Six Ways to Sunday – Part UNO

IMG_2842

OUR MISSION:  “Pursue justice through the fair and ethical prosecutions of criminal offenders”

~Adams County District Attorney (http://www.co.adams.co.us/index.aspx?NID=286)

The following link contains daily affirmations I did recite to myself as I battled pure evil for 13 months in the Adams County Detention Facility.  I did, as you can see by the stamp, file these with the court because I wanted to be sure the Public Defender’s, District Attorney’s, the Judge’s, the Westminster Police Department and so on knew exactly who I was and how determined I was to fight for my innocents:

Positive Affirmations

The following post is dedicated to the Adams County District Attorney’s Office, Colorado, to include yet not be limited to:

Adams County Deputy District Attorney Stacy Moore

Former Adams County Senior Deputy District Attorney Daniel Brechbuhl

and, Former Adams County District Attorney Don Quick (http://www.quickforcolorado.com/)

STACY MOORE & DON QUICK

Under the leadership of Don Quick, Stacy Moore, under color-of-state, acted in a investigator capacity with the Westminster Police Department causing a fatal error violating the substantive and procedural rights of yours truly.  Stacy Moore is also the Executive Director for the Adams/Broomfield Bar Association for the Seventeenth Judicial District.

The following emails show how involved the Adams County District Attorney’s Office was in my malicious arrest and vindictive prosecution which is a violation of standards and practices:

Dec 2 DA

Dec 3 Dec 6

Dec 23 Dec 29

*Please note that C.R.S. 18-8-615 “does NOT” get used much.  The only other case is People v Berry (2011) where the Colorado Court of Appeals overturned Mr. Berry’s conviction:

http://www.cobar.org/opinions/opinion.cfm?opinionid=8241

This Douglas J. Sgambelluri with the Westminster Police Department had it out for me…  The ENTIRE Westminster Police Department had it out for me!!!

Prior to my trial and after I was forced to proceed as my own attorney (Pro se) I filed a motion with the court and Judge Popovich to subpoena Stacy Moore to my jury trial and in totality remove the Adams County District Attorney(s) from my case!  My motion was totally ignored yet the following link contains the case law on why Stacy Moore and Don Quick acted outside the scope of their duties:

DA DQ

Here is where “jurisdiction” comes in!  Detective Richard Infranca with the WPD after working for some 25 days with Sgambelluri and Stacy Moore under color-of-state swore under oath that the alleged/false crime committed is C.R.S. 18-8-615(1)(b) which appears only on this document:

IMG_2072

In 2010 C.R.S. 18-8-615(1)(b) was amended which Don Quick and Stacy Moore apparently were not aware of and that statute has to do with “Stalking” as may be seen in this link:

http://www.state.co.us/gov_dir/leg_dir/olls/sl2010a/sl_88.htm

*Notice how Infranca states “The affiant feels that because William Votel THREATENED…”?  So at the time the unconstitutional warrant was issued for my arrest it was based on a false THREAT!!!

Now, let us review the substantially/procedurally unconstitutional Information filed against me and how it lacks any refection of the Application of Arrest Warrant and Affidavit:

IMG_2644

*Judge Popovich made it a RULE at my Jury Trial that I could not refer to the difference in the affidavit and the Information when cross-examining Detective Richard Infranca!  WTF!!!

The Information.

(1) An information shall be a written statement, signed by the prosecutor and filed in the court having jurisdiction over the offense charged, alleging that a person committed the criminal offense described therein.

(2) Requisites of the Information. The information shall be deemed technically sufficient and correct if it can be understood therefrom:

(I) That it is presented by the person authorized by law to prosecute the offense;

(II) That the defendant is identified therein, either by name or by the defendant’s patterned chemical structure of genetic information, or described as a person whose name is unknown to the informant;

(III) That the offense was committed within the jurisdiction of the court, or is triable therein;

(IV) That the offense charged is set forth with such degree of certainty that the court may pronounce judgment upon a conviction.

