Part 5: Rules and Red Tape – How to Sue a State Agency

This is Part 5 of my story, about suing the California Highway Patrol.

If you missed any of the previous posts, you can read them here: Winning a lawsuit against the CHP feels a lot like losing

Now that you have the background, this is where things get really interesting.  I say that because, this is where you start to see how the State has legal advantages that feel morally wrong. It’s where you start seeing things that make you wonder “How Can That Possibly Be Legal?” or “How Can They Get Away with that?” It’s where it becomes obvious that the same laws that govern us, do not apply to the State. Agencies like the CHP really are Above the Law. They do things that should be illegal, with the full support and backing of the State and the Courts.

I never had any idea things worked the way they do, until I stepped in it.  I really think most people don’t know. If you have been gangstalked, like us, you probably already take a dim view of your Government because they not only refused to protect you from criminals, they even refused to acknowledge the crimes against you. Such a simple thing:  Acknowledging the crimes we know they are aware of, crimes which we have all reported to authorities, most of us on multiple occasions. If they didn’t want to help, or didn’t know how to help, simple acknowledgment would still benefit us a great deal. Simple acknowledgement would make the crimes harder to commit. Simple acknowledgement would make it easier for us to get help and support outside of Government.

When you put it in context, denying the existence of the crimes that have been reported to them over and over, only makes sense if the crimes they are denying, are their own. Nothing else makes sense. That the FBI is unaware of gangstalking, is not even a possibility. We reported our situation to them 3 times. And we sure aren’t the only ones. They presumably wouldn’t cover up organized crime unless they had a very good (or bad) reason to do so. Sometimes the things left unsaid speak volumes.

Seeing how things really work and how petty, vengeful and morally corrupt the CHP behaved towards us, with the full support of the State and the Courts makes it clear:

Our Government puts itself before its citizens.

---

The reason I decided to take the CHP to court had a lot to do with the nature of INTERAGENCY INTERCEPTIONS. It feels like legal theft.

When the CHP sends you a bill, they tell you to notify them in writing if you dispute the charges. I did that. It’s silly, because it doesn’t change anything. Sure, they acknowledge that you dispute the charges. Then they send you another bill. They don’t actually reconsider the debt OR your reasons for disputing it.

When we didn’t pay the bill, the CHP swooped in and took our tax return in what is called an INTERAGENCY INTERCEPTION.  I was beyond irritated. They took the entire tax return and continued to send letters for the balance of 197.00. Basically we were expected to foot the bill for, among other things, the report the CHP falsified, and tried to hang my husband with.

The ability to Intercept a disputed amount, while legal, is pretty shady. I definitely don’t think it should be legal. It’s like some grey area of the law where my rights can be infringed upon by the State, in a way that would never be allowed in the private sector. Any State Agency can make up an invoice, send you a bill and if you don’t pay it, they can take your tax return. They don’t need any proof or court order or paper. They are above all that. Once they have your money… your options are extremely limited.

---

So You Want to Sue the State of California?.. First, Jump Through These Hoops!

You have probably felt ripped off at some time in your life. Maybe you’ve even taken a business or an individual to Small Claims Court to try to get what you felt you were owed. If you decided not to do it, it could be that you didn’t think the amount of money was worth the hassle of going through Small Claims Court. The operative word here, is HASSLE.

If you think suing a private business or individual is a hassle (and it is), you should try suing the Government in Small Claims Court. It’s good for an education and probably little else. There are very different rules.

First of all, you can’t even sue the Federal Government, unless they agree to it. That of course is done in Federal Court. It sounds absolutely ludicrous. If no one could sue you unless you agreed to it, would you ever? I imagine the Feds feel the same.

When you sue a State Agency in California, you are basically suing the State, itself. In order to sue the State, you must first File a Claim with the State of California within 1 year of any incident you are referencing in the claim. To file the claim you fill out a manageable form, to which you attach evidence supporting your claim, and a check or money order for $25.00.

The State will look it over. If they think it may have merit, they then kick it to the Agency you are making the claim against. That Agency looks it over, and make the decision to deny or affirm your claim. (Somehow, I don’t think this is a difficult decision for them.) You are notified of their decision 6 to 8 weeks later.

If your claim is denied, you have exactly six months from the date you are notified of the denial, to bring a suit against that agency in Civil Court, for the amount of the claim. If you wait more than one year to file the original claim, or more than six months, after the claim is denied, you are past the statue of limitations. Hassle… right? That’s a

lot of hoops and rolls of red tape to go through, BEFORE you even begin the Small Claims process.

---

SO… the first time I file the claim, I send in my evidence with the claim form and a check for $25.00. You can then look on line (supposedly to see the status of your claim and follow it’s progress). I made the mistake of sending the claim in via regular mail the first time around. It then disappeared into the vapor, never received and never returned. The check was likewise, never cashed. (Putting a stop payment on a $25 check is pointless, since it costs $25 to do so. ) That check is still floating out there somewhere, valid and cashable.

Smarter and wiser the second time around, I sent the claim, the evidence, and the new check for 25.00 via USPS with Delivery Confirmation/Signature Required. This time it was processed. About 2 months later I get the expected denial from the CHP saying they were entitled to Intercept my tax return, because I had not paid the invoice… blah blah blah. No, acknowledgement of my supporting evidence, which included this little gem, I found on line.

This is an excerpt from a 2006 report from the State Controllers Office discussing the findings of their California Highway Patrol audit :

The evidence supporting my claim is the same as the what we planned to argue in Small Claims Court:

My husband should NOT have to pay DUI ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION RECOVERY COSTS, because he had not been drinking prior to, or during the accident, and he was not riding the motorcycle at the time. The DMV returned his drivers license, after hearing the evidence in a Civil Hearing and he had was not convicted of a DUI or any alcohol related offense in Criminal Court.

In a recent case (after our court case), which referenced the validity of charging people who are never convicted of DUI, the courts rendered a Judicial Opinion on the matter.

Below, is my own summary of some of the points made in the OPINION, followed by a few choice comments from me:

The charge for DUI Recovery costs is not a a fine or punitive in nature.

(REALLY? Cause it sure feels exactly like you are being punished when you get a bill for several hundred dollars or when they snatch your tax return with no court order.)

Because it is not punitive, a conviction is not necessary for them to be entitled to your money. It is more like a contractual obligation

(I sure didn’t agree to this in writing, nor did I ever enter into a verbal contract with the CHP, agreeing to pay these costs.)

Parties can dispute the bill, and then they have all the (plentiful) protections and civil remedies afforded to them under the law

This is a Joke, right?

Below is the actual Text of the Opinion. (An Opinion is not LAW, even a Judicial Opinion. It is more like a Guide to help Interpret the Law.) Read it carefully. By the time I’ve finished this story. You will think as I do…. The people who wrote this opinion are, at best completely out of touch with reality. And… they may very well be……complete MORONS!

The first part explains the problem the plaintiff has with The DUI Recovery Charges (The objection is the same as my own,)

Allende also claims that collecting law enforcement costs from persons not convicted of a crime raises constitutional issues and violates the general principle that counties should bear the costs of law enforcement absent a contrary legislative directive. The purported constitutional infirmity is that DUI defendants are singled out to pay law enforcement costs without criminal procedural protections.

Here is the Legal Opinion, which assumes that the world works differently than the one we actually live in:

We do not agree that imposing response costs on DUI offenders violates constitutional principles. The case on which Allende relies, People v. Thomas (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 798, 49 Cal.Rptr.2d 856, involved the imposition of a criminal fine without finding a violation of the statute on which the fine was based (see id. at p. 804, 49 Cal.Rptr.2d 856). The expenses subject to reimbursement under section 53150 are in the nature of a civil debt collectible by a public agency in the same manner as a contract debt. (§ 53154.) The debt is not a criminal fine and does not require criminal procedural protections. (Cf. United States v. Ward (1980) 448 U.S. 242, 248, 100 S.Ct. 2636, 65 L.Ed.2d 742 [distinguishing constitutional protections associated with civil and criminal penalties].) If a person invoiced for the expense of an emergency response disputes the invoice, the public agency must commence an action to collect the invoice amount as if the debt were a contractual obligation. (See Ops. Cal. Legis. Counsel, No. 23833 (Nov. 4, 1985) Emergency Response:  Recovery of Costs, p. 1.) In such a civil proceeding, the public agency as plaintiff bears the burden of proving its entitlement to relief, and a person disputing an invoice is afforded adequate due process protections. – See more at: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1099451.html#sthash.F3bHBJeh.dpuf

NONSENSE! The State, which is the only entity getting reimbursement here, does not have to prove anything. Unlike those of us that are at the mercy of the State (us tax paying citizens) they can snap up your tax return, without any court order or legal document proving you owe. The money can be taken, based only on the word of the State Agency. There is no written contract. There is no verbal contract… if it was something you knowingly and willingly agreed to, it wouldn’t be such a BIG surprise, when you get the bill. There is no Contractual agreement that involves you. The only Contractual Agreement appears to exist between the CHP and the California State Franchise Tax Board, which has agreed to steal from you on behalf of The CHP and other California State entities that can claim you owe then money, for any reason.

There are no checks and balances here. The Interagency Interception Laws offer no protection or oversight. It is bound to be abused. It feels abusive, invasive, unethical and, in my opinion, should absolutely be Illegal.

The Opinion sites a source that they say distinguishes the difference between Civil and Criminal Penalties. This is just a couple lines after stating that these DUI REIMBURSEMENT Fees were NOT CRIMINAL FINES. I don’t see one bit of difference between a PENALTY FINE AND A CRIMINAL FINE. Elsewhere in the document they make it clear that these DUI Recovery cost fines are not PUNITIVE in nature. A penalty is punitive, Civil or Criminal!

The Opinion is flawed.

And as for the Adequate due process protections afforded me…. REALLY? What are they talking about? The protections available AFTER they take the money in an Interagency Interception? Getting your money back after being robbed doesn’t really qualify has a protection. A protection is proactive, and would keep you from being robbed in the first place. The civil remedies that are available to someone who was never convicted of the DUI are perfectly adequate for one thing: Making sure the CHP gets to keep the money and you can’t do anything about it.

They don’t have to take you to court to get the money, you have to take them to court to get your money back!

This Opinion was written by people (notice the first word: WE) who clearly have NO IDEA how the system works. I understand that. I HAD NO IDEA how the system worked until I got wrung through it. But I am not writing legal opinions on a topic I know nothing about, trying to influence what happens to other people in a court of law. They are living a fantasy if they really believe there are adequate civil remedies available if you dispute the bill. The burden of proof is never with the CHP, as the OPINION suggests. The first time we went to court the CHP was the defendant, not the plaintiff.

Now that we are in possession of a DENIED CLAIM from the State of California, we are legally allowed to sue the California Highway Patrol in Small Claims Court to try to recover our tax return.

I’ll cover Small Claims Court in the part 6.

A quick word about Gangstalking related comments…

I have quickly realized that I cannot possibly vouch for the credibility of the links you find in the comment area of my blog.   Some of the commenters have blogs with hundreds of posts, going back years.  Some mix up the topic of Gangstalking with theories I cannot possibly endorse. Some are disinformation sites.

My favorite comment was “Stop poking the bear. Instead pick up a 2’x4′ and beat the snot out of him. “ when I checked out the comment author’s blog,  I discovered three important  things:   He does indeed seem to be a real victim of Gang Stalking.  He is openly racist, and fanatical  in his hatred of Gays.

I do not want to endorse those beliefs, by directing traffic to his blog, however the fact that he is a real TI, creates a bit of a dilemma.

My personal philosophy is that everyone should be able to choose to live their life, as they wish, no matter what their race or religion, or sexual orientation,  without judgement or interference.   There are plenty of people who don’t agree.  Clearly gangstalkers  have  stripped us of the freedom to live our lives unharassed.   They are far worse than even this TI blogger, because they are acting on their hatred and ignorance, instead of merely voicing it.

This commenter has a right to voice his opinion.  I have the right to say I find it offensive.  We can all choose for ourselves what we wish to read, and what we choose to think.  But wouldn’t it be awful to not have a choice?  Wouldn’t it be awful to never even be exposed to opinions different from your own?    (We might all end up like the Stepford Gang Stalkers… conforming and going along with whatever the cult dictates, discouraged from questioning authority, and not free enough  to think for themselves.).

With that in mind, I am going  to do less moderation of the comments, which means more of them will be approved.   There are some gems mixed in with the disinformation.  I figure by reading the disinformation stuff, we get a glimpse  into the minds of  the people trying to oppress us.  You cannot write, without giving something of yourself away.   It is good to know what your enemy is thinking and saying.  Sometimes the topics avoided, are the biggest giveaway of all.

I cannot vouch for or verify the links you find in the Comment Section, that follows my posts.

If they do not  support my mission to get Credibility for targeted individuals, you can be sure I don’t endorse them and /or have not read the content.

