just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 11 months, 3 weeks ago

That's not what she said.

• Sign in to suggest removal

cheeseburger 11 months, 3 weeks ago

Read it again - that's exactly what's being said.

• Sign in to suggest removal

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 11 months, 3 weeks ago

No, she said that if they want to see a bond issue get passed, they'll need to learn to interact with the community in an open and transparent way. That likely would include a review board, but expecting the police to act in such a way is hardly childish-- unless you think expecting accountability from public servants is childish, which apparently you do.

• Sign in to suggest removal

BlackVelvet 11 months, 3 weeks ago

The only thing I have against a Citizen Review Board is that a certain segment of our population will expect to be able to tell the Police how to do their jobs.

• Sign in to suggest removal

cheeseburger 11 months, 3 weeks ago

Yeah, I can imagine how the department would be run with Routh, Smitty, crazy larry, and some other local malcontents calling the shots.

• Sign in to suggest removal

independent_rebel 11 months, 3 weeks ago

+1

• Sign in to suggest removal

cheeseburger 11 months, 3 weeks ago

Don't put words in my mouth. Expecting accountability from public servants is fine. Saying that not instituting a review board is a 'deal killer' for the expansion is childish.

You claim I'm wrong, but your first two sentences say the same thing I was saying, only in a different way. Bottom line is unless and until she gets her review board, she is gonna fight the expansion tooth and toenail. And if you think I'm wrong about that, or believe she's above legal blackmail, you need to get your head out of the sand.

• Sign in to suggest removal

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 11 months, 3 weeks ago

"Don't put words in my mouth."

You're certainly not above putting words (and deeds) in Ms. Routh's mouth.

• Sign in to suggest removal

smitty 11 months, 3 weeks ago

And if you think I'm wrong about that, or believe she's above legal blackmail, you need to get your head out of the sand...

Routh just offered up a solution that is par with the dirty dealings that are common practice of our LE thru plea bargains . Discusting, the JW labled "activist" suggestions mirror the same lack of ethics as the LPD are wanting forgiveness for.

Here's a reminder from just one case that has yet to be responded to by the city.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF DOUGLAS COUNTY, KANSAS Civil Court Department [Lawrence Kansas] CARRIE NEIGHBORS Plaintiff

CITY OF LAWRENCE KANSAS defendant

LAWRENCE KANSAS POLICE DEPARTMENT defendant

MICKY RANTZ defendant

JOHN JAY BIALEK defendant

COMPLAINT Conspiracy against rights Evidence violations

Demand for Jury Trial or Declaratory Judgment

Fictitious name clause: The true names or capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate, or otherwise, and defendantship of defendants, Does I, __, inclusive, are unknown at the time of the filing of this complaint to plaintiff Carrie Neighbors, who therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious names or capacities and defendantship when the same have been ascertained. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based upon such infonnation and belief, alleges that each defendant, designated herein as a DOE referred to herein that proximately caused injury to plaintiff as hereinafter alleged.

Original jurisdiction is conferred upon this court in accordance to the facts herein in accordance to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1331. Plaintiff exhausted remedies under FRCP 41 (g). Defendant's are officers of the courts, and duly sworn by oath to uphold Statutes, codes, regulations, of both Federal and Kansas State Law as well as, Constitutional rights of individuals during the course of duty.

At all times herein mentioned, defendant, and each of them, was the agent, servant, and employee employed by each remaining defendant, responsible in duty to the citizen thereof and was at all times herein mentioned acting within the course, scope and authority of the City of Lawrence, State Agency, service and employment.

cont....

• Sign in to suggest removal

smitty 11 months, 3 weeks ago

cont:

JURISDICTION OF THIS COURT OVER EVIDENCE:

1.) All evidence has been held in the City of Lawrence Police Department Property room.

2.) All evidence was collected, and/or logged/signed into the property room by Lawrence Kansas Police officers. Evidence in its entirety has never been transferred into Federal holding or custody.

3.) The only chain of command in handling the evidence has been by the Lawrence Police officers. According to Federal Statute, only Federal Agents can handle Federal Evidence.

