Robin Hood Update

Published On July 15, 2013 | By Pete Eyre | Articles, Videos

[this post was first published at KeeneCopBlock.org on July 15, 2013]

Robin Hood hearing
August 12th in the AM (exact time to be added here)
Keene “Superior” Court
12 Court Street
Keene, NH 03431

.

INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED

Those who claim to act as on on behalf of the “City of Keene”

  • tom_mullens_courtjester-robinhood-keene-copblock“court jester” Thomas Mullins – “attorney” for the “City of Keene” – signed the preliminary injunction and who is advocating for the creation of a 50′ anti-freedom zone more
    603-357-9806
  • princejohn_maclean-robinhood-keene-copblock“king” John MacLean – “city manager” for the “City of Keene” – supporting the move to criminalize Robin Hooding
    603-357-9804
  • Charles P. Bauer – Concord-based “attorney” hired by the “City of Keene” to help try to distort truth with legalese
    603-228-1181
  • Ginger Reyes – “parking enforcement supervisor” for the “City of Keene”
    603-357-9813 x7000
  • Linda Desruisseaux – “parking enforcement officer” for the “City of Keene”
    603-357-9813 x7145
  • Jane McDermott – “parking enforcement officer” for the “City of Keene”
    603-357-9813 x7211
  • Alan Givetz – “parking enforcement officer” for the “City of Keene”
    603-357-9813 x7212
  • John C. Kissinger – “judge” in Keene’s “Superior” Court who is hearing Robin Hood-related legaland ventues
    855-212-1234
  • Joseph T. DiRusso – “trooper” for the “NH State Police” who stole Garret Ean’s camera based on a still-sealed affidavit signed by Edward Burke
    [email protected]
    603-358-3333
  • Aaron Gillis – “trooper” for the “NH State Police” who assisted in the theft of Garret Ean’s camera
    603-358-3333
  • Edward Burke - “judge” for Keene District Court who signed the warrant for DiRusso and Gillis to steal Ean’s camera
    855-212-1234

Those collectivized as “Robin Hood” by the “City of Keene”

  • Kate Ager
  • James Cleaveland
  • Graham Colson
  • Garret Ean
  • Ian Freeman
  • Pete Eyre

Jon Meyer is now representing the first five named above, Eyre is pro se

________________________

COVERAGE

[click to view]

________________________

SUPPORT ROBIN HOOD

Bitcoin: 1PRPhRRoxekgLwgqXxBKGTJ9La5EwSXcJJ

Paypal: [email protected]

via Snail Mail: Keene Activist Center, 75 Leverett Street, Keene, NH 03431

on Facebook: https://facebook.com/KeeneRobinHood

Robin Hood and the Merry Men believe in openness and accountability – see hours of raw video recorded by activists at http://youtube.com/Fr33manTVraw

Watch the popular web series Aqua Keene Parking Force and local television series AKPF #1 on the channel http://youtube.com/AquaKeene

________________________.

EXCERPTS FROM RELATED POSTS

 

December 01, 2011

Activists Save People from Parking Tickets (Robin Hooding) by Ian

Robin Hood and her Merry Men have returned to Free Keene! You already know about Robin Hood if, while parked in downtown Keene, you returned to find a note from Robin or one of the Merry Men. The note kindly informed you that you had been rescued from one of the Crown’s parking tickets. You can see the full note on the Robin Hood page.

You can also visit from anywhere via RobinHood.FreeKeene.com or just look under the Shire tab in the top menu, on the right, here on the blog.

________________________

December 19, 2011

Activists Save People from Parking Tickets (Robin Hooding) by Rapsher

________________________

January 21, 2013

Spirit of Robin Hood Revived in Keene by Free Concord


________________________

January 21, 2013

Robin Hooding – Super Mario Edition by James Cleaveland

________________________

January 29, 2013

More Public Support for Robin Hooding by James Cleaveland

________________________

January 30, 2013

Introduction to Robin Hooding by James Cleaveland

What is Robin Hooding? It is a form of activism where activists try to prevent people from having their money taken from them by paying an expired meter before a parking enforcement officer can write a ticket on the expired meter. Like Robin Hood, these activists are standing up against an oppressive government tax.

________________________

February 10, 2013

Warning: Removal of This Chalk is a Class B Felony and Carries a Prison Sentence of More Than a Year by James Cleaveland

Today I was made aware from KPD Officer Jason Short that removing the chalk that the parking enforcement officers put on a parked vehicle’s tires is a class b felony. I was given a piece of paper, pictures below, with the applicable RSA.

