When the Prosecutor Becomes a Persecutor, pt 1: Spaniola or Spin-a-lie-a

[XLFD]

Back before I was shockingly prevented once again from voting at my polling place in the Michigan primaries as recounted in the thread  primary-responsibility-of-ludington-city-hall  there was my initial bout with disenfranchisement by Ludington City Manager John Shay when I ran to be a City Councilor (with the prospect of being one of his bosses) documented just after that deciding election and related here:  the-candidate-who-couldn-t-vote. 

After making my share of belly-aching threads and letters, I sought to get an investigation into the improprieties, appealing to the various state election laws, and going through the proper channels, which just happened to be the Mason County Prosecutor.  I had little confidence in that personage due to his social partnerships with many of my antagonists, but had hoped he might at least pass it on to a competent authority.  So I sent him this electronically: 

 

• Tuesday, November 15, 2011 12:48 PM

I am alleging a serious violation of the Michigan election law stated above.  That law states:  "A person who violates 1 or more of the following subdivisions is guilty of a felony:

(a) A person shall not attempt, by means of bribery, menace, or other corrupt means or device, either directly or indirectly, to influence an elector in giving his or her vote, or to deter the elector from, or interrupt the elector in giving his or her vote at any election held in this state."

 

Emphasis added by boldface on the type of injury I am claiming.  I am asserting that John Shay by an unconstitutional policy that was passed by the Ludington City Council on Feb. 28, 2011 and whose effects were forced upon me by him the following day, has effectively prevented me from voting at my polling place, even with recurring pleas to him to allow my entrance.  The evidence for this accusation is published, not in its entirety in this link which has many hyperlinks within that further fleshes out the specifics of this claim:  http://ludingtoncitizen.ning.com/forum/topics/the-candidate-who-cou...

 

Further evidence of the allegation is available on request.  I realize that John Shay serves the County Government by currently serving on the Mason County Board of Public Works and the Solid Waste Management Planning Committee, and hope that if this law's prosecution would pose a conflict of interest in the prosecutor's office of Mason County, that the prosecution of the same would be transferred to another agency with that power.

 

Please respond with a decision on this serious matter at your earliest convenience.  Thank you.

 

Tom Rotta  

 

 

It was a letter of which I expected some action on after some sort of conference with the PA's Office, but I waited a week with no reply in my inbox.  I was sent a letter in the mail from the Prosecuting Attorney the just before Thanksgiving letting me know that he was having my assertions investigated by the Michigan State Police (MSP).  After a couple of weeks from the reception of the letter without hearing anything from the MSP, I sent a brief E-mail to the prosecutor asking about the investigation, and asking for further investigation.

 

I swear I could give him job security, if I wanted to pass along everything I have on the City Hallers, but let's not forget the City of Ludington and the County of Mason governments have more in common with each other than they have with the people who vote them in (and grant them authority to do the things they do).   I never heard from him, but the MSP set up an appointment with me at the end of the week for a Monday conference at the Hart MSP.

Which turned out to be a complete waste of gas.  Note that except for my link to the Torch article on having my right to vote snatched from me, I had not even been asked for anything else for their investigation.  But that day, I learned that the case had been denied on the grounds that they did not have anything to go on.  After a thorough pat down at the entry door, I heard an investigator and the Hart MSP leader (Fellowes) tell me that they had not enough to go on for a criminal investigation, and offered up several defenses for John Shay in any criminal proceeding, that were flimsy and based on only one side's set of facts, many which differed from the full truth. 

But it didn't matter that my lawyer and I had officially asked three times each between June and November for access to the City Hall, where I never received any direct reply, it only mattered that the City Manager had let me in three times by written permission between 2-28 and 5-2-2011.

And whereas I would eventually agree with them that MI election law has some wriggle room for Mr. Shay for a successful defense against the charge (and agreed that it did have a strong chance for being civilly fought) I was very disappointed that they effectively made such a decision without ever conferring with me or looking at a fair deal of supplemental material I had brought along. 

It felt kind of like telling a dispatcher (the PA, in this case) that you've just been robbed by Joe Schmo and they send the police to interview Joe.  They call you to come in, you drive a half hour to the precinct and they tell you that Joe has affirmed that he is innocent and that his word is unimpeachable, and that you should be ashamed of yourself for casting such doubt on his character.  No matter whether you brought a video tape of the incident along with you and some eyewitnesses.  But I guess I should have been happy, I was permitted to leave the Hart MSP office on my own at least with intact kneecaps.