I will at some point be posting a list e to sites and blogs I do recommend, that support my message.

thank you! SceneNSantaCruz

Part 4: CHP bills for “Accident Investigation”

ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION CHARGES:   No Conviction Required

 

We got the first demand letter from the CHP in October, 4 months after the accident and 2 months after the DMV returned my husband’s drivers license.
The Demand letter is for Accident Recovery Costs, pursuant to Government Codes 53150 and 53158. The bill is to pay the salary of the CHP for his time spent working a DUI case. 7 hours and 40 minutes were billed at the officer’s 2007 salary (with benefits) of 73.00 per hour.
It was broken down just like a normal bill:

• Incident Investigation (response time, on scene investigation, follow-up investigation report, writing):

6 Hours, 20 Minutes

• Vehicle Storage:

0 Hours, 00 Minutes

• In Custody (field sobriety test, transportation, booking, chemical tests):

 1 Hours, 20 Minute

• Traffic Control

0 Hours, 00 Minutes

• Other

0 Hours, 00 Minutes

Total: 7 Hours, 40 Minutes @ $73.00/hr = $559.67

My husband had never been arraigned or heard anything from the courts, regarding the arrest. We had no idea exactly what this meant. We naiively thought that maybe they had decided not to persue it.
The 2nd Demand letter came in November;   I wrote a letter disputing the charges, saying my husband had not been convicted of a DUI and, in fact, the DMV had returned the license the CHP had confiscated at the scene.
In the mean time my husband was arraigned in Santa Cruz Superior Court for the DUI.
I’m going to try to wrap up the court stuff quickly, because it’s not central to my fight with the CHP.
Most people probably just plead guilty, when they get a DUI.  It is hard to win if you don’t have a lawyer, and even if you do, I suspect.  Lawyers often attack the BAC evidence, sometimes bringing in experts.  It is expensive to defend against a DUI and expensive to be convicted of one.  I don’t think that many people get out of a DUI, once they’ve been arrested for it.

I want to make one thing clear here: I do not want to be on the road with drunks any more than you do. They are dangerous and scary. Strict penalties for DUI have made our roads much much safer than they used to be.  The consequences of drunk driving are so steep, that they have acted as a deterrent .  I am all for that.
I am also for something called Due Process. The CHP and the DMV are able to collect Accident Investigation Charges, and Reinstatement Fees from people who have not been convicted of Drunk Driving. Remember the Constitution? The part where it says “you are innocent, until proven guilty in a court of law”.  Is there anyone out there who thinks this should apply to most crimes, but not to DUI? REALLY?   Our constitution is here to protect us. Every exception to it hurts us, collectively.

COURT PROCEEDINGS

At his arraignment, in late December of 2007 my husband pleaded not guilty.  Before things wrapped at the end of April, 2008. there had been 3 or 4 pretrial conferences.

At the arraignment, because my husband pleaded not guilty, the Judge asked him if he was being represented by council. He told the court he would be representing himself. The Judge then called him back into chambers, where the DA was present, to discuss it.

In chambers the Judge asked if he was below the income threshold required to have the court appoint him an attorney. He replied that he made too much money to qualify, but not so much that he could afford an attorney.

My husband, clearly not understanding the rules of court,  kept trying to tell the Judge and the Prosecuting Attorney that he was innocent. He was trying to make it clear to the Judge, that the  witnesses would testify that the CHP Officer had lied on the report.

The Judge kept waving him off, saying he didn’t want to hear about that right now. My husband was indignant that the Judge didn’t want to know why he was innocent. I assume this went on for a few minutes with my husband and the Judge getting more and more frustrated with each other.

(In case you, like my husband, do not know the rules of court: The arraignment is to get the business stuff out of the way.  The Judge never hears a defense against the charges, unless the case actually gets to trial. You also would not want to be telling the DA your defense strategy at this point, and a Judge is probably expected to protect an ignorant defendant from himself, by keeping him from making a huge mistake.

Finally the Judge, fed up with my husband said, “YOU CANNOT REPRESENT YOURSELF IN MY COURT”. To this, my husband replies “ISN”T THAT MY RIGHT?” The Judge threw up his hands and said to the court administrator, “I’ve had enough of this… Give him an attorney.”

RESOLUTION OF THE LEGAL CASE

In the end, after 4 pretrial conferences, his court appointed attorney suggested he plea to a (dry) reckless driving ( A dry reckless means no alcohol or drugs were involved.) and Pay a fine of 300.00. She would represent him to have it expunged in a years time.

She had told my husband early on she could win if it went to trial. She had interviewed all the witnesses and had excellent statements from them. As time went on and meeting after meeting with the DA took place my husband says she got really busy and she seemed to just want to get it over with. He agreed to take a plea to the reckless driving (dry), at the urging of his attorney, even though he was not driving at the time of the accident. He regrets it to this day.

When they went back to court a year later the DA argued against an expungement, but the Judge, ruled in my husband’s favor saying he would allow it. The attorney then needed to file the paper with the court. I don’t know if that was done or not, but it never came off his record, something we found out just recently.

My husband regrets taking a plea, as do innocent people all over the country. There is a lot of pressure, for guilty and the innocent to take a plea.  It isn’t really a great system; but it greatly reduces the cost of prosecution and it brings in all kinds of money, in fines.

INTERCEPTION

In the meantime, my letter to the CHP disputing the Accident Investigation Charges got a response in February, 2008. In summary it said:

The Santa Cruz Area office of the CHP has concluded that your invoice is appropriate.
Below is a brief explanation as to why you are liable and responsible to reimburse the State of California for these Charges under Government Code Sections 53150 and 53158.
Government Code Sections 53150 through 53158 authorizes the California Highway Patrol, under the DUI Cost Recovery Program to seek reimbursement for the full costs incurred in responding to alcohol or drug related traffic incidents. The Legislature has set aside driving under the influence as a behavior which taxpayers should not have to subsidize. These charges are not based on a conviction of driving under the influence. Reimbursement is based on Government code Section 53150 which says in part:

Any person who is under the influence of an alcoholic beverage or any drug… whose negligent operation of a motor vehicle caused by that influence proximately causes any incident resulting in an appropriate emergency response,…. is liable for the expense of an emergency response by a public agency to the incident.

We received a 2nd demand letter for $559.67 in February and a FINAL NOTICE at the beginning of March. The letter said if they had not received payment within 30 days they would be turning the invoice over to a collection agency and The Franchise Tax Board for offset.
In May they intercepted our tax return, taking the entire amount of 361.95, which was not enough to cover the full amount of the bill. It was, however enough to infuriate me that they could do this without a court order or a conviction for an alcohol related offense.  I wasn’t even there, but the tax return was half mine.

I decided to sue the CHP in small claims court to get our money back.

Silly me, I thought I had a right to do that.
I was about to learn that exercising your constitutional right, might not be a good idea. In fact, it could be a very bad idea.

If I thought it was unfair to intercept a tax return without a court order, I was about to learn that the big boys don’t have to play fair.  The laws that govern the rest of us, don’t apply. And as for the CHP….. you can check that box N/A.
Stay tuned… You now have all the background information. Everything to come, is the reason I tell the story in the first place.

NOTE TO READERS

I’ve had no feedback, for the last 4 posts. The link to my site, when I copy it online, looks like gibberish, instead of what it should be.    https://justifiablydisturbed.wordpress.com/

Email was changed to go to a mailbox I don’t own. Due to my subject matter, I am understandably a bit uneasy.  So feedback, please.

Thank you,
SceneNSantaCruz

Part 3: DMV Hearing Officer Questions the World’s Worst Witness

The DMV Hearing

The hearing took place at our local DMV office six weeks after the accident .  I have paraphrased all witness testimony and am recounting it as I remember it.  I am also trying to set the tone of the witnesses, to give you a feel for how everything played out.

The hearing officer, who, I think, meets mostly with lawyers, representing clients, was nice enough, patient and extremely serious. He may have been a little jaded, but considering he probably gets lied to all the time, he hid it pretty well.

The evidence, as written in the report was damning. The blood alcohol tests measured .012 (the 2 breathalyzer tests at the scene) and the blood taken at the hospital tested at .014. To refute the report, we had to convince the hearing officer that there were inconsistencies, and mistakes. The biggest hurdle was to convince him that the officer had lied about witness testimony on the report.

I had written everything out ahead of time and tried to keep my testimony relevant and on point.

The DMV, IS ONLY interested in the answers to three questions.  To get them to set aside the suspension you have to show that one of the following things did not happen:

1. Did the peace officer have reasonable cause to believe you were driving a motor vehicle in violation of CVC §§23152, 23153, or 23154?
2. Were you lawfully detained while on DUI probation or lawfully arrested?
3. Were you driving a motor vehicle when you had 0.08% BAC or more while driving a noncommercial vehicle?

 

1. The first question wasn’t one I really felt we could refute. My husband reeked of alcohol, there had been an accident and there was a motorcycle involved. That seems like reasonable cause to assume that the answer to question number 1 is yes. My assumption is that reasonable cause equates with probable cause, but that may not be accurate.  He had probable cause to investigate.  Did he have reasonable cause after investigating to believe it… maybe.  I do think that if he was sure after the investigation, that my husband had been riding, while under the influence… he would not have had to stack the deck in his favor, by changing witness testimony on the written report.

---

 

2. Was my husband lawfully arrested?  This second question, I could work with.  My husband and I both testified that the first clue we had, that he had, in fact been arrested, was 5 days later, when our mail box was flooded with offers to represent him from DUI attorneys.  Can a person be lawfully arrested and not know it? I wouldn’t think so.

The contents of the report were vague, at best, with regards to the Miranda Warning.

The report states that the time of the incident as 19:20, the CHP estimates ETA at 19:25, and the time of arrest is listed as 19:40. The report states my husband was read his rights at 20:35.  According to my husband and witnesses at the scene, the CHP was still asking questions and hammering my husband as he was  loaded into the ambulance.  The CHP then followed the ambulance to the hospital, 5 to 7 minutes, where he accompanied my husband, as he was treated for his injuries.  He was relentless.   At any time (except for the 5-7 minute transport time) he could have issued a Miranda Warning. My husband says the Miranda Warning never happened at all.

It was news to me, to discover that the Officer is not required to issue a Miranda Warning, but if he does not, he must stop all questioning.  Since the questioning never stopped, legally my husband should have been Mirandized, at the time he was placed under arrest.  Normally, a DMV Hearing Officer would not have any reason to doubt the CHP, if he reported that he had Mirandized the suspect.  But, there were some problems with the actual report.  There is a 55 minute lag time between the arrest and the Miranda, during which questioning continued.

In the report there are questions about the Miranda Warning.
With these rights in mind, do you wish to talk to us? the officer did not check the yes or the no box. Instead he wrote the shorthand for Not Applicable.

In the Waiver Statement box the Officer wrote “continued talking”.  That hardly constitutes a waiver or indicates suspect clearly understands he has a choice here. The Miranda Warning seems to have been white washed, if it happened at all. The answers on the report seem evasive. Either the suspect waives his rights or he doesn’t. N/A as an answer takes away the protection of the Miranda Warning. There should never be any question in the mind of a suspect, whether he has ,or has not, waived his rights. No peace officer should be allowed to obscure the Miranda Warning, by changing the wording, breaking it up into parts, or hiding it in the guise of an ongoing conversation. My husband didn’t know he had been arrested, because this Officer, did not make it clear. He obscured it, to increase his chances of getting an incriminating statement, post arrest. Not Right. Not Legal.

Next there is the issue of the Blood taken at the hospital to determine, BAC.   When the nurse took blood, my husband thought it was necessary for the treatment of the injury. He thought he had already done the Breathalyzer, at the scene. (Neither of us knew that the breathalyzer given at the scene is only preliminary, and another BAC test is always done post arrest. ) As I understand it, you have a choice of Breathalyzer or Blood.  Implied consent means that you are allowing them to test you;  it doesn’t mean that you’ve given up the choice of which type of test you agree to take.  The BAC test of Urine is no longer a choice, unless Blood or Breathalyzer  testing is unavailable. I don’t know if the Urine test was still an option in 2007.  I haven’t done the research.

As my husband put it to the DMV Hearing Officer: “There really was a three-foot puddle of blood. I had lost enough blood that day.  If given a choice, I would have opted for a Breathalyzer test.” Again, the reason the blood was being drawn, was obscured. That explains why he wasn’t given a choice. It would have given him a pretty solid clue that he was under arrest, something the Officer did not want him to realize.

You may be thinking, these are technicalities. Getting off on a technicality, doesn’t mean you didn’t commit the crime.
At this point in time, I don’t think anything we had said or done was going to impact the decision of the Hearing Officer.

