri. He did not have a file for the investigation, nor did he interview anyone in connection to the complaints. Mr. Schaefer also testified he did not view any of the affidavits in connection with Guy and Carrie Neighbors complaints. In June of 2008, A representative from the Kansas City FBI verified that the Kansas City FBI does not have jurisdiction over Lawrence Kansas and does not do investigations into complaints of police misconduct from Lawrence Kansas. Special Agent Scott Gentine and Agent Denton Murray from the Topeka FBI verified they are the resident agency of the FBI with jurisdiction over Lawrence Kansas. Special Agent Scott Gentine also verified that the U.S. Attorney Marietta Parker who was actively Prosecuting the case, had Sent down Special Agent Bob Schaefer to investigate the Neighbors complaints. To insure the impartiality of the Courts, it is a conflict of interest for a Prosecutor to be involved in the investigations involving the case outside the court room of misconduct involving "color of law violations" directly involved with the investigation of the case she is prosecuting.

0

footballguy49 5 years, 5 months ago

I have been following this case from the beginning and I'm surprised that no one has touched on the fact that the yellow house business owners have been arrested by the IRS and the Postal service twice on gun and drug charges. The attorney general does not recognize either one of these agencies as law enforcement agencies; this means that the business owners have been arrested several times by agencies without jurisdiction. The two agencies involved with the arrest only have the authority to arrest people pertaining to the codes they are enforcing. If you are arrested by agencies outside of their jurisdiction the charges should be dismissed.

0

lawthing 5 years, 5 months ago

One last thought. I wonder why the yellow house people were arrested for one laptop, but the Pawn shop people who it appears bought the bulk of Samples goods did not get messed with or mentioned at all.

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

Here is a compilation video of everything that was on channel 6 except the the recent 4 stories. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UW8MXuz_Dh0

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

Remember the Reason they are in federal court is they were originally investigated by the IRS and the US postal service 4 years ago When those 2 agencies discovered the neighbors were doing nothing wrong they backed out of the case. The Lawrence police department now had to save face because they thought they had uncovered the largest fencing operation Lawrence Has ever seen, but in fact had the whole thing was a witch hunt. I can promise you the LPD has spent upwards in the hundreds of thousands of dollars investigating the yellow house store to only find out they haven't been breaking the law. I am going to reference the last 15 stories done by the ljworld IF the Yellow house is committing such crimes why do the charges keep getting dropped and why has there been no trial or even a trial date set in the last 4 years. I will repeat this they have been awaiting trial for 4 years, IF the federal prosecutor had such a strong case that they were doing illegal activities why WAIT 4 YEARS AND STILL NOT HAVE A TRIAL DATE SET http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2007/nov/20/6news_gun_charge_against_yellow_house_dropped/http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2007/may/09/charge_dropped_against_yellow_house_owners/http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2005/dec/04/business_owners_deny_role_stolen_goods_case/http://www2.ljworld.com/photos/2006/jul/08/101798/http://www2.ljworld.com/photos/2006/jul/08/101803/http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2006/jul/07/officers_seen_removing_items_yellow_house/http://www2.ljworld.com/blogs/lawrence_blotter/2006/dec/12/yellowhouse/http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/aug/09/yellow_house_owners_arrested_friday/#c662552http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2007/jun/26/yellow_house_owners_arrested_again/ http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/jul/25/attorneys_decry_blog_stolen_goods_case/http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/aug/16/couple_ask_dismissal_obstruction_case/http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2007/jun/25/federal_agents_investigate_yellow_house_owners/http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2006/jun/21/police_review_board_possible/http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2006/jun/15/fbi_inquiry_under_way_conduct_police/http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/aug/19/federal_judge_orders_release_yellow_house_owners_c/

0

Multidisciplinary 5 years, 5 months ago

omg omg omg!!!I've just had time to read todays thread.This is just too unreal!Let me guess, you all knew about this, and I'm the only one who didn't have a clue, right?And I said I 'might' shoot my monitor. First problem with that is, I'd need to purchase a used pistol. Anyone know where I can get one?And two, if I do shoot the monitor, how would I then post the evidence?Heck, I just bought a digicam and haven't learned how to use it yet. It would help if I took it out of the box.lol.This made my evening!It will probably last through the night too.;D