________________________

February 10, 2013

Keene Parking Enforcement Illustrates Lysander Spooner by Free Concord

________________________

March 11, 2013

Retired Cop Confronts Robin Hooders with Unconstitutional Orders by James Cleaveland

Robin-Hood-Cards-Destroyed-300x225Parking Enforcers Steal and Destroy Robin Hood Cards

Unfortunately, the parking enforcers of Keene have resorted to theft and destruction of property as a new attempt to thwart Robin Hood of Keene, a development that I view as further evidence of Robin Hooding’s effectiveness. I was given the following stack of cards in late February from an enforcer who informed me that they were removing them from vehicles and ripping them up. I then shot the video below in which a parking enforcer of the city of Keene removed some of our cards from a vehicle and threw them in the trash. I decided to wait to release this footage to see if the enforcers reformed their ways, but since the card removal appears to be continuing if a Robin Hooder is not with the enforcer, I decided to release the footage. Robin Hooders been told that this practice was occurring and have witnessed it prior, but did not have any footage of it until now.

________________________

April 11, 2013

Retired Cop Confronts Robin Hooders with Unconstitutional Orders by Ian

Retired KPD Captain Peter “Sturdy” Thomas is back on the streets of Keene, this time armed with a video camera. He attempts to give unconstitutional orders to Robin Hooders.

________________________

April 11, 2013

Keene Sentinel Investigates Robin Hooding Investigation by Free Concord

While all public officials in New Hampshire are required to be at all times accountable per part first, article 8 of the NH constitution, the parking enforcers are open to a particularly higher degree of publicity, because they work in Keene police uniforms and wear a Keene police department badge. The normal course of their duties also require themselves to be able to attest for what they are doing constantly, as the documentation of violations is an outwardly public process.

________________________

May 12, 2013

City of Keene Goes after Robin Hooders in Court – Admits the amount of tickets issued are down and robin hooding is legal by James Cleaveland

he city of Keene has filed a lawsuit (copy here) against me and several other people regarding robin hooding (Respondents). Basically, the city wants the court to issue a “preliminary” and “permanent” injunction “restraining Respondents, or anyone under their direction, supervision, employment, or control, from coming within a safety zone of fifty (50) feet of any PEO [Parking Enforcement Officer] while that PEO is on duty.” Additionally, the city wants to stop us “from video recording, within a safety zone of fifty (50) feet,” and “from communicating with any PEO.”

This move by the city is a validation of how effective robin hooding has been in Keene with ALL of the parking enforcement officers stating that “Since December 2012, when this activity started, it has been noted that I have written less tickets than in the preceding time period.”

This case also validates that robin hooding and all activities performed by people robin hooding are perfectly legal because the city (Petitioner) admits, “Petitioner has no adequate alternate remedy at law.”

________________________

May 14, 2013

Union Leader Reports on Robin Hooders Being Sued by “City of Keene” by Ian

________________________

May 18, 2013

Thomas Mullins & Comrades Levy Frivolous Threats at Robin Hooding Do-Gooders by Pete Eyre

________________________

May 19, 2013

Prince John’s Royal Proclamation Denies Fiscal Motivation by Free Concord

princejohn_rhkeenePrince John, on behalf of his court jesters and their enforcement units, has penned a desperate response to the global outpouring of support received by Robin Hood and the Merry Men . . . Through a royal proclamation published in Saturday’s Sentinel, the Prince builds upon his deceitful characterization of individuals that he first perpetuated in a Keene Sentinel cover story over a month ago.

. . .

The Prince has become so drunken with authority that he cannot even get the alleged story of his subversive subjects straight! Is Robin Hooding officially about filling meters and saving the civilian population from tickets, or terminating the employment of otherwise replaceable enforcers?

. . .

Fortunately, the burden of proof is on his highness, and despite his fallacious allegations, we have yet to be presented with evidence of any specific incident of harassment against any of the units under the Prince’s employ.

________________________

May 20, 2013

Delivering Flowers to “Prince” John and Thomas P. Mullins by Darryl W. Perry

On Monday May 20, after the security theater closed, Nemi (Free Talk Live co-host) and Graham delivered bouquets of flowers to “Prince” John MacLean and Thomas P. Mullins, the City Manager & City Attorney respectively. The flowers were delivered to thank them for all of the news coverage they have brought Free Keene, Robin Hood and the Free State Project.


________________________

May 21, 2013

Opening Dialogue with Keene City Bureaucrats by Free Concord

garretean-meter-robinhood-keenecopblockToday I took the initiative to do what lawyers do before taking cases before the court — discussing the matter with the opposition. After passing through district court security at City Hall, I headed upstairs to see if city attorney Thomas Mullins was available. We scheduled a time to meet tomorrow morning to discuss the world-famous Robin Hooding lawsuit. While not open carrying my camera at the time, Mullins laid down a non-negotiable prohibition on electronic recording as the condition under which he would be willing to have a dialogue. I find it unfortunate that city officials are not willing to be objectively accountable in dialogues regarding public matters, but I will be permitted to take at least written notes.

