Parker Live News from the Parker Strip since 2009.
On October 8, 2010, a La Paz County jury convicted Michael Roth, 45, of Quartzsite, AZ, of two counts of Disorderly Conduct. Roth faces up to six months in jail for each count. The case was heard over two days in La Paz County Superior Court with Judge Michael Burke presiding. The case was prosecuted by Matthew Elias.
On April 13, 2010, Roth intentionally disrupted a Quartzsite Town Council meeting through his verbal and physical conduct. When Quartzsite Police Chief Jeff Gilbert attempted to remove Roth from the meeting, by means of a lawful arrest, Roth continued to disrupt the meeting.
Too bad the video of the arrest is not on youtube. You can clearly see this is a case of police harassment. Two cops standing to his sides trying to intimidate him.
NEVER speak against the MAN!! in low pay county.
Thanks Lost in La Paz. Once I get the videos from the trial I will post it here for everyone to see. (and on youtube) You are absolutely right, you speak truth to power in this county and you’re going down. Don’t worry, we will win ultimately. This is still America, isn’t it? Or have we morphed into some wimpy socialist European nation. Don’t answer that yet, the revolution is just starting!
Mr. Roth is appealing the convictions of Disorderly Conduct and will win in the Arizona Appellate Courts. Over the last 72 hours a major effort has been made in Mr. Roth’s behalf. The one fact that remains clear is under State and U.S. Supreme Court Case Law Mr. Roth was falsely arrested by Chief Jeff Gilbert on the night in question at the Quartzsite Town Hall.
Chief Jeff Gilbert’s actions were one of the subjects of this weeks meeting between the Quartzsite Town Government and the League of Cities and Towns. Chief Jeff Gilbert was informed that if he acted without the Mayor’s direction to remove or arrest anyone at a Town Meeting that he could find himself in a Civil Law Suit! In each related Case Law both State and Federal clearly shows that Chief Jeff Gilbert violated Mr. Roth’s Civil Rights on a number of occasions while “Under Color of Law”!
The Quartzsite Prosecuting Attorney dropped Chief Jeff Gilbert’s case against Mr. Roth “In The Interest Of Justice.” This should have been the end of it. However, Chief Jeff Gilbert obtained a Grand Jury Indictments against Mr. Roth, where the video evidence and letter from the Quartzsite Prosecuting Attorney was NOT offered into evidence. I in all honesty can not see how this will not cost the Town of Quartzsite and Chief Jeff Gilbert a very large verdict against them in a Civil Court. Chief Jeff Gilbert can still face Federal Criminal Charges for the willful violations of Mr. Roth’s Civil and Constitutional Rights protected by the very laws he himself is sworn to uphold!
Question to Michael Roth and Paul Staudt: What do you think should be done when someone disrupts or acts in a disorderly way in a meeting of a lawful government?
Mr. Wright,
From a battlefield on our own soil at Gettysburg, President Abe Lincoln stated in part, “that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
In this one battle 7,500 Americans died both Union and Confederate in a struggle that would define and consolidate what we as Americans stand for. We are like NO other Nation that the world has ever seen. We are defined by our very freedoms as free men with a government that is derived by the free people ruled by “laws” and not “men”!
Mr. Wright, I’m not here to insult you, but answer your question and maybe inform you. The 1st Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” This is what Mr. Roth was doing as a concerned citizen living in Quartzsite, Arizona and questioning what he and others felt were possible criminal activities that we here in Quartzsite will have to pay for in money.
You ask how do you handle such a person? Remember we are a Nation of Laws and the State and U.S. Supreme Court have rule on this very issue. Just copy and past the following link into your URL and you too can read what they say are the limits of ALL Federal and State Governments.
http://us.mc336.mail.yahoo.com/mc/welcome?.gx=1&.tm=1287224870&.rand=dc0gro0qvqujj#_pg=showMessage&sMid=4&fid=Sent&filterBy=&.rand=266680425&midIndex=4&mid=1_18528_AOHHjkQAAAawTLh3qAUV2EetLAg&fromId=&m=1_19809_AL7HjkQAAPSRTLi2CQ5STxCDZMs,1_19472_AMDHjkQAAR9cTLi1zAKS2SH8Spc,1_19150_AMPHjkQAAUKHTLi1fgKe9H7qc3M,1_18836_AMTHjkQAAGAfTLisjAAO2UhEbgM,1_18528_AOHHjkQAAAawTLh3qAUV2EetLAg,1_18211_AMDHjkQAAJReTLhQJApO%2Bxb5%2Bx4,1_193_AMDHjkQAAKIkTLZg5QZN9SBlEWg,1_578_AOHHjkQAAKCnTLRfDA8E6x%2F2kiU,1_941_AMDHjkQAAXHQTLRdUg4T1E%2F0uLE,1_1279_AL7HjkQAAH7ZTLPg4AEn0VZLaQ4,&sort=date&order=down&startMid=0&hash=e9faad024ced6c5e340fe67d8f0a0b01&.jsrand=4744024
One such ruling, “When a government decides to offer a “public comment” period at an open meeting, it provides that citizens may exercise their First Amendment rights. Government officials can limit comments to the relevant subject matter, control disruptive or overly repetitive speakers and impose reasonable time, place and manner restrictions on speech. However, when government officials create a public-comment forum, they have created a limited public forum in which greater free-speech protections apply. The government may not silence speakers on the basis of their viewpoint or the content of their speech. The government must treat similarly situated speakers similarly. In essence, the government must live up to the values embodied in the First Amendment.”
Allowing someone a place and time to speak is like a safety valve, it is far better to allow any upset citizen to vent his/her anger in a public forum than allow it to boil over until that person feels that the only way he/she will be heard is at the point of a gun or worse.
Sorry, but the proper link can be found using this one:
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/speech/personal/topic.aspx?topic=speaking_meetings
This is powerful reading and will help you better understand how Mr. Roth’s rights were violated.
Mr. Wright,
I feel that I have neglected to answer the second part of your question. I was personally present at Town Hall the night that the acting Mayor Wes Huntley and the sitting Town Council broke with the long standing protocol when after the pledge of allegiance and benediction the newly elected officers would be sworn in and the former officers joined the pubic. To the total upset and shock to the public present, elected Mayor Ed Foster was NOT sworn in until the Acting Mayor and Town Council at the bequest of Town Manager Alex Taft stripped the Elected Mayor of almost all of his powers!
The League of Cities and Towns have ruled that their actions were illegal and I think you can remember that this week they meet in a public meeting at Town Hall to inform and help the sitting Town Council, Town Manager Alex Taft, and Chief of Police Jeff Gilbert to understand just where the bear went through the buckwheat! Be grateful that our founding fathers set the protections into our Constitution and Bill of Rights to protect us from anyone that would use their passions in government to deny you your rights and freedom under the law.
You will find that all six sitting members of the Town Council of Quartzsite are facing recall for their actions related to Mayor Elect Ed Foster. We are still at a loss over the promotion of the current Town Engineering PBS & J Company by Town Manager Alex Taft and Building Department Al Johnson. This company appears to have a solid past of kickbacks and illegal campaign contributions according to FBI investigations that followed with guilty pleas. Mayor Ed Foster was elected to check into the alleged corruption and miss management at Town Hall. The sitting Town Council and Town Manager continue to block all of his efforts to view the town records. As you can see, I find it hard at this point in calling the Quartzsite government legal.
John, Quartzsite has far from lawful government. The Constitution is the highest law in the land, and my rights have been continually violated. But I guess it’s ok to you that a man in a uniform wearing a shiny badge can do whatever he wants, but when I, a patriotic citizen, stands up for what is guaranteed me and the Chief Of Police swore to uphold, I have to lick the boots of the MAN??? Wake up! And start defending America not the crap we have now. But from what I hear around the county, you don’t know much about America. And this is why you ask questions that are thinly veiled accusations. Did you see the video of the illegal arrest made against me? Did you even know that the meeting was in executive session? Did you know that others in the room threatened me and the Chief Of Police didn’t do anything to them because they are his friends? Did you know the Chief of Police has no authority at a meeting, and that a town council meeting is run by the mayor, and only the mayor gets to decide who is to be ejected? Did you know that the past mayor of Quartzsite ROUTINELY ejected people from meetings because he did not like what they were saying? Have you ever been to a Quartzsite town council meeting? You see John, what we have here is total lawlessness. And for you to sit there in Parker and try to paint a picture that just isn’t so is the most un-American thing you can do,
In conclusion Mr. Wright, may I offer you these facts and invite you to come and observe one of our Town Meetings in Quartzsite for yourself. Mayor Elect Ed Foster has made it a point to allow both opposing sides of any issue to have their say. He allows speakers to continue even when people in the audience called for them to be stopped because of their opposing views. Mayor Elect Ed Foster has even allowed them to speak beyond time limits from time to time. I have even seen Mayor Elect Ed Foster stop Chief of Police Jeff Gilbert before he could stop or eject an obnoxious person.
You will find that Mayor Elect Ed Foster has gain in support because for the first time in the 9 years I have lived here the people can have their say and express their concerns before their elected officials and ask for help or actions taken when it comes to problems with Town Employees or other problems with Town Hall. We know that with Mayor Elect Ed Foster chairing the Town Meetings we all can be heard and walk away calmer with a peace of mind that we have been heard. Town Meetings are becoming calmer and as I observed at our last meeting, a pleasant event to attend.
Mr. Wright,
As someone who was present the evening of Roth’s false arrest, and present at his “trial”, I can assure you that the jury did not receive all the information needed to make a proper verdict. The Police Chief has never, to the best of my knowledge been conferred the official title of “Sergeant of Arms” for the Town Council meetings, and even if he was, he CANNOT remove someone or suppress their speech except upon direction of the chief executive officer. This is AZ Open Meeting Law 101. At the time of Roth’s arrest, the “CEO” was absent from the room. As for your question regarding “What do you think should be done when someone disrupts or acts in a disorderly way in a meeting of a lawful government?”, the first issue that needs to be addressed is how the law defines “disrupts or acts in a disorderly” both in an open public forum and in a limited public forum, such as a “meeting of a lawful government”. We are not a system of strict legal interpretation, but rather, one of published legal precedent on this matter. The law is quite clear on how far a citizen may extend his !st Amendment Rights when addressing his grievances to the government. And it is permissive and protected far past the common perceptions of “civility” and “decorum” that the oppressors would like. Did you know, that “yelling” is not even “disorderly conduct”? Are you aware that we can give the Town’s officials the Nazi salute without fear of reprisal? Apparently Mr. Wright, you do not. Mr. Roth did neither of these things, nor did he meet the legal burden for “disorderly conduct” (“fighting words”) which is the instant threat of the outbreak of violence and/or public panic such that the “victim” would feel the need to respond physically with force. This was never explained to the jury, but will surely be brought up in the appeal, and is likely the reason the prosecutor for the lower court dropped the charges to begin with…
I didn’t try to paint any picture whatsoever; just ask a question…. which you didn’t answer! I’ll be more specific: do you think there are limits to what people in Mr. Roth’s position should be allowed to say in the order of a government meeting? If so, where do you think those limits are? The reason I ask is it seems you have less of an issue of principle here and more one of practice.