4.) The evidence in this case has never been presided over by a Federal Court. The evidence in holding has not been presented before a Judge for any evidence hearing. Motions concerning plaintiffs Fourth Amendment right to the return of her property have been denied.

5.) In accordance to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1331, applied to all actions to recover property seized in connection with criminal investigation and, thus, motion filed after criminal proceeding had ended is to be brought in district in which property had been seized.

6.) The evidence lacks any Federal chain ofcommand, and the Bates numbering system was not used to secure its authenticity or integrity as required in most Federal Cases. ! 7.) Not one piece of evidence presented in trial court seized during the issuing of both State and Federal warrants was identified through police reports as stolen, Nor was a single piece of property linked to any specific Federal Government witness.

8.) The FBI was never involved in the investigation or collection of the evidence. According to witness statements and signed affidavits, as well as a complaint submitted to

Lawrence Kansas Police Departments Internal Affairs Sgt. Dan Ward in November 2006,

by Plaintiffs Attorney Sarah Swain, the two police officers doing the investigation;

Micky Rantz and Jay Bialek, impersonated FBI agents during the investigation.

The complaint was forwarded by Sgt. Ward to the Prosecutor in Kansas District Court,

A.U.S.A. Marietta Parker, who then summoned a Kansas City FBI agent who's jurisdiction is the Western District of Missouri, with no jurisdiction over Lawrence matters;

Special Agent Walter Robert Schaefer, using the alias (Bob Shaefer) to fake an FBI investigation into the allegations.

Special Agent Walter, Robert, Bob, Schaefer/ Shaefer cleared the Police officers then later testified in Federal court he did not bring any files to substantiate his investigation.

No Disciplinary action was taken by the Superior officers of the Controlling agency (LKPD) against the officers, and the investigation and prosecution was continued.

cont...

• Sign in to suggest removal

smitty 11 months, 3 weeks ago

cont:

9.) October of 2006, Jay Bialek and Micky Rantz returned a $300.00 Sony Digital Camera to the Plaintiffs business; Yellow House Quality Appliances Inc. that was seized during the issuance of a search warrant. Officer Rantz stated under oath during a pre-trial hearing that not only was

the camera never logged into evidence, it was found in a box of files, indicating files and or documents in the case had never been properly logged into evidence either.

10.) Plaintiff identified and personally viewed her property seized from the Yellow House Store during the execution of search warrants, that should have been stored in the Lawrence Police Departments property room,

for sale at the Jayhawk Pawn Shop on 6th street.

The same week a customer; Dave Bryant entered the Yellow House and informed Plaintiff that his Glock firearm along with a special accessory clip, also being stored in the Police Property room was actually on display and being offered for sale for $600.00 at the 23rd street Pawn shop.

Plaintiff placed a call to Special Agent Scott Gentine of the Topeka FBI and handed the phone to David Bryant, who then gave Agent Gentine the serial number and other information about the firearm.

11.) In August 2006, Plaintiff and her attorney Sarah Swain went to the Lawrence Kansas Police Department and

met with uniformed officers accompanied by the City Attorney.

A number of items that had been seized from the Plaintiff was returned during that meeting.

No Federal Agents attended and the return of property, nor did it involve a Judge.

During the meeting Plaintiff requested the return of an expensive laptop that had been unlawfully seized. She was told by

the Property Room officer "the Laptop was missing". Plaintiff was never again allowed any access to her property, nor was the property in its entirety brought into the Federal Courtroom during her trial.

12.) A vague incomplete receipt for same list of the property was left at the Plaintiffs home following the searches. The list did not include a description of the property nor did it include any serial numbers of the items taken. Upon logging the evidence into the property room, the officer again failed to document property serial numbers or identification of the property.

13.) Family heirlooms, personal computers belonging to both the business and plaintiffs children, Christmas presents, personal property, property with no theft reports or victims was seized and never returned to Plaintiff, nor was a hearing to determine the evidential value of the property ever held before a Judge.

• Sign in to suggest removal

smitty 11 months, 3 weeks ago

cont:

14.) Plaintiffs conviction was obtained and upheld on Appeal based upon jury inference to witness testimony that "Plaintiff bought their stolen property and she turned a blind eye."

