“I am a firm believer in people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts.” ~Abraham Lincoln
“There are only two mistakes one can make along the road of truth; not going all the way, and not starting.” ~Buddha
“If you tell the truth, you don’t have to remember anything.” ~Mark Twain
“Politics is the art of controlling your environment.” ~Hunter S. Thompson
Dear Don Quick and Daniel Brechbuhl and all those who work in the Adams County District Attorneys Office:
“Anyone who doesn’t take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in large ones either.” ~Albert Einstein
[The above quote is firmly directed at Don Quick, former District Attorney Adams County and candidate for Colorado Attorney General 2014]
***Below you will find links to motions submitted by my third public defender (alternative defense counsel) Fran Simonet in October of 2011 and the resulting Motions Hearing conducted by C. Vincent Phelps, District Court Chief Judge (Chairperson).
Yesterdays post (https://lonesomelozer.wordpress.com/2013/12/28/prelimary-hearing-held-on-184th-day-after-arrest-to-establish-false-probable-cause/) proved as Adjudicative fact that at the Preliminary Hearing, July 5, 2011, that the District Attorney Don Quick and Daniel Brechbuhl stated in court under color-of-state:
On Page 22 Lines 18 – 23, The District Attorney Don Quick and SDDA Dan Brechbuhl for the first time state my charge with some specificity. Now this constantly changed with each new Judge and each knew Public Defender (Alternative Defense Counsel) over the next seven (7) sum months going forward toward trial. Dan Brechbuhl testifies to the court, “Your…Your Honor, I would just state that in terms of the first argument from Defense as to the harassment and it is 18-9-111 subsection 1-E is specifically on point because it says if…if a threat is made via telephone and that’s exactly what happened here. So I…I’d ask the Court based on thi…this point taking the evidence in the light most favorable to People finding that we have met our burden and to bind over the charge. Thank you.”
***Please remember this quote by Daniel Brechbul through Don Quick, “if a ‘THREAT‘ is made via telephone and that’s exactly what happened here” in comparison to the below Motions Hearing where Daniel Brechbuhl through Don Quick states page 17 line 6 through page 17 line 15:
“in the information under 18-8-615 — we’re not alleging a credible ‘THREAT‘. What we’re alleging is an act of harassment. So when [defense] counsel says that the Court has to analyze a potential threat, that’s not even a part of what we’re doing here. I — I just want to clarify that.”
***Why Fran Simonet didn’t request a copy of the Preliminary Hearing so she could have used that within this motions hearing or jury trial set for November 16, 2011 proves how incompetent of an Attorney she really is!!! And Rick Hernandez who participated in the Preliminary Hearing, having never met me until the moment I walked into court really shows what a douche-bag he is as an incompetent Attorney!!!
Previous the unconstitutional charge against was:
Please note that the Court under (dis)Honorable Michael A. Cox – no doubt a friend of John A. Stipech the FALSE Victim – never updated the court records to reflect the District Attorney’s statement(s) as may be seen by the malicious actions of both Chief Judge Phelps and/or John Popovich!!!
The following two separate motions by Fran Simonet are “explosive” within my case!
The first, “Motion To Dismiss Based Upon Lack of Jurisdiction And Lack Of Specificity In The Complaint and Information” shows as a Adjudicated fact the conspiracy against yours truly, Gonzo Journalist Billy bob Bramscher!
The second, “Motion To Suppress Arrest Warrant & Accompanying Affidavit, Motion For Veracity Hearing” was filed because Westminster Detective Richard Infranca DID LIE to the court with vindictive, malicious specific intent to violate Billy bob Bramscher’s Civil Rights:
NOTE: A “Veracity Hearing” is also known as a “Franks Hearing”:
The state judge need only determine “that it would be reasonable to seek the evidence in the place indicated in the affidavit,” United States v. Peacock, 761 F.2d 1313, 1315 (9th Cir.) cert. denied 474 U.S. 847 (1985), and is entitled to draw reasonable inferences about the material before her. United States v. Angulo-Lopez, 791 F.2d 1394, 1399 (9th Cir.1986).
A defendant challenging the veracity of a search warrant affidavit is entitled to a hearing only if he or she (1) establishes a good faith basis in fact for the challenge and (2) describes with specificity the precise statements being challenged. People v. Dailey, 639 P.2d 1068, 1074-75 (Colo.1982); People v. Flores, 766 P.2d 114, 119 (Colo.1988). Thus, the defendant’s suppression motion must be supported by one or more affidavits to meet these threshold requirements. Dailey, 639 P.2d at 1075.
At a veracity hearing, the court must first determine whether there are erroneous statements in the affidavit. If so, it must decide whether the source of the error is intentional falsehood or reckless disregard for the truth on the part of the affiant. If the court finds that the defendant has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that the source of the error is intentional falsehood or reckless disregard for the truth, then the false statements must be stricken from the affidavit. Flores, 766 P.2d at 119. False statements resulting from any other source need not be stricken if the trial court determines that other sanctions, or no sanctions, are appropriate. Id.
***Below you will find a link to the Actual Motions Hearing, October 2010 conducted by Chief Judge Phelps!
***Please note in the below Motions Hearing AGAIN District Attorney Don Quick and SDDA Daniel Brechbuhl, starting page 4 line 14, under color-of-state testify, “In reviewing counsel’s motion, she — I mean, the statute that we have hear is 18-8-615. The retaliation with the Judge. And as part of that, it indicates that if the act of harassment refers back to 18-9-111(1), et seq”.
***Additionally, Chief Judge Phelps has “active participation” with the manipulated charge…
***If you like MOVIE SCRIPTS, you will LOVE my comments to Chief Judge Phelps and this court!!! You may find my dialogue page 13 line 22 through page 15 line 4 and page 26 line 14 through page 33 line 32!!!
Again, even though the District Attorney Don Quick and SDDA Daniel Brechbuhl testified to the court in re guard the manipulation of the charge, from my past posts in re Chief Judge Phelps and Judge Popovich this COURT never updated records to reflect the change to 18-8-615 via 18-9-111(1)(e). Judge Popvich also vindictively and maliciously denied my right to a “Motion for a Bill of Particulars” multiple times and of course I did also file a “Motion for Judicial Estoppel” which was vindictively and maliciously denied by multiple judges including Judge Popovich.
I seriously just have to say WTF!!!
As I have written previously, “I am the victim of a ‘War of Attrition’ and truly thankful I was well versed on The Art of War by Sun Tzu.
01/30/2012: Trial started on January 30, 2012 ending on February 6, 2012 and forced to be my own lawyer (pro se) I was found “NOT GUILTY” by a jury of my peers. At this time, I was charged with C.R.S. 18-8-615 via 18-9-111(1)(e) and the mens rea was changed to “Specific Intent” instead of “Knowingly” as incorrectly alleged for over thirteen (13) months.
In my jury trial, the Defendant’s Theory of Defense, provided to the Jury:
“It is the Defendant’s theory of defense that the prosecution of this case was based upon retaliation by the City of Westminster. The Defendant contends that he was exercising his First Amendment rights of free speech and to redress grievances he had with the City of Westminster and that this prosecution is based on bad faith investigation, legal harassment and retaliation against him Defendant for exercising his First Amendment Rights.”
I am Billy bob Bramscher and I am a victim of bullying, bad-faith investigation, vindictive prosecution, malicious prosecution, First Amendment Retaliation and Civil Rights violations by the City of Westminster, Westminster Police Department, Westminster Municipal Court, Adams County/District Court, Adams County District Attorney, Colorado Public Defender/Alternative Defense Counsel and others!!!
~Billy bob Bramscher