No John,
Nice try. That is not what you asked! And I DID answer you. (Interesting how you accuse me of not answering the question when YOU are the one that didn’t answer ANY of MY questions.
We are a nation of rule of law, not men. If you don’t break the law you shouldn’t be arrested for it. That’s what you don’t get.
We’ve got a bad police situation here in Quartzsite, and from what I hear the Sheriff’s dept. has its problems as well )and Sh!# rolls downhill if you know what I mean, probably not!
Go read the Bill of Rights and the Constitution (Az’s too) that started this great nation and show me where a bad cop can arrest you just because he doesn’t like what you are saying!
The current Mayor of Quartzsite testifed under oath in my BS trial that he would like to see him fired. (And the people who voted for Ed Foster would like to see the Chief of Police fired too.)
The situation here is out of control and you are in Parker, what do you know about what is happening in Quartzsite? It appears you make up stuff without even researching it.
Your whole post here starts with a lie. You say I was arrested because of my physical conduct, (not true)you say I continued to disrupt the meeting (Also not true! Others, Jeff Gilberts “friends” were MUCH more loud and MUCH more vocal than I was. And under Arizona law it was not a meeting. I had just as much right to be there speaking on a soapbox as anyone else did), and you top it off by saying it was a lawful arrest? It wasn’t!
This arrest and trial was about stopping or slowing the effectiveness of a political activist (me) because I am too effective for their likes. This arrest and trial was and continues to be political harrassment by a bunch of thugs. We used to call those types Nazi’s! Now we just call them Sir!
Jeff Gilbert has no authority to remove me from a meeting, unless instructed by the mayor. This isn’t make-it-up-as-you-go-land here.
Time wounds all heels, you’ll see! The final chapter has yet to be written!!!
Mr. Wright, I feel that you like many Americans are not educated in the history of just what caused British subject to revolt against England to become the United States of America. I will not accept for one second that you are a buffoon.
You have been given the “Case Law” and rulings from both State and U.S. Supreme Courts that states what limits are allowed and NOT allowed. On the night of Mr. Roth’s arrest, IMHO, Chief Jeff Gilbert was the one breaking the law. In each case, the rulings clearly show that Mr. Roth was in full compliance with the laws that govern public meetings. If you had taken just a fraction of the time that others and I have to read up on the subject (Remember we gave you one of the many links.) your questions would have been answered.
You will have to live with the fact that we gave you the right answer, the legal answer, and the interpretation under “Case Law” as decided by the highest courts in the land even if this is not the answer you want to hear. Maybe you should talk with the League of Cities and Towns about Public Meeting Laws. The question now is will you run the story of Mr. Roth’s acquittal? Better yet, are you going to investigate the false arrest, false imprisonment, and violation of Mr. Roth’s Constitutional and Civil Rights?
Roth:
— I want to see the video. You promised you would post it on youtube. If you are a man of your word, please post the entire video by Friday of this week, so the people can judge you as the jury did. If you are not going to post it, tell the people why you are hiding it.
— What revolution are you talking about? Sounds like you are an anarchist.
Staudt:
— You and Roth believe the police have no authority at public meetings? Really…?
— Please encourage your new, jury convicted friend, Roth to post the video for all to see.
I quote from myself: “What do you think should be done when someone disrupts or acts in a disorderly way in a meeting of a lawful government?” That’s all I have asked in this thread. You can’t answer any opinion I have because I haven’t expressed any! The original post above is a press release from the County Attorney.
M, you have already made up your mind and no evidence (even the videos) to the contrary will ever change it. When the video is available, it will be posted and not until then. When you do view the Case Laws and view the videos you will see IMHO, That Chief Gilbert could be charged with perjury under oath at the Roth Trial. As for your comment about police control, take the time to read the Supreme Court decisions, it is “the courts” that have said that the Mayor controls the meetings and free speech is to be heard even if it is in opposing or an unpopular view to your own.
As I have more of an understanding and knowledge (I have seen the videos and reviewed the Case Laws that apply.) of Mr. Roth’s case than you, I will not debate his case until you have taken the time to review all the facts that were kept from the jury that will come out after the Appellate Court overturns the conviction, and Mr. Roth and is granted a new trial. That is unless the Court rules that all charges are to be dismissed with prejudice!
On the other hand if you are a personal friend and supporter of Chief Jeff Gilbert you may wish to help prepare for the upcoming Criminal and Civil Complaints at the Federal level for violations of Constitution and Civil Rights while “Under Color of Law.” You can use your computer to research not only the laws in this area but also the Cities, Towns, and Police Officers that have lost Civil Cases and have served prison time with their convictions. You can find one such link listed above to start with. You really need to do your own homework and not blindly take the word of anyone. I for one didn’t blindly take Mr. Roth’s word, but with the review of his case, arrest, research the laws, and viewing of the videos, Mr. Roth in my professional opinion was the victim of false arrest, false imprisonment, and had his Constitutional and Civil Rights violated by Chief Jeff Gilbert and members of the Quartzsite Police Department under the direction of the Chief of Police Jeff Gilbert!
M,
I will post the video as soon as I get them from the court, and I find the time to post them here and on youtube. It might happen by Friday and it might not. Your emergency is not my emergency! Who are you to demand I do something? (You sound like a cop with your bad authority attitude)
I have nothing to hide. Everyone will get to see that Sam Vederman and Police Chief Jeff Gilbert are politically motivated and did this to try and shut me up. What they don’t know is I grew up on a pig farm and pigs are stubborn animals. If I can handle sows weighing 5 times my weight, I can stubbornly fight these criminals in local government. The more they bully me, the harder I fight!!!
And what revolution? Wake up pal, there’s one already started. All revolutions are not violent! My prayer is America takes out the criminals in government at the ballot box BEFORE they grab the cartridge box. Nobody really wins with violence. (Except cops of course, because they have the backing of the courts, and the public who believe in whatever the MAN with the uniform and badge says)
And this’ll come as a surprise to you, a policeman CANNOT take it upon himself to do whatever he wants at any event. A town council meeting is run by the Mayor and only the Mayor can eject someone.
Again, we are a nation of laws, not men! Just because a corrupt Chief of Police did not like what I was saying does not mean he can illegally arrest me.
I believe the truth will come out and the truth shall set us all free!
John,
You answer my questions, and I will answer yours AGAIN!
I saw links and lots of verbiage about laws and this and that; possibly I didn’t see your answer in the middle of it all. I thought it was a fairly simple one: what should happen when someone becomes disorderly in a meeting (disorderly = breaking the order of a meeting; disruption)? I understand you don’t think you crossed the line; the question is where do you think the line should be (since it’s apparent that you and the County / jury disagree on that point) and what should happen to someone who does?
I can see how laws and the words used to prove a point can confuse you.
Answer my questions and I’ll answer yours AGAIN! It’s simple
Okay….
1) Did you see the video of the illegal arrest made against me?
No.
2) Did you even know that the meeting was in executive session?
No, and I’m unsure how it’s relevant.
3) Did you know that others in the room threatened me and the Chief Of Police didn’t do anything to them because they are his friends?
No, and if that’s true then I’m sure most people would assert that it is wrong.
4) Did you know the Chief of Police has no authority at a meeting, and that a town council meeting is run by the mayor, and only the mayor gets to decide who is to be ejected?
No.
5) Did you know that the past mayor of Quartzsite ROUTINELY ejected people from meetings because he did not like what they were saying?
No, though in this case your charge was for physical and verbal disorderly conduct resulting in disruption to the meeting, not the content of your speech.
6) Have you ever been to a Quartzsite town council meeting?
No.
7) The situation here is out of control and you are in Parker, what do you know about what is happening in Quartzsite? It appears you make up stuff without even researching it.
Nothing. And what did I make up?
Now that I’ve answered your questions, to my own, posted multiple times without hostility of any sort whatsoever, nor an expressed opinion on either side.
And to Paul who asked if I will run the story of Roth’s acquittal; absolutely, should it happen.
Mr. Write,
Now with your answer, I think I can help you to understand the laws that come into play here. I may be an oddball due to my love of the law and how we live in a society that allows people with disputes to go before a neutral judge to resolve their problems without the use of violence.
I have study, instructed, and enforced the laws of the United States both State and Federal. I have held classes for grade school, college, and even in law enforcement. As an old flight instructor of mine once said, “When you find a law that says you can’t do something, look a little harder and you will find another law that lets you”! Would you believe Mr. Bergsjo was right?
The first mistake that Chief Jeff Gilbert made was in arresting Mr. Roth for Disorderly Conduct, as this law didn’t apply at a public meeting. Every criminal law has what is called elements. These elements must be met before you can be found guilty of breaking that law. It is like baking a cake. If you leave the eggs and milk out, you don’t have a cake. Leave out the flour and you still don’t have a cake. In Chief Jeff Gilbert’s case he was trying to make a cake using a recipe for sour grapes.
Mr. Roth had the right to be at that Town Meeting. He had a right to speak and have his say when the public was recognized. On subject matters before the Town that night, the Mayor or in this case Acting Mayor Wes Huntley can limit the time to respond and keep it to the subject matter before the Council, but he may NOT cut short any speakers time allotted as was shown in the videos. During the “Call to Public” he can NOT limit the subject to be address or who may speak. This is clearly stated in the Courts Discussions as related to the “Free Speech” that each one of us is granted under the Constitution of the United States of America.
If cause exists, the Mayor may have the “Sargent at Arms” remove someone, but under the laws in this case, the Mayor must have the vote of four (4) Council Members to arrest. I believe that the fine in this case is just $20.00. As the Acting Mayor and Council Members were in Executive Session and not present, Chief Jeff Gilbert broke the law when he took it upon his own initiative to arrest Mr. Roth without proper authorization. The League of Cities and Towns warned Chief Jeff Gilbert about over stepping his authority. Please remember that the Town Prosecuting Attorney had dismissed the charges against Mr. Roth “In The Interest Of Justice.” Looks like he knew that Chief Jeff Gilbert’s arrest was wrong and Mr. Roth was right!
