Columns Old

Just another WordPress site

Archive for May, 2013

without comments

Battle of Cajamarca;

good historical account

Michael Wood’s Conquistadors – very entertaining, correct, but not the whole story.

Guns, Germs, and Steel

Written by admin

May 31st, 2013 at 6:49 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Harassment by Ted Mink

without comments

Harassment by Ted Mink (see note after list).

  1. Neighbor chimney light (almost midnight, banging on door).
  2. Right of way in front of house (threat).
  3. Oct. ’12 report, no call/visit request.
  4. Refrigerator, no call/visit request.
  5. Call, woman sergeant, “Get a life.”
  6. Taborsky 7/4/12
  7. Two deputies and ride along for legally posted letter
  8. Deputy for letter hand delivered
  9. Call on anonymous report 1
  10. cal on anonymous report 2
  11. Deputy for parking lot tampering online report, no call/visit request.
  12. Summons – didn’t read/don’t know law  (“color of law”)

Ted Mink is, by law, responsible for all all deputy behavior.  The stunning pattern over eight years strongly indicates a department-wide directive, policy, or way of operating.  All of these incidents are separate and unique (i.e., they do not relate to the same crime report or reason for police involvement).

Overall they show 1) an ignorance or “coloring” of the law and 2) a willingness to threaten, harass, and disturb citizens for acting legally and/or performing their legal duty.

 

Written by admin

May 31st, 2013 at 12:30 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Crimes Not Solved/Stopped/Responed-To By Ted Mink’s Department

without comments

Ongoing

  1. driving off road on wrong side of road to get to mailboxes (damages right of way, dangerous, illegal)
  2. dogs off leash and not picked-up after at Stagecoach Park
  3. dogs on lacrosse field (never allowed) at Stagecoach Park
  4. parking lot defacing at Stagecoach Park
  5. dumping phone books on side of road (on public property)
  6. extreme speeding on Roan Drive and El Pinal Road
  7. street racing (motorcycles) on Hwy 74
  8. harassment by Renals
  9. using law enforcement to intimidate by Renals

Written by admin

May 31st, 2013 at 12:15 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

without comments

Yesterday I tried calling Linda Kirkpatrick just out of curiosity.  I doubt we would see eye to eye.  Here are a few things I might have said.  Did you know…

  1. Ted Mink believes–at least believed–Stagecoach Park is private property?  (This is documented; as a result reports on the special district’s land would not be handled.)
  2. Crime at Stagecoach park occurs on approximately a daily basis and neither the sheriff’s department or the EPRD will do anything about it?
  3. There is a small group (I am not affiliated) on Facebook called “Demand Ted Mink’s Resignation?”
  4. Ted Mink was successfully sued by the ACLU for illegally detaining a prisoner; the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners took no action.
  5. The Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department has a per capita budget approximately twice the national average?
  6. The sheriff’s department, unlike virtually all other law enforcement agencies in the country, does not post contact information (e-mail, direct phone) on its website?  (Also, the department will not provide Ted Mink’s e-mail address; others in Jefferson County will provide it–it is public information.)
  7. Unlike the vast majority of law enforcement agencies in the country the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department will not accept e-mail crime reports?
  8. Ted Mink’s department does not respond to anonymous crime reports?
  9. The Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department–unlike most law enforcement agencies–does not publish crime report statistics (including number of calls/contacts and responses)?
  10. The sheriff’s department often does not respond to or investigate reported crimes.  If they respond action is seldom taken.  Crime persists.  Crime statistics are grossly under-reported.
  11. The state of Colorado has a law making it the “duty” of citizens to report crime?

