Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Malonis Mails Me! (How do you "represent" a "Sock Puppet?")

Seriously, now Malonis acknowledges an attorney client relationship with TxBluesMan.

September 30, 2009

Mr. Hugh McBryde
Via email:

RE: Txbluesman

Dear Mr. McBryde,

I have been engaged by "txbluesman" ( to represent his legal interests in connection with potential criminal and/or civil actions which you anticipate may be taken against you as a result of your presence and activities on the World Wide Web. "Txbluesman" has informed me that, for purposes unknown to him, you have indicated that you may attempt to serve papers upon him. In that regard, please direct all communications to me at the address listed below, save and except those papers to which "txbluesman" is entitled to personal service or service by process.

If you have any questions, please contact me at this email address or the mailing address listed below.


Natalie E. Malonis

The Malonis Law Firn
Attorneys and Counselors
1173 Bent Oaks Court, Suite 200
Denton, Texas 76210
The header:
Received: by with SMTP id o20cs310695ybm;
Wed, 30 Sep 2009 17:44:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id p12mr905487vck.57.1254357854935;
Wed, 30 Sep 2009 17:44:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [])
by with ESMTP id 6si14069198vws.141.2009.;
Wed, 30 Sep 2009 17:44:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: neutral ( is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of client-ip=;
Authentication-Results:; spf=neutral ( is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
Received: from ( [])
by (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id n910iAtx010991;
Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:44:10 -0400
Received: from
by (mail_out_v42.5.) id o.d0a.593bd151 (37093);
Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:44:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILCIADB073-90e54ac3fb5213; Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:44:06 -0400
References: <>
Message-Id: <>
From: Natalie Malonis
To: ""
Content-Type: text/plain;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (7A400)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 7A400)
Subject: Txbluesman
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 19:43:51 -0500
Cc: ""
Hmmm, be careful for what you beg? You just might get it?

Thanks Blues. Christmas early this year.

Thanks to Nat.



Oh, I replied after careful consideration:
You don't represent Jack you daffy twit.

"Txbluesman" ( is not an entity. Unless you can demonstrate to me that you represent an actual person or fictitious person (such as a partnership, LLC, or Corporation), your contention is ludicrous on the face.

I apologize and retract the above if it turns out you do have a client in association with this matter, whose name is "Jack."

Hugh McBryde
PO Box ***
Montpelier VT, 05601-****
More →

Sphere: Related Content

And so it begins (UPDATE #3) Blues Takes Malonis as Attorney

I blog, not anonymously, but as myself, so that I may be accountable. I am a threat it would seem, to some. Odd though, that it is not someone with a face that threatens me, but someone without one:
Anonymous said...
"By the way Pharisee, I turned you in this morning in (V)ermont for harassment to local police, after reading how you have harassaed [sic] and threatened another poster on this blog.

Strange the officer seemed to know who you are , and stated, this isn't the first time someone has complained about you."
My reply:
"Do you mind telling me which agency Anonymous? I will be happy to pay them a visit."
And the coward added this:
"I also turned in a complaint to google for invasion of privacy of another poster."

September 30, 2009 1:13 PM
Further, Anonymous said...
"Im [sic] sure you will be getting a visit shortly Pharisee"

September 30, 2009 1:14 PM
Strangely reminiscent of how this all went down to start with. Isn't it?

I do not think that blogging in the clear is a magic lotion with which I righteously anoint myself so that nothing bad will happen to me. It is a bane for most cowards, but not for other truly ugly ones.

Hugh McBryde
Montpelier, Vermont


I contacted the following agencies:

Berlin City Police Department, Vermont.
I work in the Berlin Jurisdiction. No complaints have been filed.

Montpelier Police Department, Vermont.
I live in Montpelier. No complaints have been filed.

The Vermont State Police, located in our Capitol City, Montpelier, where I live.
No complaints have been filed.

Barre Vermont Police Department.
Some people easily confuse the location I live in with Barre, I called them, they have received no complaint. They assured me they would not even respond to a complaint made about me as I do not live or work in their jurisdiction.

The Washington County Sheriff refers all such complaints to the State Police. They have received no complaint, and have not passed it on.

UDPATE #2 - At 5:35pm EDT, "Blues" updated his blog by deleting my posts. Meh. That his his privilege. He runs his site, I do not. If He/She thinks I will violate his "strong suggestion" that I not post at his site or communicate with him, she/he is wrong, but let us say the issue of "censorship" is now settled.

TransBluesMan seems to think that Natalie Malonis is a hotshot attorney, and has retained her, or so "Blues" alleges:
"I have deleted all of Hugh's posts since he went on a rant and hijacked the thread.

Hugh, check your e-mail. It has instructions for any further communications with me to be through my attorney, since you saw fit to threaten legal action.

Do not contact me directly, including through this blog by posting comments."
Blues however, chose to leave up the remarks in which an anonymous poster says they HAD already turned me in to law enforcement. Again, meh, since that was not done.

What is interesting is, that Blues has now identified Natalie Malonis as Blues legal representative. If you have any complaints, I'd rush right over to her law office and file them. Here is the text of Blues email missive. It should be noted that Blues first contacted me, many months ago. Not the other way around. Now she doesn't want to talk anymore:

I have retained Natalie Malonis to represent me in this matter. She will be contacting you to provide the location where the subpoena may be served. All communications about this matter should be through her.


Texas Bluesman"
I now pronounce thee, Attorney and Troll. Sore losers.

UPDATE #3 (and hopefully the last) From LambChop's blog:
"Anonymous said...

Just to let you all know, I did NOT turn Pharisee into the police in Vermont..

I did however file a complaint against him with google, because of his treatening behaviour.

His constant accusing and threats against bloggers should be stopped.

Threatening someone by internet, email , or stalking or harassing them is illegal.

If you read the terms of service for google, he would know that.

I stated I called the police, hoping Pharisee would stop his malicious behaviour. I see it didn't.

I am a real person, and Im not TxBlueman or Betty or anyone else.

One poster is now going to report me to the "Southern Poverty Law Center." I suppose reports to Google and fictitious reporting to LE isn't working.

This is why I only allow "registered" comments, and also why I moderate my comments. Originally this blog had no controls on who commented, but as it became more popular, I restricted comments to registered users, and finally, moderated the comments.

The reasoning is as follows:

Registered users are accountable to someone. I greatly prefer up front postings by people who are known, but if a user is registered, they generally can be found if the need arises. By the entity who registered them.

Because that did not stop wild accusations and "oh yeah" type postings, I also made the comments moderated. This blog has NEVER encouraged comments, it ACCEPTS comments. I have even considered full scale private registration for commenting on the blog, and thereby making those who comment, always known to me and then allowing within that context, unmoderated posting.

It would APPEAR that Blues is concerned that blues is identified as the "anonymous" poster. Blues could clear that up a little by requiring registered posters. Blues could also moderate comments. Blues does not.

The fact is "Hannah" is not believable. Hannah has stated that Hannah lies for manipulative effect. Everything that comes out of Hannah's mouth after that, is subject to belief by verification only. I cannot accept reliably that "Hannah/Anonymous" was "Anonymous/Threatener." I cannot accept reliably that "Hannah/Anonymous" is not not the Threatening Anonymous any more than I can accept that Blues is not either. You see, whoever made the claim to have called the police is a bald faced liar. Whoever made the claim that they were the liar that called the police, admits to being a liar. It's a house of cards.

Blues COULD take down the threats. All of them, including vile remarks that go entirely to character assassination, just as Blues removed remarks of mine to make it appear as if I had done something threatening myself. Blues is an anonymous troll, and if he has offended you, contact Blues Attorney Malonis, and get them to show up in court.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

A fundamental reason Rozita's trial is being delayed.