Many in Quartzsite feel that Chief Jeff Gilbert has a vendetta against Mr. Roth and as such took his complaint to the County Grand Jury to get the Indictments against Mr. Roth. Chief Jeff Gilbert and the County Attorney negated to show the Grand Jury the Quartzsite Town Attorney’s letter of dismissal “In The Interest Of Justice” or the videos available to them. My conversation with one of the Grand Jurors showed that they would have NEVER given an indictment if they had seen the videos and letter! The law is one Mr. Roth’s side and he will be acquitted and will have his day in court against the Town of Quartzsite and Chief Jeff Gilbert. It will be in a Federal Court and local politics will not save Chief Jeff Gilbert from facing criminal and/or civil charges for violations of Mr. Roth’s Constitution and Civil Rights.
Mr. Write,
Thank you for your response. I think that you should know that Mr. Roth was standing against a wall behind Chief Jeff Gilbert talking with others and in no way causing a physical threat to the people present. However, you may like to know that while Chief Jeff Gilbert arrested Mr. Roth for exercising his right of “Free Speech” Chief Jeff Gilbert at a later Town Meeting allowed his friend and former Acting Mayor Wes Huntley to physically conduct an assault and battery on a Peace Officer in his presents and allowed Mr. Huntley to walk out the door and refused to arrest Mr. Huntley! As you can see, Chief Jeff Gilbert’s credibility is very much in question here.
Good Boy John!
You see, the reason why I wanted you to answer these is you started this post with a lot of accusations, and when I called you on it ONLY THEN did you say it was a press release from the County Attorney. (Liar that he is)
You started the hostility with the post, WITHOUT researching anything whatsoever. You shut down the sheriffs post because of some supposed libel issues, then start this one by libeling me. (And you are not hostile?)
Thanks for the FREE Publicity though. Because the more people talk about the criminal government we have here the less likely someone else will get railroaded by rogue cops and lawyers.
You see John, I am an AMERICAN. And people used to come here by the boatload because we were free. There used to be a common phrase here and it went like this, “Go ahead, it’s a free country!” You don’t hear this anymore. Wanna know why? Because it’s no longer true.
The problem authority figures have with me and I with them, is I remember what it was like to be an American. I refuse to live my life like a slave!
I remember when it wasn’t necessarily if you won or you lost, but how you played the game. I believe in fair play. Our county government does not. And this is why I stand up. And I pay the price for it, as evidenced by my “trial”
Did you know I did not get a trial by 12, but only 8? You see the county can’t even get the required amount of people to try me as was guaranteed by the founders, so what do they do, they lower the bar….. in their favor of course!
This is why Americans are getting angrier by the day. We no longer have representative government. We have thugs masquerading as “public servants” and micromanaging our lives, by people who can’t produce success on their own.. They only have power because of the title they have, or the uniform they wear.
Now, to your question, and I’ve already answered before, ONLY the mayor can eject someone from a town hall meeting.
Now here’s something new. According to Arizona law the fine is not to exceed $20.
Disorderly conduct was NOT the appropriate charge.
I believe Chief of Police Jeff Gilbert charged me with a misdemeanor instead of the proper infraction for the offense so that he would have an excuse to arrest me as punishment for my unpopular speech. (In America, unpopular speech is protected.) And if you ever do watch the videos, you’ll see I was specifically addressing Chief Gilbert and he did not like what I was saying. (Tough cookies Jeff!!! You wear the badge and the uniform, now don’t embarrass the good cops.)
Where do you hail from anyway John? People have told me Europe.
I bet if you didn’t know me from Adam and we met on the street, you’d probably like me. I’m a likeable guy. But go ahead and try to lie, steal, or cheat me, or try and take away my liberty, then it’s game on……
Here’s the link to the rules. All I ask is that the government play by them….. is that asking too much?
http://www.azleague.org/newsletr/connect/2007/0607/index.cfm?a=legal_corner
I think that it would be a good idea for the three of us to sit down over a good mug of coffee and talk this out. I think we would be able to help you better understand the background of this case and how it affects us all.
No thanks, I don’t touch the stuff Paul. Now a good bottle of single malt Scotch and some Cuban cigars, then I MIGHT make time for the fella.
The truth is everyone knows Quartzsite is screwed up. But people will do just about anything for a paycheck, even defend the criminals. It’s a terrible bind we’ve put ourselves in in this country.
It used to be that a mother could stay home and raise the kids, now both parents have to work just to pay the government their unfair share.
You used to be able to go to a town council meeting and speak freely too, but that’s no longer the case….. unless you are speaking for the crooks in charge…. then you get to say whatever you want!
But you also used to be able to buy a car and it would last you ten maybe twenty years with minor maintenence. Now it’s hard to get parts for my Ford past ten years.
I realize the times have changed. But it doesn’t mean I have to like it. And it sure as hell does not mean that I have to sit down and shut up because an arrogant official does not like what I am saying!
So then I didn’t accuse you of anything! The press release details the findings of a jury. I understand you don’t think you should have been found guilty, and I wish you well with your appeal.
Belfast, Northern Ireland. I’m one of the people you mentioned who came west looking for greater freedom, so I understand the concept of freedom better than you could imagine and much more than you give me credit for.
Paul – your answer is a good one and if you’re right I’m sure the appeal will be successful. Are you his attorney? If not, you probably should be!
Don’t take this wrong John, but I’m now curious.
I married an immigrant and know all too well how people come here and become citizens.
I’m curious if you came here on a visa originally and overstayed? (again don’t take me the wrong way as I am for the free movement of people)
And I’m also curious if you were granted amnesty under Bush or Clinton. I’ve been told you are a naturalized citizen, just curious how the process worked for you.
The reason why is I find my government completely lacking in teaching what made America great. And I think they do it on purpose. Again, I married an immigrant so I know what’s happening to our great land better than most.
I only ask you to see how you came here and were able to become a citizen. I am PRO IMMIGRANT. (I find most immigrants work hard and are frequently more industrious than a lot of the people born here.)
Michael, I arrived 6 years ago as a LPR (lawful permanent resident), moving with my American wife. I didn’t ever have a temporary visa of any kind, so I don’t know much about that. The process was fairly involved, but I considered it a small price to pay to be here.
So you’re one of “those” kind of immigrants! (joking)
Cubans are easy to get Paul. All you need to know is a crooked cop at the airport. Maybe Jeff Gilbert can hook you up!
I would post that meeting on youtube.
10-4!
Which meeting you talking about? The one where Chief of Police Jeff Gilbert violated my rights, or the one where he hooks Paul up with illegal cigar?
Roth, what was the name of your lawyer in the trial and were you happy of the result of losing on both counts? ….
And why do you think the CA lied?
One will never understand M why we have restrictions on Governments, those within Government, and Law Enforcement Personnel until you become a member of the “Brothers in Blue.” I soon found out that the one factor that separated the elected government officials from the criminals was at least the criminals had a code of ethics!
You need to understand how a Grand Jury works. The Attorney Generals Office, District Attorney Office, or County Attorney Office convenes the Grand Jury within their jurisdiction. They are the only legal official present and select the evidence and witnesses to be heard. As in all Grand Juries, only the evidence that will support an indictment and any evidence that would help the accused are never presented.
Remember the recipe for making the cake? Same rules apply here. Chief Jeff Gilbert and the La Paz County Attorney Office had knowledge that videos of the Town Meeting existed that would have benefited Mr. Roth and withheld them from the Grand Jury. Chief Jeff Gilbert and County Attorney Office had knowledge that a letter from the Quartzsite Town Prosecutor dismissing the charges against Mr. Roth “In The Interest Of Justice” existed and withheld it from the Grand Jury.
You need to as well consider that the County Attorney spent more time defending and protecting Chief Jeff Gilbert in an attempt to keep Mr. Roth’s jury from hearing about Chief Jeff Gilbert’s own criminal activities, personal vendetta against Mr. Roth that would have shown the jury that Chief Jeff Gilbert was not a man of ethics, moral standing, or of sound police practices!
Many citizens of Quartzsite are still asking the question, “Just why is Chief Jeff Gilbert working as our Chief of Police when he refused to take a criminal complaint against one of his own Police Officers for Statutory Rape of an underage child”? No action was taken against that officer until almost a year later and he was let go but NOT for the reason of the alleged raping of the underage girl. This Quartzsite Police Officer isn’t the first. In 1999 a Quartzsite Police Officer, Kirk Peterson was convicted of child rape. FYI, I understand that the former Quartzsite Police Officer is now living and working in Parker!
http://www.azcorrections.gov/inmate_datasearch/results_Minh.aspx?InmateNumber=145121&LastName=PETERSON&FNMI=K&SearchType=SearchInet
With the knowledge of the fact above could you believe the County Attorney?
BTW, Mr. Roth hasn’t lost yet!
[……..EDITED……..] No personal attacks.
Thanks Paul for the info. Paul you seem to be the voice of reason– please counsel Roth accordingly.
Roth still hasn’t answered the question.
Roth has resorted to a personal attack on Vederman without backing up the slur. When a person attacks his adversary personally, it is an admission of losing.
Roth, answer the question if you can; if not, I will allow you to retract your comments and still be objective with you.
And, when are you posting the youtube video as promised?
Give me a break John, that was not a personal attack. Sam Vederman calls himself “Honest Sam” His former attorneys have told me they call him “Dishonest Sam” Sam Vederman is an elected official. And you and I are immune from censorship when it comes to criticizing public officials doing the publics business. I realize that you rule this kingdom and all decisions are final but with all due respect public officials are not immune from criticism. This is no different than Chief of Police Jeff Gilbert arresting me because he did not like what I was saying.
M: Are you calling yourself a loser? We know who you are and what you’ve done. You might be able to control the people in your world, but not here. Youtube coming when I get to it. Get over it!
If you go to a public meeting in low pay county just “SHUT UP!” Thats the point Gilbert was making here. The video clearly shows that. If you don’t kiss the jack boots of the regime then you had better shut your mouth. If you believe in the Constitution of the United States then MOVE! Look at this county folks. Hey if you hate the new sheriff and your wife is a supervisor no worries they will form and UNPRECEDENTED department of PARK RANGER and make that department work FOR THE BOARD of SUPERVISORS!!! WTF?? And the park rangers office is in Eve Alchieda(s) old office?? Are you kidding me? And they just hired a (part time) ranger for $27.00 per hour who happened to be one of the new park rangers old buddies?? Folks this case is just the result of the overwhelming corruption in our government. Our elected and appointed officials have a feeling of Supremacy over us. Is ANYBODY getting tired of this or will we just let it happen and re label it so it looks “legal”. Roth you better learn to shut up, get in line, turn in your guns, and learn the new party salute. or else…… goes for the rest of ya.