________________________

May 23, 2013

Robin Hood Court Date Set: June 10th, 9am by Ian

robinhood-wanted-keenecopblockAs you probably know, Keene’s heroic Robin Hooders have been sued by the “City of Keene” people and accused of harassing the meter maids.

________________________

May 23, 2013

First Dialogue with Tom Mullins by Free Concord

Yesterday morning, I sat down with city attorney (or court jester to use the royal parlance) Thomas Mullins, who was responsible for signing the paperwork filing suit against the Merry (wo)Men allegedly associated with Robin Hood of Keene.

Below is a transcript of the meeting constructed from memory and extensive written notes, as Mullins had refused to engage in dialogue if an objective record was to have been made.

E: So, you think that following public officials, you said “clearly a pursuit aspect”, you think that following public officials who wear a Keene police department patch and badge while they drive a Keene police department vehicle, and during the hours of employment, you think that there’s something inherently illegal about that?

M: No, I didn’t say that. This is a question of a civil action we are involved in. From our perspective, you’re trying to force the termination of these individuals by getting them to quit.

E: And you think that all six people are involved in that activity?

M: Yes, exactly.

E: Okay, and do you have more affidavits, will this be available in discovery?

M: I’ll provide you with all of the, as we get ready for the lawsuit

________________________

May 30, 2013

Robin Hooding Lawsuit: The City and its citizens will lose no matter what by Jay

In my opinion, there’s three ways this suit can go. The City of Keene cannot legally stop people from putting money in meters either way. So, here’s a list of my thoughts about the possible outcomes:

1) The entire case is thrown out.

- Robin Hooding continues as before and the City still continues to lose revenue.

- Lawsuit costs its citizens a bunch of money.

2) Negotiations happen, and a reasonable “safety zone” distance and behavior standards are agreed upon.

- The City still continues to lose revenue.

- Lawsuit costs its citizens a bunch of money.

3) The City wins its 50 foot “safety zone” and Robin Hooder’s are forced to comply.

- The City ends up losing more revenue than either of the two outcomes above. Why? Because the Robin Hooder’s will have to change their tactics to keeping all meters fed continuously instead of those just in front of the Parking Enforcer.

- Lawsuit costs its citizens a bunch of money.

So you see, they lose no matter what. Revenue from Parking Enforcement will still be down from solving a problem that doesn’t exist. Its only practical option will be to raise parking rates and/or fines sooner than they had planned. The City was already planning on raising parking rates before Robin Hooding started in its current form back in December, but of course they’ll probably pin the blame on those mean people saving folks from parking tickets.

 

________________________

June 02, 2013

Robin Hooding Lawsuit Continued Despite Objection by Free Concord

I had been scheduled to be out of town for a few days leading up to and on the hearing date, so I filed a motion to continue, asking for either all parties’ hearings to be rescheduled, or to have a hearing scheduled solely for myself. No stranger to courtrooms myself, I have filed countless motions to continue with courts across New Hampshire, and have not yet had one denied. It was not surprising that the city attorney might object, and reading his objection, you would think that the situation was dire.

As stated in the City’s Verified Petition for Preliminary and Permanent Injunctive Relief, the seriousness of the situation warrants immediate consideration and action by the Court; the City and its Parking Enforcement Officers would be prejudiced by any delay in this proceeding.

What exactly will ‘the city’ present as damages in this case? They have yet to cite a specific claim against Robin Hooders other than vague allegations of ‘harassment’. Attorney Mullins seems so convinced that Robin Hooders pose such a potential threat that even delaying their preliminary hearing one day could mean chaos in the streets of Keene. Mullins’ objection was denied, the continuance granted, and a new hearing date has been set for June 11 at 2:30pm.

________________________

June 02, 2013

Want to see what a typical day of Robin Hooding is like? by James Cleaveland

PeterThomas-cityofkeene-robinhood-keenecopblockIf you ever wanted to see what occurs during a typical day of robin hooding, feel free to check out the footage that Peter ‘Sturdy’ Thomas, the former “Police Captain of Field Operations” of the Keene police department took for the “city.” He was hired as an “Investigator” and paid $28.81/hour ($1,339.67 total) to film robin hooders on the streets of Keene. I filed a 91a request (Freedom of information in NH) for the footage.

________________________

June 09, 2013

Response to “City of Keene” Misinformation re: Robin Hood by Pete Eyre

________________________

Robin Hooding Lawsuit Update – Garret’s Response by Free Concord

Retaining the monopoly on “justice”, the government’s courts have a way of interrupting one’s life with their arbitrary demands. In civil court, unlike criminal, the burden of proof is not upon the state, and one is obligated to defend themselves or face a default judgement without any input from the defendant.