Witness's in exchange for their testimony were offered deals, were not charged for their own serious violent crimes including but not limited to; firearms and drug trafficking by convicted felon Witness Lewis Parsons to undercover officer Micky Rantz during the investigation, the cover-up in new information involving

James Ludwig in a murder for hire by Plaintiffs defense. The Prosecution ignored the Plaintiffs requests for review of

Postal Inspector David Nitz's violations of Law and Jurisdiction in the case. Postal Inspector David Nitz continued in the case as a witness and gave testimony that he had "guessed" the value of the stolen property to be between $600,000.00 to $700,000.00 based upon the wording of Ebay adds," with no substantiated accounting on how he derived at this total, with no accounting for profits, as required by Supreme court Law, no reference to evidence in holding, unsold items, theft reports, bank ledgers, business receipts, etc .. The ending restitution in this property case assessed by the court upon Plaintiff was in the amount of appx. $1,400.00. Connected to one witness's criminal activity.

Witness testimony was based upon checks written to them from the Business account derived from documents obtained during the search with no proper chain of custody. Not one witness in the case was linked to a single piece of evidence/property presented in the court room.

15.) Evidence logs show seized evidence returned to named individuals lacking any identification, or prior theft reports. An internet people search shows some of the listed individuals on the evidence logs do not even exist in the State of Kansas.

16.) Evidence photo's show planted evidence in the case including but not limited to; Mossberg rifle that the defendant did not own, and a bicyc Ie that was not seized from the defendant.

17.) Evidence logs were changed with whiteout, serial numbers changed and document labels were altered and photocopied over.

CONCLUSION: The conspiracy to cover-up the mishandled, lost and missing evidence has ipvolved at least Six Agency's directed by the Department of Justice U.S. Attorney's office, for the City of Lawrence Police Department, resulting in a ridiculous criminal case and conviction solely based upon inferences by non-credible witness unsupported by substantiated evidence.

• Sign in to suggest removal

smitty 11 months, 3 weeks ago

The supporting affidavite also filed in Dg Co clerke's office:

WIlNESS COERSION AND INTIMIDATION:

In exchange for testimony in Plaintiffs property case witnesses were not charged for the following criminal acts:

Tony Reyes: Grand Theft Auto, Drug Trafficking. Louis Parsons: Convicted Felon with Firearms, Gun trafficking including the sale of an AK-47 assault rifle to an undercover officer, Trafficking Narcotics.

LKPD Officers Jay Bialek and Micky Rantz: Theft and mishandling ofEvidence, Falsified Documents, Misappropriation of City funds and Evidence, impersonation of a Federal Agent, perjury.

Patrick Nieder: Convicted felon with firearms,early release from incarceration. During Mr. Nieders interrogation he states to Lawrence Police officers Bialek and Rantz that he dealt with Patricia. Officers correct him and give him Carrie Neighbors full name. He then confesses to having been in possession of firearms while a convicted felon. He is assured by the officers that's not a problem.

Since several witnesses including, but not limited to,

Nicole Beach and Mr. Nieder could not properly identify Ms. Neighbors during the initial interrogations, the Prosecution erected a large poster on an art easel at trial with various photo's including Ms. Neighbors Photograph and name on it.

James Ludwig: Cover-up of new information about a murder for hire, and his giving false information to a Grand Jury.

Postal Inspector David Nitz: Violations of Jurisdiction, Violations of search and seizure laws, failure to investigate, perjurious testimony presentment to the trial court offalse inflated unsubstantiated dollar amounts that were not in accordance to Supreme court rule that defines "proceeds" as "profits".

Stacy Barnes Catlett: Not charged under the career criminal act, promised a reduced sentence on her identity theft charges, released from prison immediately following her testimony.

• Sign in to suggest removal

smitty 11 months, 3 weeks ago

cont:

ABUSE OF DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY: HARASSMENT:

An attorney Kevin Regan law firm in the Western District of Missouri at the direction of the Assistant U.S. Attorney Marietta Parker, sent letters harassing and threatening the Neighbors, based upon the false pretense that he represented

Lawrence Kansas Police officer Michael McAtee.