If you are looking to me to save your friend Sam Vederman’s name you came to the wrong person. You need to understand that Mr. Vederman is an elected official and is fair game for rebuttals. In fact, I think that Mr. Roth has some very good complaints against Mr. Vederman and well founded. If you really want to find out just what they are, wait until the U.S. Marshals office serves Mr. Vederman!
I agree with Mr. Roth when he states that this forum/blog is Mr. Wright’s and he calls the shots. However, Mr. Vederman is fair game. This aside, I will await to testify against Mr. Vederman at Mr. Roth’s Civil Trials and have my say then. Until then Mr. Vederman and the others will have to guess what is coming their way.
To a point, guys. Just be respectful… that’s all. Free speech has no limits; worthwhile speech is limited by that which is worthwhile. (I’m hoping for lots of worthwhile speech like the above.)
I’d like an order of that R-E-S-P-E-C-T John! And a side of FREEDOM too.
Until someone gets the boot of tyranny placed on their head they really don’t know what it’s like to be wronged by a public official. I agree that free speech should have no limits, but who decides what is worthwhile? I know it is your blog but everyone should have the right to say what is on their mind. You, me, Vederman, Gilbert, etc.. ( I believe I have MORE of a right to speak out because the public officials get to use our taxpayer dollars to harass us, but that’s a discussion for another day)
I have seen a pattern here and it troubles me. When someone has a response that grates on the elected and non-elected officials of this county, it’s censored, or the thread is altogether stopped. Nobody wins when you do this. But what you don’t understand is YOU lose the most. Notice how there is not much participation in most of your posts.
I believe that if you let things roll and let people speak their mind, the cream will rise to the top and the “evil” ones will be exposed and over time La-Paz County can have more success than it has right now.
Take care! (And can you now uncensor my post that was so obviously not a personal attack?)
John, from my knowledge Elias took the case to trial not Vedernam. I was told this was Elias’ 1st jury trial, and he went up against a seasoned defense lawyer. Facts must have been strong to convict Roth.
Will you put up the link to the Roth arrest video?
Why are picking on my little boy?????
Don’t worry “M”. When I get the videos and audios from the court I will post it for all the world to see what a liar Chief of Police Jeff Gilbert is
Don’t be led astray, the County Attorney sets just who take on a case. There is no doubt in my mind that he didn’t want to try this one his self. I have testified in Criminal Courts in California, Alaska, Washington, and Arizona and I feel safe in saying that Mr. Roth didn’t receive a fair trial.
It will be a good lesion for Mr. Elias when his first court case is overturned in the Appellate Courts of Arizona. Maybe next time he will do his homework and make sure he hasn’t been suckered into another political reprisal and serve Justice. I have worked with some really great Attorneys and I must say I was a little disappointed in Mr. Roth’s trial. This case is one that should never have gone to trial.
Hey “M” have you gotten the point Roth is making that he is gonna put the video up YET?? I think the rest of us have. I have seen the video cuz I saw the trial. Where were you my friend? I have the utmost respect for the Superior Court, the Judge and the Jury but I don’t think Roth’s case was properly put forth by his attorney. When you bracket a citizen by officers as an attempt to intimidate in a public forum and then arrest said citizen as another member of the audience stands, yells, points and make threats against the citizen as if it was his fault, that is clear abuse of authority. This was a planned attack on a citizen that said to the Chief of Police, in his presence, his opinion of the job the Chief of Police was doing. And he arrested him for it. Pure and simple. Sad.
I was startled when our “save the town” efforts (getting Ed Foster elected) when I realized that they have apparently backfired.
Setting aside that the fact that economics.com may or may not be any better or worse than PBSJ, we STILL have no business allowing bids to be rigged in the manner that this one was apparently done.
I would not be complaining if Mayor Foster had taken the time to explain proper bidding procedures before our narrow minded and self-centered council voted to accept the likely rigged process. He didn’t do so! Instead, he actually went along with them!
There should be a legitimate process for granting a bid. It should include defining the project in a proposal letter, publishing a public notice of the bid, and allowing adequate time for legitimate bid proposals to come from anyone who might want ro submit a bid for the project. We will never know who might have bid on the project, for we didn’t follow the above procedure. Again.
Should we allow adequate and proper procedures to work, we might very well find even better bid offers popping up from most anywhere!
Mayor Foster, actually made the motion to accept the bid from the only outfit who even made a bid – even thought the bidding process was not offered publicly as it should have been. One must ask, has he joined them?
Instead of taking the opportunity to expose the woefully inadequate (and likely illegal) bidding process, Mayor Foster, did not make the effort to explain to the council or to the public how faulty the bid process was which was offered by town manager Alex Taft. He simply ignored the obvious lack of due process. The bid process appeared rigged because it did not come close to an honest bid proposal process. Yet, Mayor Foster’s response was to actually make the motion to accept the bid! He got in line with the opposition team on the council! Right in line. How very sad.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not supporting PBSJ, or any one single bidder, just exposing what appears to be a dishonest and likely rigged manner in which our council has chosen to do business – and, unfortunately, one in which our mayor apparently now agrees with. After all, he was the one that made the motion to accept the bid!
One must wonder if we gained anything by replacing the old mayor. I must ask, where’s the accountability when we allow this nonsense to happen with no public exposure of the apparent dishonesty within the process created by Alex Taft and obviously supported by our town council – and now, with our newly elected mayor going right along.
Russell Sias
I attended this kangaroo court trial. I watched the evidence (videos of the meeting), and heard the prosecutor twist the facts to suit his and Gilbert’s deceptive argument.
The prosecutor did make an interesting argument! He argued that Roth, standing with his arms folded, listened to Carol Kelly, one of the councilmen’s wives, tell him …I’ll take you outside and kick your ass…. Another man, very shortly thereafter, demanded that Roth leave while shaking his finger in Roth’s face, yet it was Roth that was somehow inciting the behavior being exhibited by these two.
Very interesting argument!
When someone stands by, (Roth never even responded to Carol Kelly!) and can incite a crowd by just standing there in a public meeting and get himself arrested for disturbing the peace (or meeting), that is pretty amazing to me.
Roth did get into a verbal exchange with the man shaking his finger in his face. That man was telling him to leave, Roth replied that the man could leave as well as well.
As I recall, that was the essence of the pertinent actions in this whole rigged event.
My thought is that the whole thing was a set up. It very much appeared that Carol Kelly, maybe even the guy shaking his finger at Roth, and Mr. Gilbert, the chief of police, conspired to arrest Roth before, and did so before the meeting ever started.
I hope that Roth does post the video of that portion of the meeting. Anyone viewing the tape would recognize just how much kangaroo court justice was involved in this mock trial.
Justice was not served that day!
Roth, there’s plenty of free speech here, as you can see above. I don’t think anything needs adjusted, and if it crosses a line where it gets personal, I’ll let you know. 🙂
I essentially said the exact same thing in my next post and you kept that one???? I don’t understand your logic
Mr. Sias,
As you are aware there are a large number of people that have joined the grass roots Tea Party here in Quartzsite and want their government returned with equal justice for everybody and not just the dwindling selective few friends of the Quartzsite Town Council, Town Manager Alex Taft, and Chief Jeff Gilbert. In all fairness to Mayor Elect Ed Foster, one of our researchers found the background on PBS & J. Upon verifications of the facts and evidences of their history Mayor Elect Ed Foster was notified and shown the documented facts personally within less than five minutes. Unfortunately, I am at a loss as to why Mayor Elect Ed Foster didn’t try to get more information into how this bid was handled and if all guidelines were followed.
Hopefully we will see a change in the Town Council and Town Manager in upcoming meetings as we have confirmed that All the Quartzsite Town Council, Town Manager Alex Taft, and Chief Jeff Gilbert are in violations of Arizona State Laws and a number of U.S. Code with an astonishing number that more than warrant a full RICO Act Investigation. We have our ducks in a row and continue to collect our evidence, records, and facts to support such investigations from the U.S. Attorney Generals Office. It is best said, “An injustice to one, is an injustice to all”!
Mr. Roth’s Civil Case against the Town of Quartzsite and Chief Jeff Gilbert has already been decided (Remember the Case Law) in the highest courts in the land. Mr. Roth will find it easer to obtain a Law Firm to take his case over Chief Jeff Gilbert finding one that take up his defense knowing that they will loose! It is like the traveler asking a girl at the bar if she would sleep with him for $2-million dollars. After she agreed, he asked if she would do it for only $2.00. She responded with, “Just what kind of girl do you think I am?” His response was, “I though we already settled that, we are now only dickering about the price”!
I would like at this time to pass along a rumor that we may have some facts to back up. However, we are asking your to tell your friends and family that may have to travel through Quartzsite, Arizona to strictly follow all of our speed limits and traffic laws. It has been rumored that the Town is in such dire cash flow problems that the Quartzsite Police Officers have been instructed to write as many traffic citations as they can per shift to help the Towns coffers!
In all fairness John, it would have been wise to preface your post with “According to a press release from the prosecutor’s office” because it did make you come off a bit like that rabid sensationalist, Nancy Grace! The Parker Pioneer put the story front page today wand included that disclaimer.I see that this thread has gotten a bit longer since I last checked in, and I commend you for allowing the facts to be presented to the public. Speech is certainly less restricted in the sterile environment of the internet than it is under the thumb of our “officials” LOL! I believe if this discussion had occurred at Michael’s trial, the jury would have come back with a very different verdict. Oh, and “M”, I would be happy to post my video online, so that the people can see how the Police Chief allowed his friends to bait and threaten Mr. Roth, but because it was allowed to go on for at least thirty to forty five minutes before the arrest of Mr. Roth, I will have to edit it into two or three shorter videos to upload properly. I don’t work on the time constraints of petty tyrants with control issues, but I will attempt to have it edited by Monday. It’s just too bad the whole video was not shown to the jury…but that’s how our justice system works. Attorneys make motions to suppress, and Judges like Burke make questionable rulings on those motions. What’s the rush there “M”? Why don’t you watch the other video of Mr. Roth demeanor before being thrown out for questioning the Chief’s need for new dash cameras when he had recently commented at his “coffee with cops” that they weren’t needed at all, when asked directly. Here’s the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxFwgxLOTcQ
Sias, I agree that Town Manager Alex Taft should have put it out to a proper bid, but we all know it doesn’t work like that here…Ed told me it was the only hope of getting the rates switched from a fixture based plan to a usage rate and he used the “work session” to pin them down to a guarantee that that would be the purpose. I don’t believe for a minute that he has joined the evil empire, rather, he is waiting for a quorum so that he can finally do the people’s business. If Mayor Foster puts an item on the agenda, not one of the Councilmembers will even second it for discussion!