The following is a correction of this:

CRS 18-4-201
(3) A person “enters unlawfully” or “remains unlawfully” in or upon premises when the person is not licensed, invited, or otherwise privileged to do so. A person who, regardless of his or her intent, enters or remains in or upon premises that are at the time open to the public does so with license and privilege unless the person defies a lawful order not to enter or remain, personally communicated to him or her by the owner of the premises or some other authorized person. A license or privilege to enter or remain in a building that is only partly open to the public is not a license or privilege to enter or remain in that part of the building that is not open to the public. Except as is otherwise provided in section 33-6-116 (1), C.R.S., a person who enters or remains upon unimproved and apparently unused land that is neither fenced nor otherwise enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders does so with license and privilege unless notice against trespass is personally communicated to the person by the owner of the land or some other authorized person or unless notice forbidding entry is given by posting with signs at intervals of not more than four hundred forty yards or, if there is a readily identifiable entrance to the land, by posting with signs at such entrance to the private land or the forbidden part of the land. In the case of a designated access road not otherwise posted, said notice shall be posted at the entrance to private land and shall be substantially as follows: “ENTERING PRIVATE PROPERTYREMAIN ON ROADS”.

I wish “JustAroundHere” would tell the whole story more accurately and when appropriate include material from content experts and/or opposing sides.

Written by admin

May 31st, 2013 at 6:46 am

Posted in Uncategorized

Cronyism?

without comments

5-28-13 224

 

 

 

 

Yesterday it happened again.  It started around noon and went until almost 7 PM.  I called the EPRD around one, spoke with Cindy, and nothing happened.  She did not send anyone out or call the sheriff’s department.  At 2:40 I called Adam Gamache; again, no reply or action.

This is the same group that did the same thing weekly all last Summer.  Is it cronyism?

The infractions and questions include:

  1. Why are they allowed to drive on the field?
  2. Why are they allowed to decorate the field?
  3. Do they have a permit, and have they paid a fee for exclusive use of the field?
  4. If they have a permit, why are there no notice of this (e.g., signs, listing on EPRD functions/calendar)?
  5. Assuming they do not have a permit, why are they allowed to erect tents, nets, and other items?
  6. Why are they allowed to have dogs–yesterday five!–on a field where no dogs are allowed?
  7. Why are the dogs allowed to run free over the entire park (i.e., no leashes)?
  8. Why, when called twice yesterday did EPRD staff do nothing to investigate and correct the situation?
  9. Why are these individuals allowed to park illegally?
  10. Why don’t these people use park trails, walking instead on fragile boundary property?
  11. Why are they allowed fires, barbeques, and cooking on EPRD (public) park land?

This morning I sent the above to Mark Footer, EPRD board president and Adam Gamache; there has been no reply (I don’t count Scott Robson because of this and this).

My personal theory is that it is an inside job.  This group only does their volleyball and field usurp thing when EPRD athletics are not occurring.  They have an inside contact; they know.  And, on occasion they have unlocked a gate.  Do they pay?  My guess is no.  Over the years this would amount to thousands of dollars.  Also, this would suggest that they would follow the rules.

The EPRD board allows it, or at least they think they can.  It is the same thing as allowing defacing, religious messages, dogs on fields where they are outlawed, dogs off leashes, and not picking up after pets.  They allow it because they are afraid to say no.

This is the epitome of corruption:  doing what you want in the face of ethics, laws, safety, and the greater public good.  And oh, BTW, this is the organization that runs youth sports in our community.

 

The order is
Rapidly fadin’
And the first one now
Will later be last
For the times they are a-changin‘.

Coming Soon, Part 2:  The Police Response

Written by admin

May 27th, 2013 at 8:49 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Why Corruption?

without comments

A short while ago I was asked why I fight corruption in Colorado.  Here are the initial causes.

1.  About ten years ago I began noticing the huge numbers of deer and elk in the area surrounding where I live and the massive damage they created.  I became a wildlife law expert and started THINK.  The state of Colorado has detailed laws to deal with this mankind-created environmental hazard but government officials simply refuse to perform their fiduciary and lawful duties.  Unprovided remedies include providing “game damage” prevention materials, state liability for damage or failure to provide adequate damage prevention, permits to kill animals causing excessive damage, and annual reports to the General Assembly on numbers of animals, number of damage complaints, herd objectives, etc.  Employees of the (now) Division of Parks and Wildlife do not do what they are required to do.