There is supposed to be, this deposition.
A deposition that NO ONE on the defense side of the FLDS equation, knew about.

Well, they do now.

Thanks to a poster on the other side (everyone's good for something you know), It dawned on me. I've been saying that Rozita's relationship with Maggie Santos and her "partner," wasn't on the record.

Well, actually it was, in this "deposition."

As soon as the trial starts, don't those things come out? In the process of defending his client, David Foley would point out the relationship of Maggie Santos and Rozita Swinton (and Maggie's partner) and who knows who else.

So the trial is delayed, and delayed, and delayed, and delayed.

I'd say that's pretty plausible, because once the trial starts, it's now on the record, for everyone. That's why the FLDS trials in Texas have to start, before Rozita is tried. Sounds plausible. Doesn't it?

If the plausible is the actual, there are a lot more people involved in covering this up because you don't delay trials for the reasons given about, without someone's participation and/or appreciation and/or request and/or a quid pro quo.

Sorry Rozita, if I'm right, I just took away a trump card. I hope you have others. Like maybe someone asked you to call.

If all of the above is TRUE. Texas probably knows about the deposition, and has withheld that knowledge, from the defense.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Canadian officials may appeal dismissal of Blackmore/Oler Charges

Just make it legal. Get on board for legalization if you practice or affirm polygyny is acceptable. More →

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, September 28, 2009

Think about it

In view of what I've been blogging about for the last few days, watch this, and think about it:

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, September 27, 2009

Did Rozita Have a Night Job? (UPDATED)

If someone is conducting an internet sting for sex crimes against children. Do they not need a little girl imitator?
Rocky Mountain Women in Law Enforcement - "Sgt. Maggie Santos has been with the Colorado Springs Police Department for 15 years. Before joining the CSPD, Maggie was a teacher for a few years and decided that policing was where she really wanted to be. She joined the department in 1992 and spent time working midnights on patrol, joined the Neighborhood Policing Unit, and spent time as a School Resource Officer. Maggie has also served the department with her bilingual skills as she is fluent in Spanish. Maggie was promoted to the rank of Sergeant in 2000 and after a couple of years as a patrol supervisor, moved to the Major Crimes Section, in charge of the Sex Crimes, Crimes Against Children Unit. As part of her current position there, she supervises an Internet Crimes Against Children team which has been responsible for several high profile internet based sex offender arrests.

Maggie is currently working toward promoting to Lieutenant. Maggie was also one of the original members of the RMWLE Conference team, serving since our project begin back in 2002. Maggie serves as a Board Member and during our conferences is known as the 'AV Guru' knowing how to save the rest of us from our electronic stupidity. We are thankful!

When she is not toting her gun or fixing a digital projector, Maggie has two kids to keep her busy and spends time quilting, reading and mastering video games. Thanks Maggie!"
We've seen these stings on TV. They usually have someone pretending to be....

A little girl....
Colorado Springs Gazette - "Police in Mesa and Jefferson counties who posed as underage girls in Internet chat rooms say Sgt. Gregory A. Sallee attempted to arrange sexual encounters." Sept, 2007.
Nov, 2007:
The Gazette - "Cañon City (in neighboring Fremont County) police have arrested a California man in an Internet sex predator sting — the department’s 13th such arrest this year.

Police arrested Carl Michael Pfaff, 50, of Oxnard, Calif., on Friday after he traveled to Cañon City intending to have sex with an underage female. He was actually communicating online with an undercover police officer, police said."
Also in November 2007:
The Gazette - "Fremont County authorities have arrested a 52-year-old Denver man who they believe drove to Cañon City to have sex with a young girl.

Jeffrey A. Tensly was arrested Tuesday at a Cañon City convenience store on suspicion of criminal solicitation, sexual assault on a child and unlawful sexual contact, Cañon City Police Department Capt. Allen Cooper said."
August, 2005:
The Gazette - "Sgt. 1st Class Andre Ventura McDaniel, 40, shot himself in September 2004 after he was arrested in an Internet sting after allegedly trying to arrange sex with a teenage girl."
And from April of 2007:
The Gazette - "It was just one chapter Friday in what was one of the most hectic days for the department in recent memory.

On top of a carjacking that ended with two arrests after a 90-mph chase that included shots fired at sheriff’s deputies, police dealt with drug busts, robberies and a 34-year old man arrested on suspicion of using the Internet to try to arrange a sexual encounter with a 13-year-old."
Sept, 2007:
The Rocky Mountain News - "A correctional officer at the Arkansas Valley Correctional Facility in Ordway has been arrested on suspicion of attempted sexual exploitation of a child.

Richard Jefferson Harris, 52, of Pueblo, is accused of contacting someone in an Internet chat room whom he believed to be under 15 — actually, an undercover district attorney's investigator — and allegedly solicited sexually explicit photographs.

He also attempted to arrange a meeting, said Pam Russell of the Jefferson County district attorney's office."
January 2008:
NBC "News First" 5 - "New developments regarding a News First Investigation we showed you over the Summer of 2007. It deals with some of the most disturbing criminal behavior our local officers have to deal with -- sex crimes against children.

Despite all the high profile crackdowns on internet predators, men continue traveling to the Front Range to try to have sex with young kids.

News First was granted exclusive access to what's arguably one of the most prolific Internet Crimes Against Children units in our state, at the Cañon City Police Department. It's one of Colorado's smallest police departments, and the officer who cruises the internet looking for predators only works that part of the job part-time. However, they still manage to capture, or assist other agencies in capturing, at least 1 suspected sex offender a month. Two of the units high profile captures that happened in Cañon City and include a Texas Constable and a Quiznos executive."
So, no one ever told me what Sex Crimes Unit Sgt. Sean Mandel was doing, on "detached duty" to the FBI.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, September 26, 2009

Rozita, David Foley, Maggie Santos and Surprising things left unsaid.

Rozita's attorney David Foley has been confident from the beginning, boldly swaggering and making public statements, accurately predicting the future, and then, saying nothing more. Listen to what he said, one week after Rozita was arrested:
The San Antonio Express-News - "Texas Rangers accompanied Colorado Springs police officers last week when they searched Swinton's apartment, where they found items indicating a possible connection between Swinton and calls regarding the Eldorado compound. Swinton, who works for an insurance office, is free on $10,000 bond. Her attorney, David Foley of Colorado Springs, said he could not discuss the allegations.

'There's a lot more to this than the public is getting. I think people would be surprised. Stay tuned,' Foley said.

Her initial court appearance is set for May 1, but Foley said he expects the case will be rescheduled."
Not only did someone probably pay cash for Rozita's bond (I checked) but David Foley is ALREADY saying the case will be delayed (has it ever been) and publicly trumpeting in the press that they should "stay tuned" because he thought "people would be surprised."

He's said exactly zero after that. You can't catch David Foley. He's casually skipped court dates and had arrest warrants sworn out for his client that were later dropped, his client has traveled the country after being listed as a flight risk in the warrant (probably routine, I grant you), she has received expensive psychiatric care out of state and she has skipped in and out of the court confidently, right under the noses of the press with last minute changes in venue.

You'd think she was a rich celebrity client.

She's not. She's a simple misdemeanor defendant.

So David Foley was right, his client did get a delay, and a delay and a delay and a delay and who knows how many other delays.

Why DO you go out and say that you've got surprising things to say and then not say them and then get everything you want?

Could it be because you've got surprising things to say, and you're not saying them?
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, September 25, 2009

Bring it on

A coward, and a nobody whose gender we do not even know, Texas Blues (Man?) aka "HeShe," aka "Hac Hoc" is telling me that I am risking a lawsuit. Do we REALLY think this is because he cares about what happens to me?
Bring it on. All of you. I would LOVE to make this an issue about ME. That is truly beyond my wildest dreams that I would be sued, and then have the opportunity to subpoena and depose and have testify, all these persons who I am alleged to treat poorly.