Mr. Wright, Iwas in Parker yesterday and not one person I spoke with all day had anything good to say about Sam Vederman. One by one, the rolled their eyes, made a facew, and then recounted a personal story about how they were treated at the hands of the prosecutor’s office, as accused and as victims of crime. I have been waiting over a year for his office to pursue a felony bad check case wherin someone stole a vehicle from me and paid with a bad check. Another case was dismissed against a man who broke into my business last year, and a friend of mine had his entire mobile kitchen stolen, but Vederman refused to prosecute the friend of the Police Chief that committed the crime. So you will have to excuse our cynicism.
M,
Can you share with us just why you are demanding information from Mr. Roth despite that fact that he is limited by the time he can obtain such evidence? Are you one of the members of the defense team for the Town of Quartzsite or Chief Jeff Gilbert? Did you know that you could visit You Tube now and see videos from Quartzsite? Trust me, it is a real Dog & Pony Show where the Vice-Mayor Barbara Cowell, Town Council, and Chief Jeff Gilbert make total fools of themselves.
One question you can ask Chief Jeff Gilbert is just why did he arrest Mr. Roth at a town meeting but refused to conduct a full criminal investigation of one of his own Quartzsite Police Officers for the alleged “Statutory Rape” of an underage girl? I have talked with Mr. Austin and have it confirmed that Chief Jeff Gilbert refused to take a report at the time. The accused Quartzsite Police Officer (age 25) had no actions taken against him for almost a year after the first complaint made to Chief Jeff Gilbert and that was NOT for the alleged child rape of a minor girl! Last I heard he is living and working in Parker, Arizona. You can see Chief Jeff Gilbert on video on You Tube stating that the “Statutory Rape” of a child involving his Police Officer was a personnel matter and NOT criminal!
I have to side with Roth. I would say the preponderance of evidence is that Vederman certainly lied when he stated in the press release: “Matt Elias did a tremendous job prosecuting this case…and really dominated the courtroom with his mastery of the facts and law.” I can assure you that Elias stumbled and stuttered and repeatedly looked at his notes. He appeared unable to remember the merits of his closing argument. I’d really love to hear Elias justify this expensive dog and pony show against Roth when ARS 9-234. clearly states that the punishment cannot exceed a $20 fine. I remember thinking as I sat there watching him from the front row how unfortunate it was that so many years in law school were wasted on someone who appreared to have so little potential beyond parroting what the bald gentleman sitting there was telling him. […………..], Elias looked to me more like a used car salesman than an litigator. He repeatedly whined to Judge Burke that his questions were not being answered “yes or no”, when he was making the rookie mistake of not asking a “yes or no” question to begin with. I also believe that Mr. Vederman told a whopper when he asserted that “Chief Gilbert is a true professional and he should be commended, as he kept a tense situation from spiraling out of control.” Anyone who might be inclined to think that Gilbert is a true professional should “Google”: “Sign Wars, Police Chief Jeff Gilbert doesn’t know the law”. Now that’s a video of a “true professional”? Keep in mind that it was filmed the very same morning of Mr. Roth’s arrest when you hear the Chief say “You may have your freedom of speech but there are limitations to it. There’s penalties to pay…” Apparently it was Mr. Roth who paid the penalty later that evening! And Sheriff Lowery flat out refused to file the assault complaint against Chief Gilbert. No probable cause to ask for ID and detained a person lawfully on their own property whose identity was already well known to Gilbert. Just another glaring example of no equal treatment/equal protection for the citizens of Quartzsite or La Paz County.
So let me get this straight…an attorney who “stumbled and stuttered and repeatedly looked at his notes,” “appeared unable to remember the merits of his closing argument,” [..] in his first jury trial before a “kangaroo court trial” against a “seasoned” defense attorney still won? A grand jury determined there was enough evidence to grant a true bill. A jury of peers heard the evidence that was presented by the County Attorney’s Office, which could have been rebutted by the “seasoned” defense attorney, and also evidence presented by a defense attorney, found him guilty even after viewing the video. What are the issues of the appeal? I’m no internet lawyer, but you seem to be meshing the facts of the crime with whatever feud you have with anyone who opposes your beliefs. Case and point is your reply to John. The irony is you wave your First Amendment flag, but bash anyone who has a different view than yours. It seems, according to you, free speech is only free if it agrees with you. You lost in a court of law, and now you are trying the case in a court of public opinion.
I didn’t lose the case “R.R.”, because I didn’t try the case. Evan lost the case. If I had tried this case, the outcome may have been very different. Who knows. I haven’t lost one in over 20 years though. And there has always been a high price to pay for “free speech”. You have every right to express your opinion, so go ahead and hang with your own rope…
Mr. RR,
I meet my first Judge at the age of 16 with speeding ticket in hand. I learned a very valuable lesson that day and that is right is right, wrong is wrong! As I have stated before, I have had the honor of being a witness, expert witness, complainant, and even had to represent the position of prosecutor in criminal court in four states. I don’t give legal advice that is for an Attorney at Law. However, I have stood toe to toe and won many a case against some of the best!
Mr. Roth’s case is flawed and will be overturned in the Appellate Court of the State of Arizona. Your personal prejudice against Mr. Roth has kept you from seeing or even reading the “Case Law” that applies. From your statements here, you have been to a trial or two yourself and know how it works. Mr. Roth is entitled to cross-examine the witness against him and bring in witnesses in his defense. This he was denied by the Judge and no jury would have found him guilty if that testimony had been heard!
Please keep in mind that many a Grand Jury Indictment has been overturned in a court of law when ALL the evidence and witnesses have been heard. Mr. Roth was denied a fair trial from the beginning. He is the victim of false arrest, false imprisonment, and wrongfully charged with the wrong criminal charge! It is a shame that the County of La Paz will now be added to the list of Civil Action along with the Town of Quartzsite and Chief Jeff Gilbert before this is all done.
Mr. Roth is the victim of political reprisals from Chief Jeff Gilbert. Mr. Elias is a young and naive new Attorney and needs to review this case. If he were to have even talked with me (I all my criminal cases this is the first time that the prosecutor did NOT revived my testimony!) about my professional observations in this case, he would have “In The Interest Of Justice” dismissed the charges against Mr. Roth and warned Chief Jeff Gilbert against further such actions as did the League of Cities and Towns. As for the label of seasoned Attorney he made several mistakes that IMHO cost him Mr. Roth’s case. In truth, the evidence was NOT there to convict.
The true miscarriage of justice here is that before this is all over with Mr. Elias will have experience in his first jury trial a win that has been overturned by the Arizona Appellate Courts, end up in a Civil Court with possible censure from the Arizona Bar because he allowed himself to be a political pawn for vengeance!
From your statements in this forum RR, you may not be an “Internet Attorney” but you are close to being an Attorney or even from the County Attorney’s Office of La Paz. Your sarcasms will not win your augments here or change the facts of the case. Remember that this isn’t over until the fat lady sings and I know you won’t like the tune!
The personal attacks on the winning prosecutor affirms my belief the jury was correct in the verdict. See Ayn Rand for reference and educate youself.
Attacks on the young, vibrant and handsome prosecutor are from bitter bomb throwers, looking for the “revolution” to start because they are unhappy Quartzsitians living a life of quiet (some times disorderly) desperation.
OLD SCHOOL COP
Back in 1976 while I was a Patrolman for the Point Barrow Police Department in the Arctic of Alaska before we became the “North Slope Borough Department of Public Safety” the new Police Chief Kim Moeller called a department meeting of all officers just before the beginning of my shift.
A man living in Point Barrow was not liked by the Mayor at that time and Chief Moeller informed us that, “The Mayor and I want (the guys name) arrested on felony charges and shipped off to Fairbanks before the end of the day. I don’t care if you have to make up the charge but arrest him”! I stood up walked over to the Chief removed my badge and tossed it onto the desk he was sitting at, turned and started to walk away.
Half way to the door of the Patrol Room I was asked by Chief Moeller, “Just what is this for, you have a shift to work.” As I turned to answer him I had noticed that half the officers were standing and removing their badges while the others sitting were doing the same. I told the Chief, “No I don’t, I don’t work for a department that breaks the law, I enforce it”! With that I again started to leave the Patrol Room only to be called back again with the Chief telling everybody to put their badges back on as he was resending his orders while handing me back my badge.
You will find a great number of “Old School Cops” that live and visit Quartzsite, Arizona are appalled and greatly upset at what is allowed to happen in Quartzsite by it’s Police Officers and Chief Jeff Gilbert. Not one that I have talked with would have arrested Mr. Roth. However, rest assures that we would have had control of that Town Meeting without violating anyone’s Civil Rights!
The most disturbing offence by Chief Jeff Gilbert that all agree should have had Chief Jeff Gilberts State Certification revoked for life is when he refused to even take a written report of the allege “Statutory Rape” of a underage girl by one of his Police Officers! It is the well accepted practice when such a serious charge is made against any Police Officer he is immediately placed on Administrative Leave, all reports, witness, evidence is turned over to an outside agency to investigate to clear the officers name or bring charges against him.
Many of us old timers feel that the ruler used to gauge who becomes a Police Officer today should be reexamined and maybe tossed out with the bath water. I am very proud of my service as a Police Officer and have suffered the price protecting others in the line of duty. I as well suffered the loss of a good partner and a cousin in the line of duty, both brave men that believed in total service and enforcing the law. It was only until I moved to Quartzsite, Arizona that I was ever ashamed to admit it after observing the Police Officers of this department. The actions of Chief Jeff Gilbert IMHO is a direct insult and tarnishes what Skip Chevalier and Donald Burke stood for and died for!
R.R.,
I agree with several of the things you said in your post.
It’s true there was a grand jury indictment and there was a jury trial (8 people not 12 as promised by the founders), and it was tried in a court of law.
I am no lawyer but I find this whole court of law thing quite disturbing. First, before the trial there is discussion about what arguments can and cannot be made, then there are discussions about who can and cannot be witnesses. Things that are relevant to a normal American are dismissed because of “legal” reasons. Before the lawyers get to the closing arguments there is a battle in the back room with the judge and both attorneys about what can and cannot be argued. By the time it is all said and done, what starts off as a 7 course meal is now a handful of cold french fries.
You see, I know a lot more about this case than you do. And this was not fair from the get go. I met with the forman of the Grand Jury and he told me how slick Chief Of Police Jeff Gilbert was in misleading the grand jurors. (slick to me is another word for lying)
On the stand several witnesses testified to the fact that Jeff Gilbert lied about signaling to the mayor to cut me off from speaking at town council meetings. How the jury allowed the man in the nice uniform and shiny badge get away with that is sickening to me.
