Community thread

Wichitaopenthread

8 Comments

  1. JWink
    Posted December 22, 2007 at 2:17 am | Permalink

    I predict reports of the Paul Morrison – Phill Kline shenanigans will continue to grow until both are gone from their respective offices.

  2. Herbert West III
    Posted December 22, 2007 at 4:01 am | Permalink

    File with Kay McFarland in the Kansas Superior//Supreme/Appealate Courts Offices in Topeka. She is at info@kscourts.org . Her Executive Administrative Assistant is Jake Fowler at the same e-mail. They are at http://www.kansas.gov under the Supreme Court info website there. Herbert West III, Publisher/Journalist, west.herb@yahoo.com

  3. writerdog
    Posted December 22, 2007 at 5:27 am | Permalink

    Mr. West I noticed that our resident legal eagles have touched on this in the other thread. I have nothing really to add, but this. I guess I was not the normal officer in my thinking, traffic is the one area of the court system that it totally one sided. For the most part an officer’s word and in most case that is the only evidence to a crime being committed. Is taken as gospel, there is seldom any way to counter it. When it is given to being a either or situation. A choice of either to believe your word or the Officer’s the court will side with the officer. As it would gain you to be less then truthful where what would it gain the officer to be less then truthful? Because I recognized this imbalance in the system, I would strive to make sure that what I perceived were the facts and indeed the law had been broken by the offender. I would rather let someone possibly get by then be wrong about their actions. And depend on the general truth that if someone has committed the crime once, they will again and of course the next time I am waiting, watching and prepared to bring charges. The truth, that system has proven itself more then once given the number of tickets and court cases I was able to file in good coconscious.I hope that if indeed you are not guilty of what you were charged with, that court goes your way.

  4. Herbert West III
    Posted December 22, 2007 at 7:37 am | Permalink

    Thanks writerdog. I have evidence against the Officer and can prove my case. Thanks again. The lack of Collateral or Associative evidence is missing, et: camera evidence, another officer, the missing windsheild camera tape, the pictures I published showing the intersection and the markings there showing it is not possible to do what he said I did as the markings and photos show. Thanks again HLWIII, west.herb@yahoo.com

  5. Ben
    Posted December 22, 2007 at 11:00 am | Permalink

    HW – not having seen the details (not sure which is the ‘other thread’) I will simply note an experience I had with WPD. I was ticketed for 44 in a 35. I took to Court with me photographs of the speed limit sign – which was clearly visible. Problem is, the sign also clearly said 40! The cop knowingly filed a false writing with the Court. In a way it’s too bad the cop chose not to show up and testify. I would like to have seen him try to explain the pictures and his purjury to the Court.

    As for the 44 part – I don’t believe it either – there would have been absolutely zero evidence for that except the liar’s testimony.

  6. Billy Bob
    Posted December 22, 2007 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

    Good luck all. I had an incident happen in Wally World parking lot, all caught on film. And guess what, neither Wally World or the Detective would provide the tape to go after the perp. I even provided my own digital pictures to add to the case. I was told by the Det’s supervisor (an ex narc) that they were too busy and it was victim induced (kind of like a rape victim being accused of she was asking for it). Also, I complained to internal affairs (old name) and they claimed there were no problems with how things were handled. Remember, cops are on the same level as the perps, just on a different side of the line. Also, remember, they all don’t always stay on that side of the line. Your on your own with these guys. Good luck.

  7. Herbert West III
    Posted December 22, 2007 at 10:39 pm | Permalink

    If I am not mistaken, if an officer states, “I was speeding”, they need radar. If they dont have collateral evidence it is discretional and this should be resonable dought of guilt. I am confident about this case. I am confident that I will get a fair appeal trial. I can prove the Municipal Court Judge had a “Predispositional Prejudice” against me. This will be enough for a change in the verdict. Herbert West III, west.herb@yahoo.com Thanks too all those responding to my posts. I had published this case when it happened at http://www.wen2k.com .

  8. Ben
    Posted December 23, 2007 at 11:48 am | Permalink

    Muni Court: Let’s see now. Who is the employer of the Judge? Who is the employer of the Prosecuter? Who is the employer of the cop?

    Can anyone here spell CONFLICT OF INTEREST?