________________________

June 11, 2013

City Fails to Obtain Preliminary Injuction Against Robin Hooders + Full Court Video by Free Concord

Despite the city’s numerous written pleadings for urgent action to be taken by the court, the issue of whether a preliminary injunction would be granted was not entertained. Instead, the judge requested optional positions from both sides on the constitutionality surrounding the proceedings, granting twenty days to file additional paperwork before a full evidentiary hearing would be scheduled.

________________________

June 13, 2013

Robin Hood’s Next Hearing: See You Aug 12 by Free Concord

robinhood-cartoon-keenecopblockJudge John Kissinger has affirmed that the city’s case against Robin Hood of Keene and friends is on hold until an evidentiary hearing to be held on August 12.

Unless the pending motion to dismiss is granted, the matter will continue on with a full evidentiary hearing in August, in which the city will be compelled to substantiate its claims against Robin Hood and friends.

________________________

June 13, 2013

Condensed Video from Robin Hood Hearing by Pete Eyre

________________________

June 18, 2013

Discoverizing the Robin Hood Case by Free Concord

Prince John, Jester keene_papertigerMullins, and the royal henchmen and spinsters have for too long continued preaching falsehoods against Robin Hood and the Merry (wo)Men. Within ten days, I expect a response from the Jester as is obligated by the rules of the court. Will the city be able to manufacture their alleged video evidence of Robin Hooder harassment, or will the world be lulled by the softening roars of another paper tiger?

________________________

June 25, 2013

Did Someone Order a 91-A Request? by Free Concord

2013_06_25_cok_video_robinhooding

________________________

June 26, 2013

AKPF Reviews CoK Hit Video on Robin Hooders by Free Concord

Days after the city of Keene published an embarrassingly poor quality, overchopped video linked from the front page of their website, the producers of AKPF #1 have responded by illustrating the number of doctorations contained in the thirteen minute shameful sham.

________________________

June 26, 2013

City Admits Incompetence, Spends Your Tax Dollars on Private Attorneys for Robin Hood Case by Ian

Gallagher, Callahan, and Gartrell attorneys Eric G. Moskowitz and Charles P. Bauer have put in an appearance in the Robin Hood sham case against local activists.

Apparently the city people couldn’t take on a handful of “pro-se” activists by themselves and had to bring in some professional help. If the hired guns were ethical at all, they’d tell the city attorneys they are out of line with the suit and refuse the case. Of course, they are not ethical, (why do the right thing when you can milk taxpayers for billable hours?) and are apparently the go-to firm for the City of Keene. I wonder how many municipalities use their services?

________________________

June 26, 2013

NH Bureaucrats Conspire to Censor Garret Ean by Pete Eyre

Is having an accurate recollection of a conversation criminal?

An hour ago my good friend Garret Ean had his videocamera stolen as he bicycled toward downtown Keene. The theft was perpetrated by two men wearing NH State Police badges identified as Joseph T. DiRusso and Aaron Gillis, who, upon spotting Ean, drove their unmarked silver Dodge Charger toward him and demanded his property.

DiRusso and Gillis claimed their actions just per some text on paper signed by Edward Burke based on allegations made by Thomas Mullins

________________________

July 01, 2013

Lawyers Hired by “City of Keene” Issue “Memo of Law” re Robin Hood by Pete Eyre

________________________

July 03, 2013

Renown Free Speech Attorney Jon Meyer Joins Robin Hood Case!” by Ian

Attorney Jon MeyerJon Meyer is a Manchester-based attorney whose normal focus is on employment-related cases, however he is also renown as one of the best lawyers in America on the subject of free speech.

Meyer filed his appearance today in Cheshire superior court on behalf of five of the six defendants, with Copblock.org‘s Pete Eyre deciding not to opt-in to having an attorney.

________________________

July 12, 2013

City Accuses Robin Hooders of “Civil Conspiracy” by Ian

the city’s hired-gun (at who knows what cost to taxpayers) private attorneys have asked the judge to accept new language alleging that Robin Hooders are engaging in a “civil conspiracy” against the city and their parking enforcers.

What’s a “civil conspiracy”? The city attorneys’ filing claims:

A civil conspiracy is a combination of two or more persons by concerted action to accomplish an unlawful purpose, or to accomplish some purpose not in itself unlawful by unlawful means.

What were the unlawful purposes or means? They claim in the amended petition that the unlawful purpose was to cause “tortious interference” with the city’s employment contracts with the Parking Enforcement Officers.

Essentially their argument is that basic constitutional activity, (speaking to and recording bureaucrats), should be banned because some employee’s feelings might get hurt.

