The idea that somehow or other that I created this mess by my prior actions, some as far back as 1999, is ludicrous and preposterous.
The town had 16 years to file any claim against me for my actions from April 1999 until March of 2013 yet failed to do so. They failed to file any action against me save an ill-gotten funding of a case that was immediately thrown out as being lacking in substance and four disorderly conduct arrests. At best, for the Trial Court’s Ruling to have been correct, a Civil Rights action or some action by the Appellees (the Town, Helen, Pam and Tracy) against Appellants (Karin and I) must have been litigated. It never was.
My reading of the Trial Court’s ruling suggests that it was my fault, my actions pre 2004, that the town attacked my Civil Rights in 2014 and 2015. Such an idea is not supported by any law or case law that I can find. A Private Citizen or even a couple of Private Citizens cannot, by sheer common sense, attack a town’s Civil Rights. If we had done any crime, broke any law, the town would have had a basis to fie against us.
First off the town has no civil rights; the town’s job is to enforce Civil Rights. Second the other appellees (Town and its sycophants) have no civil rights when they operate in their public capacities. They, like us, must bring legal action to uphold what rights they have. They have not sought such legal rights nor have they ever claimed any such rights.
The town had ample time to claim a First Amendment or other claim against me; four arrests, 19 pro se legal actions and three Baker Act involuntary confinements. Yet they failed to do so in any way, shape or form. Without a FORMAL claim against me the Trial Court’s ruling becomes suspect, I believe.
The Trial Court apparently found that my prior pre 2005 actions, some of which were blatantly misstated by the Trial Court, constituted harassment by me of the Town and its co-Appellees.
At best it could be said that both parties (Appellants and Appellees) harassed each other although Appellees chose to do so out of the Sunshine with no public discussion. They just did it using taxpayer funds and their cloak of legitimacy.
But a harassment charge in this case has been found insufficient according to the State’s Attorney finding.
While Freedom of Speech and Freedom to redress a government for grievances is not harassment, trying to silence such is a Constitutional violation, I believe. The attempts to silence me from “complaining about the town and its officers and agents”, is the violation.
I am sorry to say, their attempts to silence me were fruitful. I buckled under their pressure to silence me. Likewise Karin was very distraught at the actions of the town to “get us” often crying and shaking uncontrollably. She was placed on medication by her physician.
The White Springs Journal utilized both Free Speech and Freedom to Redress as its founding premises. Again, if such were a violation of the Town and its co-Appellee’s rights, the Town and Helen, Pam and Tracy had the financial wherewithal and the free legal representation to call such a violation into question.
Yet they did not so move in 16 years. They brought no case against me or Karin to silence us, instead they used the threat of being thrown in Prison, not jail but prison, to silence the blog, stifle my Part One Section 24 Rights of the Florida Constitution and keep me from redressing my government for grievances.
And they did so using their public office and authority and TAXPAYER MONEY. I don’t believe a citizen can harass a government body without somehow or other of breaking the law. Yet no CRIMINAL OR CIVIL charge was forthcoming even though they had a Police Department willing to claim such a charge. The town often “jumped through hoops” including a $10,000 bounty to find me in violation of some, or any, law.
We know now that the actions of Appellees (the Town) to bring a charge of Cyber-stalking against Karin or I was ruled not viable by the State’s Attorney Office. We also know that the “harassing the witnesses” complaint in the State Criminal suit carried no weight with the State Attorney because the PTI was deemed completed shortly after the events in question.
We committed no crime and violated no constitutional provision that I know of. To complain about corruption of Appellees during their public duties is what it means to be an American. And I used that knowledge that I was committing no crime as a proof source for my actions, my completely and very legal actions.
Whether they had limited immunity or not is a case to be argued by legal minds. Whether I broke a law, whether Karin broke a law, is clearly demonstrative: We broke none.
Two police agencies, the Town and the Sherriff’s office both, tried to prove we broke a law. The State’s Attorney, no friend of ours, so found twice in no uncertain terms that we did not. Yet the trial court, at the request of the Appellees, found that our supposed harassment of the town by doing our completely legal actions to be viewed as a crime as it allowed a “tit for tat” mitigation of this Civil Rights action.
What is our right, to complain about the town and its actions and to publish such and act on such, is not criminal. It did not call for our rights to be taken so cavalierly or at all by the Government which allegedly serves us. It seems to me that they serve themselves and not the citizens.
The Trial Judge said that the History of the conflict with the Town and its agents made it okay, or mitigated if you will, in our case, “They have the right to respond” according to this trial judge. I don’t believe the government has such a right outside of a filed court case.
Let’s take two cases of the “HISTORY” highlighted by the trial judge.
