Advertisement

Archive for Thursday, January 26, 2012

Judges reject appeal by former Yellow House owner

January 26, 2012

Advertisement

A federal appeals court panel has upheld the wire fraud convictions of Carrie Neighbors, an owner of the former Yellow House Store in Lawrence.

In a decision filed Thursday, three judges on the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found there was enough evidence for jurors to determine Neighbors knew she was buying stolen property in 2005 at her secondhand store, 1904 Mass., and later selling it on eBay, an Internet auction website.

A federal jury in Kansas City, Kan., convicted Neighbors, 50, of Lawrence, in 2010 on 16 counts including wire fraud and conspiracy, and U.S. District Judge Carlos Murguia sentenced her to serve eight years in prison. In her appeal Neighbors had argued the jury was improperly instructed and she had gone to lengths to ask people who sold her items to assure they were not stolen, but the appellate judges said some witnesses testified they told Neighbors the items were stolen.

“There was sufficient evidence for the jury to infer that Ms. Neighbors knew she was buying stolen property but intentionally closed her eyes to this fact,” Senior Circuit Judge Wade Broby wrote in his opinion.

Neighbors, and her husband, Guy Neighbors, who ran a Yellow House Store in Topeka and faces a trial in February in the same case, have argued the government’s witnesses were not credible and accused prosecutors and police of corruption.

Comments

Norma Jeane Baker 2 years, 2 months ago

Wow! Scrolling past smitty's posts just as if they were merrill's.

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

cont...

Claim 03) Since actions speak louder than words, and by actions contracts are consummated, Libellee's actions have made manifest, with open disregard for the Rule of Law, that Libellee's had/have at all times and in every measure, concerning their association with Affiant, operated outside the parameters of the Constitution of the United States of America, and within the bounds of treason, coercion, threat, duress, malfeasance, conspiracy, tort, unlawful conversion, theft of property and any other offenses known to be injurious to Affiant. Affiant reserves the right to amend in order that the truth be ascertained and justly determined. VERIFIED AFFIDAVIT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I, Carrie Neighbors, Sui Juris, solemnly affirm and verify that I have read the foregoing, and know its contents to be true to the best ofmy knowledge, except as to the matters which are therein stated on my information or belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. This instrument is submitted upon good faith effort that is grounded in fact, warranted by existing law for the modification or reversal ofexisting law and submitted for proper purposes, and not to cause harassment and unnecessary delay or costs, so help me God. __ See Supremacy Clause (Constitution, Laws and Treaties are all the supreme Law of the Land.) I declare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the Republic of Kansas, that the foregoing is true and correct.

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

cont...

Claim 02) Affiant affirms and alleges that through willful misconduct motivated by actual malice as clearly displayed by the University of Kansas Detective Michael Riner's defamatory internet blogging on but not limited to, the Journal World web site, in a public defamation about Affiant and her business before and during the investigation, resulting in an act of"contempt" of a court ordered gag on all parties involved in the case, conspiracy against rights in violation ofKS. Annot. codes, inequitable behavior and despicable conduct by an officer of the court including perjury and violations of discretionary authority. In a conspiracy to cover-up said misconduct the prosecution of Affiant in the University's investigation was transferred by the controlling agency (The University Public Safety police dept.) to the Federal Prosecutor Marietta Parker, along with Affiants complaints submitted to the University Police Internal Affairs about Detective Micheal Riner's violations ofAffiants civil rights under color of law, absent the controlling agency's execution of proper disciplinary investigation or authoritative action in the matter involving their own employee Detective Mike Riner, resulting in a Federal 3 Indictment so frivolous and vindictive, that the court did not even revoke Plaintiffs pretrial release upon the filing of the Indictment. Instigated outside of the jurisdiction, rules and regulations that govern said controlling agency's personnel issues and disciplinary process, resulting in the accomplishment of a conspiracy to further harassment, false arrest, false imprisonment, duress, 2 point enhancment on sentence January 12, 2011 , and continued depravation of rights due to the fact the said Federal Indictment has not been properly dismissed, resulting in abandonment of Affiant's protected constitutional right to due process of law. These resulting damages and injuries have bound Libellee's into a contract for restitution and reparation to Affiant.

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

cont...