0

Pogo 5 years, 5 months ago

It's my view that what this man has done pales in comparison to the thefts done by the likes of KU's "leadership" who get more in perks via free parties, meals, trips, and other forms of entertainment (and the good Lord knows what all else) than this guy could have taken home in 45 years.I rather suspect all of the "big guys" have several state paid for laptops at their homes.....their family using them; have broadband internet access; one has free housing; free admission to all "university" events and shindigs; yet more travel to points unknown, etc., etc., etc. The "leadership" are the one's taking the stuff from the taxpayer.Cut the budget a good $500,000.00; get rid of the perks; require "leadership" to "pay their way" and get them off the collective backs of the working Joe and Jane who are shackled with a state income tax which is absurdly high (how do the states with no income tax make things work? Wyoming? Oregon? etc.....).This man best get probation and community service.....

0

lawthing 5 years, 5 months ago

But why is Mr. Sample arrested and charged in State court and the Yellow House owners in Federal court? Since the two cases are connected shouldn't they all be in State court or all be in Federal court?

0

lawthing 5 years, 5 months ago

Thanks Alexander Neighbors!Now it all makes sense, and the pieces of this dirty little puzzle are fitting together!http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/aug...

0

lawthing 5 years, 5 months ago

multidisciplinary :" If they do find a Yellow House connection on this, I might shoot my monitor. "----------------------------------------------------------Hey I was in the YH last week and they had some really nice flat screen monitors!!!!!Hehehehehe

0

lawthing 5 years, 5 months ago

According to the story Mr. Sample was arrested on August 11. That was 1 month ago!!!!!!Did they perhaps do the story only because they found out Channel 5 was fixing to do a story?????

0

CMON 5 years, 5 months ago

multidisciplinary :" If they do find a Yellow House connection on this, I might shoot my monitor. "Is it dead yet.Pleas post the evidence .

0

CarterFaucheaux 5 years, 5 months ago

Alex Neighbors, your [posts are among the most interesting of any on the Journal World site.

0

pissedinlawrence 5 years, 5 months ago

UM this man is a criminal!! He stole thousands of dollars of stuff. I have had stuff stolen from me, and im sure they had family too. So to all you "Samples" posting on here, GET OVER IT! your father, uncle, whoever is a BAD person and should go to jail for a few, 10 years.

0

black_butterfly 5 years, 5 months ago

I can understand why his family would come on here to defend him and yes God forgives, but stealing is stealing, regardless of the reason why. If it was some young thug ( who has family also) I am sure your comments would be just as harsh as the ones here. When he stole items they had to be replaced. They raise student's tuition to help cover those costs. What he did is not fair to the students or to his family. I hope he can find some peace in the fact that he turned himself in instead of getting caught.

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

This guy was caught because the yellow house store allowed the K.U. police to copy the information from the sellers form, not just the form from the purchase of the laptop in question but also a second sellers form. Then the cops lied and hauled the business owners off to the leavenworth detention center for 12 days on obstruction of justice charges when the K.U police did NOT have a court order or a search warrant when they approached the yellow house about the information they needed to make a arrest. The business owners were arrested and taken to a federal prison based on a state case. In the story the reporter did not mention how Mr. sample was busted, humm I wonder why?Most of the stolen property was sole to the local pawn shops, the cops do not want to mention that because the police dept. controls the pawn shops and the police dept. also sells property missing from the evidence room to the pawn shops. Take a look at Mr. Sample's booking infoormation during his arrest.

0

Alexander Neighbors 5 years, 5 months ago

this case is also tied to the yellow house the yellow house gave the information to the police about a few items he sold them and lied to the yellow house about them being stolen. The yellow house owners were arrested because the police thought they were involved with this Dude. Its about time the LPD went after the criminals and not small business owners.