I am serious. Oh please. Oh please, OH PLEASE just do it.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Revisiting Sean Mandel

Back in January, I may have been wrong. That happens.
That's may have been wrong, but not very. On January 21st I reported to you that I had contacted Sean Mandel of the CSPD and discovered that he had NOT been contacted by Texas, rather he had been contacted by an FBI agent he was working with on detached duty in April of the preceding year. That would be the month that the YFZ raid occurred and Rozita was apprehended.

In view of what has been discovered in the last several days, I'm forced to say this might not have been "first contact." This was indeed a "back channel" that I discovered, a sort of "carrier pigeon" network instead of the normal channel, but who contacted whom first? I have always assumed that I stumbled upon the first communication between CSPD and Texas and the FBI, but it may have been one in a long series of contacts, designed to stay OFF THE RECORD.

One of the things CSPD's IA needs to ask, and look for is who contacted who first? Was it "Beta" (Maggie's "longtime companion") or was it Maggie or did some other member of CSPD call TEXAS first and say "I think we know your caller?" The precise mechanism of the first contact between the FBI, the Texas Rangers, Sherri f David Doran and CSPD must be known. WHO called WHOM first and WHEN?

What if Maggie did the RIGHT THING and called before the kids were carted away? Before the raid took place?

PS: I'm apparently "Stalking" Rozita, assuming of course that this blogger is Rozita. It has always seemed to be her. The graphic is funny. (In case you're wondering, the smallest print says ("BTW, you're out of milk.")
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, September 24, 2009

More on the relationship of Lt. Maggie Santos and Rozita Swinton

When someone doesn't tell you the truth, or at least, when they skirt around it, and you check their story, you keeping sitting up straight in your chair and having those insight moments. Here's another insight:
From the April 2008 arrest warrant of Rozita Swinton.
"On February 14, 2007, Sergeant Magdalena Santos (980D) was contacted by Jenna Hamilton from the Cocoon House located in the state of Washington. Ms. Hamilton stated she was concerned for the welfare of a 14-year-old she was talking to identified as 'April' from Colorado Springs, Colorado, who had been calling her since September 2006. Ms. Hamilton advised 'April' would call several times a week reporting sexual abuse by her father and uncle. She advised 'April' had told her she was staying at the TESSA safe house with her mother (at) the end of 2006. Ms. Hamilton stated 'April' told her she was a student at Rampart High School. Ms. Hamilton stated she had spoken with counselor Catherine DiNuzzo at the school in reference to 'April.' Ms. Hamilton advised 'April' had called from 719-447-7981 and 719-217-7329."
Since we now know it was "common knowledge" around CSPD that Lt. Maggie Santos knew Rozita Swinton, we can assume that Maggie was familiar with her cases. At least, she was familiar with the February 2007 call from Jenna Hamilton. She TOOK the 2007 call from Jenna Hamiliton. She KNOWS Rozita has "exported" her talents after her Douglas county guilty plea on similar charges where Rozita received a deferred sentence.

So, are we to believe that in view of Maggie's familiarity with this particular case of a young teen girl complaining of sexual abuse to a shelter in Washington State, from old friend Rozita, that Maggie turns on the tube, Fox, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC and during the first part of April 2008, watches the unfolding drama (along with her friend "Beta") and doesn't say "Oh CRAP...ROZITA?" Don't they have an IMMEDIATE responsibility to call and say "WHAT NUMBER IS YOUR CALLER CALLING FROM?" The story was so plastered all over the news that it was like it was happening in their back yard. And really, it was, because in February, the month before Rozita began calling Texas:
Newsweek - "This past February (2008), according to an arrest-warrant affidavit against Swinton, Colorado Springs police responded to two 911 calls from someone claiming to be Jennifer, a 4-year-old abused girl locked in a basement. By tracking the calls, cops narrowed the location to a two-block radius and then searched the area house by house for a trapped little girl. Swinton 'basically shut down a whole police division,' says Thrumston. The girl was never found. (In between calls, Swinton also found time to get elected as a state delegate for (then Sen.) Barack Obama in the Colorado Democratic caucuses.)"

Toes also says that if IA doesn't look at Rozita's and Maggies (and Beta's) phone numbers, they're not trying.

Don't tell me they didn't think of it. They are detectives. What do they do? They DETECT.
Last updated 7:22am EDT 09/25/09
More →

Sphere: Related Content

CSPD Internal Affairs, Lt. Maggie Santos and Rozita Swinton

I had two conversations with Colorado Springs' Police Department's "Internal Affairs" division today.
The first was grossly unsuccessful. The listed contact for CSPD's "IA" is a Lt. Kirk Wilson, and it should be noted that while Lt. Wilson was with CSPD in April of 2008, he was not in "IA."

When I called, about 9am their time, a woman answered the phone and indicated that Lt. Wilson was "in training" this morning and was unavailable. I left my phone number and name and asked that he get back to me. Within the hour I had a call back from a male member of CSPD, presumably in IA named Sgt. Lux. The conversation with Sgt. Lux could be best described as initially cordial, then cold, and then verbal warfare. At no time during the conversation would I describe Sgt. Lux as being helpful.

The gist of the conversation from my point of view was, that if I brought evidence, signed sealed and delivered of impropriety on the part of a CSPD officer, they would look into it. Specific times, specific places, specific persons and specific crimes. I was verbally harassed at several turns in the conversation and it descended into an exchange that I could best compare to a traffic stop where I was the driver being asked to quickly produce my License, Insurance and Registration.

In calling CSPD's IA, I had little expectation of real result. Lt. Maggie Santos had directed me to call IA and so I did. In general I expected the most positive outcome to be that IA had investigated Lt. Santos, and had cleared her. That would be a positive result in terms of information. I also have no desire that Lt. Santos be involved in anything improper. That would be sad and would possibly destroy lives. I have no desire for such an outcome, but Lt. Santos has brought this on herself, by being less than forthcoming.

If there was an ongoing IA investigation, I would not expect IA to tell me, one way or the other, and as far as I know, there is an investigation. I think that is unlikely, but it's possible.

The conversation with Sgt. Lux was fruitless with me yelling at him in the end that he was obstructing, and being obtuse and wasting my time. He repeated questions and belittled saying I was unprepared for the call and didn't know what I was alleging. Right Sgt. Lux. I was unprepared, I don't know what I am alleging. This is all new to me. I eventually found part of the information he asked about, having no way to know in advance what CSPD's IA would want to know or use as documentation, and I gave it to him. Like I said, after that I ended up yelling at Sgt. Lux. It was an infuriating conversation.

So I went to Costco. Did some shopping, drove back, and called the number I had to pry out of Sgt. Lux for CSPD's records division in the hope that I get access to Becky Hoerth's deposition that almost certainly had to spring out of the April 2008 arrest warrant of Rozita Swinton.

And got interrupted.

By a call.

From Lt. Kirk Wilson.

Lt. Wilson said he had a "number on his phone" and was calling back, he also said he had an email about the conversation Sgt. Lux and I had from Sgt. Lux. The tone of our conversation was considerably different. Whereas the one that took place between myself and Sgt. Lux could be best characterized as Sgt. Lux telling me "What do you want US to do about it?" and me eventually becoming angry, Lt. Wilson wanted to know what I had called about, and made an effort to fit it into a form Internal Affairs could deal with.

Eventually I was able to clarify who it was that I was suggesting there be an investigation concerning and why it was important. Essentially it boiled down to "This is the largest child custody case in US History, Lt. Santos has not been forthcoming, it needs to be investigated for even the smallest appearance of impropriety and then those appearances pursued until resolution." It was not hard once the case was laid out to convince Lt. Wilson that this was important.