---

 

3. The third question is the biggie. Was he riding the motorcycle with a blood alcohol of .08 or higher?

I never told the CHP Officer my husband was drinking prior to the accident. I told him he wasn’t. The report states that I had told him he had drunk beer and a Margarita, before the accident. That was a flat-out lie. I was the one who drank the Margaritas, and that was after he failed to return home and had already broken his leg (which I had been unaware of.) There was no beer mentioned at all.

The three of us testified that the bike was broken down. To get it home, my husband needed a truck. His brother had been called to transport the bike, before the accident. I had also received a call prior to the accident notifying me the motorcycle wouldn’t start. (A point that could have been verified with phone records).  My husband testified that he repeatedly asked the officer to touch the engine, so he would realize it was cool and had not been running.  He tried to talk the officer into trying to get the bike started, so he would realize it wouldn’t start. Neither of those things happened.

After our testimony, we are still nowhere with the Hearing Officer.  But we still have the witnesses, supposedly standing by waiting for the call. (Or so they had promised me.)

The officer had a statement on the report saying a bartender gave my husband a shot of Bacardi after he saw the extent of the injury.   There is the proof that he drank alcohol post accident.

Two of the three witnesses, listed on the CHP report did not answer their phones, even though the hearing officer dialed them several times.

When the Hearing Officer got ahold of the bartender he said that he had not seen the accident (that was in the report). He heard is buddy yelling “Oh my God!” and went to investigate. He said he was horrified at the amount of blood and at being able to see the bone.

He said “If that was my leg, I’d beg someone to knock me out until they fixed it.”

Did you bring the injured man a shot of rum?

“Not a shot, a bucket, man and not Just Rum, this was the strong stuff, 151, Dude. I thought
it  would make him feel better. He downed it,  so I brought him another one.”

What is a “bucket” ?

“It’s a glass that holds three shots, instead of one”

(We were hearing about the bucket and the 151 for the first time)

Did you tell this to the officer?

“I told him the same thing, I’m telling you, I gave the guy 2 full buckets of 151 cause his leg was so bad. I thought it might make him not think about it. I told him the guy just downed a bunch of booze and he sure didn’t seem very drunk. Maybe he was in shock or something, …didn’t seem like the alcohol was really working. He wasn’t freaking out though. I know I would have been. Maybe it was working, keeping him calm, ya know… or maybe he’s one of those dudes, that’s just that way. It was gross, man. I don’t even like to think about it.”

This is helpful, but, it didn’t tip the scales in our favor. The Officer hadn’t out and out lied. He had only minimized the amount and type of alcohol consumed, post accident.

For half an hour the Hearing officer had been periodically dialing the other two witnesses. They weren’t answering and he was wrapping things up, ready to dismiss us. I pleaded with him to just try the numbers one more time. This time the guy, who am pretty darn sure is the Worst Witness in the World, answers his phone.

It is embarrassing!  The hearing officer kept rolling his eyes during the conversation.  We all listened on the speaker phone, mortified. This witness was sworn in and he sounded like a sitcom version of a stoned, dumb, surfer duuuuuuude…….

He said he saw the bartender (his cousin) bring the shots, and the injured guy drink ’em down.   He was a little confused on some of the details and not always making a lot of sense.

Finally, the Hearing Officer asked him if they had been drinking that day.

“Oh man, we were wasted! It was the Fourth of July. We were partying.”

Weren’t you working in the kitchen at the time?

“Yeah, but everybody’s cool. I work with my cousins. We were doing the boss a favor, man. We weren’t gonna be open that day. We were doing her a big favor.”

When did you start drinking?

“Oh man early…. probably around 6:00”
 

AM?????

“Yeah, It was the 4th of July, Man. ‘ Course.”

So you were drunk at the time of the accident?

“I already told you man, we were wasted!”

(by this time the Hearing officer is kind of smiling and shaking his head, like he can’t believe this guy was the best the CHP could come up with for a witnesses (or that we could be foolish enough to think he could help our case)  We are trying to figure out how to distance ourselves from this guy, who can’t possibly do us any good.

Had you consumed any drugs, that day…. or was it just the alcohol?

“Oh sure, we smoked some bowls, the good kind. It was the 4th of July, man, I told you… we were partying.”

Have you consumed any alcohol today?

“No man, I just got home from school.”

Have you consumed any drugs today?

“No man, Well… I just smoked a bowl, before you called… but nothing else… if that counts. But, I’m good.”

By this time, the hearing officer, still shaking his head, has a big ‘ol grin on his face. He looks like he might start laughing. We are still squirming.

The CHP Officer wrote on the report that you saw the defendant, riding the bike in the parking lot, prior to the accident, hot- rodding and popping wheelies.  Is this what you told…..

The stoner witness doesn’t even let him finish. He cuts him off sounding very indignant.

“I KNOW MAN! I HEARD THAT! I COULDN’T BELIEVE THAT. It really kinda pissed me off, cause I never said nothin’ like that. What ‘s he doing that for…? That just AINT RIGHT.”

That was it. The guy who had been honest about drinking and drugging, was telling the truth. He sounded Indignant. He really was pissed about the contents of the report. It really bothered him.  You just couldn’t doubt his genuine reaction.

You just knew the guy was telling the truth. We all knew it. This guy, a little too honest for his own good, was deeply offended to have been misrepresented by the Highway Patrol, in the accident report.  The Hearing Officer looked up at us and I could see it in his face. He knew, this was the truth.  He got lied to all the time.  But this guy was absolutely telling the truth.

This witness, that no one would ever willingly pick to bolster their case, if they had a choice, had just turned the tables in our favor.

It really did feel like a Perry Mason Moment.  Up to that point, I don’t think the hearing was going our way.

There was a few more questions, where it was established that the witness never saw my husband riding the bike, never heard the engine, and had noticed him working on it, before the accident.

When we left the hearing, we thanked the officer, who told us we would get his decision in the mail within 10 days.

I had to ask, “so what do you think?

All he said was:

“Well, the witnesses do tend to bring into question, the Officers version of events”

10 days later, My husbands Drivers License was returned in the Mail with the Set Aside Order.

Part Two: Injury, DMV, DL, DUI and CHP Report

THE INJURY

 

If you read Part 1: The Accident, you are probably wondering how my husband ended up at home instead of hospitalized or on the night of the accident  . I will try to be brief about the medical stuff, It isn’t central to the story and  my message.

 

The injury was severe: a compound fracture with very jagged edges.  They put a temporary cast on it (I guess to immobilize ), the night of the accident.  They then sent my husband home, with a prescription for painkillers and instructions to make an appointment to see his Orthopedic Specialist, and have it looked at.   We have good Insurance. What we don’t have is an Orthopedic Specialist on speed dial.  We called everyone who practices locally. . The soonest any one of them would see him, even after we explained the circumstances, was 10 days away.

This led to an agonizing weekend filled with excruciating pain for my husband (because of the jagged bone ends grinding together, we later learned.) Over this long weekend we made two more trips to Emergency, where they administered Morphine.  I spent a good part of the weekend covering my ears, because my husband was literally screaming in pai.n and there was nothing I could do for him.

The 3rd visit to emergency, a doctor gave my husband a his  business card.  Instead of a 4th visit to the ER, my husband  called the number on the card at 4:00 AM Monday Morning. Within minutes there was a call back from the Orthopedic Surgeon. He told my husband to be at the Surgery Center in 3 hours.  This was a huge relief to us.

Because it had been more than 24 hours since the injury, the leg was put into a contraption to stabilize it

Fixation Device

The fixation device (similar to the one in the picture) is screwed into the bone, above and below the injury, to keep it from moving or rotating.

This was a temporary measure, until the swelling went down and the break could be properly set.

The 2nd Surgery (involving metal plates and many. many more screws) was scheduled for a month down the road.
Prompt treatment of the injury would have eliminated the need for a two costly surgeries, when one would have sufficed.

Arrest?  What Arrest?

Obviously, we were both preoccupied with my husband’s injury. What neither of us realized, was that my husband had actually been arrested for DUI. The last my husband saw of the CHP officer at the hospital, he was still trying to get him to confess to something he swore he hadn’t done.

The first hint we had of the arrest,  began arriving in the mail, in a flood of very informative literature from DUI attorneys. Drumming up business with a little post-holdiday ambulance chasing.

My husband did realized his Drivers License was missing from the wallet he had handed  over to the CHP at the scene, because he was asked for it in one  ER visits.

Neither of us had ever had any experience with DUI procedures, but we were about to get an education

In California, when you are arrested for DUI, typically you are taken to jail and your vehicle is impounded. There isn’t much room for doubt.

My husband really thought the cop had interviewd the witnessess, and realized he was telling the truth and had decided not to arrest him.

A couple days after the DUI brochures, we received a notice Order of Suspension/Revocation from the DMV in the mail , notifying us we had 10 days to contact them, if we wanted a civil hearing (to review the matter.)
The literature from the various attorneys explains that you are not just facing criminal charges for DUI, but that forfeiture of your DL is automatic and, and considered a civil matter, unrelated to any criminal charges by the DA. The attorneys claim that only 5% of all DMV civil hearings, result in a Set Aside (return of license and driving privileges) for those defendants not represented by a Lawyer.  Because they are trying to drum up business, this is probably not accurate.

I did read somewhere that in 2007 only 9% of all DMV hearings were decided in favor of the defendant. I have no idea what the real stats are, but suffice it to say that very few cases, represented by lawyer or not, result in the defendant walking away with their driving privileges intact.

When you are notified that you have 10 days to schedule the hearing, you have to act fast. We could not afford a lawyer, but my husband insisted we fight this because he was innocent. Because of my husband’s severe injury, most of the planning and preparation for the administrative DMV hearing, was left up to me.

First thing to do when you are going into battle: learn the rules of engagement.

---

 

The following info comes from the Department of Motor Vehicles website:

WHAT HAPPENS TO MY DRIVER LICENSE?
The officer will give you an Order of Suspension/ Revocation. If you have a valid California driver license, the officer will take your driver license and send it to the DMV (to be destroyed). The Order of Suspension/Revocation includes a temporary driver license valid for 30 days from the issue date

(usually the date of your arrest). At the end of the 30 days, the suspension/ revocation action goes into effect. If the officer does not serve you with an Order of Suspension/ Revocation, the DMV will mail you one.

The temporary driver license does not allow you to drive if there is another DMV or court-imposed driver license action in effect.

The APS suspension or revocation is independent of any jail, fine, or other criminal penalty imposed in court if you were convicted of a DUI offense.

WHAT DOES DMV DO?
DMV automatically conducts an administrative review which may include an examination of the officer’s sworn report and any accompanying documents, such as an arrest or traffic collision report.

If the review shows there is no basis for the APS suspension/revocation, it will be set aside. DMV will notify you in writing only if the suspension/revocation is set aside.

WHAT CAN I DO ABOUT THE SUSPENSION/REVOCATION?
You have 10 days from the receipt of the Order of Suspension/Revocation to request a hearing to show that the APS suspension/revocation is not justified. DMV will conduct a telephone hearing unless you request an in-person hearing. The APS suspension/revocation will not be stayed (delayed) unless:

You request a hearing within 10 days from the issue date of the order and the DMV cannot provide a hearing before the effective date of the suspension/ revocation.
Before the hearing, and upon request, you may see and/ or obtain copies of DMV’s evidence. If you want copies released to someone else, such as an attorney, you must give the person signed permission. You have the right to have a sign or language interpreter present at your hearing. Immediately notify DMV if you require an interpreter.
You may represent yourself or at your own expense, an attorney or another person may represent you at the hearing. You may present oral testimony and other evidence. Your testimony will be taken under oath or affirmation and the hearing will be recorded.

DMV ordinarily does not arrange to have the peace officer testify. However, DMV reserves the right to call the officer if his/her testimony is needed. You may subpoena the officer or any other witness(es) you feel may help your case and have relevant testimony or evidence to present. You are responsible for paying the required fees and for making sure your witness(es) receives the subpoena.

---

 

We scheduled an  in-person hearing was scheduled for the end of August. My husband was issued a temporary DL, good until the hearing officer has decided the case, (approximately 10 days, post hearing.)  The temporary DL, was a moot point for us, as my husband was still a  months away from being able to drive.
In preparation for the hearing, we immediately requested the copies of the DMV evidence. This basically consisted of the CHP Report filed by the officer who responded to the scene and test results of the breathalyzer.

The DMV, is  ONLY  interested in the  the answers to three questions. To get them to set aside the suspension you have to show that one of the following did not happen:

1. Did the peace officer have reasonable cause to believe you were driving a motor vehicle in violation of CVC §§23152, 23153, or 23154?
2. Were you lawfully detained while on DUI probation or lawfully arrested?
3. Were you driving a motor vehicle when you had 0.08% BC or more while driving a noncommercial vehicle?

 

 

THE EVIDENCE AND THE CHP REPORT

The evidence against my husband wasthe CHP report and the results of the Blood Alcohol Tests (BAC).The CHP officer’s report, stated as fact, exactly what he thought happened. It had 4 witnesses, including myself.