0

pinkpearl 5 years, 5 months ago

I like your qoute freesample. I think that what Mr. Sample did is wrong. I do believe in a fair trial and I believe he will get one. But I also think that the people out there who are chastising him need to take a look at their own lives first, before they rush to "pass judgement" or say obnoxious things about someone else. I myself am not perfect. I too have taken from a job. No where near the magnitude of Mr. Sample, but nontheless it happened. Mr. Sample is a curageous man in that he did turn himself in. Many would run, and hide from that kind of truth. I'm not saying that he should get off easy because he turned himself in, but it does take someone of a great stength to do that kind of thing. So I say again, look at yourself before you cast the stone. What have you done "big or small" in your life that you knew was wrong, that your not proud of, that you wish you could take back. Mr. Sample will be punished for his sins, how about you?

0

freesample 5 years, 5 months ago

Just gonna leave ya'll with my favorite quote from my favorite author.Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. Dr. Seuss

0

Norma Jeane Baker 5 years, 5 months ago

Hey, lawthing, you're flat out wrong in your statement. A while a back a girl(if I recall correctly) made a comment here that Rose (the kid who caused the Boardwalk Apts. fire) said that he was going to burn something done when he got out of group home living -- or something to that effect. LJW was subpoenaed to provide her log in records and she was tracked down and later ended up having to testify. I might have a few of the details wrong, but the general gist is correct: you can be held accountable and what you post on a blog can be used in court. Like someone else said, "just ask YH."

0

mom_of_three 5 years, 5 months ago

Pywacket can give his/her opinion on the article and on the blogs. That's what the blogs are for. And if someone doesn't get blogging, why are they on here? I know why I am; to discuss what I read, and to find out additional information from those who are knowledgable in that area (such as politics, etc.).

0

mom_of_three 5 years, 5 months ago

they can so whatever they want, but as experience as shown, bloggers can sometimes be tracked down by authorities to give information and have an effect on court proceedings.

0

lawthing 5 years, 5 months ago

third party remarks on a blog site are hear-say and inadmissable in court. Further more there is no guarantee that the person claiming to be a Sample kid is not really just some secret lover, or co-worker wanting to see him fry.Therefore they can say whatever they want. Anonomous Comments on a blog are not admissable in court. Regardless of who the person claims to be.

0

samplethis 5 years, 5 months ago

last one I promise skinny how did you know he had a heart attack?

0

samplethis 5 years, 5 months ago

Pywacket Why are you speaking your thoughts? What does this have to do with you? It does not personally affect you in any way. If calculations were done the amount he allegedly would have stolen from you personally would be about a penny of 'your tax money". I am not on a high horse, I sucked myself into the hurtful fiasco. I really don't get blogging. What is the point of being so blatantly disrespectful to people the way that some people have been in this matter. Find better things to do with your time. Like I am going to right now. Spend time with my family and teach them respectability and honesty. Freesample, they are right. Let us not talk anymore about details,do not want it to be hurtful in the end.

0

Pywacket 5 years, 5 months ago

Shoot--how do we know he hasn't been stealing the entire time he worked there, working his way up to bigger and bigger-ticket items? It's possible he just "decided to confess" because he was confronted and given that option. For all we know, the courts and public opinion will actually be easier on him than he deserves.Don't expect the public to appreciate being ripped off to the tune of thousands of dollars. Not gonna happen. And it's purely ignorant to claim (as hawkperched.. did) that stealing at KU is "the norm." In an organization that employs thousands of individuals, there are bound to be a few thieves among them--you point out a couple of high-profile ones--but don't impugn all the decent and honest people up there who would not steal so much as a paper clip. They are by far in the majority.We have one thing in common, freesample--- we are both proud of our fathers. Difference is that mine (who also worked two jobs, one of them in a hot, dangerous factory all his life) was an honest and decent man who never provided us with anything that he didn't EARN. That meant we had hand-me-down clothes, a small, modest house, no fancy vacations, and a very simple life. But we learned the value of honesty.And I don't think any one of us would be "100% behind" anyone else in our family if that person turned to thieving. Apparently your dad, knowing he might some day need the support of enablers, instilled very different values into you. What you don't seem to realize is that the disapproval and disappointment of loved ones might go a lot further toward jarring him away from his penchant for crime than anything the courts will do. Your love for him should not waver, but you should rightfully be ashamed of him--and ashamed to try to intimidate us for speaking our thoughts.