 

________________________

July 12, 2013

Sentinel Speaks on Latest Paperwork Shufflings by Free Concord

mullens_conspiracyYesterday at Free Keene was posted copies of the memorandums recently filed, which points out the ridiculous new element being levied against Robin Hood and friends by the city of Keene. A new low has been reached by the city as they are now introducing conspiracy theorizing into the case by alleging “civil conspiracy“. According to the city, the goal of Robin Hooding is not to reduce the number of penalties imposed upon the good people of Keene, but to psychologically manipulate parking enforcers into quitting their jobs, amounting to a secret conspiracy. Our principled attorney obliterates this assertion in his critical response, highlighting how the city is without standing, and seeking legal relief in contradiction of previous precedents. We shall see if the judge is amused by such cliché, deluded ramblings as conspiracy theories being introduced into the court by the jester and his legal cortege.

________________________

July 12, 2013

Sentinel Speaks on Latest Paperwork Shufflings by Free Concord

 

Like this Article? Share it!

About The Author

Pete Eyre is co-founder of CopBlock.org. As an advocate of peaceful, consensual interactions, Eyre seeks to inject a message of complete liberty and self-government into the conversation of police accountability. Eyre went to undergrad and grad school for law enforcement, then spent time in DC as an intern at the Cato Institute, a Koch Fellow at the Drug Policy Alliance, Directer of Campus Outreach at the Institute for Humane Studies, Crasher-in-Chief at Bureaucrash, and as a contractor for the Future of Freedom Foundation. He later hit the road as co-founder of the Motorhome Diaries and Liberty On Tour, and now resides in the 'shire.
  • Jason Free

    I see these stupid fuckers around Keene. They definately will get their asses handed to them in court. Everyone I know in Keene can’t stand these losers. I see they are making more fucking videos whining and crying. They must obviously know they are fucking losing. They fucking travel around in packs with fucking cameras and radios. Then, they descend on meter maids who are doing their jobs and then pester the fucking shit out of them. I have seen a few citizens start trying to kick their casses but then they just run away like the pussies they are. The city is going to win this one big time and it’s aboout time they get a sample of their own medicine. Stupid cunts.

  • steve

    Jason Free AKA Adam Miller and Slappy. back again with a different name. Robin Hooders keep-up the good work. will someone please give me the real name and address of Jason Free. I can see some constitutional issues in your favor. If they want a full injunction upon your names and only your names to be at all times 50 feet away from the meter beaters that sounds somewhat desparaging. its as if they are ordering all of you from town, due to you never know where the meter beaters are. As for harrasment as long as your only putting money in the meters and not confronting these people while doing their jobs or photographing and filming them as to where they can see you there is no harrasment. no heckling, following,or contact and your fine. there is no nothing that states putting money in a meter that is expired is against the law its just good citizenship and the neighborly thing to do.If their wages are based on the tickets they give then that is extremely imoral and unfriendly behavior of the city towards its people.Look for skeletons in the closet one at a time. real estate deals. taxes that have not been paid there are a thousand things these high and mighty people are involved in.some good dirt is out there, just look for it.

  • Common Sense

    Had you only put his much effort into getting a real job…

  • steve

    oh yea i forgot. garret ean , you should trim that hair, your a danger to yourself and others during electrical storms and or forest fires.

  • http://google workingman

    I wonder what this is costing the city just trying to stop this

  • RadicalDude

    Regarding the 6/11 hearing, Kissinger basically implies that he intends to deny Ian’s motion prior to the evidenciary hearing: If Kissinger is supposed to be neutral, fair and impartial, then wouldn’t he want to actually consider the evidence BEFORE making his ruling? Why does he want to make his ruling, and THEN consider the evidence AFTER? Aren’t the courts findings supposed to be based on the EVIDENCE, or in this case, lack of evidence? If he is going to make a decision prior to weighing the evidence, then such a decision is, by definition, arbitrary. Grounds to object to such arbitrary/biased proceedings, and move to disqualify this judge since he appears to be acting arbitrarily out of sheer bias.

  • steve

    Dear Common Sense , As for the real job im retired for the second time along with owning my own business and running it myself.What would you know ,or what have you accomplished besides a big mouth and an arrogant attitude.you and your kind are obama suckers.

  • steve

    The old conspiracy theory. This has got to be the most idiotic rambling i have seen in small courts. Gallagher,Callahan & Gartrell PC. CONSPIRACY THEORISTS, perfoming along with Ringling Brothers,Barnham & Baily. The most greatest show on earth.

  • Jason Free

    Oh look it’s steve the fucking lying faggot. The man who stood over his mom’s dying body and told her what a piece of shit he was and scolded her for making you stop breast feeding at the age of 50. You are such a lying piece of shit. It must be sad to know your own momther didn’t even know you. You need to go choke yourself and stop lying to about everything and everyone. It’s too late for your mother. It’s not too late for everyone else.