The officer wrote that I told him my husband and I were drinking Margaritas in our hot tub, prior to the accident.  I knew it wasn’t true and that I never told him that. It was something he had made up, based on what I did tell him. It is legal for him to tell a lie to my husband to extract a conviction. It is not legal for him to use that lie in his report. It became evident at that point, that the report was not truthful.
The report stated that, according to the three witnesses, my husband was popping wheelies, and racing around the parking lot, showing off, when he lost control of his motorcycle. (My husband would have to be a lot drunker and stupider than he is to pull a stunt like that on 4th of July, down the street from a CHP office, knowing he would be stopped at checkpoint to gain access to our street, on his way home.—that would be akin to ASKING to be arrested for drunk driving.
According to the report,  two of the three witnesses reported they had observed this out of control display of showmanship just prior to the accident. The witnesses all worked at the hotel. Two of them had been on a break at the time of the accident. One of them was the hotel BARTENDER. And now you know where the alcohol came from.
We contacted each of the witnesses. The bartender said he told the officer he brought shots out to my husband two times. The other two witnesses both were surprised to hear the officer had said they saw my husband riding the motorcycle. They had noticed him working on the bike, but neither one of them had told the officer he was riding it, much less showing off and popping wheelies. They agreed to testify to this on our behalf at the DMV hearing. They promised to make themselves available to the hearing officer by phone, as did the Bartender.
It is important to note that we did not pick these witnesses. They are not our friends of ours. We didn’t even know their names until we saw the report.  We are 25 years older than them and to this day, I’ve never met them. My husband met them briefly, in the 5 minutes after the accident happened– never before, never since.   These witnesses were listed on the CHP report as witnesses. supporting the CHP version of events.

The report stated that bartender witnesses reported that he had given a shot of Bacardi after he called 911. That isn’t exactly accurate, which I’ll get into on the next post.
There are other inconsistencies on the report.

• The officer states the alcohol was given to my husband 10 minutes before his arrival, (but after the accident happened.)  The eta on the report is 5 minutes after the 911 call.

• The supplemental report is dated July 4, 2007.  The date of the report and the date of the accident are listed in separate boxes, next to each other.    The report could not have been created on the 4th, since key witnesses were not interviewed until the 5th.  Witnesses were interviewed the following day, per the written report.

• The report states the bike was lying next to my husband in one place on the report and that it had been moved by witnesses prior to his arrival,  elsewhere in the report.

• The report states that the CHP Officer observed my husband, who had an “unsteady gait” (this was one of the things that led him to conclude my husband had been drinking. )This is clearly wrong. He couldn’t have observed a gait (unsteady or otherwise), due to the injury.

• The report states that the time of the incident as 19:20 and the time of arrest is listed as 19:40. The report states my husband was read his rights at 20:35. My husband says he never even knew he had been arrested or was in custody,  and that he was never read his rights.

 

• The report has 3 boxes regarding the Admonition of Rights:

1.    Do you understand these rights? box checked “Yes
2.   “With these rights in mind, do you wish to talk to us? no check in either yes or no      boxinstead, has a hand written N/A
3.     Waiver Statement box has the words “continued talking” written in it

These might seem petty, but CHP Officers are held to certain standards and their reports are expected to be accurate. That’s one way to protect the rights of citizens from overzealous law enforcement.
Unfortunately this report went far beyond having a few inconsistencies and typos. Parts of it were fabricated, including my testimony and the testimony of other witnesses.

The report also falsely states that while still at the scene of the accident:

• My husband admitted drinking alcohol prior to the accident (If he had, the officer wouldn’t have continued to hammer him for the next two hours, to get him to confess to it.)
• My husband admitted that he was riding the motorcycle at the time of the accident (a pretty neat trick for a motorcycle that he’d arranged transport for, because it wouldn’t start)

At the DMV hearing, we address each  questions the DMV is interested in. They are the only thing that the DMV considers relevant, and the only things considered  grounds for a Set Aside of the DL Revocation

.
I know I promised you a “Perry Mason” moment. I will deliver on that promise in the next post, where I cover the actual DMV Hearing

Part One: The Accident

Part 1: The Accident

One Break Down, One Bad Break,  One Mysterious Man bearing Booze, Two  Annoyed Paramedics,   One Eager CHP  Officer,  One  Good Break

July 4, 2007, County of Santa Cruz, CA

For years our neighborhood has had a reputation as the place to go berserk on the 4th of July. The fireworks (many of them, small sticks of dynamite) begin going off in earnest, a week in advance.  The holiday  itself, starts out fun, but eventually it starts to feel like a war zone. overlapping rockets, and explosions, coming from all directions, with no quiet time in between—and it literally goes on for hours and hours.  Every animal goes to ground, or runs terrified into the night, often to be mowed down by some inebriated (or not) party goer.  The house continues to shake and the windows continue to rattle for days after the big party has ended.  The neighborhood is tired of it. The police are tired of it.

The streets fill with people, and it is a complete madhouse. Every one should experience it at least once. It kind of reminds me of the spring break in Florida or boat parties that go on at the Delta (Sacramento River) where Jack Daniels (or a similar vendor) sets up a booth at one of the small islands. House boats and ski boats come from everywhere, lining the docks and dropping anchor. There is Loud Music, Wet T-Shirt Contests, Bawdy Games and Chugging Contests.

People have an absolute blast: bathing suits come off’; boat keys get lost; there’s always a few fights; inappropriate PDAs; people puke; someone always gets hurt; someone always leaves in handcuffs.

Everywhere you look there is something going on, and someone acting like an idiot. It’s crazy fun– but you wouldn’t want the party at your house. When you’ve had enough, you want to go home. It’s stops being fun, when 300 guests have over-stayed  their welcome. That is our neighborhood on the 4th of July.

The Santa Cruz Police Department has tried to contain it. They get a bit more restrictive each subsequent year, in their efforts to lock it down. That’s a tall order. This year they added big fines for anyone found in possession of fireworks (Safe and Sane, included). It seemed to be getting  better in recent years, until this year, when all hell broke loose right around the corner from us. A large tree and three cars went up in flames, neighboring houses  were evacuated.   And without missing a beat, the explosions continued, unabated, as throngs of people milled about, continuing to light fireworks in the street, in plain view of firefighters and police working the scene. Mayhem all around — again fairly normal for the 4th of July in our neighborhood.

In 2007 the police had the beach access blocked early in the day, with a rented chain link fence that ran from south of the San Lorenzo River to the Santa Cruz, Yacht harbor. Access to the beach was controlled  at several gates.  There, the police were diligently checking ice chests for alcohol, and bags, blankets, and portable BBQ’s for fireworks. (Smart and determined types bury the goodies in the sand ahead of time, for later retrieval.). Road access to the neighborhood is blocked off later in the day, but well before dark, via the feeder streets. Once the streets are blocked, you can only enter the neighborhood by car, if you are a resident. You have to show your driver’s license and answer a couple of questions from an officer at the check point to prove it. By 2007, we had lived here for years, and like other residents, were well aware of the road blocks.

If you go to a party somewhere else, and want to come home after, you better be sober or have a designated driver. If you knew you had to go through a checkpoint on the way home, would you risk a drunk driving arrest by drinking alcohol –in a state where one drink can put you over the limit, and a first offence costs an estimated $10,000?.—NO!.. well, neither would we.

My husband had to work the on the holiday in 2007. He had spent most of his spare time, in the week leading up to it, repairing his motorcycle. It had been down for a while, waiting for parts to arrive. He had just gotten everything back together fairly late on the evening of the 3rd.

When he got off work it was the first opportunity he had to take it out for a spin and see how it ran with the new parts. He changed his work clothes and left the house, promising me he would try to be back, before they blocked off the streets, to start the BBQ. I told him If he took too long, I was going to blend and drink the first batch of Margaritas without him.

He called an hour or so later to tell me the motorcycle had broken down on him. He was in a parking lot behind the Laundromat, in Aptos (a nearby town). He was waiting for his brother, to come with the truck. so he could haul the bike home. His brother, wasn’t happy about it, he was coming but  he said the soonest he could be there would be half an hour, if the traffic wasn’t too bad. (Summer beach traffic is bad enough but weekends and holidays can be a nightmare.)

My husband really doesn’t like asking for favors. He would not have called his brother (or anyone else) if he thought there was any chance of getting the bike started. But he’s a mechanic, he had a time to kill, while waiting, and this bike was his baby, so he continued to make adjustments and try to get it running, or at least figure out what the problem was.

The parking lot he was in is big and poorly maintained. It has broken asphalt and pot holes, truckloads of varying sizes of rock and gravel have been deposited on it over the years to make it passable. It is sparsely populated by a few businesses, that don’t use it for customer parking, because they back up to it. The parking lot has one place where there is a very short and slight incline.

My husband tinkered with the motorcycle, making several attempts to start it. After making an adjustment here or there, he would try to start it. He would run along side the bike, pushing it to try to get some speed going, until he reached the incline. At that point he would jump on the bike, pop the clutch, hoping it would kick in. He had already done this twice. without success.

This third time he tried it, approaching the incline, he tripped, slipping on the gravel, legs akimbo, he lost one the handlebars, the wheel turned in.  and the bike came down on him, gouging into his lower leg and snapping his tibia (shin bone.) near the ankle. It was a compound fracture, very jagged, leaving several bone fragments loose in the surrounding tissue

Though most of the near by businesses were closed for the holiday, the accident was witnessed by a couple of guys who were smoking outside the kitchen entrance to an old hotel.   Blood began spurting out of the wound immediately, but the smokers were too far away to see it. When my husband didn’t get up, one of the two guys, who been smoking came over to investigate. When the guy saw the hole in his leg and how much blood there was, he said  “oh my God, stay right there, I’ll get you an ambulance”.    My husband, not realizing how bad he was hurt, managed to sit up and , said “its alright, my brothers on his way”.  The guy said “Dude, you’re hurt bad.  I’m going to call an ambulance. — do you want me to bring you a towel and some ice?  How about something to drink?  You want me to bring you a shot of something?

And then my husband does something really stupid.. He says “yeah, sure.” That’s the turning point. This is where the CHP’s version of events and my husband’s part ways.

At this point I am sure you think it is pretty odd that a complete stranger would run to call 911 and then return with a glass of unknown liquor to give to an injured man, while he waits for an ambulance. Not only that, He did it twice.

My husband, injured or not was an idiot for accepting the booze. I do think he would have drank water, orange juice, coke or beer, if it had been handed to him. He  may even have been in shock.

If you are skeptical, that this is how it went down… you will be able to imagine how the CHP Officer, who arrived on the scene shortly after, felt about it. He didn’t believe it for a minute. He was an eager investigator and he just knew my husband was a lying, drunk motorcyclist. Perfectly understandable. It’s a fishy story… but I’ve gone into great detail laying the foundation out for you. If you don’t believe it now, you will by the end of an upcoming post, after I reiterate the testimony of the subpoenaed witnesses. It is almost like a “Perry Mason Moment”, only a lot funnier.

The officer had every right to doubt the story. Sounds pretty unlikely, right? It sounded strange even to me. Sure, some complete stranger appears out of nowhere and gives you shots right before the ambulance gets there?  You don’t know this guy? Are you sure? Why would he do that? He just happened to be carrying a bottle of hard liquor on him? 

It sounded unlikely to me, and I knew things the officer didn’t. I knew my husband worked all day, that he came home,  changed clothes and left, without having a drink. I knew he certainly sounded sober (and disappointed) an hour later when he called me about broken down bike.  I knew he was in the parking lot because he waiting to get his bike transported home.  He could not have been driving  (coasting maybe….) when  the  accident happened..  Still, the man with the booze was a pretty bizarre twist. (And you don’t know the half of it, yet and neither did we until a couple of months later).

Unaware of the accident, I was impatiantly waiting at home.

Meanwhile… back in the parking lot… it is chaotic. The paramedics arrive just before the CHP (5 minute ETA on the report). They are just beginning the initial assessment trying to get baseline readings and determine the extent of the injury. The (eager) CHP officer interrupts them several times, sticking his breathalyzer between them and their patient, cutting off their questions, with ones of his own,  trying to conduct a modified field sobriety test. The paramedics repeatedly ask the officer to step aside and let them do their job. The Officer thinks his business is more important than theirs and keeps getting in the way. My husband, probably reeking of booze, keeps insisting to the officer that he fell while pushing the bike. The officer keeps saying “come on, you can tell me the truth, we both know you were riding it”. My husband wants to show him that the bike won’t start, but he is incapable of doing so, and the officer isn’t interested anyway. He really isn’t interested in anything but an admission of guilt. After the second breathalyzer test, one of the Paramedics finally gets fed up and snaps at the officer to GET OUT OF THE Way!