2.  Employees of the Jefferson County Planning and Zoning department refuse to enforce their own rules.  The county–the local government in Evergreen–has good, modern, updated zoning requirements.  The problem is that they will not enforce them, even when notified (citizen notification is the only potential avenue for enforcement).  Illegal signs, outbuildings, fences, lights, etc. are the norm.  I am stumped as to why local government officials believe the virtual lack of zoning enforcement is a good thing and why and how they think they can get away with it.

3.  By far the worst corruption I have ever seen is from Ted Mink and the Jefferson County Sheriff”s Department.  Corruption is worst when it is by law enforcement employees .  Crime is rampant in the Jefferson County foothills of Colorado.  I have been told specifically that if I continue to report crime I will be in “danger.”  On three firm occasions (and up to seven less “firm”) after reporting crimes sheriff’s deputies have come to my home to threaten me.  There are no patrols.  Speeding (50 mph in a 20 mph residential area), dumping, illegal use of parks, harassing neighbors, vandalism, etc. are the norm.  Often when calling there is no response at all.  There are no patrols.  The sheriff’s department response to citizen complaints is clearly one of retaliation.  And, to make matters worse, the local district attorney’s office refuses to prosecute–or even investigate–police misconduct and abuse.

These are just the reasons for getting me started…  I have lived in or spent significant time in something like fourteen states.  I have never experienced any like it.  Colorado has excellent, modern, updated laws.  Their enforcement is extremely lacking.

The FBI defines corruption as “a breach of trust” and that is my favorite, all-inclusive, and most general definition of the behavior.  Frequently, and historically, corruption has been defined as a quid pro quo crime such as bribery, extortion, or graft.  Personally, I consider corruption to be a lack of fiduciary responsibility or, more specifically, behaving as required by law.  For the most public employees their jobs are clearly defined by local, state, and federal laws and regulations.  Judgement is usually not required and of course illegal orders must not be followed.  I believe failure to protect the people and their property as provided by law constitutes corruption.

Written by admin

May 21st, 2013 at 8:41 am

Posted in Uncategorized

Seeking Activists

without comments

I don’t like the word “activist” but I used it anyway.  Correction:  Seeking people to fight corruption.  Public corruption is the worst.

I came across Judy Denison.  Ms. Denison sought to expose the deeds of former commissioner John Odom.

Today I looked-up the director of parks and open space, Tom Hoby ([email protected]) when I saw an open space vehicle observing the noxious weeds in my neighborhood.  The e-mail to Mr. Hoby is forthcoming.  Also on my list is Casey Tighe; his campaign said something about auditing and accountability.  Does he stand by it?

And then there is the issue of the fire board recall…  I am glad to see concern, scrutiny, and action.  Ooops, I am too late.  It is over.  The recall lost.

RE Ted Mink:  this appears to have fizzled.

Written by admin

May 20th, 2013 at 1:07 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

On Oscar Wilde

without comments

While I had heard of Oscar Wilde I really didn’t know much about him.  I knew he was a playwright, poet, and humorist, and that he was known for being witty and controversial.  I guess I also knew vaguely his two most famous works, The Importance of Being Earnest and The Picture of Dorian Gray.

Peter Finch-Oscar Wilde

Thanks to movies I now know more and his life–rather his downfall–is a fascinating story.  When I saw that Peter Finch and James Mason were in it I had to watch it.  The 1960 film ages well–after all, it is set in the Victorian Age.

Wilde, who was married and had two children, eventually became homosexual.  Wilde began an intimate relationship with Lord Alfred Douglas, whose father, the powerful Marquess of Queensberry, disapproved.  Queensberry publicly accused Wilde of being a sodomist.  Wilde foolishly attempted to sue for libel but was subsequently convicted and imprisoned for sodomy and gross indecency.  His career basically stopped, he was broke, and his health eventually failed.

He was destroyed by both his arrogance and outspokenness and the laws, mores, and public sentiments of the times.  He was at the peak of his fame, wealth, and creativity when this occurred.  Queensberry was the protagonist in Wilde’s downfall but Wilde himself brought it on:  He egotistically fought the laws and will of the majority and he lost.

Wilde’s work is eloquent.   His downfall is historic in its tragedy.  Next up:  the third movie of The Importance of Being Earnest (2002).