0

starbucks 5 years, 5 months ago

KU turns a blind eye to professors who order examination copies of textbooks online with the intent to just sell them on amazon.com.Nice work, KU!

0

been_there 5 years, 5 months ago

hot2trot and freesample, according to the story he is pleading not guilty, has he changed his mind? If he hasn't you have just screwed up his defense by posting he has admitted his guilt to family who has posted it on the web for all (including authorities) to see, just ask yellowhouse about the fallout from blogging.

0

jaywalker 5 years, 5 months ago

Truly empathetic for your pain, hot2trot and freesample. But I have to agree with Pywacket, everyone's opinion is their's to voice. I can understand being hurt by others commenting on something so close to you, but I gotta say it's rather foolish to rub salt in your own wounds by visiting this particular comment string. I suggest you quit aggravating your own sensiblities and go help your family. And samplethis, be careful gettin' down off that horse. It's always humorous for someone to chastise others for 'wasting time' posting on these sites by.....umm... posting on these sites.

0

geekin_topekan 5 years, 5 months ago

Good thing they don't hire felons.Wait a minute...he wasn't a felon prior to working at KU.Hmm..Would it be safe to say that KU doesn't hire felons but would rather create their own?I wonder how many of the feloneous lawncare workers and dishwashers are in on this?Probably all of them.

0

been_there 5 years, 5 months ago

Just think how many blogs there are on newspapers all over the country. Saw it on channel 5 last night.

0

mom_of_three 5 years, 5 months ago

This story has hit the AP wires.

0

mom_of_three 5 years, 5 months ago

If family members don't like what is being written, then don't read it, especially if you think people are being judgemental. But he was charged with stealing, which is a crime, no matter who you steal from. It's wrong and punishment is deserved. Why did he steal? I don't think anyone cares about it at the moment, but lots of people are desperate with sick relatives and they don't steal. but he did pretty much ruin his chances of getting any job in the future.

0

persevering_gal 5 years, 5 months ago

Lawrenceguy, that's a great point, but what I meant to say is that people tend to overlook the smaller things and only focus on some of the issues that you brought up such as rape and strangulation. I'm by now means saying this guy should get off easy, but rather stating that people tend to judge a person way too harshly simply for making a mistake (whether they knew it or not), when in fact, we ourselves make mistakes too...maybe just not as noticeable.

0

PapaB 5 years, 5 months ago

My guess is that Mr. Sample felt a little bit of entitlement after 14 years at KU, then exercised this feeling the last 4 years. It's not the same as a CEO at all, since they are in a high risk - high reward, decision-making position.I fell sorry for Mr. Sample and his family, but want a fair trial with due punishment. If he did steal all of these things or close to it, it should be treated as if he stole a brand new, $31,000 car.

0

lawrenceguy40 5 years, 5 months ago

Persevering_gal - your heart surely breaks easy! So if a deed is wrong, it is just wrong and all wrong deeds should be dealt with in the same way. If I overstay my parking meter, I should be dealt with in the same way as this common thief? If I rape and strangle a child, I should be dealt with in the same way as this common thief?I'm glad I don't live in your world!

0

persevering_gal 5 years, 5 months ago

Freesample - I am sorry for what you and your family are facing. I'm glad that you and your family can admit the wrong doings. It takes a very courageous person to do that. Although I am not pleased with what he did, I'm happy to know that he is learning from this mistake - if in fact he is guilty of these charges. We've all made mistakes in our lives, and unfortunately, not all of us are able to recognize them. It's even more heart-breaking how society labels such actions as worse than others when anything wrong is simply wrong. I wish the best for you and your family and everyone who is making unsavory comments. God bless.

0

lily 5 years, 5 months ago

Why don't we all have the right to be upset and angry about this? He stole. Plain and simple. Why did he turn himself in? Was he suspected? Was the guilt getting to him? We don't know all the details but he did steal and nothing makes that right. He will have to face the consequences. I'm sorry if he was having difficult times but that doesn't excuse what he did. It wasn't once, it was several times over the years.