I would say there has NOT been a case opened with regard to Rozita at any time by IA involving Rozita and either Lt. Santos and her "friend" in the department, with whom she lives, the female officer I refer to as "Beta." Had there been, Lt. Santos would have been better prepared when I called on the 21st. She wasn't. Lt. Wilson would have been carrying out a case of faked ignorance as to some of the details, that should have him acting out his job, not doing it, in Hollywood, for bigger bucks. I'm going to call this as the first formal investigation into the matter. I of course, cannot predict the outcome.

One of the things that I told Lt. Wilson I would quote him on was his statement that it was "common knowledge" that Rozita and Lt. Maggie Santos had a "relationship" around CSPD, as an internal matter. For this to be true, contact with Maggie and Rozita simply had to be of a relatively contemporary nature. The obvious familiarity and "common knowledge" in the department (which included Lt. Wilson knowing at the time of Rozita's arrest) means that it wasn't a 15 year old relationship. I'm sorry. Rozita has gained weight, changed in appearance, and was arrested initially under a different name. Maggie, in addition had fielded a call in February of 2007 from Washington state regarding Rozita and if her memory had faded, it certainly had been recently refreshed, and a little over a year later, here they were again. Similar problem. False reporting across state lines.

After telling Lt. Wilson I intended to publish his statement, he hung a few believable qualifiers on it. By "common knowledge" he did not mean "EVERYBODY at CSPD knew." He offered that of course, he knew, but that didn't mean everybody, but indeed quite a few people at CSPD that were around for the arrest, did know.

He also did not mean that the quality or nature of the relationship was known for anything other than "they knew each other." In other words that's all that there might have been to the association. They knew each other. That makes sense to some degree for an officer that is the CSPD sex crimes unit and a frequent false reporter that used to be your kid's nanny. Except this was not acknowledged to me by Maggie, so that further erodes her credibility.

Basically it is evident to me so far that Lt. Wilson is being truthful with me (this could change) and at least initially intended to investigate the charge. The fact that a good number of CSPD officers knew of the familiarity of Santos and Swinton says that Lt. Santos blew smoke my direction.

At one point Lt. Wilson wondered aloud why I would want to push the issue and I explained. This is the largest child custody case in US History. Hoerth, Swinton, Santos and "Beta" are almost certainly all lesbians that at one time, hung out together. That makes their relationships anything from romantic to professional and inappropriate. If it was "common knowledge" at CSPD that Rozita and Maggie had a "relationship," then why has that fact NEVER come to light in the reporting of the story?

IA has opened a case or initial investigation, they will be getting back to me.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Apparently, there will be no Polygamy Test Case in Canada

The charges against Blackmore and Oler? Dropped. Child abuse? Not even mentioned.
The Canadian Press/CTV - "A British Columbia court decision has quashed polygamy charges against two controversial B.C. religious leaders.

Winston Blackmore and James Oler were arrested earlier this year in Bountiful, B.C., and charged with one count each of polygamy.

The men had petitioned the court to stay the charges, arguing that the B.C. attorney general had gone 'special prosecutor shopping' until he found someone who would go ahead with charges.

In a decision released Wednesday, B.C. Supreme Court Judge Sunni Stromberg-Stein agreed.

The judge said the province's attorney general did not have the jurisdiction to appoint a second special prosecutor to consider charges against Blackmore and Oler after the first special prosecutor recommended against charging the two men.

She found that the appointment of the second special prosecutor -- and therefore the decision to charge the men was 'unlawful.'

The attorney general had no jurisdiction to appoint a second special prosecutor, the judge concluded."
Will the charges be brought back?
"(Blackmore and Oler's attorney) said he's not sure whether the charges could be resurrected.

'I believe this will be the end of the criminal case but what the judge has actually done is to quash the appointment of the special prosecutor,' (Bruce Elwood) said.

The B.C. Criminal Justice Branch will have to decide what they will do now, he said."
So, they went venue shopping to "get" someone. How strange. It is probably not an accident that the Canada avoided a "Charter Rights" issue at the same time.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Latest Rozita Revelation started with this: Was she a NARC?

The latest Round of Rozita Revelations started with my friend "Toes," after one of our brain storming sessions. I updated a speculative post that was primarily written to tweak press interest which is typically pointed in other directions:
March 30, 2009 - "The owner of the MySpace page has made a convincing presentation that she is not a close friend of Rozita, but a passing acquaintance. For that reason I am at least for now, removing references to her home page and her name. What is odd is that this paints a portrait of a young woman trapped in the idea that she is still in High School, and hanging out with High School students in Colorado Springs, pretending to be one of them.

It has been suggested to me by a friend that this is what a 'NARC' does. It's a totally wild speculation, but could it be that Rozita was such a person, employed by law enforcement to befriend High School students, as if she was one herself?

Right now, I caution, that's just wild speculation, under the heading of "What if?' "
Trying to follow Rozita has always been very difficult. Her associations, aside from that claimed by former foster mother & GLBT rights advocate Mary Catharine Nelson, and a probable foster parent in Idaho have always been glancing at best. Rozita often claims strong ties by implications or actions with persons whose memory of her is fleeting. Either that or their memory of her is strong and they view her now as radioactive and lie about it.

The above quote is an edit from the original speculative post which was based on the fact that one of Rozita's two known "My Space" accounts was claiming to be moving, and the other was claiming to live in Ontario. As a now "put off" trial date approached, it seemed as if Rozita was saying she was leaving the country. The flurry of associations around Rozita led to a woman now no longer in Colorado Springs (or the west for that matter) that seemed to know Rozita well, based on what Rozita was saying about her. According to that woman, who I still believe, or at least want to believe, she barely remembers Rozita.

I believe her because of what she insisted was true about Rozita. That she was part of another group of High School students that hung out at the same bowling allies. She saw her, heard her name, and knew of her, but associated her with that "other High School" group. Why does one woman remember another woman she doesn't know in another group of High School students? The most credible reason is that the woman I mention that gave me this information is a lesbian. Rozita would seem to be one herself, and hung out with a group of lesbians in that time frame, in Colorado. Perhaps this unnamed person found Rozita attractive, at any rate, she remembered Rozita, but didn't really know her and claimed she was on the periphery of her activities.

This is what my tipster saw. The tipster has inside information that I have verified first hand. The tipster began to search the internet for terms like "Rozita" and "NARC" and found me. The tipster was concerned and increasingly agitated about the free pass Rozita was getting and claimed to know why.


Because "Tipper" alleged that Rozita was employed by Lt. Magdalena (Maggie) Santos of CSPD and her lesbian life partner who also works closely with Maggie at CSPD. Lesbians. Again.

I verified that the two individuals DO in fact work for CSPD. They are often mentioned together in CSPD and association literature. They own or recently owned a home together in in the Colorado Springs area and the other woman whom I've called "Beta" has been "outed" as a lesbian, by name. It makes sense to assume that she and Maggie are a "couple."

