Doc cyber slammed

[Thomas Paine]

we have gone over the cyberstalking statute and have parsed it into the followings:
1. There must be a substantial emotional threat, with no legitimate purpose

2. There must be a series of acts over a period of time. (This does not include constitutionally protected
Activity)

3. There must be a credible threat delivered by electronic communication and show a reasonable threat to
a specific person.

4. Does not have to show any intent to carry out any threats.

5. Malicious cyberstalking is 1st degree misdemeanor

6. Making credible threats via cyberstalking is a 3rd degree felony

We hope the arresting officers can meet the above criteria. More questions follow.

Thomas Paine, command pimp, Po-Po poet
Your most humble servants

[Thomas Paine]

the dynamic trio has studied both sides of doc's & Hpd's circus of fools. We can only await the up coming fluster duck.

[Unregistered]

No action , no action , no action

[Unregistered]

No action , no action , no action

The Beating Will Continue Until Morale Improves..........
What a bunch of Dopes, filing totally BOGUS charges, Totally Abusing Your Positions of Authority and Power.......
YOU ARE SO SCREWED

[Unregistered]

Wondering how that sphincter is feeling after the good reaming by the judge last week, bet it still cannot sit down. Then the second reaming after the no action today, that thing must be sore.



Spelling words/terms of the week. Please write each one 10 times and memorize the definition. Quiz will be at deposition and the test will be in federal court.

Keystone Cops

Arguable Probable Cause

Reasonable Articulable Suspicion

No Action

Dismissal

Freedom of Speech

Freedom of Press

Freedom to Peacefully assemble

Freedom to Petition for Redress of Grievances

Core First Amendment activity

Constitutionally Protected activity

Prior Restraint

Viewpoint based Restriction

Second Amendment

Fourth Amendment

Fifth Amendment

Sixth Amendment

Eighth Amendment

Excessive Force Amounting to Summary Judgement

Fourteenth Amendment

Reasonable and Prudent Man

Exercising Due Caution

Chilling the Man of Ordinary Firmness

Retaliation

Qualified Immunity

Piercing Immunity

Obstruction of Justice

Perjury

False Statements of Material Fact

Fabrication of Evidence

False Statements Through Deliberate Omission

Entrapment

Official Misconduct

False imprisonment

Kidnapping

Tampering with a federal victim witness or informant

Intimidation of a Federal Victim, Witness or Informant

R.I.C.O.

Predicate Act

Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law

Conspiracy Against Rights

Pattern and Practice

Deliberate Actions Calculated to Incite a Pretextual Response

Nepotism

Public Corruption

[Unregistered]

(d) “Cyberstalk” means to engage in a course of conduct to communicate, or to cause to be communicated, words, images, or language by or through the use of electronic mail or electronic communication, directed at a specific person, causing substantial emotional distress to that person and serving no legitimate purpose.



“…where comments are made on an electronic medium to be read by others, they cannot be said to be directed to a particular person.”

David v. Textor, 189 So. 3d 871, 875 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

[Unregistered]

https://youtu.be/Td0R8MY7AjQ

[Unregistered]

the dynamic trio has studied both sides of doc's & Hpd's circus of fools. We can only await the up coming fluster duck.

So much FAIL!

Cyber false charges and malicious prosecution.

https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...uit-Court.html

great dialogue:

THE COURT: Well, let me ask you this question, so basically what you're saying is that he was
at a city council meeting where you were at the city council meeting.

MR. MONACO: Correct.

THE COURT: -- and he videotaped you.

MR. MONACO: No, maam, the council meeting is videotaped and put on YouTube. He took an
excerpt.

THE COURT: So he didn't even videotape you.

MR. MONACO: He did not.

THE COURT: He just took something that was posted on YouTube and sent it some place else?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE COURT: And the undercover officer was posing as somebody that was going to do an
investigation for him?

MR. MONACO: No, that's somebody that was a bad guy.

THE COURT: As a bad guy?

MR. MONACO: Yes.

THE COURT: That was going to follow you?

MR. MONACO: Yes.

THE COURT: I don't know what a bad guy" means. What does that mean?

MR. MONACO: I -- I don't -- I'm speaking second -- third person, Your Honor, because --

THE COURT: Well, sir, I need the evidence, right? So you're speaking third person, and you
said "bad guy," and I don't know what that means.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE COURT: You didn't bring any of the things you're talking about with you today?

MR. MONACO: No, ma'am.

THE COURT: Why not?

MR. MONACO: Well, they're part of the criminal investigation. I don't have access to them. The
lead officer does. I'm a victim in the criminal investigation.

THE COURT: But you said you could easily look these up on Facebook and other things, right?

MR. MONACO: Ma'am, I can't, I don't know how to do that. I don't have Facebook.

THE COURT: Let me just state this before we go any further. These allegations don't meet the
definition of stalking under Florida law. The fact that he posted or reposted a public meeting
where you attended and put that some place like on a LEO blog, that doesn't amount to
stalking. There's the whole balance here between free speech and stalking, and for purposes of
this injunction, this doesn't amount -- this doesn't amount to stalking under Florida law. It just
doesn't meet the criteria for it.

[Unregistered]

Anyone see the close out memo yet? Holy chocolate salty balls batman!!!

Filling Decision:
Upon reviewing the case and conducting the Pre-trial conference, it became instantly apparent that there was no evidence of Tampering.

Officer Monaco was apparently a back-up officer on the open misdemeanor case. However, nothing in the posts by the defendant indicate that the defendant would do some action if the Officer proceeded with the misdemeanor case.