Claim 01) Affiant quotes: "Anything in repugnance to the Constitution is invalid or unlawful". Bond, supra. In {Bond v United States, No 09-1227 (June 16, 2011)] the Supreme court ruled in a 9-0 decision, that bond had standing to challenge the federal statute 18 USC Section 3231, on the grounds that transferring a State investigation into a Federal Prosecution interferes with the powers reserved to the States. In accordance to18 USC Section 3231, part of the enactment of title 18 states: "The district courts ofthe United States shall have original jurisdiction, exclusive ofthe courts ofthe States, ofall offenses against the laws ofthe United States. Nothing in this title shall be held to take away or impair the jurisdiction a/the courts a/the several States under the laws thereof" Without the validity of 18 USC § 3231 a federal court must revert the powers of the federal courts back to the states. 2 Affiant's charges were transferred to the Federal Government in violation of Constitutional law, causing affiant unconscionable harm by forcing her to be tried by the Federal Government instead of the State where she would have received less time (or never been prosecuted at all.) See [US. V Sharpnack, 355 US 286 (1957)] It further specifies that "Whoever. .. is guilty ofany act or omission which. .. would be punishable ifcommitted or omitted within the jurisdiction ofthe State ... in which such place is situated, by the laws thereof in force at the time ofsuch act or omission, shall be guilty ofa like [federal] offense and subject to a like punishment". In [Carol Ann Bond v. United States, No. 09-1227], the Supreme court stated that any act of Congress repugnant to the Constitution is void. Lower courts are required to follow Supreme Court rulings.

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

cont...

CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE If this affidavit is not properly rebutted with a counter-affidavit within thirty (30) days from the date of its service, all paragraphs not denied shall be eonfessed affirmed, by such default, and shall be accepted as dispositive, conclusive facts by the named Libellee's or other properly delegated authority there of, had the opportunity and "failed to plead." All Counter-affidavits must be signed with the valid legal name ofthe respondent. Affiant hereby states that she is of legal age and competent to state on belief and personal knowledge that the facts set forth herein as duly noted below are true, correct, complete, and presented in good faith regarding the illegal transfer of a state investigation by the above named Libellee's into a Federal complaint for prosecution that lacked jurisdiction and authority. It is now incumbent on you, the purported original Agency and oversight officials with discretionary authority to compel discovery of facts and evidence under UCC 1-308 (RSMO 400.1207). Including but not limited to any evidence under federal statutes that supports the investigation of a stolen laptop from the University of Kansas by the University of Kansas police for a transfer to Federal Jurisdiction solely for prosecution in violation of Supreme court ruling. Affiant requests the Libellee's to provide evidence that the Plaintiff trespassed Federally under common law, constitutional law or public law and specifically identify Acts, Codes, Rules, Regulations and Statutes that support the transfer of the allegations from State to Federal.

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF DOUGLAS COUNTY, KANSAS Civil Court Department [Lawrence Kansas] CARRIE NEIGHBORS Affiant v KANSAS PUBLIC SAFETY: KANSAS UNIVERSITY POLICE DEPARTMENT Case Libellee MICHAEL RINER Libellee AFFIDAVIT/AFFIRMATION IN SUPPORT OF COMPLAINT

AFFIDAVIT/AFFIRMATION IN SUPPORT OF COMPLAINT This sworn Affidavit is my presentment of "Official Notice of Facts, and Demand for Answers and relief' and an administrative remedy under notary and or witness presentment, for me; the Affiant Carrie Neighbors. This is an offer for The Kansas University Public Safety Police Department and Detective Michael Riner, in honor, to respond to this Affidavit within 30 days to offer settlement in this dispute in the amount of

Five hundred thousand dollars. ($500,000.00). Affiants sworn notice hereby constitutes a private contract set out in admiralty Due to the fact Collaborative resolution rather than continued litigation would be the most efficient way to allow healing in this matter, Affiant hereby gives consideration in the form of forbearance of suit for a reasonable period of time, 30 days to respond to this sworn notice.

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

May the civil suit route expose the truth for the Neighgbors and provide them justice..

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

cont...