So on Saturday, I got an email from "Tipper."
"The interesting part about this is that during the interview of Becky Hoerth at Colorado Springs Police Department she stated she meet Rozita through friends Maggie Santos and **** ****(Beta) these two individuals are both Sargent's with CSPD who happens to be a Lesbian couple.. Rozita use to be there nanny! Very Interesting, right? For someone who claims to be LDS is surrounded by lesbians does not make sense. I was also told that Maggie Santos has a hand in the investigation with Terry Thurmston who is also a female. Does this not seem odd? Why would you not remove yourself from a case when you have a relationship with the individual involved? It's all shady to me but what do I know."
A subsequent interview with Maggie, which led off with me asking for "Rozita" after calling Maggie on her cell phone had Maggie immediately claiming that the relationship was 20 years old (Rozita was 14 and in Nashville TN). I discounted that as unlikely (frankly nearly impossible) and Maggie retrenched at 1995 being the date, after being confronted with the date of 1997. Maggie's recollections were alternately wrong, vague or specific based on what served her best. For that reason I do not believe Maggie. She has changed her story and Tipper has not. Maggie would not clarify and promised to swear out a criminal complaint if I contacted her again. All of this started in very friendly fashion but in less than 12 hours descended into threats and claims that I was "blackmailing" her. I would not publish her name until after she refused to clarify and after she cut off communication and after her story was called into question. I had kept her name out of the story because it would be wrong to name her if she just had a passing relationship with Rozita once. It now seems it was not a passing relationship. Back to Tipper, paraphrased and redacted ever so slightly so as to hide Tipper's identity:
"Page 1/50 of the discovery under Becky Hoerth Statement says:
'Ms. Hoerth stated she met Rozita in 1997 through a mutual friend at the Colorado Springs YMCA. She stated at the time Rozita was doing day care for Maggie Santos and **** ****(Beta). She stated the two of them have been friends and that Rozita has helped her out when ever she needs it. She stated she had just recently moved back from Wisconsin and due to financial reasons is staying with Rozita."
This cannot be disputed as it is in the discovery."
I stress that this document simply exists, or does not. "Beta" and Maggie are close enough to the situation to verify this, but Maggie will not. CSPD or El Paso/Douglas County officials can verify it too. I'm either wrong, or right about the existence of this statement, which is worded almost exactly as I have presented it above. There is even a page reference. Back to Tipper:
"Some of (Maggie's) statements to you are incorrect also; such as (Rozita) worked for her longer. (It was hoped that) if either one of them spoke with you that they would be honest this. My concern (is that Maggie) is hiding something. One of the problems is it's affecting the case against Rozita (for Rozita's benefit) since Maggie didn't recuse herself 3yrs ago. The only reason she pulled out was because Becky outed her and Beta in her statement so she was forced to pull out."
Again, this is ever so slightly redacted and paraphrased for the purposes of concealing Tipper's identity.

Since nothing Tipper has said to me has been contradicted by the facts and Maggie has already owned up to getting one critical detail wrong, I'm going with Tipper for now. Tipper has not had to retract one bit of the story so far. Much of it has been independently verified.

So when did Rozita start getting into trouble with the law on phony tips?
"ABC News - Colorado Springs police said Rozita Swinton had made calls in February (2008) in which she pretended to be a girl locked in a basement, claiming abuse and calling authorities for help. Swinton has a record for making similar calls in 2005."
2005? That fits with "3 years ago" when it is said that Maggie was forced out of the case, forced to recuse, as opposed to doing so voluntarily. If this is the case it would call entirely into question everything that Maggie said, such as details like not knowing what part of the south Rozita came from (Tennessee) or unverifiable (at this time) details like exactly when and how long Rozita worked for Maggie, or that Maggie and Beta both employed Rozita together.

So how do we speculate at this point?

Was Rozita at one time, "locked in" Maggie's basement? This is a fair question to ask. Unlikely, but nonetheless fair. As I have said to Maggie and many others, lies tend to contain elements of the truth. I would guess from what Rozita said, she'd been locked up somewhere once, by somebody and it really bothered her. Not exactly a surprise.

Was Ms. Swinton's relationship with either Beta or Maggie ever sexual? If a male police officer had a long ongoing relationship with a female suspect in and out of trouble with the law that required rescuing, it had better be a relative, or the department will eventually ask "are you doing her?"

Was Ms. Swinton a snitch? A confidential informant? A "Narc?" Stories from one of my other sources (now unnamed) says she may well have been. At the time she was in Colorado, she was in her 20's and apparently was viewed as another High School student and "hung out" with them.

Was Ms. Swinton a convenient warrant factory? Can't get into some residence? Need help? Maggie has a nanny that can fake an abused kid's voice and you're in the door, no problem! Rozita at 33 convincingly passed herself off as 15. To several people.

These last two speculations gains more weight when viewed with how quickly CSPD was said initially, to have ID'd her. Texas calls. There was a lot of back channel chatter off the record as well. We were asked to believe that they said "Oh yeah, those are Rozita's numbers." If most lies do indeed contain an element of truth, what if CSPD really knew who Rozita was by the phone numbers she used? Texas calls. "No problem, we know that gal."

Some other questions that need answering are among others, is there some sort of accessible database on which Rozita and her number were already published. We know that since 9/11 there has been an effort to coordinate and consolidate information between various law enforcement agencies. Would it be possible for the FBI in Texas for instance to type in Rozita's number and it comes back with "PAID SNITCH, ROZITA SWINTON - CSPD?"

Would you type in the number and it says "NUMBER IN CASE IN COLORADO SPRINGS, PERP ROZITA SWINTON?" This was the goal post 9/11. Is that possible in this case and if so, was it done?

More "out there" but deserving of consideration as well is the idea that someone was calling around looking for a decent actress to play a part. Does this lead to Maggie and "Beta's" warrant machine Rozita? Does someone need to be checking into cases investigated by Maggie and her department for the veracity of the information or informants used in gaining warrants in Colorado Springs?

I've fed all this information to the press and their reaction? Meh. As a matter of fact, I mentioned on Brooke Adams blog at the SLTrib that there was a relationship between Maggie and Rozita. Her reaction? She didn't publish it. I didn't link, as I recall. I did not characterize the relationship with anything other than that which Maggie has willingly confirmed to me personally. Brooke comes on today, makes a comment herself, but won't publish that cold hard simple fact.


PS: As of this post I am making it official. If you post at this blog, you're going to have to make sense. Ranting this and ranting that and blindly ignoring evidence will only get you published here if it is a great example of how idiotic you are. Other than that, you're going to get rejected. Jam's last post is not published, but not because it was stupid. It was not published for reasons Jam knows.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, September 21, 2009

UPDATED (again): Rozita. Source says: Lt Maggie Santos untruthful.

Since nothing essentially, that my source has told me, has been refuted, I will publish the source's response to Lt. Maggie Santos.
"Some of 'Alpha's' statements to you are incorrect. Rozita worked for her longer. I am concerned Alpha and Beta are hiding something. The problems is it is affecting the case against Rozita in ROZITA's FAVOR. Alpha DID NOT RECUSE 3 yrs ago. Alpha pulled out was because Becky Hoerth outed Alpha and Beta so they were forced to pull out." (this is a paraphrase)
This is getting VERY interesting.

Alpha is CSPD Lieutenant Maggie Santos.

Maggie's rebuttal to this information is the following:
"I have nothing to add, feel free to pull CSPD reports. If your source has a complaint they are welcome to file a complaint with IA (internal affairs)."
"If your source has more information ask her."
Please note that I have not identified the gender of my source, nor will I be tricked into doing so now. I have disclosed nothing to Maggie about the identity of my source:
"Smells like blackmail."
Lt. Santos has had every opportunity to clarify and refuses to do so. I cannot evaluate the truthfulness, ultimately, of either party, but more of what my source has said, checks out, as opposed to that which Maggie has said. I note that Maggie was truthful that Rozita was her Nanny, but her explanation of time frames stretches credulity to the breaking point.

An invitation to file a complaint with internal affairs is an invitation to go public. I would greatly prefer to have Maggie's greater insight into this matter, but she does not give it.

The Modern Pharisee does not take the position that Maggie is untruthful. The Modern Pharisee does not take the position that the source I employ is truthful. I present both sides and point out that so far, more of what the source has said, checks out.