On January 24, 2012 I sent the following E-Mail to PA Spaniola and the County FOIA Coordinator Fabian Knizacky: 

"In November just after the election, I had forwarded you a complaint on a violation of state election law, wherein you notified me of having the MSP investigate the case. About two weeks after that, I had a talk with the investigators from the Hart MSP, and although I got a verbal result of their conclusions, which I felt was flawed, I have as of yet received some sort of written summarization of an investigation and any of your conclusions, and why it had not rose to the level of violating the State Law. In my preparation of the final documentation I need to initiate a federal investigation on how the City of Ludington, under color of law, violated my voting rights, I wish to review the totality of your investigation.

Since I am on the understanding that the officers closed that investigation back in December, 2011, and sent the fullness of their investigation to you, there should be no problem with sending me this, as you have not contacted me since the investigation started over two months ago and are long past due. I hope you don't treat other victims of crimes who report to you so callously. I would appreciate either the sending of such records by transmission through E-mail or allow me to inspect them. This is effectively a FOIA request in that regard, and is why I have the County Administrator, newly sworn in, as a co-recipient."

Here is what I got back:  Memo: Warrant Action.  The slanderous allegations made against me by this moron are totally debunked in this thread  creating a monster pt3.  I put out in the beginning of March.  Kind of makes you wonder how he's adapting the facts in the Baby Kate case in order to get a conviction, doesn't it?

 

In the meantime, however, I chided Prosecutor Paul and his 'careless disregard for accuracy in a public record' by sending him this E-mail on 1-28-2012 complete with his offensive memo:

"The attached public record you created has false and malicious claims against myself and my character. MCL 750.370 says: " Any person who shall falsely and maliciously, by word, writing, sign, or otherwise accuse, attribute, or impute to another the commission of any crime, felony or misdemeanor, or any infamous or degrading act, or impute or attribute to any female a want of chastity, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor."

I have not committed any of the infamous acts as you depict in the above memo as "numerous non-consenting acts of a stalking nature by the complainant against a City Hall employee" nor have I ever been issued a Personal Protection Order, both of which you declare as fact in your capacity as a Prosecuting Attorney for the County of Mason in your 12-2-2011 memo to Michigan State Police Sergeant Fellowes. My previous E-mail of this day also noted several other inaccuracies you could set aright as well, of a non-defamatory nature.

I hereby give you notice that you need to publish a retraction of your false claims of myself and my character or to publish facts and evidence that certifies any truth to your claims. I give you two full weeks to do so (February 12, 2012). If I receive no such retraction, or any reasonable request from you to extend the time period further than two weeks, I will seek relief through legal means.

Thank you for your interest in the rights of individuals.

 

I also sent another E-mail that same day clarifying my position on the offensive and inaccurate details he passed off as facts and asked to see the supposed PPO he referred to by the FOIA.   I had to fight for all of February to get to see the PPO application which was denied, but have I yet got the retraction and the apology one would expect?  Find out in the soon to come out sequel:    When the Prosecutor Becomes a Persecutor, pt 2:  The Dressing Down of Defendant Paul Spaniola.

 

[Willy]

That memo: Warrant Action, is an absolutely  disgraceful example of a public official  ho humming a complaint that truly needed immediate attention. A complaint that affects the entire citizenry. It's so sad that the ordinary citizen does not know that these local officials are masking their ineptitude, cronyism and corruption and passing their actions off as effective governmental oversight.

[XLFD]

I was glad that he did get the MSP to investigate the case, as he should have done, but that Memo does impeach any impartiality he had in the actual process, particularly since he had no other public records with any finding of the MSP's investigation up to that point.  As such, it was highly prejudicial, slanderous and effectively hindered a police investigation in its false premises.

[Marty Redman]

Totally shameful.  If the prosecutor loses the Phillips trial you can probably capitialize on that to get some sort of punishment for his defamations. 

Good luck in going after the prosecutor though, I don't think Scuette- Mi AG- will bother helping you. 

[XLFD]

Schuette may not even need to be involved in this one, it may go strictly civil, but Spaniola's handling of the initial investigation will likely get Federal scrutiny once their investigation into the disenfranchisement issues begins in earnest.

[Jason]

I bet when Spaniola received that E-mail, he was rolling on the floor with laughter. You don't have a chance with that one (defamation). I would bet you $500 that it would be thrown out IN ANY COURT in the US but for now we will stick with the court thats available. Heck, I'll even pay for your initial filing fees. Do it in small claims court(you can get up to $5000 there, no attorneys and the court is a lot less formal, easier for you) so its quick and easy on you and you collect your $500 fast, plus up to $5000. You lose and $500 plus my filing fees back, deal? I'll (in good faith) give you the fees prior to you filing. If you agree just post on here how much the fees are and I'll figure out how to get them to you. Spaniola is probably still laughing and he has every legal backing NOT to issue an apology nor retraction. You will never see nor hear it.