0

hawkperchedatriverfront 5 years, 5 months ago

Everyone must remember that KU is like a very large corporation, with a bad board of directors, very little oversight, and opportunity avails itself. It needs to be re organized, just as the major corporations need to be.This man's theft is no different than the CEOs of companies who receive millions of dollars in compensation. Their bountiful rewards are authorized theft. His was not.He didn't have the backing of the board of directors and didn't play golf.

0

none2 5 years, 5 months ago

freesample (Anonymous) says:I am proud to call this man my father. Hot2trot is right (thanks cus). No one on here has a right to judge him. You have no clue what kind of man he is. He is a kind, loving, caring man. He did everything he could to provide for his wife, daughters, and grandchildren. He made mistakes and now he is wanting to pay for them. He will stand before the judge, take whatever comes at him, and hope that he can move on from this. Look at yourself and your own sin before you cast a stone at him.====================================freesample, I'm sorry that you are faced with this.It puts you in a precarious position to be Mr. Lee's offspring and also deal with what he did (ok -- accused of -- innocent until proven guilty).I don't think people are trying to stone your dad. Rather, I think they are just being honest with the frustrations. It may sound like he didn't steal from them personally and thus they should back off. However, when someone steals things from a public institution it may SEEM impersonal, but it affects all who pay taxes. Also like so many, the "mistakes" continue until they are caught. I think people have more sympathy for people who out of guilt confess voluntarily rather than only after they are caught.I do find it interesting that all these things listed happened in the last four years of an 18 year employment. I don't know your father's motives whether it was kleptomania or anger at KU that they didn't give him a salary increase or advancement in position. Regardless, I think that if this was something he did during his last few years, it will go easier than if he had been doing this for all those 18 years. If this goes back even further, expect some more heated comments.

0

skinny 5 years, 5 months ago

Maybe his heart attack had something to do with it, I don't know.But a thief is a thief is a thief.He is no longer trust worthy and will go to jail as a result of his actions.

0

hawkperchedatriverfront 5 years, 5 months ago

justaverage, stealing at KU is the norm, Remember the dude who embezzled some 1/3 million dollars from KU bus? Remember the gal who embezzled money and her dad was a KU prof, and it's anyone's guess how much was pilfered through the years at the Kansas Union years ago,This guy's take is a pittance to the dude who ripped off the bus system. He even got himself a condo in Colorado.

0

freesample 5 years, 5 months ago

I should clarify myself here with this. I never meant to imply that he stole to help provide for us. He worked his a$$ off for years at 2 jobs to make sure we had a roof over our head and food on our table. He was there for us for everything. He took care of us and mom when she was too sick to work. I do not know his reasons for taking what he did and neither do i want to know. All i know is i love this man and i am right behind him the whole way.

0

LogicMan 5 years, 5 months ago

Let the justice system take its course. Our part in this matter is showing up for jury duty, if called.

0

lawrenceguy40 5 years, 5 months ago

Freesample - I too could become a common thief to provide for my family, but I hope that I have brought them up so that they would have NO pride in me if I did. This man stole from his employer and from every taxpayer in Kansas when placed in a position of trust. In future, I guess the only thing he will be stealing from his employer is the occasional fry, if he is lucky.......

0

samplethis 5 years, 5 months ago

You should all be ashamed of yourselves. First for having nothing better to do than to sit at your computers and type hurtful things about a person you don't even know. Second for having a laugh at those hurtful things. And making fun of someone who has a disability (Pywacket).

0

freesample 5 years, 5 months ago

I am proud to call this man my father. Hot2trot is right (thanks cus). No one on here has a right to judge him. You have no clue what kind of man he is. He is a kind, loving, caring man. He did everything he could to provide for his wife, daughters, and grandchildren. He made mistakes and now he is wanting to pay for them. He will stand before the judge, take whatever comes at him, and hope that he can move on from this. Look at yourself and your own sin before you cast a stone at him.

0

justaverage 5 years, 5 months ago

Stealing is stealing and he stole from every taxpayer in the state. I wonder how many others at KU are taking items that we don't know about?

0

been_there 5 years, 5 months ago

Looks like it made channel 5 news, hot2trot has his work cut out for him.