It is, into this chaotic scene, that my husband’s brother pulls up in his truck. He is stunned to see his brother on a stretcher, about to be loaded into the ambulance.   And off to the side, mostly forgotten, the broken. troublesome, killer bike (with nothing but a scuff mark on it, ) is about to be rewarded for its treachery, with a vacation from the open road,  that will last for many months, while my husband heals from 2 surgeries and learns to live with one leg  shorter than the other.

It is here that we get our first break, (2nd, if you include the leg;)  Instead of being impounded, (as it surely would have been) the officer releases the ungrateful  bike to my brother-in-law. It rides home, in the back of his truck, just as it would have, had the accident never happened.

The timely arrival of my brother-in law, a few minutes after the ambulance and CHP officer arrived on scene, never would have happened if he had gotten the call to pick up the bike after the accident (when 911 was called). Holiday beach traffic was worse than expected and it took him longer than half and hour to get to Aptos.. (That’s why my husband rides a motorcycle) . The quick arrival of transport certainly supported my husband’s claim that he couldn’t have been riding the bike, because it was, in fact, not running and awaiting rescue, when the accident happened. I don’t really know if the Officer gave it any consideration at all,  He was happy to release it to my brother-in-law, (instead of waiting for the tow service) so he could follow the ambulance to the hospital and work on getting a confession out of my husband.

My husband pointed out the guy that gave him the drinks before the ambulance arrived saying ,  “Talk to him; he’ll tell you”  the Officer responded  “Oh believe me…, I plan to.”
At home, I was spitting mad.. My husband wasn’t answering his phone, neither was his brother. I had no idea there had been an accident.   I was DONE waiting. I hit the hot tub AND the margaritas at the same time.

I got the phone call around 8:15 pm. It was the CHP officer and he said there had been an accident.   He  wanted me to come to the hospital and pick my husband up. He said he also had a few questions for me. I told him the street was barricaded, I had drunk a couple margaritas in the hot tub and there was no way I could legally drive right then. He said “That’s all right, your husband’s brother is here. He’s going to give him a ride home”, leaving me to wonder why he called to tell me my husband needed a ride.

After he spoke to me, the Officer went back into the room where they were treating my husband, and said “Your wife says the two of you were drinking Margaritas in the hot tub.” I never told him that, but cops are allowed to lie to people they suspect of a crime, when they are trying to get a confession. Its lousy but it is legal. My husband knew it was a lie, because it never happened, and he told him so: “She did not say that. She sure wouldn’t make up some lie to try and get me IN trouble. If you really think that’s what she said, you better call her back, because you misunderstood her.”

Not too much later, my brother-in-law drives up, and together, we helped my husband into the house.

To be continued in Future Posts!

I poke the bear because he won’t let me go

You might have noticed I added a disclaimer to the previous post. I did this in deference to my husband, who despite thinking the CHP has nothing to do with gangstalking, is nevertheless uncomfortable with my publicly writing that I am sure they do.

Poke The Bear

I think on some guttural level most people feel (me included) a little leery of Poking the Bear Especially a bear that has the power and ability to bite back. So to reiterate: It is my opinion that the CHP set our gangstalking in motion. That very statement makes both my husband and I nervous. It’s obvious why Poking this particular Bear makes me apprehensive: I’ve been bitten. If my husband does not think the CHP has anything to do with gangstalking, exactly why is he wary of Poking the Bear?

 

Police get lots of bad press and I am small potatoes. If the California Highway Patrol  is an ethical agency, they aren’t going to be interested in this bloggers opinion.  In theory, I need not worry about  being bitten by legally exercising my right to express myself from an agency that upholds laws.  And yet… in my interactions with them, they have displayed a complete disregard for ethics and the law.  I’m not talking about one  bad apple.  I’m talking about the culture.  So, there is this apprehension….

Could it be that even among the most trusting of us, there is, at our core, a niggling apprehension and distrust of government and its enforcers. I do think most of us are aware enough, to be alarmed by the stripping away of the protections, put in place by the Founding Fathers.   Maybe the uneasiness is because we sense that those diminishing protections,  may be all that stands between us and the snapping jaws of Big Brother. Our liberty is a stake. Our way of life is at stake.

If you would also feel apprehensive, about exercising your legal right (by say…. for example, suing a government agency in small claims court, or writing about it in a blog), you aren’t as free as you think you are. You are feeling the thumb of repression. Government should be working for us… not working us over. Any apprehension at all.  should give you pause. And when you pause… think about what an important tool repression has been. historically to those in power. Not very pretty, is it?

Most people go through life trying to avoid trouble. I’ve always done that. We don’t want police, government or criminal interference in our lives. We just want to live as unfettered and unobstructed as possible. I was naïve in thinking that I could actually sue a powerful branch of law enforcement and emerge unscathed.   It never occurred to me that there might be consequences to seeking a legal remedy to recover money taken from me, money I disputed owing.  I thought the entire collection process was unfair, unconstitutional and would be illegal if done by any group or person, other than the State.  Winning a few battles, felt like victory at the time, but I had no idea I was fighting a war.  And that was before the gangstalking  started. Our nightmare with the CHP began in the summer of 2007. It wasn’t resolved legally until fall of 2010. Add 4 years of gangstalking to that. No, I am not winning this war.  I can’t even walk away from it.

Silly me, I had no idea that doing something perfectly legal would piss off the Highway Patrol as much as it did. I mean…. they are the California Highway Patrol– surely they piss off people daily… probably hourly. People choose their battles. Make ’em mad enough, or treat them bad enough and they just might sue you. The Highway Patrol must get sued all the time, or so I thought. I certainly never could imagine that they would take it personally–extremely personally.

Now… having been through it… I no longer think they get sued in small claims court– at least not very often, and  if they do, they must never lose. The system is rigged, absolutely rigged.  I had to go through it to realize it.  The judgment in our favor seemed to have taken them completely by surprise.

They were, with all their resources, completely unprepared for it. If anyone has ever won against them in small claims court before… I would be very surprised. I used to think an impartial judge made a decision based solely on the merits of a case. Now, I am fairly certain  CHP doesn’t even have to put in an appearance to win.  I think they are a slam dunk and everybody knows it, except opposing parties in law suits (like me)  From what I’ve seen,  our judicial system and law enforcement are one and the same.  Judges can’t be expected to be impartial when they have a horse in the race.

Keith Labella, an attorney and my one of my personal heroes,  has done a lot for gangstalking victims.  He is also no stranger to judges that won’t be swayed by the facts.    Here’s a summary of his recent lawsuit over FOIA request omissions by the FBI   : http://gangstalkingismurder.wordpress.com/gang-stalking-f-o-i-a-lawsuit.  There is a link to the  full text PDF from there, if you want to read it in its entirety.

I am no whistleblower. I am not an activist. I just want to live my life free from harassment. It doesn’t seem like a lot to ask. It’s called the “pursuit of happiness”. You may have heard of it. Well, for the past 4 years the “pursuit of happiness” as been denied us. Gangstalking is covert aggression. An agency, which is in place, strictly for the purpose of upholding the law, would never be able to justify retaliating against anybody that legally sued them in court. You wouldn’t expect them to retaliate at all. But if they did…. they would have to do it covertly.

I don’t believe in violence, but it is pretty obvious that harassment, bullying. mobbing and gangstalking can push people over the edge. I think there is a lot of evidence to support the theory that mass shootings are often preceded by it. Complaints are often lodged with someone in a position of authority about by the (soon to be) shooter, trying to get relief from the harassment.   Later the shooters are described fairly consistently, regardless of the victims,  or the real motives.  You’ve all  heard it before:  The shooter  is described (after the fact) as a loner, a disgruntled employee, anti social or not quite right in the head. I think one of the goals of gangstalking is absolutely to: push people over the edge. They keep the pressure on victims constantly, hoping frustration and rage at the injustice, will do just that.

Being placed on a list by some secret threat assessment committee, signals the start of total and unrelenting, harassment. The fact that being on the list in the first place is what caused a person to go off the rails, just wouldn’t work to further the gangstalking program or the huge expenditures it requires.. When people do blow their tops, it furthers the consensus (among those in the know) that these lists (and the ever tightening noose around the neck of free America) are necessary to find and neutralize potential threats. Cause and effect are obscured by arguments for even more lists, more vigilance and ever more intrusive ways of identifying threats, (thus widening the net) including labeling, identifying and protecting us from the mentally ill (conveniently diagnosed by expert opinion, rather than science). This (they claim) will keep us safe and free from tragedy by preventing crime before it happens. This not only distracts the public, it allows them to marginalize people for crimes they may commit in the future.  Ludicrous as it seems,  this is a well-funded hot research area right now.  I’ll try to give you more information about it some time.

My personal favorite, among methods used to obscure what causes  mass shootings is to break out the old, tired gun control debate– always good for diverting attention and shifting blame.  Nothing ever comes of it, of course, because in the current climate, guns are  useful.  It’s easy to blame guns, and it might not be in your best interest to blame government harassment and blacklisting.

Everybody knows you don’t need a gun for killing, Murder takes place every day,  in almost every country, without them. Guns just make killing more efficient. You can’t grab the attention of our rubber necking society without some substantial carnage. Guns are good for that. This explains why the argument never gets put to rest. It’s a distraction away from the real reason people go postal.

The truth is, nobody in power envisions or wants a future where the civilian majority can legally own a gun. It’s problematic. The day it becomes illegal for civilians to own guns will be the day we can’t get back up the slippery slope. . Until that day, there is still hope for a way of life that allows all people to have their basic needs met and live a life of hope and dignity.

I hate violence. I don’t think it has any place in a civilized society and this…., writing all this crap down and railing passionately on a public forum about societal ills is so not me. It is, instead, the me who has been pushed over the edge by four years of non stop harassment and stalking. The old me didn’t feel the need to stir things up. Even the new me wishes they would just give up, so I could too.

I think about Christopher Dorner and how he destroyed himself to make an impact. He paid the ultimate price. He had other avenues available to get his message out. He was blinded to the possibilities by frustration, indignation and rage at what had been done to him.  Violence is never the answer.  It could be he felt his days were numbered and he had to get the message out very quickly –or never.  A lot of gangstalking victims feel that way.  that their health is in decline from the stress of be harassed.  I’m currently healthy and I shouldn’t have any problem rolling out my message at a snails pace, if I want.  But I still feel an urgency to get the message out

I really think Christopher Dorner was a man out of time, and out of options.  After reading his manifesto, I think he was an intelligent man who didn’t think he would be alive to take the “slow and study wins the race approach”.  He spoke out against police brutality and he later goes on a killing rampage.  He was out of options.  No one should ever feel that way and backing people into a corner by gangstalking, mobbing and monitoring  until they lash out, doesn’t solve problems It creates them.  If you’ve been told gangstalking is a solution to a problem, don’t believe it…  you’ve been snowed.  You can’t break things to fix things.  When you break people, society doesn’t get better; It gets less open and more fearful.  Who among us doesn’t want society to get better?  Who benefits from gangstalking?  Don’t be part of it.

Thank you for reading my blog.

What does Gangstalking have to do with the California Highway Patrol?

DISCLAIMER ADDED:  MY BLOGS CONTAIN MY OPINIONS ONLY, WHEN I SAY I CAN NOT PROVE SOMETHING, YOU CAN ASSUME I AM STATING MY OPINION.  YOU, OF COURSE ARE WELCOME TO YOUR OWN  OPINIONS.

I can tell you, with confidence that I now know  WHY my husband and I have been relentlessly stalked and harassed for the past 4+ years. I also know WHO is behind it.

In 2009 my husband and I successfully sued the California Highway Patrol for a seemingly paltry sum of less than $500.00.  I knew that they were seriously pissed about it, but I could not have even imagined a program like gangstalking, or that an agency that upholds our laws, could endorse anything like it.  I cannot prove the CHP had anything to do with gangstalking– they are certainly not following us around.  Lackeys do that.  What I can tell you is that it fits the time line and it requires resources to keep this going.

Let me say right up front, I am nervous about discussing this. It is a story that needs to be told. In fact,  I have written about it in many places, all off-line, and shared it with a few select individuals over the years. I’ve wanted to share it, but I know it is not going to be appreciated by the very groups that have endorsed and participated in making my life hell for the last 4 years. (Again,  This is my opinion!)

I guess an escalation of the harassment or difficulty getting my message out there will serve as a confirmation of what I now know. If you believe in gut instinct, intuition or what ever you want to call it, you should know that even though I can’t prove it, I know with every fiber of my being that this is it…. this is the answer to the question that was so important for me to answer.

Many of you already know gangstalking is a government sponsored program. I will try and explain why it took me so long to believe that, given that I already knew what went on between us and the CHP. I don’t want you to think I’m stupid for not figuring it out sooner. The CHP was always one of my main suspects.   The other  possibility was, I suspect a  diversion — but it was a huge one.

I was also probably in denial, because I have always  loved my country. I felt privileged to be born in the United States. I will discuss all that some time down the road.