Mr. Regans name is not listed as the City attorney provided to officers for representation over Police matters. Mr. Regan states in the letters that he was a personal friend of Prosecutor Marietta Parker for more than 20 years.

On October 19,2010, Ms. Neighbors communicated to her husband via a CCA recorded phone call that

Louis Marshal would be accompanying her at his hearing. On October 20, 2010,

Micky Rantz falsely arrested Louis Marshal on a falsified State Warrant, with a forged Judges signature, in Federal Judge Carlos Murguia's court room. Mr. Rantz had the Marshall's place Mr. Marshal in a Federal holding cell with Guy Neighbors. As part ofthe cover-up, the public arrest log falsely showed [400 State Avenue, Kansas city Kansas] as the location of the arrest, instead of the actual location ofthe Department of Justice, at [500 State Avenue].

In 2007, at the expense of the Lawrence Tax Payers,

Officer Micky Rantz and Jay Bialek drove a police issued Crown Vic to Denver Colorado, to interview former Yellow House employee Sandra Donner. Ms. Donner was not called as a witness at trial.

Annette Miller was a single mother with 2 children living in Denver also. Miller had filed a complaint with

Internal Affairs Sgt. Dan Ward against several Lawrence police officers including Jay Bialek for harassment tied to the Yellow House case.

On the same day as Ms. Donner's interview two men were seen in a Crown Vic with Kansas Plates in Annette Millers Apt. Parking lot.

A short man matching officer Bialek's description got out of the Crown Vic walked around her car and slashed all four of Annette Millers tires.

• Sign in to suggest removal

smitty 11 months, 3 weeks ago

cont:

Plaintiff attempted to expose the police and prosecutorial corruption through an internet Blog site. The Federal Prosecutor filed numerous bond revocation motions. One such motion included an attachment printed from the Neighbors Blog.

The Prosecutor obtained passwords via a Subpoena served upon the Neighbors internet provider Sunflower Cable.

Using the password the Prosecutor logged in and modified the Blogs. She then printed off the Blogs prior to logging out, whereby the editing icon showing the blog had been changed, as well as log-in icon were still visible in the attachment.

Quotes from these tainted blogs were then used for a sentencing enhancement by the Federal Court on Carrie Neighbors. Quotes from the tainted Blogs were again used in the Prosecution's response Brief submitted to the Appellate court.

On Aug. 17th 2010, Carrie Neighbors sent a request for consideration of any procedural challenge in regards to the

Postal Inspector David Nitz in his official capacity, and scope ofthe right to Federal review of the Postal Inspectors authorized procedures to the

Postmaster General John Potter of Washington D.C. In response to this complaint, the Federal Prosecutor requested that the court revoke Carrie Neighbors bond. Accordingly, on September 28, 2010, the Federal Judge revoked Ms. Neighbors Bond and remanded her into Federal custody.

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 of my 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 ofthe Land.) I declare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the Republic of Kansas, that the foregoing is true.

• Sign in to suggest removal

smitty 11 months, 3 weeks ago

How many other civil suits are there against the LPD and city that the public is unaware?

Absolutely no bargaining over corruption..expose it and fix it...if a facility is needed it has nothing to do with a activist version of a dirty plea bargain.

Rouse, take some more time ...you lost your moral hold with this proposal.....the grand jury petition is by far better approach and solution.

Now it must be said..the grand jury petition takes the political maneuvering away from city hall, the LPD and ill informed but well meaning activists.

• Sign in to suggest removal

RoeDapple 11 months, 3 weeks ago

"owners of a 27 yo mom and pop local business has been forced out of business"

???

Oh, you must mean the Marijuana growing buyers of stolen properties. Got it.

• Sign in to suggest removal

beatnik 11 months, 3 weeks ago

nah, i think the lpd pretty much does a good job, don't think it's possible to be perfect but i think the lpd gives it a good effort to treat the citizens fairly and still make us feel secure

• Sign in to suggest removal