CONCLUSION: Under the direction of The Kansas Public Safety Department (KU Police) Kansas University Detective Michael Riners acts of Fraud upon the court have enabled the Federal Assistant U.S. Attorney's expanded allegations of offenses lacking Federal Jurisdiction against the Plaintiff well beyond the face of the indictment, in violation of statute, misrepresented the constitution, and operated outside of legal authority. The transfer of the State investigation to a Federal Prosecution violates the Constitution and Supreme court rule. In an ongoing pattern of abuse, Conspiracy to violate due process of law has caused irreparable harm to the Plaintiffs life, reputation, liberty, business, right of due process, and operated outside of legal authority. Rights secured by the Constitution of the United States are carved in stone, and they are cumulative, they are not independent or elective unless someone knowingly chooses to forfeit one ofthe specified rights. Plaintiff has never forfeited her rights. If one of the constitutionally secured rights is bypassed, administrative offices, including the Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney, and courts of the United States lack or lose subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff hereby declares: Defendant's willful misconduct was motivated by actual malice toward the Plaintiff. that the controlling agency over Detective Mike Riner is Kansas University Public Safety Police Department, as a result of a conspiracy against rights, resulting in monetary, and punitive damages in an amount to be decided by a Jury, as well as request for compensatory general damages award to be decided by a Judge and Jury, payed to the Plaintiff Carrie Neighbors for her time, lost wages, violations of Constitutional rights, loss of liberty, defamation, false arrest, and ongoing pain and suffering, directly related to the incident beginning August 8th 2008, continuing to the present, detainment, and vindictive prosecution, continued deprivation of rights, enhancement of sentence, pending appeal, and continued stress of the pending Indictment too frivolous to be presented before a jury. Violations under color of law, and vindictive prosecution lacking Federal Authority for "Federal obstruction of Justice" in case 08-20105-cm. The Plaintiff hereby graciously extends an offer for the University Public Safety Police Department and Detective Michael Riner, in honor, to respond to complaint, notice of suit and attached affidavit within 30 days. This filing hereby constitutes a private contract set out in admiralty and Plaintiff hereby offers consideration in the form of forbearance of suit for a reasonable period of time, 30 days to respond, and offer an efficient collaborative resolution of $500,000.00 in settlement rather than continued litigation in this matter .

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

cont...

A). Falsely arrest and incarcerate the Plaintiff in a case lacking Federal Jurisdiction.

B). Force the Plaintiff into a court order to shut down her internet sales, which resulted in huge losses ofprofits for her business.

C). Plaintiff was held in Federal Prison until she agreed under duress to sign an unconstitutional gag order to relinquish her 15t Amendment right to free speech, which prevented all parties from making public comments about the case. In violation ofthe court order Detective Riner continued to blog about the Plaintiff, defaming her and her business on the internet.

D). Prosecutors revoked Plaintiffs bond on September 28th, 2010 and she was sent to Federal prison on the premise that she violated the Obstruction Case gag order when she sent a request that the Postmaster General in Washington D.C. Review the Postal Inspectors violations oflaw and jurisdictional authority.

E). The Federal District court used the unconstitutional Obstruction case for a 2 point enhancement on the Plaintiffs sentence on January 12,2011. That ruling is currently under appeal.

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

cont...

3). COMPLAINT FILED FOR PERJURY: On September 16, 2008, a complaint detailing KU Detective Mike Riners federal perjury, ongoing unconscionable vendetta constituting theft, conspiracy, cover-up, and harassment ofthe plaintiff and her business, along with copies of Mike Riners defamatory blogs under the user name "MichaeLT" on the Lawrence Journal World web site was submitted by the Plaintiff to the University of Kansas Public Safety office. Captain Schuyler Bailey received the complaint on behalf of the Department. On October 8th, 2008, in a conflict of interest, and a conspiracy of cover-up due to the fact Marietta Parker was the Prosecuting attorney in the case, The University Police Director Ralph V. Oliver responded with a letter informing the Plaintiff that he had allegedly forwarded the complaints to the U.S. Attorney Marietta Parker. No disciplinary action was taken by the University or the Prosecutor in regards to the serious allegations against Detective Riner. With no accounting for the Plaintiffs complaints and requests for review, KU Detective Riner has escaped any accountability for his violations of both State and Federal law, he has been held "above the law" by his Controlling Agency as well as the Governments Prosecuting Attorney's in this matter. He was authorized by both the court and his controlling agency to violate the Plaintiffs Civil and Constitutional Rights, continue to commit abuse ofdiscretionary authority and power, violations of oath, candor, jurisdiction, selective prosecution, perjury and due process violations under color of law. Mr. Riner was repeatedly used as a witness by the Vindictive Federal Prosecutors in the interrelated case against the Plaintiff, as a staple witness to secure a frivolous Federal Indictment for "Obstruction ofJustice, as well as the Federal Prosecutors have continued to use his perjurious testimony before the Federal District court Judge and subsequent trial Jury. Detective Riners false allegations have damaged the plaintiff and enabled the Prosecution to vindictively:

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

cont...

2). PERJURY BY KANSAS UNIVERSITY DETECTIVE MIKE RINER: On August 11 th, 2008 in Federal court for the District of Kansas, before the Honorable Judge O'Hara, K.U. Detective Mike Riner was called to the stand to testify about his state level investigation into the laptop allegedly stolen from Kansas University. He falsely testified that the plaintiff had not let him see the sellers form. However in failing to get the lie straight, in the "Application for arrest affidavit" by Postal Inspector David Nitz, it clearly states that Mr. Riner was shown the sellers form by Carrie Neighbors, bearing Robert Sample's name and information. Detective Riner also took notes from the sellers form on his yellow note pad, and used the information obtained from the form to arrest and further investigate the seller of the laptop; K.U. Employee Robert Sample. Mr. Sample stated to the police that Carrie Neighbors did not know the laptop was stolen. It was found during the investigation that Mr. Sample had stolen numerous items from his employer, and sold the items to the Jayhawk Pawn Shop. Plaintiff was selectively and discriminatory Federally prosecuted in connection to Mr. Sample's criminal acts. (No action was taken against the Pawn Shop.) Detective Riner gave perjured testimony as a Federal witness at the hearing on August 11 th, 2008 that the Plaintiff had concealed the sellers form from him, when shown the sellers form on the witness stand, he again committed perjury and claimed he had never seen it. When the defense revealed the fact that his notes would contradict his testimony he testified he had "shredded" the notes. During the subsequent hearing on August 18tb, 2008, Assistant U.S. Attorney Terra Morehead proffered to the court that Mr. Riner claimed to have found the notes he had earlier testified to shredding. At the close of the hearing the Magistrate judge ruled that no bond violations had occurred and ordered that the Plaintiff be released from Federal custody and her bond reinstated. On August 19t 2008, at the direction of Kansas University's Public Safety Police Department for Detective Michael Riner's "fraud upon the court", the Government's Attorney's moved forward and obtained a Frivolous indictment before a Federal Grand Jury against the Plaintiff for "Federal Obstruction of Justice" [US. V Carrie Neighbors 08-201 OS-cm (2008)] .

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

cont

2.) UNLAWFUL ARREST AND DETENTION OVERVIEW: Kansas University Detective Michael Riner served a search warrant on the Plaintiff's business; The Yellow House store, 1904 Massachusetts, Lawrence, Kansas and the Postal Inspector David Nitz Acting outside of his jurisdiction of authority rules and regulations served arrest warrant on the Plaintiff and her husband on Friday August 8,2008 for "Federal obstruction of Justice" in violation of Title 18, USC 1512(c)", in the University's state investigation ofa stolen laptop from the University of Kansas, sold to the Plaintiffs resale store, stolen by a University employee Robert Sample, that was being investigated by the University Police Detective Mike Riner. The investigation did not fall under federal statutes, codes, Acts, or regulations and did not involve any crime ofthe U.S. mail. "Under where the Federal Agents lack authority over jurisdiction, so to the Federal courts lack jurisdiction. " [Brooks v. Yawkey, 200, F 2d. 633]. During the execution of the search on 08-08-08 the stores surveillance video cassette was stolen by the officers from the recorder and a blank "off brand tape" was put in its place. (The blank tape has been sealed in an evidence bag for future DNA fingerprint analysis, as it is not possible that the Plaintiff's DNA will be on it, since Plaintiff was arrested prior to the search, theft and switch). The Plaintiff, prior to the purchase was not aware that the laptop in question had been stolen, no federal or state law had been trespassed upon by the Plaintiff. Cooperating with the investigation, Plaintiff turned over the laptop and showed Detective Riner the sellers form that Robert Sample had filled out. Detective Riner copied the information onto his yellow pad "field notes" then later asked for the actual form to take with him. Plaintiff informed KU Detective Riner that she allowed him to copy 3 the information from the form onto his field notes, however due to the corrupt investigation already in progress by the Lawrence Police Department, she would need her attorney present if she was to make any statements or turnover the sellers form as evidence. Plaintiff's attorney John Duma had already informed her he would not be available until Monday. Four hours later Detective Riner, several KU uniformed police officers, Lawrence Kansas Police officers that the Plaintiff had filed complaints against, including Micky Rantz and Jay Bialek and Postal Inspector David Nitz served the search warrant upon the business signed by a state Judge and Federal arrest warrant on the Plaintiff and her husband for "Federal obstruction of justice". If an agency isn't vested with authority by law, it lacks standing to bring a complaint, or make an arrest.