Maggie also says she will change her cell phone number tomorrow, which means that she no longer wishes to comment. Her last communication to me by email:
"I am requesting you not contact me again, by phone, email or in any other format. As I explained to you on the text, at this point any information you want should be done through CSPD. I have notified my chain of command that you are becoming creepy and I am concerned about the safety of my children (whom you are now bringing up). You have access to my personal cell, email and may have access to my address. Any further communication I will consider harassment and I will also consider filing this criminally."
This is what is known as a "non-denial denial."

I got Maggie's phone through a publication where she published that phone number. I got her email the same way. I have published neither. I believe that I have her address but I am not interested in revealing it. I will not do so. She has requested that I no longer communicate with her, and I will not. I asked her to clear up the time frames, and she would not. None of my communications will show that I have even hinted at revealing anything but her name. I will also point out that I have NOT identified "Beta."
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Allen Steed? He seems to be winning.

Again, with the disclaimer that I ain't no lawyer. Read it yourself.
Allen moves to have the charges dismissed, part deux.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Update on Rozita, she did work as a nanny for CSPD officers

She did indeed perform services as a "Nanny" in the rough time frame of 1995-1997, perhaps earlier for employees of the Colorado Springs Police Department.

I spoke with one of the officers involved and confirmed their occupation, relationship, and that Rozita was their nanny. I will call this officer Alpha. I am keeping their names out of the story, as it does not appear yet, nor do I suspect, that the relationship was anything other than I have been told, by officer Alpha. Officer Beta was not interviewed. The relationship of officers Alpha and Beta is professional and personal.

When Rozita was about 20 according to Alpha, she worked for a short time (months) for Alpha and Beta as a nanny. She was terminated quickly for being unsatisfactory. Alpha is very hawkish when it comes to protecting children. Alpha could not confirm aspects of Rozita's claimed background, and discharged her. Alpha says that Rozita was referred to Alpha by a "friend" that Alpha no longer keeps close contact with, though Alpha knows that this friend is in the Colorado Springs area, still. Alpha would not give me the name of this "friend." I have offered to email Alpha so if Alpha feels it appropriate to pass this information along, Alpha can do so.

The only disturbing aspect of the story was that Alpha tried to claim that the relationship was "20 years old" which is untrue. Rozita was not of age at that time, she was 14. When pressed, Alpha said the relationship was in the 1995 time frame or earlier. This begins to seriously encroach on the time frame during which we know Rozita was with Mary Catharine Nelson in the Nashville TN area. It is disturbing that this sort of distancing is taking place since it suggests there might be something to hide. In other words, this portion of the story does not match.

Becky Hoerth is said to have testified in "discovery" regarding Rozita, on a "page 50" of that document, that she was introduced to Rozita by Alpha and Beta. Alpha says that they were in the same circle of friends, but was vague. When asked about Becky's LE connections, Alpha says she thinks Becky was "in corrections."

Alpha also offered this intersting observation. "Dana Anderson" is an alias used by Rozita. It is a combination of "Gillian Anderson" and "Dana Scully," of the actress and the character portrayed, on the "X Files."

Alpha also offered that they recused themselves, when Rozita was arrested by Alpha's department. Alpha claims not to know David Foley, ex the El Paso county prosecuter, who now represents Rozita Swinton.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

$250 Million in Clunker Payments Rejected

Doubtless some will be eventually accepted. In the end? Millions of Dollars will be paid out and not paid for, by the Government, no, wait, by your local car dealer.

Can you say "unseen tax?" Sure you can. I knew you could. Of course, the rich fat cats of America's franchised dealers can afford it. Right?
More →

Sphere: Related Content

No to the Bailout!

There is no need to prop up any segment of the media.
The Hill - "Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) has introduced S. 673, the so-called 'Newspaper Revitalization Act,' that would give outlets tax deals if they were to restructure as 501(c)(3) corporations. That bill has so far attracted one cosponsor, Cardin's Maryland colleague Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D).

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs had played down the possibility of government assistance for news organizations, which have been hit by an economic downturn and dwindling ad revenue."
I too mourn the passing of the traditional News PAPER. Heck, I was a paperboy delivering for the "Daytona Beach News-Journal" in 1968. Let's get real though, hard print news media has been in decline for years, the only thing buoying them up being the increasing population. The clue is in the very names of our newspapers. Once in Daytona Beach there was a "News" and a "Journal." They merged into one. Daytona Beach is vastly larger than it was when there were two papers, but there is only one now. Similarly you can find evidence of that in Orlando with their paper being the "Sentinel Star."
" 'I haven't seen detailed proposals yet, but I'll be happy to look at them,' Obama told the editors of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and Toledo Blade in an interview."
Look, but don't you dare touch you dingbat. If the Apocalypse comes and we lose our electronic media, new newspapers will spring up overnight. Like mushrooms. All we need is the freedom to publish them. See now? In that very quote you have the "Pittsburgh Post-Gazette," yet another evidence of the merger of two papers.

At one time papers that are now one, that used to be two were "Morning" and "Afternoon" publications. You got one to see what happened yesterday. You got the other in the afternoon to see what happened in the morning. You sat down to dinner to watch Walter Concrete and see what happened while they were printing the afternoon paper (and what to think about all of it) and you maybe went to bed watching the evening news at 10 or 11 with the wife, who probably thought she was the news, not what was on the tube.

It's all different now and we don't need these various papers, that's why they're asking for a bailout. With copy machines, email, faxes and PC's there will always be news publication and dissemination. There is no need for a bailout.

Saturday I mentioned why cars were important and why a domestic car industry was important to all of us. A domestic paper press? It's only as important as we want it to be, and if you want it to be important, buy the paper. If you don't, let 'em die. Until we're deaf, dumb and blind, and DEAD, there will always be news, and it will always get out. Somehow. Just let me keep my 1st Amendment, and we'll never need a bailout. Talking is not going to go away.

What's really going on? Democrats are propping up mouthpieces that are favorable to them. Even if this was not the case, how "objective" would media that most go to the hand it just thought about biting, to get the operating cash it needs to continue? Doesn't that question answer itself?
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, September 19, 2009

Rozita Again. Something new. UPDATED

I thought I would be done with this story, except for the forensic aspect of it.
The Modern Pharisee is now in possession of information, given to him unsolicited. Unsolicited in the sense that I did not go research and find the lead, the lead came to me. Not unsolicited in the sense that I have put a lot of work into this subject and anyone possessed of information about Rozita, and wondering what to do with it, would probably find, and consider turning that information over, to me.

This information has now been confirmed, click on the UPDATE above to go to the new post.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

So like a Republican (or any conservative)

To be frank, I both get it, and don't get it. I have refrained for the most part from blogging on the subject of the auto industry bail out. There have been a few posts, but not a lot. My livelihood depends on the domestic auto industry and so I have been restrained.
Now I'm going to say it. The attitude displayed here by the American Voting Public is just plain stupid:
"My Mustang aside, the greatest automobile in the history of the world may have been the ‘57 Chevy. It liberated the nation to see the USA in their… well, you know the rest. The common man had what the rich man had — without Eisenhower Motors.

Now GM is on the ropes thanks to decades of stupidity on a scale seldom seen outside of Congress.

Rasmussen polled the people and found the voters think the government has helped GM enough.