For now, it is sufficient to say, I feel Betrayed, completely and utterly Betrayed.

And as for the actual stalkers, well they are a diversion too!   The Hash House haraassers (multiple California clubs) continue to treat us like their pet project. The Santa Cruz Chapter operates like a cult, and, as is one of the hallmarks of a cult, they keep their members busy busy busy. They also actively recruit, trying to make stalking  a fun, bonding experience for the group, sucking in young families, and swallowing them whole. (They make them feel “oh so special” , and before long they are crossing moral boundaries and encouraging their children to do the same. It is scary to watch –the recruitersappear to be very good at it.)

The higher ranking hashers are great cheerleaders to get the crews doing what nobody would normally choose to do (sort of like “who wants to sell flowers on the street corner for the Moonies?, Who wants to wait on street corners in case the target turns left there?) The cheerleaders take the plum assignments (like following me out of town to a fancy Napa resort), while the low ranking members wait on the bridge to watch my my husband as he passes by, headed for home (same time every day- tell me that’s not BUSY WORK). The higher hashers are spending a fortune to harass us, so they must be well paid by Uncle Sam. They are not nice people.

If you live in California and you are being Gangstalked —  Check out the photos of your closest hash house harassers. The SF, Monterey, SC, San Diego, Santa Barbara and Long Beach Chapters all have web sites and faces I recognize.  Maybe you’ve seen a few of those faces in your rear view as well.

Even though I can offer no proof that the California Highway Patrol, set the gangstalking of my husband and I in motion, The story I am about to tell can be completely collaborated with accident reports, hospital records, Court documents, an Internal Affairs Investigation, etc.

The following agencys have at least some information about what transpired. Much of it, is probably public record.

CHP Satellite Office, Aptos, CA :(Patrol Division)

CHP Headquarters, Sacramento CA: (Legal Affairs, Risk Management, Internal Affairs, Accounts Payable, Accounts Receivable–Collections/Interceptions)

California Office of the Attorney General

California Franchise Tax Board

California Department of Motor Vehicles

Santa Cruz  Couty Court: Records Division

I’m not revealing our names –not yet, anyway…(and maybe not anybody elses either), but there are enough details that a good investigator shouldn’t have any trouble establishing that my story is true.

Because it is a long complicated story, and it took place over a couple years time, I’ve broken it down into parts and will do a post for each separate section.

Much of it is written already, but not blog ready. I do have a basic outline on how I plan to roll it out. Here is what you can expect:

1. The Accident, The Injury, and The Investigation
2. The Civil Hearing
3. The Criminal Case, and Rules of Court
4. Demands, Collections, and Interceptions
5. Hoops: Preparing To Sue a State Agency
6. Small Claims Court, and Judgement
7. Demands, Collections and Internal Affairs
8. Man Behind the curtain, and the Motion to Vacate
9. Small Claims Court
10. Collections, and another Interception

Stick with me, you are bound to learn things I wish I didn’t Know. I think you will find it all more than a little Disturbing!

 

Gangstalking Posts Generate Interest

 

I want to address all those people who have written comments, those who may do so in the future.  I am really happy to hear from you.  It means a lot to me.  Collectively, we have a lot of information.  We see our perpetrators every day.  We are paying attention and we are highly attuned to the way they operate.  Sharing that information can help other targets.  A little humor can give us a laugh and help us marginalize them for a change. I do have a couple hilarious tips, where, for at least occasionally, I’ve made their life worse than they were trying to make mine.  (to be shared in future posts). 

The comments, likes. re-posts, shares, and people who are now following  the blog (you physical followers…KMA!) are really encouraging. It helps me to feel like we are our own community and like maybe we have a fighting chance.  Our numbers may be small by comparision but judging by the comments, and my own personal feelings, our OUTRAGE is large.  That Passionate outrage we feel at being treated so terrible by our fellow humans, has been known to change the coarse of history.   We need to be angry.  Nobody has the right to do this to another human being.

Even though I didn’t do anything on this blog for 2 years. I continued to get readers and views and comments during that time. After I wrote the 2 years later post, I began moderating the comments that had piled up.  I still have 65 older comments to go through.

I am sure there are people out there, who are legitimately being gangstalked , who also happen to be crazy.  By and large, though, the targets of gangstalking are sane people, put under tremendous stress by the complete insanity around them. Credibility for all of us victims, and exposure for all of our gangstalkers is my goal. To that end, if your comments have anything fringe or crazy sounding, I’m not going to post them. 

If I think they have helpful content, with some fringe,  I may edit them.  You know how I feel about censuring and freedom of speech  (if not, read this post).  But in this case, my blog…my message.  If your comment does not further my goal of getting credibility for TiI’s among the uninformed public It’s not going to be made public.

 

Please don’t be offended. I might believe you are a real victim, but still feel that your story will be hard for the uninitiated to accept. If that is the case, your message was still be received and read with interest; it will just have a smaller audience.  It’s ok to discuss and comment outrageous things fringe theory, but for my blog, you have to do it in a way that I think comes across as credible if you want to read it later.

 

If you include a link with your comment, that’s great… I do check them out, prior to approving the comment. I don’t want to post links to web sites and blogs that further the interests of the people harassing me. We all know that a lot of comments are made by the very people that are gangstalking us. If you have any doubts about that, from day one, within hours of my first post, I’ve had a following. The only people who could have found my post that quickly, are the esteemed members of my own personal stalker fan club (I don’t take credit for the fan club term, but I like it –  I fist saw it when a woman, commenting  on gangstalking in the “experience project” said her and her daughter called their stalkers their “fan club”).

Gangstalkers were my first readers because, as we all know, they don’t miss a trick. But hey, even if you are a stalker, I’ll approve your comments, if…. they further my stated goals for this blog.

The comments that include links and have questions for me are going to take a little longer for me to moderate. Nothing is being discarded without careful consideration. If you asked where I got my info on a particular subject, I will answer you, as soon as I get through the quick decision comments.

If you ask me to keep your comment private, I fully intend to do that. I felt terrible when I saw that a comment was posted that I was specifically asked to keep private. I am so sorry that happened. I was certain that I had checked the unapproved box until  I saw it on the page. This was not intentional.  No doubt, caused by going through the back log of comments so quickly (some of them are even longer than my posts- I don’t mind long, though) The problem has now been corrected. Again, I am so sorry.

Justifiably Disturbed by Gang Stalking: Mission Statement

My goal in writing this blog is very specific: I want to garner support and credibility for gangstalking victims, among the unaware public.   Being a victim is bad enough, but having to first explain the crime, and then convince people that it really does happen, is particularly demoralizing. It is like being victimized again by those who would unquestionably support you, if you were the victim of almost any other crime.

If you are a Targeted Individual you already know plenty about skepticism.  Prior to being gangstalked, I can never remember having my credibility, or my version of events being questioned. I am a skeptic myself, but this  type of skepticism is something I was completely unfamiliar with.  I realize skepticism is a practical tool to facilitate the search for the truth. Truth is trump. Doubting that the holocaust ever happened doesn’t make you a healthy skeptic, it makes you uninformed or an idiot. I will consider it a victory when gang stalking awareness has achieved 3 things:

1. Gangstalking becomes a familiar mainstream term, that people equate to Organized Harassment.
2. The unaware public has become aware that it goes on and don’t doubt its veracity any more than they doubt that bullying or genocide are real.
3. Targeted Individuals are recognized as Victims.  Gangstalking is considered a serious, reprehensible crime, and perpetrators are criminals. responsible and held accountable for their behavior.  Victims will not need to convince anybody it happens; everyone will be familiar with it.

It was really shocking for me to realize that people, friends, family. neighbors, etc. were skeptical of my accounts of being followed and harassed by strangers.  All my years of being truthful and stable was not enough, to overcome the doubt that strangers would actually do this to someone they didn’t know.

As I said in an earlier entry, these strangers are exhibiting focussed hostile behavior towards you that is usually reserved for vendettas of a very personal nature. You lose support when you cannot come up with the answer to the question “WHY?” “Who would put this much effort into it?” The skepticism is understandable,  because it seems to defy logic. At first you can hardly believe it yourself. Your world is turned upside down and you feel disoriented, shocked even.  Realizing that everything is different then you thought it was  is easy to resist and hard to accept.

Early on, I remember reading information by other victims of gangstalking, and feeling skeptical about some of the experiences they  described. I was appalled that people were treating me with skepticism — but at the same time I was doubting what other victims (credible victims) were reporting. I remember reading Mark Rich’s “The Hidden Evil” on the web (before he had compiled it into a book). I never have doubted that he is a targeted Individual. Not then. Not Now. He is the real deal. But I was new to being gangstalked and I hadn’t experienced how pervasive it is–or how money (or lack of it) really is no object.
Mark Rich wrote of a trip that he took to visit someone (a sister, I think) in another state. He got on a plane and 2 of his stalkers boarded the plane with him. I didn’t believe it. I thought the stress of being stalked had caused him to see stalkers where there were none. Today… there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that his stalkers got on the plane with him, just as he described.

Eleanor White has a pamphlet that explains what is happening to us, It is a tool for victims to give to people who have never heard of gang stalking before. Because, as she explains, people who have not experienced what we have… are not ready for the truth. In essence, they can’t handle the truth. It doesn’t mean that the bystanding unaware public will never be able to handle the truth. What it means is that, the truth is something so out of their realm of experience that they need to have it spoon fed to them or they will choke on it and discount you as a Nutter. (I’ve been playing around with British Slang lately)  This spoon-feeding approach advocated by Eleanor is helpful. Her pamphlet really does help lower the credibility hurdle. I’ve used it with positive results. But I do have a less rigid approach.

The most important thing to me is to present the information in a way that is credible, even if what I am describing seems absolutely incredible to the uninitiated. Gangstalking takes place in the midst of the UNAWARE PUBLIC. They don’t see a thing–but they could, and would, if they were aware of it and/or looking for it. Exposure will take a lot of the power away from gangstalking activities. Getting the word out is the best way to stop it. I really believe that. That is my goal. That’s what I want. I want to see the rock these criminals are hiding under, overturned. I want to put an end to the cloak of plausible deniability and to them flying under the radar.

I hate having my credibility questioned. My personal feeling is that I have to temper my words so they don’t contribute to the unaware public associating the term gangstalking with anything other than what it is. A lot of the disinformation out there, attempts to paint it as some sort of fringe phenomenon. It isn’t. Gangstalking is organized and meticulously thought out and planned. It is not being perpetrated by humans with reptilian DNA, aliens, Satan or the Occult.

The hocus pocus fringe theories are put forth predominately by gangstalkers in an attempt to make victims look crazy. The fact that they have been so prolific about it has actually helped us, by spreading the term.  The term Gangstalking seems more common and main stream today than it was, even two years ago. They have done their part to help spread the term “gangstalking”. I expect it to become even more common with time.

Next post will address the many comments I have received.

Gangstalking: 2 Years Later

It has really been almost 2 years since I published the last of 10 posts about being gang stalked and time hasn’t exactly stood still.  The bad news  (I hate to report it to anyone who is a more recent victim) is that it continues, unabated, at least for my husband and I.   That’s the bad news, and actually the worst news I have to report.  I read and continue to research everything I can about the topic.  I also have continued to write, although not in a public forum.  We have learned and continue to learn ways to deal with our gangstalkers and what they can and cannot do.

They have not rendered us homeless, penniless or any of the other claims made on various web pages (written or hyped by stalkers.) They have managed to isolate us from our neighbors, many who now participate in the harassment campaign; but our families, while not exactly supportive don’t  seem to have joined ranks with the dupes.

Like everything else in life, there are good and bad sides to everything.  The best part has been the laughs that they have given us with their awkward antics, to make sure they get our attention. When things backfire on them, and they are clearly feeling foolish, it’s a hoot. Sometimes things we do, make them change tactics. This is a victory for us, and anything that makes things better for us and worse for them, needs to be shared

I really prefer not to dwell on negativity, which is part of the reason I stopped writing: it is such a complete downer to write about daily harassment by strangers.  I also hated giving people who are invading my life, even more information about what I think and feel.  A blog that deals with gangstalking is not going to be happy and fun.  And our lives are about so much more than being gangstalked. but that is what this blog is all about.  That means that I am writing about a narrow range of really nasty, unpleasant things that don’t define us and that are not of our choosing or making.  It is a bummer to dwell on unpleasantness day in and day out.  I am  natuarally optimistic and try to focus on good things, and let the bad roll off me.

I really don’t get depressed, but that said, gangstalking is discouraging and it wears on you. Its sad to know that other people are so easily manipulated and immoral.  That bothers me every bit as much as being the actual focus of such stupidity and cruelty.  When you read about gangstalking tactics you may be fooled into thinking that they have more power than they do.  They want you to think that.  They alter their methods to capitalize on any fears you already have.

