Re: [QUAD-L] please read Tort Claim

[David K. Kelmer]

Hi Ron,

 

We have a couple of people using Dragon NaturallySpeaking� make it to 'Chat', so feel free to stop in even if it's just to say hi. 

 

I wish you all the best with your legal case.  If you are in the right nothing can stop you except yourself.  Stay strong.

 

With Love,

CtrlAltDel aka Dave
C4/5 Complete - 29 Years Post
Texas, USA

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

I amUnableTo typeI am usingDragon NaturallySpeaking�In order for me to typeI wish I could join inIn the chat sessionHoweverIt is impossible For meTo keep up.TodayI sentThe followingTo do chief of police of Oxnard.

 

Advocates for the Disabled & Elderly
Peter Aguirri            Fred Vera             Ron Hawkes

 

27 Apr 2005

 

County of Ventura
District Attorney

 

Dear Sir:

 

On 12 Oct 2004 I sent to you a fax requesting documents in accordance with the California Government Code, �6253 and �6254 (f).  You apparently ignored my requests.  Your a chief investigator refused to investigate my claim he said that  "... it is my opinion that Art Lopez walked on water,,,,,,,".

 

Today I received a receipt that I had sent to The Attorney General for the State of California on my issue.

 

I gave my word to your chief investigator that I gave my word that I would not file a tort claim against him.  I have operated all my life that my word is the same as my signature.

 

The following was sent by certified mail to the chief of police of Oxnard today:

 

This letter is to memorialize two facts.  The first being receipt of your recent letter and the second being a phone call made by my husband to you on April 25, 2005, trying to explain about the problem with the responding officers on March 5, 2005.

 

In your letter you state that the incident report has been flagged.  This is a direct contradiction on what was said at the meeting on April 11, 2005.  Both you and Ms. Birmingham stated the report had been "redacted".  When I asked you what you meant by redacted, you told me the report was gone, it had been removed.  Ms. Berman concurred.  I reminded you that a follow-up report had been made and filed, there by "revising" the original report.  There should also be my rebuttal to Polo's report in the file.  I also stated that if, as you said, the report had been removed, it would have saved considerable amount of time and trouble for all concerned.  Apparently, somewhere in translation, the meeting our redacted was lost.

 

As to the phone call made by my husband, he was trying to tell you he had been assaulted by our neighbor on March 5, 2004, not that the neighbor was blowing grass clippings his way. 

 

Everyone seems to have forgotten this fact, because the two officers who responded to my call seemed to think it was amusing that a person could be assaulted with a leafblower.  Since they chose to speak to my neighbor first, I called to speak to the watch commander.  While I was on hold for him, the officers told me to hang up the phone so they could discuss the problem with us.  Foolishly, I did so.  When I told them I was angry that they had not spoken to me first, I was told they had actually came out this way or another call.  I think they were disappointed to be here for a neighbor dispute when they thought there was something more exciting for them to do.  They advised my husband to ignore the neighbor, deeming any threats made as not credible, and to call the city sweeper to come out each and every time the clippings and water gathered in front of house.  This did not seemed to be satisfactory conclusion to us.
When we had t! he meeting with Polo on April 5, 2004, it was to file a complaint the aforementioned offices.  He told us there was nothing he could do about the officers, but he would help with the neighbor.  When you advised my husband if you meant before the city Council and made any disparaging remarks about Polo, that Polo could sue him, you effectively took away his right to petition for right to have a small measure of justice.  Not against Polo, but to remove the negative assertions made by others about him.  Would you please see to it that the audiotapes left with Ms. Wiley on June 25, 2004 I returned to us?  They were to be listened to by Chief Lopez.  Also, did you look into the matter of the $17 we paid on June 10, 2004 for the three-page report #04-16962?

 

     Thank you,

 

     Cynthia H. Hawkes

 

this document has been accomplished by the assistance of Dragon NaturallySpeaking�.

 

If you fail to respond I will proceed according to law.

 

Ron W. Hawkes
Master Sergeant retired (USMC and USAF OS I-Special Agent)
MS Criminal Justice