ABOUT TIME THE COUNCIL WENT ON RECORD !!!

CITIZEN COMPLAINT
Joe Griffin 9/7/2014

I believe that Helen Miller, Mayor of the Town of White Springs and Council Member has violated my Civil Rights including but not limited to the particulars set forth in my Federal Civil Rights suit, 14-CA-01051, and thus has committed MALFEASANCE in using her political office for illegal purposes. According to the Town Charter 2.03 (6) Citizen demands a vote of the council to find her actions MALFEASENCE and thus relieve her of her duties as a member of the Council.

____________________________/
Joe E. Griffin

The Council either agrees with me and follows the Charter or doesn’t and becomes guilty of their own criminal activity.

The Charter and the Definition of Malfeasance

 

 

WHITE SPRINGS TOWN CHARTER

Section 2.03 Vacancies; Forfeiture of Office; Filling of Vacancies and Extraordinary Vacancies, Subsection (a) Vacancies. A Town Council Member shall forfeit his office if he:  6. For malfeasance, misfeasance or nonfeasance in office.

An Explanation of Malfeasance:

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misfeasance

The expressions misfeasance and nonfeasance, and occasionally malfeasance, are used in English law with reference to the discharge of public obligations existing by common law, custom or statute.

Obligations:   An obligation is a course of action that someone is required to take, These are generally legal obligations, which can incur a penalty for non-fulfilment, although certain people are obliged to carry out certain actions for other reasons as well, whether as a tradition or for social reasons. Obligations are generally granted in return for an increase in an individual’s rights or power.

 

 

Definition and relevant rules of law

When a contract creates a duty that does not exist at common law, there are three things the parties can do wrong:

  • Nonfeasanceis the failure to act where action is required – willfully or in neglect.
  • Misfeasanceis the willful inappropriate action or intentional incorrect action or advice.
  • Malfeasance is the willful and intentional action that injures a party.

At present the terms misfeasance and nonfeasance are most often used with reference to the conduct of municipal authorities with reference to the discharge of their statutory obligations; and it is an established rule that an action lies in favor of persons injured by misfeasance, i.e. by negligence  in discharge of the duty; but that in the case of nonfeasance the remedy is not by action but by indictment or mandamus  (Mandamus is a judicial remedy in the form of an order from a superior court, to any government  public entity) by the particular procedure prescribed by the statutes.

This rule is fully established in the case of failure to repair public highways; but in other cases the courts are astute to find evidence of carelessness in the discharge of public duties and on that basis to award damages to individuals who have suffered thereby.

 

Do any of you remember the Keystone Kops?

 

 

KeystoneKops

The Keystone Cops in a typical pose in In the Clutches of the Gang (1914). The desk officer using the telephone is Ford Sterling. The policeman directly behind Sterling (in extreme background, left) is Edgar Kennedy. The hefty policeman at extreme right is Roscoe “Fatty” Arbuckle. The young constable with bulging eyes, fourth from right, is Arbuckle’s nephew Al St. John. The casting of the Keystone police force changed from one film to the next; many of the individual members were per diemKeystoneKops actors who remain unidentifiable.

A story by an anonymous reader

We received an anonymous story which I pray would never happen because this is a concern we all have with a police car that goes the distance.  Obviously, others besides Tanja, ourselves and Mrs. Hardwick among some have concerns about such liabilities.   The story anonymous provided is as follows:

“It was another stormy night in Jacksonville and Chief “Two Guns”Nodick Tracy was at home watching a movie enjoying her third margarita when she got the phone call.
An incident had occurred in her jurisdiction of Broken Springs, –some 60 + miles away.
It was serious, shots fired, possible racial strife over a Federal Civil Rights Complaint filed by a White resident against several parties, –one of which is Black.
Realizing the potential explosive nature, Chief Nodick Tracy gulped down the last of her drink, rushed to her Patrol Car and raced west on I10 toward Broken Springs.
Traveling at high speed, the road slick with rain, she threaded her way around vehicles like an Indy 500 Champion, in an attempt to quickly cover the 60+ miles.
Unfortunately for her and the other driver she impacted, the octane racing through her veins, brought her speedy response to a horribly deadly end, miles short of her objective.
While the passengers in the other auto –Parents and two children did not survive their fiery  infernal, Nodick did.
The Trooper responding noticed a strong odor of alcohol emanating from “Two Guns” (those three Margaritas) which a blood sample showed to be way over the legal limit.
Epilogue:
The Town incident was finally brought under control by the County Sheriff’s Office, “Two Guns”- Talk about Overcompensating- is now “No Guns” waiting trial for vehicular homicide and the Town of Broken Springs is searching for the funds for the Wrongful Death Lawsuits (4) and inevitable settlements., not to mention a replacement auto the insurance company refuses to cover, as well as a new Chief that resides in a more reasonable response-time vicinity, contrary to Council members prior lack of concern, most prominent of which is one Wally Windbag.”