And to your comment that it was a jury of my peers. I bet I was the only person in the front of the courtroom that even knows what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights says. More important I KNOW what the words in those documents mean! I’ve actually studied what the founders of this great nation meant when they wrote those documents. A person truly does not get a jury of their peers anymore. What you get, and you know this, is a jury of what’s left over (After all of the elimination rounds)
Now, do I think the jury was a bunch of dolts? NO! And I mean this sincerely. However, a jury has a right to disagree with a bad law, and a bad arrest, even if it is “legal” (which mine was not) However, most jurors today don’t know this and do what they are told to do by the judge, and the judge never ever instructs them on their rights as a juror, that they can say no to a bad law. (Google Fully Informed Jury Association)
This is why America is in the shape it is in. When patriotic citizens can go to a town hall meeting and speak out against the crimes being committed against the citizens and get kicked out, told to shut up and sit down by arrogant politicians, or even arrested, and a judge, jury and a county attorney go along with it, we’re phucked!
The tyranny will soon come to you, and the ones who tried to warn you will be long gone and no longer able to (or willing to) help YOU.
I’ll leave you with this…
“First They Came for the Jews”
By Pastor Niemoller
First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.
IT IS HAPPENING AGAIN.
IN FACT, IT NEVER STOPPED.
M is prosecuting attorney Matthew Elias.
Mr. M,
Just when did the Judicial System become a popularity contest? Is the only requirement for a guilty verdict now is for the County Prosecutor to extend a pouting lower lip with a tear or two from his eyes? As for Mrs. Rand’s comments, IMHO she needs to get her eyes reexamined. Her comments are what is called “Without Standing” and shows just how little of the facts she has as she calls the kettle black!
Mr. Elias is a big boy and I have yet to see a personal attack, just statements of fact and that fact is that upon retrial Mr. Elias would not win this case against Mr. Roth. Maybe you should take the time to read (if not for the first time in your life) the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights before you make your next post.
In short, no matter how wrong your statements are in the eyes of others, I will be one of the many that would stand up to defend your rights of free speech no matter how much it makes you look like a buffoon!
Funny thing about case law, people always use it to fit their needs.
I keep reading that the founders “promised” a jury of 12. I’ve read the 6th Amendment. Nowhere in it does the number 12 appear. I’ve posted is for your reading.
“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.”
In fact, since you seem to be big on case law, read Williams v. Florida 399 U.S. 78 (1970). The Supreme Court ruled a jury of six was sufficient for trial.
If you lose the appeal and/or the civil trial, will you accept the verdict? Or will you cry conspiracy once again?
I never cried conspiracy RR. I know loons like you like to toss that word out there to paint us as something that we are not.
By the way, the Supreme Court has been a lost cause since FDR stacked it to accomplish his socialist agenda. So that argument does not work for me.
I’ve already accepted the verdict, just don’t agree with it and will use all of my options available to me to see that justice ultimately prevails. And if it doesn’t, we get the government we deserve.
You seem perfectly willing to go along with the crap happening in our town and this county. Good luck with that!
When the boot of tyranny is firmly planted on your head, I hope you remember that others before you tried to warn you
Having attended the trial, I keep coming back to Gilbert’s testimony that he arrested Roth because he was inciting the disturbance. What twisted logic!
In fact, he was being verbally accosted by Carol Kelly with her offer to take him outside and kick his ass…her words, not mine. And later, the man shaking his finger in Roth’s face was also abusive..
After these two incidents, Gilbert arrested Roth while ignoring these two assaultive behaviors by Kelly and the unidentified man.
I think that Gilbert was looking for ANY excuse to arrest Roth, and used this disruption by Kelly and the other man simply as an phony reason to make the arrest of Roth.
It very much appeared that the whole incident was staged. And, at least Kelly and Gilbert were in on the plan — in my not so humble opinion.
Thanks Russell,
When the videos are made available it will be obvious to anyone with an ounce of American in them that Chief Of Police Jeff Gilbert is corrupt and Sam Verdermans office went along with it
And to RR
Here’s the proof that the founders insisted on 12 jurors. This comes directly from Wikipedia. Just because The Supremes change the founders intent does not make it right, no matter how much you lawyers like to twist the facts.
Originally, the Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial indicated a right to “a trial by jury as understood and applied at common law, and includes all the essential elements as they were recognized in this country and England when the Constitution was adopted.”[4] Therefore, it was held that juries had to be composed of twelve persons and that verdicts had to be unanimous, as was customary in England. When, under the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court extended the right to a trial by jury to defendants in state courts, it re-examined some of the standards. It has been held that twelve came to be the number of jurors by “historical accident,” and that a jury of six would be sufficient[5] but anything less would deprive the defendant of a right to trial by jury.[6] Although on the basis of history and precedent the Sixth Amendment mandates unanimity in a federal jury trial, the Supreme Court has ruled that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, while requiring States to provide jury trials for serious crimes, does not incorporate all the elements of a jury trial within the meaning of the Sixth Amendment and does not require jury unanimity.
An appeal to the Old Country for rights? Lol, I hope you understand the irony in that, Roth! 🙂
To all: Someone please inform Paul who Ayn Rand is.
For Roth: I am not attorney Elias. Also, I read that you were represented by the public defender, therefore indigent. But you ran for elected office stating that you are a sucessful businessman….. what gives?
And the bald guy did a great job as 2nd chair at the trial, ;).
Yes John, our country has a lot to explain for… But please share with us exactly what you meant by that statement
“M”att, you got me!!! (NOT)
You were there when the judge asked the questions about getting my own council. Now don’t try and do what you do best and mislead people here. We’re onto you […..]
If you’ve read Rands stuff, how can you justify doing what you do, “M”att?
C’mon John, he calls me indigent and you delete that [………]????
I see that the spin-doctors have arrived in a feeble attempt to distract from the facts of the case and the errors that will be corrected in the Appellate Courts. The arguments in favor of Mr. Roth have yet to be disproved or destroyed and as such we can withstand any statements offered up by both RR & M.
I can’t wait until Chief Jeff Gilbert is made to answer questions in a Federal Civil Rights Violation Trial where he has no political clout or power. A fair and equal playing field of law and trust me, Federal Judges don’t play the games that the Lower Courts do! No one could have ever destroyed their own career in Law Enforcement better than what Chief Jeff Gilbert has done by his own hands…
Roth- First, your argument rests on the unproven assumption that M is who you think it is. Second, ‘indigent’ is not an insult, it’s a description. Yours was a simple insult; an attempt to disparage a guy. (Not that I need justify moderation decisions like this…!)
And why didn’t you answer my previous question, John wright? The real irony here is YOU
Roth,
To be eligible for services of the Public Defender, one must found by the court to be indigent (aka: too poor to hire private lawyer). I was not insulting you as you insult others.
Paul:
Who is the spin doctor? If you refer to me, I will call myself Dr. M. I will encourage RR to add the title too.
Are you going to be at Roths sentencing? I may show up too. When is it? Thanks.
Roth,
Here is the everso complicated irony John is talking about…You speak of the Bill of Rights and Constitution. Those documents were created to free us from the oppression of the British and to secure our rights as free men. But in trying to prove your point about jury numbers, you use the very same oppressors (British) to prove a point about the Bill of Rights and the Constitution!
According to the paper, the sentencing is November 8.
Dr. R.R., I like the sound of that. It sure beats Inmate #295732.
Yes R.R. I understand. It’s good John has a hired gun like you to spell everything out for us. The Irony I was thinking about was that John Wright starts a blog, part of the new found freedoms the world has to level the playing field, just like the Constitution and the Magna Carta before it did, and he reverts to rule like the very same oppressors we fought off, (arbitrarily and unfairly)
I just want to be a free man in a free world and not be […..] Guess it’s not possible here. Sad!
And for what it is worth, we were all British back then. We fought against tyranny!
“M”att. Don’t remember the judge asking me if I was indigent. Nice red herring though
“the young, vibrant and handsome prosecutor “? Wow! I didn’t know I was supposed to bring my hip boots…it’s getting pretty deep Maybe Elias should give up on the law and pursue a modeling career.
Roth:
No Red Herring here. Not Elias either……. thats your red herring.
The only way for you to have a public defender is for you to avow to the court you are too poor for to afford your own attorney.
Do we need to post the video / audio on youtube of you saying your indigent in court?
You have stated when running for public office that you have plenty of economic resources from being a sucessful businessman.
If you have resources, are you going to reimburse taxpayers for the defense costs?
Maybe Elias should ask for an inquiry as to you ability for you to pay……. affidavits, oaths, tax records, bank statements,…… I am sure Elias will be objective and professional even though you have insulted him — he is that good.
I am a student of Ron Paul and his son’s namesake. I know you know of these people….. you know that Looters / Parasites take from the government and live off the taxpayers, aka the traders and producers, for their life needs. Roth, where do you stand?
Roth, just answer this: Will you reimburse the taxpayers for the expenses you incurred in this matter if you are able? Please don’t be evasive.
Jones,
Rumor has it that Elias is former Chippendales model while in law school. So, been there and done that I guess.
Are you an attorney, if yes, what state? You said you haven’t lost a case in twenty years……. thats amazing. congrats.
Yes, sure, whatever, “M”att! Yes, post the youtube. Please do it by Friday as I am busy next week. See you at sentencing. And I don’t live off the system, never have.
You’ve got it wrong and this is where you reveal yourself, the parasites don’t “take from” the government, the government is the parasite. The same parasite that dragged me into this stupid political muck. And NO I WILL NOT pay you ONE RED CENT for anything you’ve done in your futile attempt at a political smear
Have you noticed that both “M” and “RR” are attacking the messenger and not the message? If you look at the direction that they are coming from one would have to take the view that they are against a fair trial, freedom of speech, and the right to redress their government with their grievances! A good guess here would place them in the County Attorney’s Office or in Chief Jeff Gilbert’s camp and know that if they can’t dispel the truth here, Chief Jeff Gilberts will be facing Federal Criminal Charges for violations of Mr. Roth’s Civil Rights and face prison himself!
If you look at the information addressed in their statements you can see that they were at the trial themselves, have knowledge of the videos and are foolishly defending Mr. Elias efforts at blocking the defense in bringing in evidence and testimony that would have clearly shown that Chief Jeff Gilbert committed perjury and had in fact committed a false arrest. For many in the Town of Quartzsite see Chief Jeff Gilbert’s actions against Mr. Roth as a political revenge for Mr. Roth pointing out or calling to the attention of the citizens of Quartzsite the criminal and/or corrupt activities of the elected officials of Quartzsite!