  • t.

    Follow RadicalDudes advice. That’ll served you well and be more humorous.

    This whole post breaks of panic fire.

  • steve

    after watching all the video of how you guys got in there and followed these people around. getting down on them while they are at work while filming them. i have an idea it may turn a direction that none of will like.i just didnt realize you all were up in their faces like that. i could see running in front of them and going up and down the street with change and helping the townsfolk out. however you may have violated their asses by being to close and personal.i mean WOW OH SHIT i hate the hell outa those creeps. i think you guys made this real big and somethings gonna come out of this and i hope it dont hurt the rest of us.

  • steve

    someone please give me jason frees real name and address.

  • http://www.policemisconduct.net Glenn

    Looks like this one is set to blow up (legally of course) in the face of the City of Keene. Check out all those news links to major media outlets. I am stunned that a lawyer actually stepped up to the plate and is willing to represent the Robin Hood guys. This is going to be one hell of an entertaining fiasco. Everyone get a bowl of popcorn.

    >>> !!! POLICE OFFICERS RAPING INFANTS AND CHILDREN !!! <<<

    When you see common sense, t., psosgt and all the other police union shills spew their boot-licking propaganda here on Cop Block, remember, THIS IS WHO THEY ARE, THIS IS WHAT THEY STAND FOR, AND THIS IS WHAT THEY DEFEND!

    Wichita KS police officer Officer Joseph T. McGill, 28, was convicted today of committing a sexual act on a 3-month-old child and a 1-year-old child. Officer McGill pleaded guilty in January 2012 in an unrelated case to sexual battery while on duty as a police officer and was sentenced to three years probation. Those charges stemmed from separate incidents in November 2010 and February 2011. The judge set sentencing for March 1.

    xxx.kansas.com/2013/01/24/2649372/former-police-officer-convicted.html

    Wichita police officer Gregory P. Nicks on Friday received consecutive life prison sentences for sexually abusing a 15-month-old girl. The 32-year-old worked for the Wichita Police Department for just over three years beginning in 2006. Prosecutor Justin Edwards introduced three written statements at the hearing, including one from the victim’s mother. She said Nicks had used her daughters — the 15-month-old and a 4-month-old — as sex objects to fulfill his sexual fantasies.

    xxx.kansas.com/2013/05/03/2788414/former-wichita-police-officer.html

  • Centurion

    @ Radical you must not be paying attention , the extension was to bring evidence in for constitutional Law before an injunction is passed if an injunction can be passed. PAY attention or dont talk.
    @ Jason Freeloader I havent seen anything out of him for you to respond to him . You actually sound like t,common ,north philly, Just with extra swearing. OOOO your mom your mom your mom, your a lyer your a lyer your a lyer. How origional. Talking about others peoples moms tits means you have titsbecause your triple chin diebetic self cant suck on your own because everytime you look down you start to gag from that oxygen tube in your nose. you must have one of those special oxygen tanks with your fathers JIZ flavor because your mom sved it in the freezer from it dropping on the floor when you were concieved. They wrote bob on the side of the frozen Jiz cup because it was your other half . They named your other half fell on the floor dads Jiz short for Bob it because thats what you do with your prosthetic botox balls because with idiotic childish comments like yours to someone you dont know we all know you have no balls. At least you replaced them with made in America plastic polimer chemical form a China sweatshop that your mom works in . to pay for your bills because we know your ssi check cant pay for your heroin addiction or your mouthwash alchahol addiction or your incestral sister ralationship tacked with bath salt syndrome.

  • Centurion

    Jasonfree, Stay on subject or shut up. Theres enough ghetto bullshit dramo shows on with childish banter and fighting so keep the bad girls club shit off the blog. Stay on point. Dont be a Pez dispencing trash idiot like t,AKA Common Sense or Slappmymeatappy.

  • RadicalDude

    @Centurion

    Are you serious or are you trolling me? I’m talking about Kissinger telling Ian he’s probably gonna deny Ian’s motion BEFORE ANY EVIDENCE HAS BEEN PRESENTED. Ian objected that there is no standing by the plaintiff, and Tom Mullins asserts that they have standing based on “tortious interference” with their contract w/ the parking enforcers. But that is just a lawyer’s naked assertion/allegation until EVIDENCE has been presented. How can he reach a determination one way or the other without that EVIDENCE? He is ruling based on naked, unsupported allegations, if he does that. And taking a side on the issue based on naked assertions by Mullins without holding Mullins to any burden of proof to back his assertions is a clear showing of bias.