Rasmussen polled the people and found the voters think the government has helped GM enough."
'If GM requests more money to stay in business, only 16% now think the federal government should provide it. Sixty-one percent (61%) say no more taxpayer money should be given to the automaker,' Rasmussen reported. 'Interestingly, those who currently own GM cars are more strongly opposed to any further bailout of the company than are non-GM owners.'
"Over the years, I have owned an Oldsmobile, a Buick, a Chevy… no complaints. I just like the Mustang’s look."
'Most Americans (58%) still say Ford, the company that didn’t take a government bailout, is the Big Three automaker that has the best chance of surviving and becoming profitable again,'
(Found at Don Surber.)
I've finally condensed down to something relatively short, what the problem with the car industry in the United States has been for probably 20 years or more. Collectively the "Big Three" couldn't afford to shut down their assembly lines for 2 months. Their fixed costs included compensation to too many people not working and still getting paid. That's the short form of it. Rephrased, the US Auto industry was bankrupt a long time ago if it had to shut down the plants for 60 days.

In other industries, salaries and wages are variable costs and as draconian as it may seem, an industry could survive in hard times to pay you another day, by closing it's plants and turning out the lights. Stinks to be you if you're a wage earner, but when they opened again, you had a job. That ceased to be a strategy for the US Auto industry years ago, so they kept plants open, losing money on making cars and discounting them in slow times. Why? Because they lost more money paying people to do nothing.

I'm not prepared to argue with anyone (without wanting to explode at the same time) how it got that way. Let's just say there is blame to go around and it doesn't all settle on Auto Industry Fat Cats, the convenient location both those on the right and left like to place most of the blame. We have a new Little Three left over, and Ford's problems are the same as those of GM's and Chrysler's prior to both going bankrupt. All were losing money. 67% of the US auto industry going down the tubes with one remaining almost assures that the next time we're having this discussion (and there will be a next time), 100% of the Auto Industry (Ford) would be on the chopping block.

In the highly regulated environment of selling cars in the United States, emissions, safety, warranty concerns and fuel economy, the entry level costs are too high for anyone to get into the business any longer. Ask Tucker. Ask DeLorean. Essentially you have to set up shop simultaneously in 48 states and produce a product that passes the scrutiny of the Feds, several big states such as California and the insurance industry.

Are you going to buy that car if and when someone tries to do that? Probably not. It probably will not happen. Tesla is TRYING, but right now they are not making cars for ma and pa. Tesla's are expensive and custom ordered. I do not count them as automobiles in reality. You might as well say that Checker, when they made cars, was an American car company. Checker is said to have gone out of business in June of this year. Did anybody notice? By the time they went, they were so insignificant a player that not of us cared. What's left of Checker seems to be owned by the Canadian company, the "Narmco Group. Their website says they're still there, as a stamping plant.

What's my point? You don't want an America without an domestic auto industry. They are a strategic industry. Try to go to war with the country you're BUYING cars and trucks from. See how that works. I am not a trade protectionist, but if you figure you're going to take out your rage on the auto companies that took Federal help by driving them out of business through lack of patronage, you might as well put a gun to your head.

Similarly you figured you'd "show us" when you didn't like John McCain, and you put the Obama/Acorn/Democrat/Liberal gun to our heads in the last election.

How's that working out for you?

Is the satisfaction (schadenfreude) of seeing those guys get theirs enough comfort for you when you cut the rope we are all clinging to, to see them fall?
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, September 18, 2009

Rebecca Musser to be deposed September 30th

So ordered and signed by Judge Steven Conn.
The depositions will occur at the offices of Wright Stanish & Winkler, 300 South Fourth Street, Suite 701, Las Vegas, NV 89101
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Large number of notices at Mohave County Court site RE: Warren Jeffs.

My apologies, I am at the emergency room with my wife who has a foot injury. You'll have to read them yourselves. More →

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Where has Mary Travers Gone?

Peter, Paul and now, no Mary. She has died, at age 72, in Danbury Connecticut of complications of leukemia. I had the pleasure of seeing Paul Stookey in concert in Orlando FL and of meeting him later, but never had the pleasure of seeing all three together. No one ever will again.
"Mary Travers passed away today. After successful recovery from leukemia through a bone marrow/stem cell transplant, Mary succumbed to the side effects of one of the chemotherapy treatments.

We all loved her deeply and will miss her beyond words."
Statement by Peter Yarrow:
"In her final months, Mary handled her declining health in the bravest, most generous way imaginable. She never complained. She avoided expressing her emotional and physical distress, trying not to burden those of us who loved her, especially her wonderfully caring and attentive husband, Ethan. Mary hid whatever pain or fear she might have felt from everyone, clearly so as not to be a burden. Her love for me and Noel Paul, and for Ethan, poured out with great dignity and without restraint. It was, as Mary always was, honest and completely authentic. That's the way she sang, too; honestly and with complete authenticity. I believe that, in the most profound of ways, Mary was incapable of lying, as a person, and as an artist. That took great courage, and Mary was always equal to the task.

Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of my relationship with Mary Travers over the last, almost, 50 years, is how open and honest we were with each other, and I include Noel Paul Stookey in this equation. Such honesty comes with a price, but when you get past the hurt and shock of realizing that you're faulted and frequently wrong, you also realize that you are really loved and respected for who you are, and you become a better person. The trio's growth, our creativity, our ability to emerge over the years completely accepting of one another, warts and all, was a miracle. This gift existed, I believe, because of the music itself, which elicited from each of us the best of who we were. When we performed together, we gave our best to each other and to the audiences who came to hear us.

I have no idea what it will be like to have no Mary in my world, in my life, or on stage to sing with. But I do know there will always be a hole in my heart, a place where she will always exist that will never be filled by any other person. However painful her passing is, I am forever grateful for Mary and her place in my life."

Statement by Noel Paul Stookey:
"As a partner...she could be vexing and vulnerable in the same breath. As a friend she shared her concerns freely and without reservation. As an activist, she was brave, outspoken and inspiring - especially in her defense of the defenseless and, as a performer, her charisma was a barely contained nervous energy - occasionally (and then only privately) revealed as stage fright.

Sometimes frustratingly dismissive, I seldom heard her say she was sorry, yet she often displayed an immense generosity that would surprise even herself. Witty, politically savvy, she was the master/mistress of the cutting exit line. Once I was attempting to defend Ronald Reagan's educational policy. She interrupted me with 'Oh, for heaven's sake, do your homework!" turned on her heel and walked away. Need I say it turned out she was right?

As the relationships in the trio continued to shift and grow, Mary's insights and evolving comfort onstage drew her into the role of societal commentator and satirist; her genius revealed especially poking fun at the tumbling chaotic communications technology expanding around us.

Her illness softened her outlook considerably. Her work, her life and friends became more and more precious and friends, especially women friends, closed ranks in the later years, returning in kindnesses so much of that which Mary, their powerful feminine matriarch, had given them.

I am deadened and heartsick beyond words to consider a life without Mary Travers and honored beyond my wildest dreams to have shared her spirit and her career."
All of this is found at the Peter Paul and Mary website, including this:
"In lieu of sending flowers, for those who would like to contribute to a particular charity in memory of Mary, that information will be posted tomorrow after the family has an opportunity to make a decision."
More →

Sphere: Related Content

New "Texas Monthly" FLDS Article (The "Sex Bed" is baaaaack...)

I've read through it. The article is incomplete and somewhat one sided. You might want to as well.
"Less apparent in the tranquil setting was a powerful undercurrent of joy: Merrianne Jessop had arrived the night before. There was no 'Welcome Home' banner, no party; such theatrics would have been out of character for these humble, quiet people. But the feeling was there all the same. 'Right now there seems to be a little bit of relief in the air,' said Willie Jessop, the unofficial FLDS spokesman (Jessop is a common surname in the FLDS), as he drove me around the 1,700-acre spread outside Eldorado. Merrianne, a spunky fifteen-year-old with red hair, was happy to be back with her family on the ranch. She was quick to joke, rolling her eyes every now and then for laughs, tossing her head as a light West Texas breeze ruffled her lavender prairie-style dress.