Are we observing a carefully orchestrated attack from the County Attorney’s Office against Mr. Roth to smear his name in the publics’ eyes? What does the County Attorney’s Office have to fear? Are they trying to miss direct the public from Mr. Roth’s right to appeal? What in the Case Law (The interpretation of the law) from the Highest Courts of the land ruling in Mr. Roth’s favor scare them so much? Is the County Attorney’s Office under the directions of Sam Vederman above the law or only following the laws that they pick and chose? Kind of reminds you of, “Badges? Badges? We got to show you no stinking BADGES”!
I feel it right to interject here that attacking Mr. Elias with unfounded rumors here fails to make any point and is unfair as some of the attacks on Mr. Roth. You lose ANY credibility in the point you are trying to raise with such attacks even if in fun. I for one don’t care if he has a fetish for anchovies floating in his beer before bedtime. It has NO place here!
IMHO Mr. Elias made some major errors in Mr. Roth’s case. The first was trusting Chief Jeff Gilbert without fully investigating the charges without a follow up in the related Case Laws that apply. I for one have NEVER taken a defendant to trial without fully examining the Case Laws that applied to my arrest. More than once I have had “In The Interest Of Justice” dropped or corrected the Criminal Complaint. The second came when Mr. Elias failed to fully examine and see that this was a political motivated arrest and upon further examination see that Mr. Roth was charged with the wrong criminal complaint!
In defense, I don’t see Mr. Elias falling into this trap a second time. However, if it does, a review of his qualifications before the Arizona Bar would be in order and maybe some retraining? While it is Mr. Elias job to represent the public and defend the public it doesn’t give him the right or condone his breaking the laws he is charged to present in a Court of Law!
The Definition of Tact:
Simply stated, the definition of tact is the ability to tell a man to go to hell in such a way that he looks forward to the journey!
M,
You don’t have to be an Attorney to win cases in either Criminal or Civil Courts of Law!
Case in point, I have been told of a man that loves to travel and for most he looks like a vagabond as he sees the United States. He to has a record of not loosing a case in over 30 plus years. You see, he has a law firm and Attorney on constant retainer. When some Police Officer or City/Town Official steps on his Civil Rights or makes the mistake of making a false arrest or citing him, he makes a phone call and both he and his Attorney make large amounts of money.
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.
This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her color or race.
Acts under “color of any law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under “color of any law,” the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
Title 42, U.S.C., Section 14141
Pattern and Practice
This civil statute was a provision within the Crime Control Act of 1994 and makes it unlawful for any governmental authority, or agent thereof, or any person acting on behalf of a governmental authority, to engage in a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers or by officials or employees of any governmental agency with responsibility for the administration of juvenile justice or the incarceration of juveniles that deprives persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
Whenever the Attorney General has reasonable cause to believe that a violation has occurred, the Attorney General, for or in the name of the United States, may in a civil action obtain appropriate equitable and declaratory relief to eliminate the pattern or practice.
Types of misconduct covered include, among other things:
1. Excessive Force
2. Discriminatory Harassment
3. False Arrest
4. Coercive Sexual Conduct
5. Unlawful Stops, Searches, or Arrests
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 245
Federally Protected Activities
1) This statute prohibits willful injury, intimidation, or interference, or attempt to do so, by force or threat of force of any person or class of persons because of their activity as:
a) A voter, or person qualifying to vote…;
b) a participant in any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by the United States;
c) an applicant for federal employment or an employee by the federal government;
d) a juror or prospective juror in federal court; and
e) a participant in any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
2) Prohibits willful injury, intimidation, or interference or attempt to do so, by force or threat of force of any person because of race, color, religion, or national origin and because of his/her activity as:
a) A student or applicant for admission to any public school or public college;
b) a participant in any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by a state or local government;
c) an applicant for private or state employment, private or state employee; a member or applicant for membership in any labor organization or hiring hall; or an applicant for employment through any employment agency, labor organization or hiring hall;
d) a juror or prospective juror in state court;
e) a traveler or user of any facility of interstate commerce or common carrier; or
f) a patron of any public accommodation, including hotels, motels, restaurants, lunchrooms, bars, gas stations, theaters…or any other establishment which serves the public and which is principally engaged in selling food or beverages for consumption on the premises.
3) Prohibits interference by force or threat of force against any person because he/she is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or class of persons from participating or affording others the opportunity or protection to so participate, or lawfully aiding or encouraging other persons to participate in any of the benefits or activities listed in items (1) and (2), above without discrimination as to race, color, religion, or national origin.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life or may be sentenced to death.
Demographically speaking, La Paz County would be the most “indigent in the state, correct? And therefore Quartzsite the most “indigent” in the county. 99% of the US is “too poor to hire private lawyer” (at $300/hour or better + travel expenses), because in order to get one that is competent and without a conflict of interest an “indigent” defendant must import that lawyer from Yuma or Phoenix!
What’s interesting Jones is that ALL of the hired guns I interviewed told me to not hire them and to go with the public defender. There were many reasons given why, but the main reason told to me by these top guns in PHX and other areas was that it made no economic sense to hire them. Maybe I was talking to honest lawyers who […………]
Roth, Paul and all:
It has been fun, but I can’t add anything else– like beating the proverbial dead horse.
But I leave with one comment:
Roth, I think your statute of limitations to sue the government over the incident expired 9 days ago.
You may want to consult with a lawyer regarding the issue.
Ciao readers….. see you on the 18th.
P.S. Roth, let us know about youtube posting! Thanks.
Enjoy “M”att, and all others
http://vimeo.com/2893203
I’m sure glad for the citizens of La Paz County that “M” is only pretending to practice law because Mr. Roth’s statute of limitations to file a “notice of claim” expires 180 days after final adjudication, and since there’s both a pending retrial and appeal, Mr. Roth has plenty of time!
12-821.
“All actions against any public entity or public employee shall be brought within one year after the cause of action accrues and not afterward. ”
12-821.01.
A. Persons who have claims against a public entity or a public employee shall file claims with the person or persons authorized to accept service for the public entity or public employee as set forth in the Arizona rules of civil procedure within one hundred eighty days after the cause of action accrues. The claim shall contain facts sufficient to permit the public entity or public employee to understand the basis upon which liability is claimed. The claim shall also contain a specific amount for which the claim can be settled and the facts supporting that amount. Any claim which is not filed within one hundred eighty days after the cause of action accrues is barred and no action may be maintained thereon.
C. Notwithstanding subsection A, any claim which must be submitted to a binding or nonbinding dispute resolution process or an administrative claims process or review process pursuant to a statute, ordinance, resolution, administrative or governmental rule or regulation, or contractual term shall not accrue for the purposes of this section until all such procedures, processes or remedies have been exhausted. The time in which to give notice of a potential claim and to sue on the claim shall run from the date on which a final decision or notice of disposition is issued in an alternative dispute resolution procedure, administrative claim or review process. This provision shall not be construed to prevent the parties to any contract from agreeing to extend the time for filing such notice of claim.
This may be true for Tort Actions in the State of Arizona, I am sure that you will find that the U.S. Federal Courts have a different version when it comes to Civil Right Violations and criminal acts while “Under Color of Law.”
I am sure that in a Federal Grand Jury you will find a true bill that will find Chief Jeff Gilbert sitting at the other table before the Judge and Mr. Roth at the Plaintiffs table. This will be the time when a full true picture will be made public of Chief Jeff Gilbert’s Administration and criminal activities. I can truthfully say that I have NEVER lied in a court of law and I know that Chief Jeff Gilbert can’t say the same under oath without committing perjury.
The big question here that sticks in my craw, and that is when the Quartzsite Town Attorney dismissed the charges against Mr. Roth in the “Interest of Justice,” just why did the Chief of Police Jeff Gilbert take it upon himself to force a County Grand Jury to hear the limited evidence against Mr. Roth? This I’m sure will come out in the Federal Courts and places another nail into Chief Jeff Gilbert’s coffin!
I don’t think that this will be a bone of contention after the Recall Election and what many people in Quartzsite view as Chief Jeff Gilbert’s personal protection on the Town Council are replace and call for a formal “Board of Inquiry”! I am sure that all creditable evidence and testimony under sworn oath will be passed up the ladder to the Arizona State Attorney General and U.S. Attorney General’s office for further actions in the “Interest of Justice”!
Another piece of the puzzle to look at, just how credible is Chief Jeff Gilbert as a defender of the law when he by Shanana “Rain” Golden-Bear’s own sworn testimony in a court of law this last Thursday stated that Chief Jeff Gilbert freely give her the time and location of a person on Mr. Roth’s defense witness list to serve a restraining order before she could testify in Mr. Roth’s behalf!
I have NEVER see or heard of any Law Enforcement Officer giving this kind of protected information to what is called a civilian. He will share such information with other Law Enforcement Agencies but NEVER such information with the public! This too will have to be answered to in a Court of Law some day in the future. Please keep in mind that in Chief Jeff Gilbert’s own words in regards to one of his own Police Officers being accused of the “Rape of a Child,” a personnel issue and not criminal!
Lets look at some facts here, it is okay in Chief Jeff Gilbert’s eyes to allow one of his Police Officer to be sexually involved with an underage child but spars no efforts in bring Mr. Roth to trial for his exercising is rights of “Free Speech” that Chief Jeff Gilbert didn’t like. Are you not wondering now if Mr. Roth really got a fair trial?
OMG would you people stop with the “Gilbert let his cops rape children” crap. I’m no Jeff Gilbert fan, but its a flat out lie. Maybe you think if you repeat the lie over and over again, people will believe you.
The officer in question was fired. The Criminal Investigation was turned over to the Arizona Department of Public Safety, who is currently conducting the investigation. Gilbert has clearly said, but you people refuse to listen.
A Police Department will NEVER conduct a Felony Criminal Investigation on one of its own Officers. Its always forwarded to other agencies to prevent the appearance of bias. Even in cases of justified officer involved shootings, the investigation is handled by outside agencies.
http://www.youtube.com/user/QWatchingEyes#p/u/25/6uUeNkREy58
Fast forward to 3:40 where he addresses it. I didn’t hear “Its a personal matter” or “no report taken” in any of that.
Had QPD done the investigation, and he was found innocent, the first words out of your mouth would be COVER UP and BIAS. LPCSO would have the same problem, because they work so closely with QPD. DPS can send in Detectives from Phoenix who have no ties to QPD or any of its Officers. Its the proper way to handle such an investigation, both procedurally and morally.
While I have heard some valid complaints made against the Gilbert, your cause loses any and all credibility by spreading such obvious and easily disprooven lies.
Same reason the Lowery recall will fail. Refusing to go outside because of a Hurricane, when its really just a light rain. I don’t like the rain either, but I’m never going to believe you when you tell me what the weather is like.