  • RadicalDude

    Having said that, I do think Ian should have framed his argument more around the evidenciary issues rather than making such a direct legal argument. What I mean by that is to challenge them on the EVIDENCE rather than the “law”. So, rather than just assert, “They have no standing”, put it more like, “They have presented no EVIDENCE to show standing.”

  • t.

    Dude: You really need to get this. “Standing” is in its simplest terms is a “right to bitch”. The city…has a right to bitch about the way its employees are being harassed while doing their jobs. Get past the standing thing….you aren’t using the term in the correct way.

  • RadicalDude

    @t.:
    You say I’m not using the word correctly, how am I using it wrong? What do you think I think it means? What am I using it to mean, if not what you say?

  • RadicalDude

    RULES OF EVIDENCE
    ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS
    Rule 103. Rulings On Evidence

    (a) Specific objection. A general objection shall not be sufficient to raise or preserve an issue for appeal.

  • RadicalDude

    http://www.wsh-law.com/blog/3115/

    A nightclub owner brought action against the County, challenging the constitutionality of ordinances prohibiting nude dancing in venues where alcohol was sold and alleged malicious arrest and prosecutions. Opening as a sports bar in 2006, the nightclub began to feature nude dancing in 2007. After local authorities conducted an undercover investigation, the club filed a lawsuit to enjoin the County from enforcing its alcohol and adult ordinances. After conducting an evidentiary hearing, the District Court denied the club’s motion to enjoin the provision of the adult ordinance prohibiting nude dancing in places that serve alcohol. – See more at: http://www.wsh-law.com/blog/3115/#sthash.NmrJLI1Z.dpuf

  • RadicalDude

    http://www4.samford.edu/schools/netlaw/dh2/casetutorial/Tortprocedures.html

    CAUSE OF ACTION.
    Before litigation of any type can be initiated against anyone, the aggrieved party must first suffer some kind of loss or harm for which the law provides a remedy. This is known as a cause of action.

    In most Tort claims the aggrieved party’s cause of action typically arises automatically (i.e., by operation of law) as soon as the injury occurs (or has been discovered by the aggrieved party). Once a specific cause of action arises (i.e., accrues), the aggrieved party only has a limited period of time within which to investigate the claim and bring a lawsuit.

    This time is typically referred to as a limitations period which is set by statute for each individual type of claim. In most jurisdictions, the statute of limitations for most types of Tort claims varies between one and three years. The aggrieved party will be barred from filing a cause of action in court after the period of time specified within the applicable statute of limitations has expired, even if the claim was otherwise legally valid. The purpose of these statutory limitations periods is to prevent the filing of “stale” claims.

    Ordinarily, after an injury of some kind has occurred, the aggrieved party will consult initially with an attorney to determine if a valid cause of action exists. The attorney first investigates the facts and circumstances surrounding the aggrieved party’s claim, obtaining any necessary additional information, and (when necessary) the attorney may also research the relevant law. If the attorney finds no legal basis for the aggrieved party’s claim, rules governing the attorney’s ethical and professional conduct prohibit the attorney from bringing a claim that is groundless and without merit. Thus, the attorney can only litigate those claims on behalf of an aggrieved party that are based upon at least some legitimate legal theory.

  • RadicalDude
  • RadicalDude

    https://ftp.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/180/180.F3d.1.html

    In order to prevail on a claim of intentional interference with advantageous business relations, a plaintiff must demonstrate actual harm to an existing or prospective relationship of economic benefit. See Ratner v. Noble, 35 Mass.App.Ct. 137, 138, 617 N.E.2d 649 (1993).

  • RadicalDude

    http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3066226137021579392&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr

    1. The defendant’s appeal is based on a fact stipulated by the parties: that the plaintiff suffered no pecuniary loss as a result of the defendant’s campaign. There was evidence that the plaintiff’s professional reputation was harmed within the gay and lesbian community but that she retained her paid position as president of Pride Institute, a gay and lesbian alcohol and drug treatment center that she and the defendant founded, and her position with its parent, Addiction Recovery Corporation. There is authority for the proposition that noneconomic damages, such as damages for emotional distress, may be recovered on a count for intentional interference with business relationships. See Mailhiot v. Liberty Bank & Trust Co., 24 Mass. App. Ct. 525, 528 (1987); Restatement (Second) of Torts § 774A(1)(c) (1977). Nevertheless, it is clear, under decided cases, that the essence of the tort is damage to a business relationship or contemplated contract of economic benefit. Owen v. Williams, 322 Mass. 356, 360 (1948). Comey v. Hill, 387 Mass. 11, 19 (1982). ELM Med. Lab., Inc. v. RKO Gen., Inc., 403 Mass. 779, 787 (1989). Ryan, Elliott & Co. v. Leggat, McCall & Werner, Inc., 8 Mass. App. Ct. 686, 689 (1979). Chemawa Country Golf, Inc. v. Wnuk, 9 Mass. App. Ct. 506, 509 (1980). Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 766, 774A. In the words of § 766, comment t, “The cause of action is for pecuniary loss resulting from the interference. Recovery may be had also for consequential harms for which the interference was the legal cause. (See § 774A).” The latter section, as well as Restatement (Second) of Torts § 47 (1965), makes clear that recovery for emotional distress is not allowed unless the elements of the tort are made out: i.e., actual damage to an economic relationship or prospective relationship.