The past year had been an ordeal. In the spring of 2008, the ranch was raided, and the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services had removed 437 children, including Merrianne, after a local domestic abuse hotline received a call from someone claiming to be a sixteen-year-old FLDS member. The caller’s report of underage marriage and sexual abuse triggered a massive investigation that led to an epic child custody battle, the largest in U.S. history. The Third Court of Appeals ruled that the removal of the children had been unwarranted, and a chastened DFPS returned the kids to the ranch, though the department continued to investigate the cases. Merrianne’s was the last to be settled.

Her mother, Barbara Jessop, and her new court-appointed guardian, Naomi Carlisle, who is also an FLDS member, seemed giddy as they looked at her. All three of them were confident that the Lord was on their side and that the state had had no right to intervene, never mind the mountains of evidence obtained during the investigation, some of which plainly showed that the FLDS had married young teenage girls to much older men. Never mind that the church’s prophet, Warren Steed Jeffs, was himself in prison for being an accomplice to the rape of a fourteen-year-old. Never mind that criminal charges, including sexual assault and bigamy, were still being brought against twelve men from the ranch. When asked about the upcoming trials, which start on October 26, Merrianne shrugged. 'The truth will prevail,' she said."
The Texas Monthly. There is this interesting allegation, for which I can find no basis in real evidence:
"A document that (Charles) Childress had not seen but was obtained by TEXAS MONTHLY appears to be instructions for the construction of a similar bed. It describes a bed 'covered with a sheet, but it will have a plastic cover to protect the mattress from what will happen on it.' It also described 'padded sides that can be pulled up that will hold me in place as the Lord does His work with me.' What in the world was going on here?"
I have never heard this allegation before, and if this document was found with the bed, why was it not entered into evidence? There is a serious matter implied here, and the even more serious question of why would evidence "obtained" by the Texas Monthly NOT be in the possession of the state?

There is this indictment of Governor Rick Perry:
"Childress wasn’t terribly impressed with the state leadership’s understanding of the situation. 'Going up to the governor, none of them had any idea what was going on,' he says. 'They had no clue.' As he worked through the cases, he says, all the department saw was numbers. ' "The department is losing two hundred some-odd cases!" That’s what was all in the news,' he says. Nonsuits were not 'losses,' a subtlety overlooked in most accounts. Having formed a clearer picture of family structures by way of DNA testing, the DFPS was identifying the individual circumstances of each family and coming up with specific tasks that needed to be done, such as psychological evaluations or parenting classes. By mid-September (last year), more than 250 children’s cases had been nonsuited."
The article seems to be written from the point of view of Mr. Childress. Charles also seems to reflect the attitude I have ascribed to Barbara Walther, and all those on the prosecution side of the issue. Just get this in front of a "West Texas Jury."
"As the months wore on, Childress went down to Austin to attend several meetings and explain his approach. One meeting included Albert Hawkins, the Health and Human Services commissioner; one included representatives from the attorney general’s and governor’s offices. Childress said he wanted to take some cases to trial. 'They’d ask, "Well, can you guarantee us it will win?" "No, there’s no such thing as a guarantee in a jury trial," I said, "but I’m pretty doggone certain that a West Texas jury hearing what all these people have been doing the last ten years is gonna be real reluctant to send these kids back to be raised by Warren Jeffs," ' Childress says. 'I didn’t get any feedback . . . I think they just frankly lacked the courage.'

And so, on October 23, Childress quit."
The article never touches on the evidence challenge. If it's lost, all the evidence Childress worries about is irrelevant from a legal standpoint and he has no cases. It sounds like Rick Perry seems to know that.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Why go after Acorn?

"After (Hannah) Giles proposed the ACORN video-sting idea, (James) O'Keefe -- who started making the videos while a student at Rutgers University -- pounced on it. 'Why go after ACORN?' Giles asked. 'Because I love America, I love God, and corrupt institutions don't help that.' "
At the New York Post.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

FLDS Hater Wheels Coming Off?

Bill Medvecky seems to have an insider.
"Judge Conn has Ordered Dan Fisher and Sam Brower to Salt Lake City to be deposed again. It seems that neither one can get their stories straight, and so Warren’s Lawyers have to figure out how many counts of perjury they can file."
Bill has had information like this early, before. Nothing as of yet is on the Mohave County Site.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Bwwwahahahaha ! (The Daily Show on Acorn) UPDATED, "Suspends Operations"

The Washington Times:
"ACORN, calling the actions of some of its employees 'indefensible,' has suspended advising new clients as part of its service programs and is setting up an independent review to see what happened.

ACORN chief executive Bertha Lewis said in a written statement that she was 'ordering a halt to any new intakes into ACORN's service programs until completion of an independent review.' "
More Coverage at Fox News.
The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
The Audacity of Hos
Daily Show
Full Episodes
Political HumorHealthcare Protests
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Racism? Jimmy Carter doesn't want to tell us the Real Reason.

Yawn. Yeah, I'm the racist.
AP/My Way News:
"Jimmy Carter said Tuesday that U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson's outburst to President Barack Obama during a speech to Congress last week was an act 'based on racism' and rooted in fears of a black president.

'I think it's based on racism,' Carter said in response to an audience question at a town hall held at his presidential center in Atlanta. 'There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president.'

The Georgia Democrat said the outburst was a part of a disturbing trend directed at the president that has included demonstrators equating Obama to Nazi leaders."
Really Jimmy? Or is it that you don't want another Democrat with Big Ears that's failing in Mideast Military policy and the Economy to be a one term President?

Nevermind, no one wants to stand next to you anyway. White boy.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Acorn Employee expert on Prostitution, offers her experience as Murderess

More →

Sphere: Related Content

1st Amendment? Welcome to the "Silent Hill"

It's starting to sound like an insurance policy, that doesn't cover anything, what with all the exceptions.
Chairwoman Louise M. Slaughter, US House of Representatives Committee on the Rules Majority Office.
Under section 370 of the House Rules and Manual it has been held that a Member could:

* refer to the government as “something hated, something oppressive.”
* refer to the President as “using legislative or judicial pork.”
* refer to a Presidential message as a “disgrace to the country.”
* refer to unnamed officials as “our half-baked nitwits handling foreign affairs.”

Likewise, it has been held that a member could not:

* call the President a “liar.”
* call the President a “hypocrite.”
* describe the President’s veto of a bill as “cowardly.”
* charge that the President has been “intellectually dishonest.”
* refer to the President as “giving aid and comfort to the enemy.”
* refer to alleged “sexual misconduct on the President’s part.”
Sure you have free speech, just don't use it here.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Warren's "Creative" Rape Conviction to go before Utah's Supreme Court

We're one court reversal away from this house of cards beginning to fall apart.
The Deseret News - "The hearing will be Nov. 4 at the J. Reuben Clark School of Law on the BYU campus. The Supreme Court routinely visits BYU and the University of Utah so students can see how the high court operates, but the business that is conducted during these visits is not the mock-trial variety, but genuine appeals."
Hat tip to "Sore Toes and a Bleeding Heart."

Allen Steed is claiming a statute of limitations issue, and has yet to be tried on top of that. Warren is appealing his conviction, and Barbara Walther continues to foot drag on the evidence ruling in Texas. It will be 30 days this weekend since the state and the defense were "all in" on the issue with the judge.

Could it be there is some "persecution" angle that is real in these cases and eventually the smell will become to large? I have always believed the constitutional basis for the evidence collected at YFZ and the conviction of Warren Jeffs to be creative, to put it politely. The higher these decisions go, the more likely some judge or group of judges will be to reverse them altogether.

Remember, the history of this string of persecutions is not good for the persecutors. "Toes" worries about the venue. I worry only about the time frame it takes to reverse this nonsense.
More →

Sphere: Related Content