In 1999 the town’s agent, Mrs. Shirley Heath, filed an injunction, a restraining order, against me. This is the famous “stick a fork in you; you’re done” letter. The local Circuit Court judge threw the restraining order out summarily for lack of basis. The town, meaning the taxpayers, paid for the prosecution.
In another case cited by the Federal Trial Judge that it was apparently not kosher to visit a series of houses to distribute a flyer. This was in 2002. How was a citizen to know that Mr. McKire’s wife was ill at the time? And I never went to his door but simply “left the flyer in his gate.” There are no witnesses that have or can say otherwise either in 2002 or today. Yet the Trial Judge deemed the erstwhile visit to the gate vitally important. The trial judge mentioned no laws that I or Karin broke or misapplied yet found the History to be determinative.
I believe the case falls directly in the sphere of Bennett v. Hendrix, 423 F.3d 1247, 1255 (11th Cir. 2005). The trial court barely looked at that case.
1. We stated a claim of retaliation by the town of our right to complain. Our speech is protected by the Constitution but apparently not from the town or the lower court.
2. Appellee’s retaliatory actions directly and positively impacted our Free Speech rights.
3. And, there was a causality of their actions and our silencing the Blog.
As to the second, (response of retaliatory actions) we clearly state that a person of “ordinary firmness”, us, Karin and I, were intimidated and cowered by Appellee’s actions of retaliation trying to arrest us for exercising our Free Speech and our right to Redress our government for grievances.
Karin and I are somewhat impervious to most town actions to subvert the law. 16 years of dealing with the corruption that is White Springs clearly shows that. BUT we didn’t want to go to Prison which is what the town wanted. Only the State Attorney, again no friend of ours, kept us out of Prison. It didn’t keep us from having to silence the Blog however or from allowing us to Petitioning our government for a redress of grievances.
We, Karin and I, did no legal wrong yet the Trial Judge said in listing of our alleged misdeeds, completely legal deeds, that the deeds were unacceptable actions and required a “tit for tat” response by the court to indemnify the “put upon Town and its officers and agents.”
I strongly disagree.
Suwannee Hardware & Feed
We are Proud to announce that we have teamed up with SunSations of Jasper to bring a new adventure to White Springs. Starting off with …goodies for him or her for Valentines. Stop in and take a look. More coming soon.
SunSations of Jasper
Moderator: Good evening ladies and gentlemen. Let’s start any one of the following questions for you Mrs. Clinton. Take your pick:
“When you left the White House after your husband’s last term as president, why did you steal $200,000.00 worth of furniture, china, and artwork that you were forced to return?
Mrs. Clinton, when you were Secretary of State, why did you solicit contributions from foreign governments for the Clinton foundation after you promised President Obama you would not?
Mrs. Clinton, why do you and your husband claim to contribute millions of dollars to charity for a tax write off when it goes to your family foundation that gives out less than 15% of the funds you collect and you use the balance to support yourself tax free?
Mrs. Clinton, why are you unable to account for $6 billion of State department funds that seem to have disappeared while you were Secretary of State?
Mrs. Clinton why did you say you were broke when you left the White House, but you purchased a $2 million home, built an addition for the secret service, and charge the tax payers of the United States rent in an amount to the entire mortgage?
Mrs. Clinton why did you lie to the American people about the terrorist attack in Benghazi but managed to tell the truth to your daughter the same night it happened?
Mrs. Clinton why did you lose your law license? Why did your husband lose his?
Mrs. Clinton, what really happened to Ron Brown when he was about to testify against you and your husband?
Mrs. Clinton what really happened to Vince Foster ?
You have 2 minutes to respond Mrs. Clinton.
‘Worry looks around, Sorry looks back, Faith looks up.’
This is a sad situation indeed that consideration is being made in the Sunshine Laws to change “shall” to “may” relating to the repayment of filing a sunshine law suit against a governmental entity.
Like Newspapers, for years the Town Attorneys’ enforced their statements that Joe Griffin would be arrested if going to meetings. There was no other option than to request information by 119 requests. With the shall in place, most of the suits…at least 17 of 19 related to skullduggery by our local government officials. They just didn’t feel they had to obey the law. From threats of arrest, we had police intimidation and so on so we would not show up. The only time we were able to contribute was when Rhett Bullard became mayor. Prior to that former Mayor Miller would do everything she could in her conniving way along with Walter McKenzie, to show us that the law did not matter in White Springs and should you question what the officials do, the authority of the law will be against you.
In White Springs, however, there was always, except in the case against Shirley Heath, that any suits made by Joe Griffin pro see were followed with a motion to dismiss and a judgment for thousands of dollars of attorney costs and fees.