 

There you have it – more discontent about the automobile the Chief is using for her own use.

There

YOU CAN’T GET THERE FROM HERE….

SOMETHING SMELLS WRONG IN DENMARK…
Here are the Constants:
1. Gasoline costs $3.45 gallon.
2. Tracy’s car gets 20 miles per gallon of gasoline, city and highway.
3. Tracy lives 64 miles one way from White Springs.
4. Tracy works 20 days a month in a 10 hour shift per day worked.
5. Tracy does limited patrolling in her government vehicle.
6. In August the town spent $162.00 for gas and Tracy spent $150.00
7. In July the town spent $160 and the Chief spent $257.00.
8. In June the town spent $164.00 and the Chief spent $169.00.
9. In May, before the deal was reached, Tracy spent $462.00 and the town spent $0.00.
10. Tracy patrols 20 miles on each 10 hour shift worked.
11. Tracy must go to Jasper 3 times a week for her duties.

Now, it takes Tracy 128 miles to get back and forth to Jacksonville. That equates to 6.4 gallons of fuel a day to get back and forth to work. She works 20 days a month. That’s 20 days times 6.4 gallons per day or a total of 130 gallons of gas a month to get back and forth to work.
130 gallons at $3.45 per gallon is $461.00 a month for Tracy to get back and forth to work. Said clearly, if she is paying less than $461.00 she either isn’t working 20 shifts per month or she is Cheating the town out of some money.
Tracy patrols when she is on duty. Let’s say that she patrols 20 miles a day, or a mile for each of her hours worked. That’s 1 gallon of fuel used per shift. That equates to $3.45 per shift times 20 shifts or $70.00 per month in gasoline costs per shift.

Tracy, in her job, must go to Jasper or Live Oak 3 times a week. That’s 13 times a month. At 60 miles round trip that is 780 miles a month Tracy must use the patrol car for town business. That’s 39 gallons of gas per month for trips to Jasper or Live Oak. That’s $135.00 per month to go to Jasper and Live Oak.
The Total costs for Tracy’s car to patrol and to go to Live Oak and or Jasper is $70.00 (patrol costs) plus $135.00 (Jasper/Live Oak costs) or $205.00 per month assuming three trips to Jasper/Live Oak a week.

Now the simple fact is that before Tracy got her sweetheart deal in May, she spent $462.00 while the town spent $0.00. She COULDN’T GET BACK AND FORTH TO HER RESIDENCE FOR LESS THAN $461.00 per month. Did she not patrol or go to Jasper/Live Oak in May?
In June she claims the town and her spent combined $333.00 dollars roughly split 50 50. Again it takes $462.00 to get her back and forth to her residence 20 days a month. I’m smelling a rat here.
In July she claims the town and her spent combined $493.00 split roughly 1/3rd to the town and 2/3rd to Tracy. $493.00 still hardly gets Tracy back and forth to work much less any patrol fuel or Life Oak Jasper Fuel.

And in August she claims she and the town spent $312.00 combined for a roughly 50/50 split. $312 certainly would only get Tracy to work half of the time and leaves no money for Patrolling or going to Live Oak or Jasper.
Something smells here. What are the possible reasons the figures are so wrong? Tracy is Lying to the Town Council either about not living in Jacksonville or her car is getting 35 miles per gallon of fuel, an impossibility.
Is it just me or do these figures just not add up? Someone needs to break the sweetheart deal or do a complete audit of the fuel consumption including a daily odometer reading.