0

Multidisciplinary 5 years, 5 months ago

If they do find a Yellow House connection on this, I might shoot my monitor.

0

been_there 5 years, 5 months ago

The yellow radar detector must be turned off today.

0

Multidisciplinary 5 years, 5 months ago

Py,you're hurtin me!Gootsie is going to have fun with this tomorrow.

0

been_there 5 years, 5 months ago

One has to wonder what he did with all that stuff, presents to others maybe, did family members benefit?

0

lawthing 5 years, 5 months ago

No fuss here, Non person, non violent crime, if a first time offense will just be reduced to probation only.

0

Pywacket 5 years, 5 months ago

MD~ Don't forget these ones:Hot2SampleSampleTrottersSampleTheseHotTrotsTrotYourSamplesHereFreeHotSamplesSample4FreeFreeYellowSamples(That's not funny!)

0

Pywacket 5 years, 5 months ago

hot2trot~ I sentence you to 4 semesters of remedial English.Yes, the judge went through law school and practiced law for some time to gain the knowledge and experience needed to ensure that his legally binding judgments are just and fair. Nobody will argue with that.We, on the other hand, as we discuss the news of the day on this forum, have a perfect right to offer our NON-legally binding opinions. See how that works? If our opinions (or judgments, if you will), which are formed on the mere basis of the written reports here, were used to sentence a person, it would be very unfair indeed. But they're not!We are well aware that anyone who appears in the news for an alleged crime will get his day in court. Nobody's going to hijack that right, so cool your jets, please.Finally, can you in all honesty sit there and tell the rest of us that you have never handed down your own opinions --and sometimes indignation or outrage -- upon reading about someone else's alleged criminal acts?You have never been an armchair judge of thieves, rapists, drunk drivers, child molesters, bank embezzlers, etc? Does this bother you only because this particular alleged thief happens to be your relative? Be honest.

0

Multidisciplinary 5 years, 5 months ago

Next possible names:sample_bobone_more_samplesample_on_the_bussample_claussunshine_samplefree_samplesample_was_heresample_irresistablefree_samples_take_one

0

hot2trot 5 years, 5 months ago

That's why hes the judge went to school to do this. Thats not what there meaning when they say dont judge him. They mean your not perfect you dont no all the facts he will get what he gets by desistion of the courts. Judgment from others is not only rude but not your place.loving family member

0

mom_of_three 5 years, 5 months ago

no one has the right to judge him - i think the judge will differ.

0

Pywacket 5 years, 5 months ago

No one has the right to judge him? I think the state of Kansas would beg to differ.I agree with been_there. If allegations are correct, the man was a habitual and long-time thief. He was put in a position of trust and he violated that. He was stealing from all of us.

0

Steve Jacob 5 years, 5 months ago

Those are big ticket items he stole as of late. He must of had something that triggered the need for cash.

0

hot2trot 5 years, 5 months ago

I have known this man for many years. He shouldn't have done it but he did. He knows he messed up and now he will have to deal with the outcome. But no one is perfect and no one has the right to judge him. That's why we live were we do. loved family member

0

been_there 5 years, 5 months ago

Multiple thefts over four years is not "a mistake" he had years to think about what he was doing. To bad "he" wasn't worried about what his family would have to go through. Sorry, he gets absolutely no sympathy from me, I've been robbed too many times to feel sorry for a thief.

0

samplethis 5 years, 5 months ago

Your negative and not funny comments need to be kept to yourself. He is a human being that made a mistake and has to pay for it. He has a family that also has to pay for it. Its not going to be an easy path that he and his family have to face in the future.

0

freesample 5 years, 5 months ago

actually he wasnt caught, he turned himself in

0

ridinghood 5 years, 5 months ago

secure all you want, employees can steal. He was caught. That's about all you can ask of an employer.

0

Bud Stagg 5 years, 5 months ago

That is a lot of stuff that seems very easy to get to. Maybe KU needs to do a better job as well securing the property that the state helps pay for.

0

BuffyloGal 5 years, 5 months ago

Something tells me the samples ended up on ebay.

0

cthulhu_4_president 5 years, 5 months ago

Wow, looks like Mr. Sample could have filled a (yellow) house with his loot!

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.