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

cont...

It is necessary for a department or agency ofthe Federal Government to prove standing. Ifan agency isn't vested with authority by law, it lacks standing to bring a complaint. So the court also lacks subject matter jurisdiction.

1.) LACK OF JURISDICTION Search warrant signed by a State Judge executed on August 8th, 2008, accusing the Plaintiff of "Federal Obstruction of Justice" by Detective Michael Riner with the Kansas University Police Department, and executed with assistance from Lawrence Kansas Police department and the Postal Inspector lacked jurisdictional authority over Federal Statutes, Acts, codes and regulations. "Federal Jurisdiction cannot be assumed, but must be clearly shown. [Brooks v. Yawkey, 200 F.2d. 633] Federal arrest warrant executed in the same cause on August 8th 2008 by Postal Inspector David Nitz, based upon Kansas University Detective Mike Riner's theft investigation which violated the jurisdictional authority of Post office statutes, constituted malicious conspiracy under Color ofLaw, resulting in the arrest of the plaintiff, in violation of the Plaintiff's fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment rights of due process, without an official compliant that any trespass of laws had been committed involving the U.S. Mails. The arrest and Frivolous Federal Indictment solely based upon a state investigation by the University Of Kansas police involving an alleged stolen laptop sold to the Plaintiffs business the Yellow House Store, continues to cause extreme duress and pain to Plaintiff for an ongoing period of more than 3 years.

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

CARRIE NEIGHBORS Plaintiff IN THE DISTRICT COURTOF DOUGLAS COUN1Y~~J~~~ Civil Court Department [Lawrence Kansas] CARRIE NEIGHBORS Plaintiff UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS OFFICE OF PUBLIC SAFETY KANSAS UNIVERSITY POLICE DEPARTMENT defendant MICHAEL RINER defendant COMPLAINT Demand for Jury Trial or Declaratory Judgment COMPLAINT

Jurisdiction ofthis court: At all times herein mentioned, defendant, The Corporation ofThe University ofKansas Office Of Public Safety and any controlling John Doe's presently not known by Plaintiff was the controlling agent, servant, and employee of each remaining defendant and was at all times herein mentioned acting within the course, scope, and authority of said agency service and employment, located in Douglas County, State of Kansas, duly bound under and by virtue ofthe laws ofthe State of Kansas. Comes Now Plaintiff Carrie Neighbors by special appearance, hereby brings forth notice of suit that the above entitled defendants have knowingly and willfully conspired under color of law to violate plaintiffs right of due process, acting outside of their Jurisdiction, and in an abuse of discretionary authority to Conspire to bring forth a Federal Indictment of "Federal Obstruction Of Justice" an alleged crime solely based on a State investigation involving Kansas University that should have been tried by the State where no crime would have been found to be committed, "Federal intervention depends upon proofthat there is both a present and immediate threat to a federal right and no opportunity to protect it in the state court prosecution." [Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971)] wherefore violating Plaintiff Carrie Neighbors due process of law, Constitutional and Civil rights, and denial of equal access to justice in case 08-20105-CM-JPO filed in Kansas Federal District Court. Requests by Plaintiff for review of violations of law, disciplinary action, and investigation in the violations of rules and regulations have been submitted predicated on the following issues by plaintiff to The Kansas University Public Safety office (KU Police). The Department representative Captain Schuyler Bailey received the complaint. The foregoing named defendant's in this cause have knowingly and willfully conspired to violate Carrie Neighbors Due process of law, harassed her and conspired to provide the court with noncredible perjured testimony by K.U. Detective Michael Riner in an abuse of Authoritative discretion to falsely arrest, falsely imprison, torture, discriminate, control and selectively prosecute, as well as fraudulently, and Vindictively Federally indict the plaintiff in violation of the Constitution and Jurisdictional Supreme Court Rule. In support of said allegations Plaintiff states as follows:

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

Yuuup!!..........JW....but the appellate judges said some witnesses testified they told Neighbors the items were stolen....

That needs to be the next move, to show how the witnesses lied.....aka perjury.......and bought and paid for gun carrying felons along with any "other perjury" on record thus provable....

The hard copy JW is by-lined [Staff]?

0

demonfury 2 years, 2 months ago

These two people have been targets for a long time. Are they squeeky clean citizens, probably not. But spending how many hundreds of thousands of dollars to imprison a person for 8 years seems quite excessive to me. During the whole investigation process, I recall the police and the prosecutors trying feverishly to stack the counts as high as possible in order to get a sufficient number to stick. They were profiled and targeted, plain and simple. Maybe's there's more that meets the eye here, but I just can't imagine some thug walking into the Yellow House and saying, "Yeah, I just stole this laptop, what will you give me for it?" And then Carrie openly buying it, and then offering it for sale to the entire world on Ebay. That's just brain damage. Call it what you will, but I still believe that the powers to be wanted these two out of the picture, and did whatever was necessary to make that happen.

0

ibroke 2 years, 2 months ago

I have a hard time understanding somebody taking a computer in to a store to sell it and saying they stole it ? what? duh!!!

0

somebodynew 2 years, 2 months ago

The only story here is that the Neighbors' lost again. But somehow in some peoples head that equates to them winning (must be ala Charlie Sheen style) and they try to sidetrack the real story with the fantasies in their heads.

There will be no other story for the LJW to report on. And smitty, just because something has been posted in this blog before, doesn't make it true or that it should stand today. Haven't you noticed, there is a new sheriff in town at LJW.??

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

There's a crime in the making and the JW wants to be the one that prints it. Do 'yur research first. Anxiously awaiting to see the printed version of the JW story. Happy reporting, JW.

0

jackpot 2 years, 2 months ago

Dang and I'm out of popcorn!!

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

There will be more from the Neighbors.

This has nothing to do with the sex scandal, though. roflmao

0

UNIKU 2 years, 2 months ago

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

0

MacHeath 2 years, 2 months ago

I don't think I will hold my breath for that one, smitty...

0

sunny 2 years, 2 months ago

Wow! So were the ones that submitted the stolen goods also arrested and sentenced?

0

somebodynew 2 years, 2 months ago

Ok LJWorld Just what is up with allowing Smitty to post her blatant lies and libelous comments,but recently you have been pulling posts right and left for a lot less reason???

Smitty has been allowed to post just about anything she wants and you let her. Are you scared for some reason, or is it just because she drives up the posting numbers???

0

thebcman 2 years, 2 months ago

This crapola is just annoyingly boring anymore. It's like sitting through endless reruns of CHiPs.

0

sierraclub 2 years, 2 months ago

Wow, I am so shocked. The Lawrence Liberals stood behind this couple!! Go figure....hahaha

0

smitty 2 years, 2 months ago

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

0

BlackVelvet 2 years, 2 months ago

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

0

motercyclejim 2 years, 2 months ago

2 much goverment!!! now citezens are going 2 jail because of all the goverment!! this is why everone should vote for RON PAUL!!!!

0

Jim Phillips 2 years, 2 months ago

I think orange is the universal prison jump suit color these days.

0

jhawkinsf 2 years, 2 months ago

Yellow was one of my favorite colors before this never ending story. I've changed to blue.

0

somebodynew 2 years, 2 months ago

Oh, you know that ex-Chief Olin had these judges involved in the conspiracy also.

Isn't that how the posts will go ????/

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.