Written by admin

May 16th, 2013 at 6:37 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

It Is Not About Amanda Knox

without comments

Yesterday marked the start of the next chapter in the Amanda Knox story with her first post-release interview.  I made a point to watch it.  There is meaning in it but it is tough to figure out.  It was boring:  the hour consisted mostly of a familiar summary of the overall case; there were maybe ten or fifteen minutes of Ms. Knox speaking.  She was stoic and unemotional.  She was serious.  Her answers were brief.  She looked good.

This morning I even braved the nonsense of Good Morning America to catch more.  She smiled.  She seemed a little more relaxed.  A little more seeped out…  She said she didn’t want to become jaded, negative, and angry like people she knew from prison.  She wants to “make a difference.”

This last part–what she does with her life since exoneration–is the real reason to continue to watch her.

The book is out and the reviews are starting to come in.  amazon reviews5-1-13The reviews on Amazon reflect the continuing dichotomy of pubic opinion regarding the case and Ms. Knox.  The one-star reviewers consist of people who consider Knox selfish, spoiled, dishonest, and–this is the really ugly part–guilty.  The five-star reviews are compassionate, rational, and concerned; these people see the facts of the overall situation and not the personality or irrationality of a twenty year-old student.  This has been the distinction concerning Ms. Knox from day one and it continues to this day.

When I saw the Knox-Sawyer interview I was initially confused.  I felt disappointed and letdown.  I expected to see an energetic, articulate, re-energized (and attractive) young woman standing up for herself.  I expected, and wanted to see someone who was vengeful, and now, finally, well-armed.  I wanted to see the beginnings of the next chapter, the fight back.

That isn’t what happened and now I realize why.  She did look good, and that one I can come to grips with rather easily by considering it as fit, healthy, and nourished (thanks, Italian prison system).  Then I recognized that she was articulate, just in her own somber, serious, brief way.  Finally, the energetic, here’s-the-plan, vengeful part wasn’t there; my impression is Ms. Knox is still struggling with what it all means, plus, even though it will continue only in the circus theater some 8,000 miles away, it is not yet over.  Regardless, my own disappointments are entirely my own business/problem.  Amanda Knox never claimed to be an actor, lawyer, activist, or anything except a college student.  As has been a characteristic of this case right from the beginning, maybe she is a little different.  Maybe she acts in ways some people consider inappropriate or not like them.  That is absolutely her prerogative.

From the NY Times book review:

“She’s a complete blank,” the playwright John Guare once said, trying to explain the public fascination with Amanda Knox, the American student accused (along with two men) of murdering her housemate Meredith Kercher during a sex escapade gone awry in Italy. “You can project anything on to her. Is she Henry James’s Daisy Miller, an innocent young girl who goes to Europe for experience? Or is she Louise Brooks, the woman who takes what she wants and destroys everything? Or is she Nancy Drew caught up in Kafka?”

I am only a partial fan of the above quote.  Yes, certain events bring out who we really are… but the thought is not complete.  We forget, Ms. Knox is an unknowing, unwilling participant.  Participant in what?

prosecutorial misconduct

Police and prosecutorial misconduct is what we will learn about in the months to come.  Ms. Knox’s perspective on it will be a piece, but the overall issue is larger.  It is nothing less than a wake-up call for us all, and it doesn’t just happen to immigrants and minorities in ghettos.  “They knew what they were doing,” she said to Diane Sawyer, as well as “I trusted them.”  Dozens of in-cahoots, experienced police officers picking on an alone, foreign, twenty year-old woman?  That is hardly a fair fight.  It is brutal and it is cowardly.

And then there is the prosecutor, who in Italy is also in charge of the investigation.  Prosecuting based on the facts is legitimate public service; somebody has to do it.  Anything less–the list to the left from Wiki contains only the criminal offenses–is a failure of fiduciary duty.  “Political repression” notwithstanding they are all there; “American” and “sexually active” may be substituted for “racial.”

How will the political and judicial powers in Italy react?  What will they do?  And in the meantime…  stop picking on Amanda Knox.

Written by admin

May 1st, 2013 at 2:09 pm

Posted in Uncategorized