After discussing the case with Division Chief XXXXXX XXXXXX and ASA XXXXXXX XXXXXX, we all concluded that the defendant's behavior and the evidence provided did not amount to stalking. The defendant voiced his dissatisfaction with Officer Monaco on a public forum and never made any threat to the officers.

I also looked in to 843.17 Unlawfully publishing Name & Address of Police Officer, however not only does the defendants actions not fit this statute but this statute was found to be unconstitutional in Brayshaw v. City of Tallahassee...

[That kind of speaks for itself, but explanations, and due sarcasm will be given in these brackets]


PFC Notes...

Witnesses Sworn In By ASA X. XXXXXX

Ofc. John Monaco (victim) -

Det. Pascal -

Det. Mata (lead)- ....

Lt. Assigns case to Mata, he handles " high profile cases or political emergencies" [Big Wow!!! Please explain?]

Mata subpoenaed the legal affairs (has documents)... [Does HPD really want to bring leoaffairs post into this legal battle, that's like the pot calling the porcelain black?]

**Det. Mata spoke to ASA XXXXXXX 843.17 (unlawful to publish officer's address) & cyber stalking....[You guys know this already, since you guys are reading and cataloging everything Doc does]

Defendant has been baker acted in the past....[Can't wait to see the proof of that, that's a harsh thing to swear to under oath with no proof, as well as an attempted discrimination under ADA.]

Vic. hasn't received any threats.[No shyte Sherlock, some criminals just hate the First Amendment and have sand in their private parts]

Vic. has temporary restraining order...[There are many cowards, particularly criminals, among us who are afraid of their own shadow, nothing new.]

Vic. Moved from published address on September 2, 2016.[That's not what voter registration, and/or tax records say]

Vic is legitimately afraid for the well-being of himself and his family.[well when you set yourself up for failure, by breaking the law and willfully abusing your authority, what can you expect in terms of job/financial stability?]

Original video of council meeting shows vic. talking about bodycams...[Yeah said He'd be the first to wear one!]

Homestead does not have body cams, department trying to decide if they will get them, in the video the

vic. Is advocating for officer NOT to have bodycams... [What happened to, "I have nothing to fear God guides me daily"?]

Defendant called Help me Howard. (Aired 9/20/16)...[Crap now we are losing in the court of public opinion and law, Damn this First Amendment curse!]

Vic. Received notice this morning that defendant started "truehomestead" on Facebook, where he once

again posts the council meeting video...[Why do the peasants even have First Amendment rights?]

After det. Have collected the evidence and controlled calls, det. Went to defendant's house to arrest the

defendant. Officer chose to wait for defendant to exit the home and shortly after det. Mata conducted a

traffic stop.[Why not get a warrant? Why act outside of your jurisdiction? Was this a stake out? Not looking too good in terms of retaliation for the exercise of First Amendment rights.]

• Det. riding alone in unmarked.[Love when people except responsibility for their own actions!]

• Has a marked unit waiting in the area.[Premeditated conspiracy against rights, keep it up]

• Ofc. Agusto conducts the traffic stop and is the transport officer [AM's sidekick jumps into the fray, they are the mental, psychological and legal manifestation of Lilliputians acting as corrupt police officers. It's like Gulliver's travels and 1984 all rolled into one, with a twilight zone twist.]

• Video of traffic stop and arrested in file.[Proving how ignorant and abusive of rights we are, and how cooperative Doc is.]

• Defendant alone in the vehicle.[On way to civil rights attorney to file more suits, how does this help HPD's cause again?]

• Det. Thinks defendant also recorded the stop on his cell phone. [Did you not believe it when he said he is recording everything?]

**DEFENDANT HAS SUED KFR & SAO** [Yeah because Rolle retaliated against Doc for exposing some of his crimes, then lied under oath to the FDLE about his second records destruction fiasco]




CSR

Investigator: MATA, D. (0650) [Alright what political emergency do we have here, since we brought in the big guns, the one trained in conflict resolution?]

I called the SAO and spoke with ASA XXXXXXX who advised I had the elements of a crime and probable cause to arrest

the subject. [Oh really now? You sure nothing was left out, or added, or exaggerated? Like maybe the repeated false claim of threats. Will the ASA take the fall for you, since the liability is going on somebody?]

At the station I met with the subject who was read Miranda per form. The subject stated he wanted an attorney. [Which attorney do you think he wanted to call, maybe the one form the ACLU who is one top of this? Did he even need to call an attorney?]

While at the station Felipe (Pinac News) called and he was allowed to speak to the subject....[Now that's a team member, on the phone with the true criminal before he sits the real victim down in his office to interrogate him! Didn't he tell you at the station you were wrong on FS. 784.048 calling the statue out by citation?]

Investigator: PASCHAL, F. (0623) [Whats up D?]

9-3-2016 I received several text messages and calls from unknown person (714-492-0484)asking why did I set their

friend up and to identify myself. [Yeah dumb/incompetent people get figured out and lead on from the beginning thinking they are in control, burner phones are fairly easy to figure out, then you get the complete troglodytes who try to be anonymous while having public Facebook pages. SMDH. Regardless, the mental gymnastics done by you guys was absolutely superb, while completely telegraphed, it was like you spent years choreographing of perfect corrupt retaliatory arrest(s). The only thing you missed was the law, and that it was all recorded. No wonder you don't want bodycams.]

[Unregistered]

How absolutely brain dead do you have to be as an undercover officer to have a public facebook page?