These figures just don’t add up. Someone is lying to us, I BELIEVE. Way to go Tanja. Thanks for the heads up.

Whatever decision you make for yourself is yours to live for.

Throughout the tribulations of what the Town of White Springs has put us through, we have learned many lessons mainly relating to who our friends really are.  There are those who tried to make us believe we were their friends but when the going became rough, those individuals kept on going far away from their association with us.

One man befriended us after the first arrest, but after it was suggested that Joe plea that he was mentally off or sick, I knew this man could not be a friend. There is and has not been anything wrong with my husband.  This man, I believe in my heart, was working for the town officials when he himself initially denied an association and affirmed his findings that Joe was correct and had substance in his fight for justice.. By making such a suggestion to someone who has a brilliant mind and had only fought for his and other citizens’ rights under the law it became apparent that he must be working for the town.  To lie about such a mental problem would surely have taken all of our rights away.  You know who you are and I cannot believe that you have continually wished us ill will.

We do not need those people in our life who feel they are better than we or other citizens of the community.  We see through your deceit and your lies and wish to have nothing to do with you.

We all make choices and each person makes the choice they may live with.  We know it is difficult for whom to stand when one is considered prominent in the eyes of the officials.

Our special thanks to those who have and still believe in us.  You will forever have us in your debt and we so appreciate you.

Karin Griffin

 

WHAT DO YOU THINK? IS THE WSPD FAIR and IMPARTIAL TREATING ALL WITH INTEGRITY?

http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/content/cjst/menu/officer-requirements-main-page/le-ethical-standards-of-conduct.aspx   (See full document)

Officer Requirements

Law Enforcement Officer Ethical Standards of Conduct


Purpose

This policy defines conduct unbecoming a police officer. This policy supplements the ethical standards contained in the International Association of Chiefs of Police’s Law Enforcement Code of Ethics, a copy of which has been included following this policy.

Policy

Law enforcement effectiveness depends upon community respect and confidence. Conduct which detracts from this respect and confidence is detrimental to the public interest and should be prohibited. The policy of this Department is to investigate circumstances suggesting an officer has engaged in unbecoming conduct, and impose disciplinary action when appropriate.

THE COMMUNITY HAS LITTLE RESPECT AND CONFIDENCE THAT OUR WSPD WILL ASSIST THEM.  OFFICER/DETECTIVE HARDING IS THE ONLY OFFICER IN MY OPINION WHO HAS TRIED TO FOLLOW THE LAW  and HIS TALENT IS WASTED IN WS.

 

Principle One 

Police officers shall conduct themselves, whether on or off duty, in accordance with the Constitution of the United States, the Florida Constitution, and all applicable laws, ordinances and rules enacted or established pursuant to legal authority.

OUR CHIEF OBVIOUSLY DOES NOT BELIEVE IN THE AFOREMENTIONED PARAGRAPH BUT WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE HAD THE SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT IN TROUBLE IN THIS LATEST CHARGE AGAINST JOE AND KARIN.

Rules

1.1 Police officers shall not knowingly exceed their authority in the enforcement of the law.  

EXCEEDING AUTHORITY AGAINST CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS WHO DO NOT AGREE WITH THE TOWN OFFICIALS IS THE NUMBER ON AGENDA OF THE WSPD.

1.2 Police officers shall not knowingly disobey the law or rules of criminal procedure in such areas as interrogation, arrest, detention, searches, seizures, use of informants and preservation of evidence.

THEY WILL ATTEMPT INTIMIDATION FIRST AND IF THAT DOES NOT WORK, THEY WILL GO FOR AN ARREST AND WILL NOT ARREST SOME IF THEY ARE INFORMANTS.

1.3 Police officers shall not knowingly restrict the freedom of individuals, whether by arrest of detention, in violation of the Constitutions and laws of the United States and the State of Florida.

THE GRIFFINS’ FREEDOMS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED BY THEIR MALICIOUS COMPLAINTS TO THE SHERIFF AND THE STATE. we know of others as well

 


1.4 Police officers, whether on or off duty, shall not knowingly commit any criminal offense under any laws of the United States or any state of local jurisdiction in which the officer is present, except where permitted in the performance of duty under proper authority.