    We recognize that language from an early case, Walker v. Cronin, 107 Mass. 555, 564-565 (1871),[1] might have been 139*139 made the starting point for recognition of a
    broader tort, comprehending not only relationships of economic benefit, but those of nonpecuniary professional or social benefit as well. The law has not developed that way, however. In the words of Professor Prosser, “When the attempt has been made to carry liability for interference beyond such commercial dealings, and into such areas as exclusion from social organizations …, the courts have been disturbed by a feeling that they were embarking upon uncharted seas, and recovery has been denied….” Prosser & Keeton, Torts § 130, at 1006 (5th ed. 1984). Applying the law of tortious interference as it is reflected in present law, we think that the judge erred in submitting that count to the jury in the absence of proof of damages to the plaintiff’s economic interests. The jury’s verdict on that count cannot stand.

  • RadicalDude

    Mullins has taken the position that ITS NOT ABOUT THE MONEY, yet the court precedent is that IT HAS TO BE ABOUT THE MONEY in this kind of case.

  • RadicalDude

    He only has standing insofar as he can show evidence of a pecuniary interest, Mullins is seeking the injunctive order out of a much broader claim of “rights” to “contract”.

  • RadicalDude

    Absent evidence of a pecuniary interest, then the city has no standing to bring a tortious interference claim.

  • t.

    Wow. Sorry I set you off. Hitting the Wiki hard this mlrning I see.

  • Wow

    There he goes into a copying and pasting frenzy again.

  • RadicalDude

    “t. says:
    July 17, 2013 at 9:49 am

    Wow. Sorry I set you off. Hitting the Wiki hard this mlrning I see.”

    Haha, it’s not all about you, this info is for anyone who can benefit from it.

  • t.

    Nobody can /will benefit. The city is seeking injunctive relief to keep the Keener’s from harassing its employees. You’ve missed that.

    I sure hope the city uses this site in its case. Evidence of exactly how the Keener’s act. Sweet.

  • RadicalDude

    If the employees are being harassed, then they have standing to file for restraining orders on their own behalf, the city doesn’t gain “proxy” standing just because the employees work for them.
    Mullins claim is that they are creating “tortious interference” with the city’s contract. But a claim of tortious interference has, as one of its elements, harm to a pecuniary interest, which Mullins has acknowledged is not part of the city’s claim. The city has no standing to sue.

  • Common Sense

    The city’s interest is that by harassing the employee, it costs them money. Loss of money is the “harm” and thus, they have standing, as to the employees, in their individual capacities. I read once where on the parking enforcement suffered some medical issue. Those medical costs would be covered by the employer and could further be used to show “harm” by the actors.

    All you have to do is see some cases that involved the interference of business employees by others.

    Think of it like protesters picketing outside a business; once you interfer with the employees (trucks) coming and going, the company suffers a economic loss. The company now has “standing.” The company can seek an injunction.

    Just look at Walmart in Texas.

  • t.

    Common: he can’t see that. That’s logic and not easy to Wiki.

  • t.

    My guess is that the Keener’s “take a plea” so to speak and settle this quietly and we won’t here about it.

  • RadicalDude

    I doubt Mullins will prevail on this case. I predict it will get thrown out, if not by Kissinger, then tossed on an appeal.

    “Common Sense says:
    July 20, 2013 at 8:56 am

    The city’s interest is that by harassing the employee, it costs them money. Loss of money is the “harm” and thus, they have standing, as to the employees, in their individual capacities. I read once where on the parking enforcement suffered some medical issue. Those medical costs would be covered by the employer and could further be used to show “harm” by the actors.”

    This just isn’t in the complaint, either in the facts or the section on the cause of action. Nowhere does it articulate any particular economic injury with any specificity. It just makes vague reference to an “economic relationship.” that it vaguely insinuates is threatened, using phrases like, “PEO Givetz has considered resigning”
    and it alleges a physical fight between “Respondent Cleveland” and a “member of the public”, without even tying it to the case.

    Are you saying a parking officer had a medical issue from the Robin Hooding? Or just you mean an unrelated medical issue?

  • t.

    Guess we’ll see. Actually I bet we don’t. If (when) the Keener’s go down….I suspect that suspiciously this story will “disappear” like somany others have.