CASE LAW:  It is defendant’s right to be informed with reasonable certainty of nature of changes against him by requiring that an indictment answer the questions of “who, what, wheres, and how” in cases where the acts constituting the offense are not adequately described by the statute. People v. Donachy, 196 Colo. 289, 586 P.2d 14 (1978); People v. Gable, 647 P.2d 246 (Colo. App. 1982).

CASE LAW:  Indictment must clearly state essential facts which constitute the offense: Fundamental fairness requires no less. People v. Tucker, 631 P.2d 162 (Colo. 1981).

CASE LAW:  Recitation of statute may be insufficient. Where acts constituting an offense are not described by the statute, any indictment merely reciting the statutory words is insufficient. People v. Tucker, 631 P.2d 162 (Colo. 1981).

So, the charging Information is fatally in error, insufficient and unconstitutional failing to grant jurisdiction to the Adams County District Court and it allows me to personally sue every judge that touched my case!!!

http://caught.net/prose/immunity.htm

As I have stated before the Colorado Supreme Court ruled in People v Hickman (1999) that the phrase “Act of Harassment” is unconstitutional striking it from a different statute yet the Colorado Legislature failed to apply this ruling to all other statutes containing the same language like they should have:

HICKMAN:  http://www.cobar.org/opinions/opinion.cfm?opinionid=1059

Adams County was well versed with the ruling that the phrase “Act of Harassment” is unconstitutional as reflected in People v McIntier (2005):

http://www.cobar.org/opinions/opinion.cfm?OpinionID=5398

In addition, the Mens Rea of “Knowingly” is wrong because RETALIATION is a SPECIFIC INTENT OFFENSE.  The Adams County District Attorney was obligated by LAW to re-file the Information against me as required by rules and statutes instead of just changing it days before my trial as you will see later in the JURY INSTRUCTIONS I will link to.

DANIEL BRECHBUHL & DON QUICK

My Public Defender Cathlin Matson was completely incompetent and worthless.  On February 18, 2011 I was supposed to have a Preliminary Hearing to establish Probable Cause.  Instead of defending me, and against my wishes, Cathlin Matson motioned to have my competency reviewed and the Judge suspended my Preliminary Hearing in violation of C.R.S. 16-8.5.101(7) whereas a suspension in criminal proceedings only means trial, sentencing, execution, and any pretrial matter that is not susceptible of fair determination without the personal participation of the defendant.  The preliminary hearing is NOT included on this list!

*Please see United States v Crawford (1990) where defendant strenuously contended before the Court that any determination of her competency to stand trial remains independent of the preliminary examination required under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.  The court agreed ruling, “the Magistrate was in error in refusing to conduct a preliminary examination under Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure pending completion of the defendant’s competency evaluation.”

https://casetext.com/case/us-v-crawford-78/

*The Adams County District Court again violated “jurisdiction” for failure to hold my Preliminary Hearing within the required time-frame and Speedy Trial issues.

FAST-FORWARD to July 5, 2011 when my Preliminary Hearing was held with my second incompetent and worthless Public Defender Rick Hernandez.  Slick Rick never met me prior to the adversarial hearing which did prejudice my substantial and procedural rights.

As I have posted before, at this hearing Daniel Brechbuhl through Don Quick made the following confirmation declarations that I was charged with THREATS (not Harassment):

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.”

Additionally, when Danny Boy questioned the false victim Elected Attorney with Magistrate Duties John Anthony Stipech the following dialogue took place again affirming I was alleged to have made false THREATS (not Harrassment):

Page 16 line 23 “Now were you told that there was a THREAT made against you on November 29th of 2010?” Stipech answers “Ah, I don’t remember when it was or when I was told but yes.” this totally shows DA DON QUICK was was going for a Credible [TRUE] THREAT and not an “ACT OF HARASSMENT” as I had to defend myself in my trial…