LET’S SEE  THERE WAS A DUI….AN ASSAULT AND GOD KNOWS WHAT ELSE!
———————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Principle Two 

Police officers shall refrain from any conduct in an official capacity that detracts from the public’s faith in the integrity of the criminal justice system.

INTEGRITY IS OF UTMOST IMPORTANCE BUT FEW FEEL THERE IS INTEGRITY BY OUR OFFICIALS OR OUR WSPD.

Rules

2.1 Police officers shall carry out their duties with integrity, fairness and impartiality.

THERE IS NO IMPARTIALITY.  WHEN THE OFFICIALS WISH SOMEONE TARGETED, THE WSPD DOES TARGET THEM  WITHOUT INTEGRITY, FAIRNESS OR IMPARTIALITY FROM WHAT I HAVE EXPERIENCED.

2.2 Police officers shall not knowingly make false accusations of any criminal ordinance, traffic or other law violation.

 

 

ONE INCIDENT REPORT against us WAS FALSE BECAUSE THE CHIEF WISHED A CONVICTION AND WE KNOW THIS PERSONALLY.

 

2.3 Police officers shall truthfully, completely and impartially report, testify and present evidence, including exculpatory evidence, in all matters of an official nature.

2.4 Police officers shall take no action knowing it will violate the constitutional rights of any person.

 

WE CAN FORGET A POLICE OFFICER IN WS FOLLOWING THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF ANY PERSON AND THE CHIEF IS SO EFFECTIVE SHE TALKED A SHERIFF’S DEPUTY IN VIOLATING SAME.

2.5 Police officers must obey lawful orders, but must refuse to obey any orders the officer knows would require the officer to commit an illegal act
.

THE MANNER IN WHICH THIS TOWN HAS OPERATED IN FOR SEVERAL YEARS, IS IF SOMEONE REFUSES TO OBEY THE ORDERS OF THE TOWN OFFICIALS, THEY MAY NOT HAVE A JOB FOR LONG.  THE MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR SEEM TO LIKE PEOPLE WITH A COLORFUL HISTORY BECAUSE THEY THEN CAN MANIPULATE THEM, IN MY OPINION AND FROM WHAT I HAVE SEEN.

2.6. If the misconduct is committed by the officer’s immediate supervisor, the officer shall report the incident to the immediate supervisor’s supervisor.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Principle Three

Police officers shall perform their duties and apply the law impartially and without prejudice or discrimination.

Rationale 

Law enforcement effectiveness requires public trust and confidence. Diverse communities must have faith in the fairness and impartiality of their police. Police officers must refrain from fostering disharmony in their communities based upon diversity, and perform their duties without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability, sexual orientation or age.

THE WSPD ALONG WITH THE ELECTED OFFICIALS FOSTER DISHARMONY SO THE COMMUNITY IS PITTED AGAINST ONE ANOTHER.
————————————–

Principle Four

Police officers shall not, whether on or off duty, exhibit any conduct which discredits themselves or their Department or otherwise impairs their ability or that of other officers or the Department to provide law enforcement services to the community.

Rules

4.1 Police officers shall not consume alcoholic beverages or chemical substances, while on duty, except as permitted in the performance of official duties, and under no circumstances while in uniform, except as provided for in Rule 4.3 below.

4.2 Police officers shall not consume alcoholic beverages to the extent the officer would be rendered unfit for the officer’s next scheduled shift.

 

4.4 Police officers, while on duty, shall not commit any act which, as defined under Florida law, constitutes sexual harassment, including but not limited to, making unwelcome sexual advances, requesting sexual favors, engaging in sexually motivated physical contact or other verbal or physical conduct or communication of a sexual nature.


4.8 Police officers shall not, in the course of performing their duties, engage in any sexual contact or conduct constituting lewd behavior, including but not limited to, showering or receiving a massage in the nude, exposing themselves or otherwise
making physical contact with the nude or partially nude body of any person, except as pursuant to a written policy of the Department.

ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THE ABOVE IS THE PARTY THE CHIEF THREW AFTER THE ELECTION FOR FELLOW OFFICERS.   I UNDERSTAND THE CHIEF HAD A SPECIAL HOLSTER FOR OFFICER KLUG.  MY OH MY ISN’T THAT SPECIAL.  AND OTHER CITIZENS HEARD IT.  REALLY OFFERS RESPECT FOR THE HEAD OF THE WSPD.

Principle Five

Police officers shall treat all members of the public courteously and with respect.

Rules 

5.2 No police officer shall ridicule, mock, deride, taunt, belittle, willfully embarrass, humiliate, or shame any person to do anything reasonably calculated to incite a person to violence.

Principle Six 

Police officers shall not compromise their integrity, nor that of their Department or profession, by accepting, giving or soliciting any gratuity which could be reasonably interpreted as capable of influencing their official acts or judgments, or by using their status as a police officer for personal, commercial, or political gain.

Rationale

For a community to have faith in its police officers, officers must avoid conduct that does or could cast doubt upon the impartiality of the individual officer or the Department.

Rules

6.1 Police officers shall not use their official position, identification cards or badges: (1) for personal or financial gain, for themselves or another person; (2) for obtaining privileges not otherwise available to them except in the performance of duty; and (3) for avoiding consequences of unlawful or prohibited actions.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Principle Seven

Police officers shall not compromise their integrity, not that of their Department or profession, by taking or attempting to influence actions when a conflict of interest exists.

 

THERE ARE NO CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN THE MIND OF THE WSPD.  THEY FOLLOW THE ORDERS OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL PERSONS.  IF THE PERSON IS NOT LIKED, THE WSPD WILL DO WHATEVER IS IN ITS POWER TO ABIDE BY WHAT THE OFFICIALS OF THE TOWN DESIRE.  HOWEVER, HOW MANY OF THESE CRIMES OF THEFT HAVE BEEN HANDLED?…INCLUDING THE STEALING OF WATER?…BECAUSE THE PEOPLE CANNOT AFFORD WHAT THIS TOWN IS DOING TO THEM?



Rules

7.1 Police officers shall, unless required by law or policy, refrain from becoming involved in official matters, or influencing actions of other police officers in official matters, impacting the officer’s immediate family, relatives, or persons with whom the officer has or has had a significant personal relationship.

7.2 Police officers shall, unless required by law or policy, refrain from acting or influencing official actions of other police officers in official matters impacting persons with whom the officer has or has had a business or employment relationship.

7.3 Police officers shall not use the authority of their position as police officers, or information available to them due to their status as police officers, for any purpose of personal gain including, but not limited to, initiating or furthering personal and/or intimate interactions of any kind with persons with whom the officer has had contact while on duty.

7.4 Police officers shall not engage in any off duty employment if the position compromises or would reasonably tend to compromise the officer’s ability to impartially perform the officer’s official duties.

 

OUR CHIEF UNDERTOOK ANOTHER POSITION USING A POLICE CAR FROM WHITE SPRINGS FOR THE PURPOSE OF GUARDING THE STATE’S PROPERTY AT THE FARMERS MARKET.  I GUESS WHEN THE POLICE CAR IS PROVIDED BY WHITE SPRINGS FOR THE CHIEF’S PERSONAL USE, SHE CAN DO AS SHE PLEASES….RIGHT WALTER MCKENZIE????———————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Principle Eight 

Police officers shall observe the confidentiality of information available to them due to their status as police officers.

Rationale

Police officers are entrusted with vast amounts of private and personal information, or access thereto. Police officers must maintain the confidentiality of such information to protect the privacy of the subjects of that information, and to maintain public faith in the officer’s and Department’s commitment to preserving such confidences.

 

Lose $40,000 and can’t find it – Take it from the Sewer account and say there was a deficit.

Everyone knows that a great amount of revenue was received by the increase in our sewer rates.  In fact the Mayor, you will recall, bragged about having enough collateral because of the increase to be able to use it against the $3,000,000 loan.

Prior to her statement there was scuttlebutt about the town losing some $40,000 out of a Grant and they did not know what happened to it.

Look at the 2014-2015 proposed budget.  You will note that it shows an approximate $40,000 sewer operating loss.   Well we now know where the $40,000 loss of grant money came from.  It came from the Sewer and Water Budget.