I’ll tell you right now, this garbage you read about people killing themselves over being gangstalked is not something gangstalkers have ANY control over..  I’ve told everyone in my life since I’ve been 10 years old (when my Dad was explaining the attempted suicide of a relative to me) that I would NEVER commit suicide.  If I’m dead and somebody calls it a suicide….. they better take another look.  It’s not me… and I’m pretty damn sure its not my husband….  (who, actually can’t believe anyone would take gangstalkers that seriously– or would be ungracious enough to take a self inflicted exit strategy, without doing other victims the courtesy of helping a few stalkers through the door, before doing so.)

We (my husband and I) have learned a lot during nearly 4 years of non stop harassment.  We also deal with it quite differently from each other. and possibly from other targets.  There are advantages to having another person close to you, know and understand, (and most importantly believe) the reality that being gangstalked inflicts on you.  My husband is much more confrontational with gangstalkers than I am.  I avoid them; he often seeks them out appearing where they meet (just a random tourist snapping pictures-ya know) because it is quite clear that it makes them uncomfortable.  I worry that his obnoxious behavior towards them alienates people who are not (yet) on board with them.  He worries that I have become a hermit.

Becoming a hermit, has made the stalkers put on exhibitions in front of our house and go to great lengths to get my attention.  We record it all on 2 cameras that catch an ongoing “Parade of Idiots”.

We rent an old Victorian house 2 blocks from the beach.  built long before the sidewalk or setback requirements which create a buffer from house and sidewalk.  The side of our house can be touched without ever stepping off the sidewalk and it is a very busy sidewalk, indeed..  We live in close proximity  to several bars and a couple restaurants  (we can actually see some of them from the porch). We have always had a stream of drunks and other idiots during the summer months, but now its a year round parade of even bigger idiots, including some of our formerly normal (and friendly) neighbors.

Anyone who is gangstalked is going to feel better after I tell you about the antics of our own personal “PARADE OF IDIOTS”.  Sometime soon, I’ll get into the “Tourettes Twins” the “Warthog”  “Chisel Face” and the drunks who pretend to pass out and wait to be revived by emergency vehicles that hang out with lights flashing long after their downed drunk has sobered up (within minutes).  I do not need to leave my house to get a show.  It is literally non stop entertainment where I live.  There are the parents who have instructed their kids to scream and make a scene and actually come up the stairs onto our porch while they pretend not to notice.  Those same parents let their children come into contact with the human pee on the fence and sidewalk and the dog feces that contaminate the area, courtesy of their fellow stalkers.  Some of them break out the ice chest and have lunch right there, on the grass median between the sidewalk and the street.  They may leave their trash, but they are loudly sitting on something much worse that the stalkers before them left. I’ll tell you about the futility of the CAR DOOR SLAM PARTY that happens every night, all night.  That’s what harassment looks like.  Sometimes, it does get to you…. other times its a free front seat ticket to the show, a show that makes me grin and shake my head that people would actually participate in it.  Who are these idiots?  Are people really that stupid?  No doubt about it. (image found on REDDIT).

 

The 3AM car-door-slam-party! Yoo Hoo!!!

Some people don’t believe that stalkers would USE their own children to further their agenda.  This little anecdote should blow that theory out of the water:  I was sitting in my living room one day and I hear 3 little kids having an argument right outside my window.  These kids are about 5, 6 and the oldest might have been 7 or 8.  They are arguing over a house, which house,  specifically.  The one little kid says “NO, Not Here…. Its that house…. over there.”  The other kid says “No, I know I’m right… This is the house!”   It goes on for a bit,  getting pretty heated and they stomp off.  They are back less than 5  minutes later.  They approach the house and one of them starts bouncing a basketball.  The little one starts screaming in that earsplitting little kid way (the one that makes you secretly glad to know his parents get to enjoy it in frequently, and in closed spaces) the oldest one starts pounding his skateboard against the front steps.  It was so funny and so ludicrous to think of those little kids running home to get confirmation from Mom and Dad about the correct house to behave so incorrectly in front of…I laughed my ass off and thought what I always think:  Model Parents, Right There!

 

Model Parents, Right There!

above image found on Pinterest

 

 

Respect for others is learned early.  Or it’s not.  Do these parents really think their children are going to  respect them when they grow up? Gangstalkers treat us without any respect at all…. but for those with children…. they are going to know what if feels like to be disrespected.  It is inevitable.  And guess what… it is even worse when disrespect is personal.  Your children will one day treat you like garbage– and guess what?  YOU DESERVE IT!

 

Now,  I want to end this post with something that is more positive.  When I go somewhere stalkers like to impede my progress.  They block doorways, rush ahead in line and then move extremely slow through the check out process.  They also like to create traffic delays.  It used to bug me.  Now I have a different mind set. I never go anywhere in a hurry.  I have the luxury of not having to.  Every time they delay me by 5 minutes, I figure it took many stalkers much more than 5 minutes each just to facilitate my delay.  And as I wait in line, traffic, or whatever…  I think to myself…. I will gladly give up 5 minutes or however long it takes, because I know that it took each and every one of the harassment detail for the day, the amount of time they are costing me,  plus considerably more time to get in place (a place they wouldn’t even be, and would probably rather not be, were it not my destination).  They go where I decide to go, and when I decide to go.  They are giving up their time in droves to take up a little of my time.  And, there are many  more of them.  Who is really inconveniencing who here?  You do the math.  They are really the ones doing all the WAITING.  They wait for me to leave the house, Wait for me to shop, to pay and to do whatever I have to do anyway. They may delay me, but each and every one of them has individually spent more time than they are costing me—That’s sweet…  And I, for one, am willing to give up a little of my day for the pleasure of  making stalkers wait and wait and wait.     The fact that they are all too willing to do it, means they really do suck at math!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Santa Cruz Cop Gets Played by Gangstalkers

The Santa Cruz Police Officer who responded to the traffic accident, that could have crippled my husband (see my last post,) got it wrong on his report. The report stated that the accident was caused by my husbands failure to yield the right of way, while entering  a traffic lane.

I am certain that the three gangstalkers who acted as witnesses are the reason the patrol officer, wrote a report that did not reflect the actual circumstances that led to the accident.  I think the witnesses followed a script.  I think the script used language and words that were deliberately chosen because they were powerful enough to influence the police, and keep real  witnesses to the accident at bay.   CAREFULLY CHOSEN WORDS CAN BE EXTREMELY POWERFUL. In this situation, they influenced the perception of the responding officer,  and ultimately shaped that officer’s written accident report and findings.

Evidence for this is found in the behavior and words of  all three of the witnesses.   These three witnesses, posing as strangers to each other and the driver of the Jeep.  All  used the exact same words, alternating between them and repeating . “I saw everything! I’ll be your witness!”.  They said it loud and often.  This began seconds after impact and  continued while the paramedics tended to my husband, and even while the officer interviewed the parties involved in the accident.  These gangstalkers are into NLP stuff.  It is basically using the words to influence the mind.  NLP goes hand in hand with hypnosis and the “power of suggestion”.  When it is non consensual and used to influence or control someones thoughts or behavior, it is unethical, but…. for gangstalkers, ethics isn’t really a concern.  Many NLP practitioners, no doubt, think applying NLP ethically, severely limits its power.  More info on NLP here.

When the cop took the witness statements, all three witness also used the exact same words to describe the accident. Those words are what made it onto the actual police report.  interestingly enough, the report references the three witness accounts,  but gives them one voice , saying  “all witness agreed that it would not have been possible for the Jeep to have avoided hitting the motorcyclist” .  Even more interesting is that the report only identifies one of the witnesses by name. Remember, these people want to remain anonymous. We would love to know their names. Why the other two names don’t appear anywhere on the report, seems a little sloppy to me. But maybe two of the witnesses slipped off, (planned, no doubt) before the officer could get their personal information.  .

Their real names are important to us. It helps us to connect dots, and often leads to the real names of other gangstalkers, and the groups they are members of. The connections are often family members who we recognize from times they followed us.  Sometimes it leads full circle, and connects back to a possible motive for targeting us.  Here is an example:

My awareness of  gangstalking started right after I threatened to sue Carrington College, in San Jose,  and told the dean, I thought their accreditation should be rescinded. I did this after an ugly experience where in my opinion (disclaimer:  my opinion, okay)  they  failed to deliver on their promises, had behaved unethically. and basically ripped me off and then tried to extort even more money out of me, after that.    The motive for my personal gangstalking is not known, but we do have a couple of theories.  Carrington College is one of those theories.  I have written about them at length, and will post it in the future.

The real name of one gangstalker,  led us to a relative of hers, who has also followed and harassed us.  This relative has a connection to Carrington College; so it lends support to one of our theories,  about why we were targeted. It’s not conclusive, but it’s another brick in the wall, so to speak. It also explains the importance of knowing the real names of these people.

We have often joked that we’re tempted to deliberately ram a car into one of the a$$hole stalkers, just so we could find out who they were from the police report. How disappointing to see only one of the three witnesses actually named on the report.

Okay, back to the accident:

 

The gangstalkers sprang into action, the moment the accident happened, to protect their fellow gangstalker from legal trouble. They had a job to do and they did it just as they planned and practiced for. They acted just like professional con artists.

The cop actually had everything he needed to ascertain exactly how the crash happened. But he also had to contend with the testimony of three lying witness, determined to influence the outcome.

The gangstalker who was involved in the accident, was clearly shaken up.  (my husband wondered at the time if maybe he didn’t have insurance, a license or had fake plates, because he was so nervous acting.)  My husband and the other driver both told the truth.   Inexplicably, neither one of their statements actually appears correctly in the report.

The Jeep’s driver told the officer that he “punched it around traffic to make the green left turn light.”   (Him and my husband were interviewed together.) This admission is found nowhere in the report and is extremely important. It was not part of the witness testimony, probably because it alters the perception of the driver as blameless .and in need of three impartial witnesses to protect HIS interests ( as evidenced by  “I’ll be YOUR witness”.)

My husband told the officer he was about to make a left into southbound traffic and he was looking right to make sure it was clear, when he was hit.  He says he never saw the car coming because there was no reason to look in that direction.  The report says my husband was looking at the driver when he hit him. That must have come from the witnesses.

Neither of my husbands statements are all that crucial, to understanding what happened, but it is worth noting that the phony witnesses statements are the only ones that appear on the report, and they were lies.

To understand how the accident really happened only required a few pieces of information, all of it readily available.

The Santa Cruz Officer who responded to the accident knew (or was told) the following:

1. The spot where the impact of the accident occurred ( at the very beginning of the Northbound left turn lane)

2. The Northbound lanes that proceed straight through,were stopped, backed up, and waiting for the red light to turn green.

3. My husband had maneuvered his bike through the two lanes of stopped traffic to get to the spot where the impact occurred. (he admitted this.  and it’s the only thing the witness did not lie about.)

4. The driver of the jeep had “punched it around the traffic to make the green left hand turn light.“

That leaves only one crucial question:   How did the driver of the jeep arrive at the spot where the accident happened?  HOW?

The traffic wasn’t moving in the northbound lanes, backed up well before the left turn lane began, effectively blocking access to the northbound turn lane. The jeep couldn’t have come from the gas station, squeezing between the cars backed up, waiting for the light, like my husbands motorcycle did.

There was only one way the driver could have gone around the traffic to reach the place where the left turn lane actually began, and the accident happened. The driver of the Jeep had to have been going North, traveling the wrong direction, in the Southbound lane, to circumvent the northbound traffic that was  stopped at the light.

That explains why my husband says he was looking right before turning into the southbound lane, and never saw the jeep. The jeep driver hit my husband broadside, unable to stop. Witness and the report said there would have been no way for the driver to have avoided the motorcyclist. My husband thinks there were probably skid marks because the jeep driver locked his brakes in an attempt to avoid the accident.

I disagree, about this being and unavoidable accident for the jeeps driver.  What if the jeep driver had not been going the wrong way on Ocean street, clearly against the law, in the first place?

Or try this thought experiment:

if my husband had been a couple of seconds faster, or the jeep driver, just a bit slower, they would have had a head on collision in the southbound lane. The jeep driver would have been going the wrong direction (north in a southbound lane) and clearly be at fault for the accident. The cause of the accident was set in motion prior to the impact, regardless of fault. If it had happened a couple of seconds earlier it would have happened in the southbound lane, instead of the start of the northbound left turn lane. It would have changed nothing about the jeep drivers actions. So how could it change his responsibility for the accident, once he is in motion?

Feel free to use the comment section, if you find fault with my logic here.

 

Since the jeep driver was already in motion, doesn’t he assume some responsibility, even if the impact takes place as he is illegally pulling into the northbound lane, instead of still traveling the wrong way to get to the point of impact?

I don’t know if what my husband did was legal, but I am certain what the driver of the jeep did, was NOT LEGAL. Yet, my husband who,  got broadsided by the jeep was found at fault, instead of the Jeep’s driver.