FORWARD to August 12, 2011 when Daniel Brechbuhl through Don Qick filed his FULL PROFFER  motion in re Res Gestae where the word THREAT appears sum 25 times and Daniel Brechbuhl author’s in conclusion, “Here, establishing that the Defendant [Billy bob Bramscher] was the person who had THREATENED Judge [cough] Stipech is material to proving the charge Retaliation Against a Judge”:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/res_gestae

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/proffer

DA Res Gestae Motion

I of course filed a motion with the Kangaroo Court against the prosecutions FATAL motion:

Res Gestae Response

FAST-FORWARD to October 13, 2011 when my third incompetent and worthless Public Defender Fran Simonet was representing me.  I ask you this, with the above proven as adjudicated fact in court regarding my charges why would Fran have to file a “Motion To Dismiss Based Upon Lack Of Jurisdiction and Lack of Specificity In The Complaint And Information”?  WTF!!!

FranSimonetMotions

FAST-FORWARD to October 21, 2011 and the pre-trial hearing conducted by Chief Judge Phelps in re Fran Simonet’s Motion’s.  Daniel Brechbuhl completely in violation of my substantive and procedural rights states to the court on Page 17 Lines 9 – 15, “Well, nowhere in the statute or anything that was filed [except the Application for Arrest Warrant and Affidavit], in the information under 18-8-615 — we’re [prosecution] not alleging a credible threat.  What we’re alleging is an act of HARASSMENT.  So when counsel says that the Court has to analyze the potential of a credible threat, that’s not even a part of what we’re [Daniel Brechbuhl and Don Quick] doing here.  I — I just wanted to clarify that.”

At this point I filed another motion on my own behalf for Judicial Estoppel based on the following:

“The prosecutions charge in 10CR3690 has been amended, manipulated and transformed and is obviously and clearly inconsistent with the peoples earlier position resulting in an unfair advantage and prejudice to defendant if not estopped.  The defendant hereby invokes the doctrine of Judicial Estoppel in effort to protect the integrity of the judiciary prohibiting the prosecution from deliberately changing positions according to the exigencies of the moment.  See Syayesteh v Cent Bank, 2010 US Dist Lexis 7842 (2010) (quoting Bradford v Wiggins, 516 F3d 1189, 1994 (10 Cir 2008); Shayesteh v Raty 2010 US APP Lexis 25246 (2010); New Hampshire v Maine, 532 US 742, 750-51 121 S Ct 1808, 149 L Ed 2d 968 (2001).”

And I also submitted the required Affidavit:

Judical Estoppel Affidavit

FAST-FOWARD to November 16, 2011, the day may jury trial was supposed to start, and Fran Simonet quits my case.  Now, Chief Judge Phelps presided on the October 21, 2011 Motions Hearing and some how Judge Popovich and the court records are never updated with C.R.S. 18-9-111(1)(e) and I am again only left to defend myself against “knowingly” having committed an “Act of Harassment”.

The following motions shows how early I was advocating for myself through filing motions with the court as my public defender’s threw me to the wolves:

IMG_2652

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/bill_of_particulars

DON QUICK

The following motion is interesting!  On every other motion from the prosecution, it is written Daniel Brechbuhl for Don Quick.

You will find a motion containing within the introduction the authority of Don Quick stating that there was no change to Information on 10/21/2011 – which Judge Popovich should have known about because you would believe someone with the Court would have updated records:

Don Quick Motion

FAST-FORWARD to my JURY TRIAL after being a victim of false-imprisonment, malicious arrest, vindictive prosecution, fatally error’d, completely lacking fundamental fairness, unconstitutional and lacking jurisdiction First Amendment Retaliation by a Non-Employer FALSE CHARGE!!!

Jury Instructions

CONCLUSION

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 as 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!!!

~Your Affectionate and Obedient Servant…

~Billy bob Bramscher

~BbB~

https://www.facebook.com/BlueDakini

Advertisements

One thought on “Six Ways to Sunday – Part UNO

  1. Pingback: Jeff Sessions Benedict Arnold!!! | Lonesome Lozer

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s