[XLFD]

Jason, Small Claims Courts are strictly for people who feel that someone owes them money, and would not apply in this case.  

I will consider the rest of your 'legal advice' as equally suspect, and you can go ahead and keep your money; I make it a habit not to take advantage of fools.

[Jason]

XLFD,

Why the need to insult? Other than money, what is it you're after? Retraction and apology? That has to be done in a "reasonable amount of time" and that time has passed. He didn't give you one because he doesn't owe you one, legally. I didn't offer you any legal advice, I just recommended you use small claims court so I would get paid faster. G_d knows how long other courts can linger on.

Its OK to be afraid or admit you cant afford to make that bet, I know if I was in your shoes I wouldn't make it. Why didn't you just respectfully decline it instead of resorting to insults? Its just my opinion that you wont barely even get your foot in the door on that one.

I was only making that bet as to try and recoup some of the money you're costing me, I pay city taxes, by looking on that site you showed, it doesn't appear that you do. Also, if you lived at one address and your legal residence was another, where did you (within the law) legally vote before? Or did you vote? Did you vote in a different district than where you actually lived? No disrespect intended, I'm just curious.

[XLFD]

Jason, I have no money claim, and thus you're right that it would be thrown out of Small Claims Court, and/or I would fail to get a money settlement.  I'd probably fail in Traffic Court too with this one.

If someone muddles an investigation like the record shows Spaniola did, he at least deserves rebuke from those agencies that oversee competency in public officials.  I would like to charge Spaniola with the criminal charge of defamation, but showing defamation (or any other offense) criminally is harder to do than showing it civilly, and I would need help from AG Schuette or a special prosecutor to do so.

If you pay local taxes, expect more from your officials, instead of the legitimate concerns of your fellow citizens. 

[XLFD]

On second thought, your reply to my insinuating that you were a fool (and offering to not take advantage of you) for not knowing what Small Claims Court does (which should be learned in any Civics class) shows even more evidence that the epithet may fit.

You object to that and accuse me of insulting you.  Apparently, the mere insinuation of someone saying you published something foolish offends you.  Take that mere insinuation and have someone say that you performed numerous acts of non-consentual contact to a female (whom you have never met or contacted otherwise than in her official capacity), and that you had a PPO placed on you.  All of which are provably false. 

And then have that someone be the Prosecuting Attorney of the County who was given an alleged crime to investigate on your behalf.  And have them do that during an active investigation being conducted by the MSP in a letter addressed to the investigator of that alleged crime, where those defamations do not even have any relevance to the investigation. 

[Jason]

XLFD,

The only person that epithet may fit is yourself. As usually is when you have a possible criminal accusing other possible criminals. Which is the case here, as I see it. If your wrong, which is more likely the case, then by accusing him of a crime he hasn't committed, you become the criminal. Difference? YOU DID IT IN A PUBLIC FORUM. Furthermore, that's not the only crime I am of the opinion that you have committed (no, not your thievery from your past). Which is the reason I would never vote for you (still not talking about your thievery). I don't want to replace one bunch of possible criminals with new ones. Especially ones who pay no taxes here and have no vested interest in the community, other than to invest hundreds, if not thousands of dollars into a ticket on a bicycle. Who's the fool? Definitely not your lawyer. I would rather weed all of you out. I think you know exactly what I'm talking about, eh? Either way, I hope you run again, then I will post exactly what it is I'm speaking of, in the Public's interest. For now though, no accusations, mere speculations on my part.

[XLFD]

Jason, I once again am having a hard time figuring what the heck you're talking of, but you have the right to express your opinions elsewhere, as you have once again been placed off the forum for your unsocial tendencies, and terms of service violations. 

Spaniola has the right to bring up charges that I am guilty of defaming him.  The only problem is:  all that I have put out here is the truth, which is a proven defense against slander.  Almost all he put out in the public records was false and prejudicial.  Your arguments and accusations are juvenile.

[Willy]

Jason

If you have some information then post it. Don't act like the proverbial tail chasing dog. Your last post made no sense in the context of what has been discussed on this forum. Your double speak isn't going to convince anyone that you have anything worth posting so just spit out what you think is the truth and let the forum users decide if what you say is relevant.