Because most towns are run by wanna bees who did not succeed in their prior careers, some people took advantage of the law, which was unfair to the rest of us. Yet former mayor Miller and her sidekick Koberlein did write to the Florida League of Cities complaining about Joe Griffin’s e-mails requests. Yet the majority of these requests either pertained to things the Town did to us or numerous follow-ups for the same paperwork which would not be seen for months.
These bills which the Lake City Reporter will also affect newspapers because there will be no recourse against a corrupt government such as White Springs has been for the past fifteen years. The only good thing is that Shirley Heath the number one violator has retired and Robert Townsend the “he may be a pedophile but he is our pedophile” is no longer working for the town. Yet we still have Pam Tomlinson who does not have a lot of expertise in really anything except trouble making. It may be that the two ladies only had a GED and not a lot of training and as for Townsend, he I believe graduated from high school but did not have the expertise to run government even with the “some college” of Walter McKenzie. The Town charter requires at least a bachelor’s degree and now we finally have a manager with the right degree. The only thing I fear is that since our new Town manager has found so much had been done incorrectly throughout the years, in order to prove herself, she spends more time in paperwork than cleaning up Town Hall. That constitutes her nose to the grindstone, only jumping to the Town officials without making certain that the correct things are done for the Citizens who she really serves.
What is sad is that I really believe those of the officials who are ignorant, really believe their lies.
Karin for the blog
LAKE CITY REPORTER
Sunday, January 14, 2014
A BETRAYAL IN THE MAKING
”Florida has a great reputation for governmental transparency. Our Sunshine Laws are among the best in the nation for making sure state and local leaders don’t skulk around in the dark during who knows what on the taxpayers’ dime.
Problem is, these laws aren’t so easy to enforce.
Should a government agency refuse to follow the law, you just can’t call the cops. You have to take them to court. Since suing the government is always a daunting prospect state law balances things out by requiring the government to pay your legal fees should you win the right to see what they’re hiding. That way you can at least break even.
It’s not a perfect system but it works. In Florida the average citizen really can fight city hall.
But now — by swapping out a single word in state law —lawmakers are looking to effectively dismantle the entire system.
Companion bills in the Florida House and Senate would alter the provision that courts “shall” order an offending government agency to pay a citizen’s legal fees to “may” order them to do so.
In other words, the right to public information in the Sunshine State may soon hang on the whim of a judge.
Bill Sponsors cite unscrupulous folks who game the system in hopes of reaping a windfall in court.
This in fact, a growing problem, but there are other ways to solve it.
Eviscerating the rights of everyone in wholesale fashion just isn’t the answer.
Our Sunshine laws are eroded, ever so slightly, just about every time the Florida Legislature meets.
This time it is different:
The current legislation —House Bill 1021 and Senate Bill 1220 – — would effectively end a citizen’s right in government in the Sunshine. All the old laws would remain in place but a law with no way to enforce it isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.
This ill-conceived legislation has set off a firestorm in Florida among citizens sick and tired of skullduggery on the part of those claiming to have their best interests at heart.
We can only hope the folks we sent to Tallahassee to represent us – – – Sen. Charlie Dean and Rep. Elizabeth Porter – – – realize what a grave threat this is to our right to know.
We will follow this important matter with care.”
“One-ring” cell phone scam can ding your wallet
Consumer Education Specialist
Who’s calling now? That number doesn’t ring a bell. Hold the phone, says the Federal Trade Commission. You could be a potential victim of the growing “one-ring” cell phone scam.
Here’s how it works: Scammers are using auto-dialers to call cell phone numbers across the country. Scammers let the phone ring once — just enough for a missed call message to pop up.
The scammers hope you’ll call back, either because you believe a legitimate call was cut off, or you will be curious about who called. If you do, chances are you’ll hear something like, “Hello. You’ve reached the operator, please hold.” All the while, you’re getting slammed with some hefty charges — a per-minute charge on top of an international rate. The calls are from phone numbers with three-digit area codes that look like they’re from inside the U.S., but actually are associated with international phone numbers — often in the Caribbean. The area codes include: 268, 284, 473, 664, 649, 767, 809, 829, 849 and 876.
If you get a call like this, don’t pick it up and don’t call the number back. There’s no danger in getting the call: the danger is in calling back and racking up a whopping bill.
If you’re tempted to call back, do yourself a favor and check the number through online directories first. They can tell you where the phone number is registered.
If you’ve been a victim of the “one-ring” scam, try to resolve the charges with your cell phone carrier. If that doesn’t work, file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Communications Commission.
And as a general rule: Read your phone bill often — line by line. If you don’t recognize or understand a charge, contact your carrier.
I’ve got to go now; my cell phone is ringing.
Brain and Why Big Pharma Won’t Study It
Fasting kills off old and damaged immune cells, and when the body rebounds,… it uses stem cells to create brand new, completely healthy cells.