How does a police officer trained in accident investigation get it wrong, despite having all the evidence needed, at the scene, to get it right?

He was up against pros.

 

I think being trained to spot gangstalkers and witness who are not just lying, but using the same words and phrases to do so, would help them do their jobs better.

This isn’t a one time thing. These gangstalkers cause lots of accidents. They will do the same thing to you or anybody they hit or run over, if they continue to get away with it.

That witness testimony kept the cop from asking that all important question. HOW DID THE JEEP DRIVER ARRIVE AT THE POINT OF IMPACT? The answer to that would have shifted blame, and should not have been missed.  In this case the witness testimony was so persistent, so adamant, and so unanimous, that, that alone was given enough weight to determine the cause of the accident.

Witness testimony should only be used as a tool for determining what happened to cause the accident.  It shouldn’t be allowed to lead the officer away from the truth.   Officers need  training to see the signs that these people are running a game.  Training is the only way to keep from getting snowed by them.  There are certainly signs.

These witnesses behaved strangely, and the police department should train their officers to recognize the signs that signal collusion and gangstalking tactics are being used to influence the outcome of an investigation.

There isn’t really anybody at an accident scene that can legitimately make the claim. “I saw everything” .  (You would need an overhead view.) This accident had three of them.  Nowhere on the report does it state where the witness were when the accident happened.  It’s also missing, just like two of their names.

These witnesses kept saying. “I’ll be your witness” repeatedly to the jeep driver”. Clearly, not unbiased, and again, an odd thing to have all three witnesses say repeatedly.

And maybe the cop should have noticed how all three witness avoided eye contact with the motorcyclist,  they told there stories without a glance in his direction, usually keeping their backs to him. Odd behavior all the way around.  Of course the officer didn’t actually get to  see the strangest behavior, which happened before he arrived. All three witnesses stepped over and ignored a bleeding man in the street, and convened a pow wow at the window of the unhurt jeep driver.

My complaint is not so much about the officer, as the departments failure to train their officers to go with the evidence, instead of allowing witness testimony alone to determine fault. Officers should be on the lookout for witness testimony that is all seeing, all knowing, and told verbatim by different witnesses.  It’s classic gangstalker.

The report should have identified all three witnesses by name, and given their location at the time they witnessed the accident. It was incomplete. And even more important…it was wrong.

The gangstalkers are here. they are working Santa Cruz, and they are working Santa Cruz PD.  It’s not too late for Santa Cruz Police Department  to get it right, by training officers to recognize gangstalkers in action.

 

My Husband Almost Lost His Leg To a Gangstalker

My husband came close to losing his leg to a gangstalker less than two months ago. It happened on Ocean Stree, in Santa Cruz on a bright sunny day. Although some Gangstalkers have reportedly run into their targets on purpose, this really was an accident. A foreseeable accident, but an accident just the same.

If you think this happened to my husband, because he is a target, you should know that it could easily (and often does) happen to anybody in the vicinity of gangstalkers, as they go about harassing their target by car. They drive like maniacs, taking whatever chances are necessary to keep their target in site and to create an environment of unrelenting harassment.

They cut off parking lots; they go the wrong direction on one way streets. They periodically exit a freeway from the fast lane, making an abrupt right angle turn, cutting across all lanes to scare their target and force them to brake suddenly. They’ve done this to me, going 60mph, and pity the innocent person who could have been behind me. (This tactic is going to be covered more thoroughly in future post.) It’s an intimidation move, meant to let you know they have been right in front of you for the last few miles.  Box maneuvers happen frequently, on  freeways using several vehicles to keep the target (and anybody who is unfortunate enough to be behind the group) , from speeding up or exiting the freeway.  They are dangerous. It might seem like they are playing a game, but the stakes could be your life or your leg.

Here’s my husbands leg, in pictures taken the day of the accident and over the following 2 weeks. I have no doubt that if my husband had lost his leg or been permanently crippled, the gangstalkers would have viewed it as a happy accident.  If an innocent bystander lost his leg it would probably be viewed as unfortunate, but just the cost of doing business.

I’m going to describe the accident in detail, because it is important for realizing how the Santa Cruz officer was taken in by the Gangstalkers.  Gangstalkers never work solo, when stalking their targets. They operate using the “safety in numbers” principal.  If one of them gets in trouble, the others spring into action to deflect any negative consequences. that might befall any member of the team.  In the case of police involvement or an auto accident, the job of the rest of the team is to act as witnesses, vouching for the member of their team who has earned unwanted attention.

The gangstalkers, posing as witnesses, can rightly be compared to an experienced team of   grifters, smoothly pulling off a complex con on a mark.   In my husbands accident,  the ultimate goal was to make sure the stalker who hit him, was not held responsible for the accident.  To achieve this goal the Gangstalkers had to work two separate marks:  the police officer who responded to the scene, and  ultimately wrote the erroneous police report; and several real witness, that were just feet away, at the moment of impact.

The Gangstalkers are able to pull this off, by using psychological tricks to create an alternate reality, which enables them to suck the unsuspecting into the lie. You’ll be able to see exactly how it works, when I describe the actual scene that began to unfold,  seconds after the accident.

I am not holding my husband blameless for the accident. He should have spoken up at the time.  He felt outnumbered, he wasn’t sure if his actions were entirely legal. and he may have been in shock. At the very least, he was shook up, in pain, and not thinking clearly.

I spoke with my insurance agent, who informed me there can be degrees of fault assigned to any accident. Insurance companies regularly use these findings when figuring how to proportion payout, in an accident, where the actions of both parties are considered a contributing factor. Even if my husbands actions were not strictly legal, I think you will have a hard time assigning the blame ratio at 100 to 0, in the Jeep driver’s favor, once you know what happened.

Gangstalking and Predictive Policing: A Perfect Pair

Gangstalking and Predictive Policing: A Perfect Pair

At the same meeting mentioned in the last post, my husband spoke with Santa Cruz Mayor, Don Lane. My husband emailed him several months back, about our harassment and the lackluster response from local police.

We have had some success in getting a police response by contacting members of the Santa Cruz City Council. They responded quickly, pressuring the police to “take care of the problem.” Apparently the city council has the ear of the Chief, because their intervention generates a proactive effort on the part of the PD.

If you are being gangstalked and your police department has been less than helpful, you might consider going to your city council We were just reaching out for help, and didn’t realize that this is akin to going over the heads of the PD. They really don’t appreciate it. It is probably better to work with them, if you can. Contacting the the PD and using the cc (carbon copy) for the city council is more respectful. This makes the City Council aware of the problem, and gives the police an opportunity to act without prodding. I would try that first….but truthfully, my husband doesn’t usually ask for my opinion before dashing off the occasional pointed or inflammatory email. There are, after all, two people being gangstalked in our house. Keep in mind, the dynamic between city government and the police department may be different where you live.

Because of the City Council’s intervention, we were given an opportunity to present our case to the Deputy Chief, who was nice enough, but probably didn’t bother to read the detailed incident report I gave him. (I say this, because a week later he appeared to not be familiar with any of the details, when I spoke to him on the phone.)

What the deputy chief actually did, was give me the BIG BRUSHOFF (details to be covered in another post.) I didn’t even realize it at the time, because the man is very good at his job. In hindsight, i’m actually amazed at how smoothly he went about not helping me at all. His job was never about helping me. The job of a Deputy Chief is to help his Chief. In this case, the Chief was prodded by the city council to “take care of the problem”. I’m a little slow, on the whole chain of command thing… but now that my myopia has been corrected, by the virtue of hindsight… I realize that “MY problem” was not “THE problem” for the Chief. My husband and I were “THE problem”. I may not have considered the Deputy Chief to be very helpful, but i am sure the Chief is very pleased with him. If the chief paid his salary, he deserves a raise.

Anyone who is familiar with gangstalking, already knows Santa Cruz PD has admitted (apparently the first PD in the country, to openly do so) that gangstalking exists, and that it is a growing problem. The original story aired on our local TV News station, KION, where a SCPD spokesperson called it “bullying on steroids.” The Deputy Chief told me, he was not surprised by the gangstalking activity that we have experienced, remarking that he had “seen it all before.”

Judging by the thousands (from all over the world) of references to the SCPD’s public admission, regarding gangstalking, there is a general perception that SCPD is an enlightened and progressive police department. Logic dictates that a department that identifies a particular crime as a “growing problem” should be working on solutions to nip it in the bud. After all, you always hear that the first step, is admitting there is a problem. Logic also dictates that advance knowledge of gangstalking should put an end to the credibility hurdle victims have had to overcome. Right? Uh….not so fast.

There appears to be a serious breakdown in communication between the people who are in charge, and the officers who work for them, patrolling the streets. Every single SCPD officer who has responded to our calls, has told us they have never heard of gangstalking, or anything like it. (Maybe they watch KSBW instead of KION. )The moment we tell them we are being harassed by complete strangers, and that we do not know WHY they are doing this, we are treated to barely disguised skepticism.

You have to wonder why the Patrol Officers are unaware of it, when their bosses have gone on record acknowledging that it is a growing problem, Is it a matter of scarce resources, and low priority? I have NO idea. But this cavalier attitude is exactly what fuels the belief, by many victims, that law enforcement is part of the problem. Unlike some victims, I don’t think law enforcement or the U.S. government, is officially complicit in gangstalking. But, CLEARLY …they don’t seem to be part of the solution! It is extremely upsetting to be treated like you are imagining intense harassment, because the bosses haven’t bothered to tell the responding officers that this crime is a real crime with real victims.

That said, I do want to say that there is one Lieutenant on the SCPD, who has always treated us respectfully, never expressed skepticism at our reports, and really tried to help. My guess is that there is only so much one man can do, in a culture where those in charge have refused to do even the bare minimum, to stop these criminals.

When the patrol officers, who interact with the public, say they have never heard of Gangstalking (a crime that is PURPOSELY executed in a way that invites skepticism) upper management (sorry for the civilian term) really has failed to do the bare minimum. They have failed to share their admitted knowledge of the crime, with those in the best position to observe it, and catch the perpetrators in the act. Nobody is going to put any effort into solving a crime they don’t think is real.

By not even doing the bare minimum, the SCPD has further victimized us, by fostering an environment which encourages patrol officers (through ignorance) to disregard our pleas for help, view our accounts with barely concealed skepticism, and allow organized criminals to operate unchecked.

The first step in reconciling this problem is for the entire department to know what has already been shared with the public: Gangstalking is a crime that is happening in our area; it is growing, because technology has made it easier than ever.

When everybody is on the same page, and gangstalking is recognized for the serious crime that it is, the police department should make a commitment to eradicating it, or at least, treat it like other serious crimes.

Being the first PD in the country to take a stand against Gangstalking , is about as progressive as it gets. And how about this for the predictive policing agenda: I tell you where I’m going….and you predict the place and time where police will find gangstalkers harassing and violating the civil rights of an innocent citizen of Santa Cruz, as well as inconveniencing every other person in the vicinity (which can’t be avoided, and is of absolutely no concern to gangstalkers.)

There are rough estimates that put the number of gangstalking victims in the U.S at around 500.000. That is half a millon people who desperately need a progressive police department be the first to take up our fight against gangstalking. Why not the Santa Cruz Police Department?

Regardless of the position SCPD ultimately takes on gangstalking, there should be protocols in place for handling reports made by victims of it. “Act skeptical”, should be shelved, despite its long reign of popularity. It really is unhelpful in every imaginable way. It is a know the police encounter a lot of liars. I really wish the truth wasn’t so hard to believe. But thats how gangstalking works. That’s why it works. Skepticism is only possible, if you choose ignorance (which requires no effort). In my opinion, gangstalking has no informed skeptics.

In predictive policing, isn’t the goal to prevent a crime altogether or catch perpetrators in the act of commiting crimes? Drug deals take place out in the open every day, right under the noses of an ubsuspecting public. Should Gangstalking take place right under the noses of an unsuspecting patrol division? Police see crimes that the ordinary citizens routinely overlook. Training is what makes the difference.

Training officers to spot and recognize gangstalking, while its happening would not take a big time committment. Gangstalking is a smart crime that frequently takes place in public. It is subtle and invisible to the untrained eye. Officers study human beings, they can be trained easier than most people to detect the subtle signs of gangstalking activity. I can guarantee that the first time an officer spots it and recognizes it for what it is, it will be like ringing a bell– it can’t be un-rung.

.

In the next post, I will tell you how the Gangstalkers ran a con on a Santa Cruz Police Officer, responding to a traffic accident. They absolutely influenced his investigation. The story should illustrate the importance” of educating the local police department on how to spot Gangstalkers and catch them in the act of breaking the law. They aren’t just hurting us. They are a menace to the entire community; and currently Santa Cruz is hosting a large active community of Gangstalkers. Anyone who wants to see gangstalking isn’t going to lack opportunities. I am going to do what I can in this blog to educate people on how to observe gangstalking in action. And how easy it is to overlook it.