Common Sense,
Chief Gilbert was only forced to take action after the complaints about his lack of any action being made in the alleged “Statutory Rape” complaint and then only almost a full year later. I don’t know of ANY Law Enforcement Agency that would wait that long! I was standing there the night he made his comments and others since then. It is our understanding that the officer was fired not for the alleged “Statutory Rape” of an underage child!
Nothing you can say will change the facts that Chief Jeff Gilbert screwed up the moment that he failed to place the QPD Officer in question under immediate Administration Leave and place the call to the proper State Agency to conduct an IMMEDIATE investigation to clear the officer in question or if evidence of criminal activity exist to a State Grand Jury for indictments and prosecution!
There is no justification in this case to support Chief Jeff Gilbert’s lack of fast and proper action when it comes to the alleged raping of an underage child at the hands of any Police Officer much less his own. There is more to this story that is yet to be told in relation to the creditability of Chief Jeff Gilbert and questions just why he holds the job of Chief of Police or any Law Enforcement job. I truly believe that by the time this is all over with, Chief Jeff Gilbert will be the resident in a room with a view…
Common Sense would have been to place the officer within the hour under Administration Leave. Common Sense would have been to forbid the officer from having any contact with the family or underage girl. Common Sense would have been to take a written report and secure evidence. Common Sense would have been to take sworn affidavits related to the alleged charges of “Statutory Rape” of a minor. Common Sense would have been to secure contact information of all witnesses. Common Sense would have been to notify County Dispatch that this Officer was under Administrative Leave. Common Sense would have been to notify the Sheriff’s Department. Common Sense would have been to notify the County Attorney’s Office and turn over all related information for formal investigation. Common Sense would have been to ask for the Arizona Investigation Bureau to assist and if at all possible to take over the investigation. In short Chief Jeff Gilbert failed to have any Common Sense in such a serious criminal complain involving an underage child and a Police Officer. This IMHO is the most egregious violation in the miscarriage of justice and slanders every Law Enforcement Officer that ever died in the line of duty defending the people within their bailiwick!
101!
And I see common sense isn’t so common anymore. The fact is Chief of Police Jeff Gilbert refused to do anything about the known consentual statutory raping of a child, (Except arresting the step father who complained loudly about it) and only after a few “Crazy Truthers” made enough noise did he do anything whatsoever. It took OVER A YEAR!
And another thing. Chief of Police Jeff Gilbert is NEVER clear about anything. If you believe otherwise how can we take you seriously in the future? Don’t piss on my shoulder and tell me it’s raining out!!!!
The Arizona Investigation Bureau huh? So you think the first thing Gilbert should have done was to contact an agency that doesn’t exist? Yep, that’s common sense all right. You expect us to believe you guys don’t make things up when you are imagining non-existent detective agencies?
Someone should not be placed on Administrative Leave just because an accusation is made. You guys are such proponents of peoples rights, you should understand that those rights must be applied to EVERYONE. I suggest you read this article.
http://www.njlawman.com/Garrity.htm
Before an Internal Investigation of a Police Officer is conducted, that could result in criminal charges, he must be advised of Garrity. Just like Miranda Rights. After Garrity is read, NOTHING obtained in the Internal Investigation can be used in a Criminal Prosecution. If garrity is not read, the evidence found is inadmissible for even INTERNAL purposes. Just like not advising someone of miranda. A separate Criminal Investigation must be conducted for any possible criminal charges. Whether you agree with garrity or not,take it up with the United States Supreme Court. Gilbert didn’t make that rule.
Had Chief Gilbert done what you propose, immediately done his own Internal Investigation and turned all the information he obtained over to the Sheriff’s,or the CA’s, the case would have been DISMISSED because Internal Investigation results are not admissible in court. They are ONLY admissible for Internal Administrative actions. Nor could he conduct an Internal Investigation without first notifying the officer and advising of Garrity, and following the rules of garrity.
Being that the Officer was fired, and the case is now in the hands of DPS for criminal investigation, it sounds like everything is being done by the book. The legal book, not the imaginary ones you dream up in your own head.
I know it won’t sink in, because you guys love the Lynch Mob mentality, but these kind of serious felony investigations take time. If this guy really did what hes being accused of, he needs to go to prison. I’d hate to see him get off on a technicality because of a rushed and improperly conducted investigation.
Common Sense,
The procedures that I have spelled out to you have been in place for decades and are still in use. Thanks so much for falling into the A.I.B. Trap! You again prove under another name here that you are nothing more than a spin-doctor with smoking mirrors trying to pull the publics attention away from Chief Jeff Gilbert.
We are not talking about an Administrative violation but a criminal violation of the laws in Arizona and Federal laws by this officer. Being placed on Administrative Leave allows the accused to be paid until his/her name is cleared or a criminal indictment is made. How you can defend the mishandling of a criminal investigation involving a child is un-defendable. This case only speaks of a long standing of mishandled criminal complaints within his Administration.
Not one of you arguments have merit or speaks to the false arrest of Mr. Roth or the violations of Mr. Roth’s Civil Rights protected by the Constitution and Bill of Rights by Chief Gilbert. Now we have to seek answers into Chief Jeff Gilbert giving protected information about a defense witness that may have been a planned attempt to keep that witness from testifying at Mr. Roth’s trial.
As for the “Lynch Mob Mentality,” I feel that the mass amount of post here have shown that we believe in the Judicial System, the Constitution of the United States, and the Bill of Rights even if you don’t. As for you I will not belittle you any more that what you have stated in your own words. Again may I state that many of the residents of Quartzsite and the Law Enforcement Officers that I have discussed this case with are very upset and are asking just why isn’t Chief Jeff Gilbert standing trial himself.
The one fact that you fail to understand is that in Chief Jeff Gilbert’s long delay in taking the legal and proper action in time may have caused irreversible damage to the investigation in securing statements and evidence to do a proper investigation. In the end would you be so understanding of Chief Jeff Gilbert’s delays if it was your underage daughter and because of him the alleged rapist was allowed to wake away a free man?
Paul, Michael, etc.- must everyone who disagrees with you be part of the conspiracy? Do you believe extraterrestrials are involved?
The AIB Trap? Calling you out on one of your delusions is a trap designed to prove I’m one of Gilbert’s lackeys? Wow. Just wow. I’ll let the readers judge that one for themselves.
I already explained why a separate internal and criminal investigation needs to be conducted, and why Gilbert and QPD could not conduct the criminal investigation themselves (Gathering witness information, evidence, etc… is part of an investigation btw.) Conflict of Interest. That’s why its turned over to DPS, as it should be. As for Roth, none of my posts addressed other because that wasn’t the topic I was commenting on.
But since you brought it up; I must, point out how you conflicted your own post. You say: “I feel that the mass amount of post here have shown that we believe in the Judicial System…”
Mr. Roth was convicted of the offense you claim he was “falsely arrested” for, by the same court of law you claim to believe in. If you believe in the Judicial System, you should believe in the judgment found by the jury.
With that in mind, you should clarify your statement to say “We believe in the Judicial system, but only when it does what we want it to do. If it does what we don’t want, then its part of the conspiracy.”
Off topic, I saw a commercial for a show I’m sure you’d love. You can even watch some episodes online for free. Enjoy!
http://www.conspiracytheoryjesseventura.com/
Mr. Wright,
May I first thank you for this forum, your understanding and patience regarding this thread and allowing the other side of the story to be posted here. I learned a long time ago that propaganda was nothing more than an out right lie with just a small amount of truth to make it believable. In Quartzsite we have some major political factions that would try and shut your forum down if you try to speak against their agenda.
At present we have another web blog that they are trying to shut down and restrict because they don’t like what is being said even when factual and true. If they are successful, you may find yourself served with a restraining order too!
I have respect for your opinion even when it doesn’t walk the same path as mine. Just ask Mr. Roth as we have some good debates from time to time. That is what we do in the United States of America, not throw people in a deep dark dungeon to rot in desperation. As I have a deep respect for the Judicial System, our Laws, the Constitution, and Bill of Rights, I am duty bound to speak out when I see a miss carriage of justice or someone trying to miss represent the facts of the case.
The people that have come in to rebut have yet to speak to the issues raised and try to miss direct the attention away from the violations of law, Constitutional, and Civil Rights. There is NO justification for anyone “Under Color of Law” to break the law in order to enforce the law! Have you asked your self, “If Mr. Roth was the victim of false arrest, false imprisonment, had his Civil Rights denied by the Chief of Police Jeff Gilbert, what would be the financial fallout for the County Attorney’s Office, the Town of Quartzsite, and Chief Jeff Gilbert be?” There is a mountain of Case Law in favor of Mr. Roth and very large settlements received from those “Under Color of Law” with more spending time in Federal Prisons!
Paul, so long as nobody is libeling anybody or getting personal, we really don’t have any issues… free speech is very important, as you say. If you’re right about Roth’s case then I hope justice is served.
Common Sense,
You may or may not be interested in the fact that as the Crime Scene Photographer for the Point Barrow Police Department, North Slope Borough Department of Public Safety, and Fort Yukon Police Department my investigation and photograph was responsible for the first conviction involving both native Eskimos as victim and rapist. I have conducted and assisted in several rape cases as well as being privileged at attending the first training session by the wonderful women from the Seattle, Washington Rap Crisis Center. Time is the most valuable element in any rape investigation. Please show me one State Academy that trains State, County, and City Police Recruits that it is standard procedure to wait for almost a year to start ANY rape investigation. When dealing with ANY rape of an underage child TIME IS CRITICAL!
Yes, there have been cases that the woman didn’t know she had been raped until the check bounced. I had such a case and believe me that we acted as fast as we could to investigate, collect evidence, statements both in favor of the (in this case) alleged victim and young buck that was accused of raping the complainant. The over zealous District Attorney against our request had the victim swear out a criminal complainant for rape and we were forced to arrest this young fellow before the completion of our investigation. At trial when we presented our facts of the case we were able to show that this young man had in no way that night had contact with the victim much less rape her. In fact we were able to determine that it was an act of reprisal between families.
It is a well-known fact within our Judicial System that if you are like the Attorney mentioned above without a complete and proper police investigation using only the victim’s statement before a Grand Jury you can obtain an indictment for felony rape. However, as I have shown you, just because you have a warrant for the arrest doesn’t mean that you have a case much less conviction for rape. Now if you have the money for a good Trial Attorney you can prove your innocence. If you are poor there is a good chance you will be convicted of a crime you are not guilty of and THAT is one reason we have the Appellate Courts! If the evidence and law were against Mr. Roth, I would be one of the first to ask him when was visiting day.
The thought that is on many Quartzsite residents’ minds when it comes to Chief Jeff Gilbert’s delay of almost a year to start to investigate this alleged (and lets face facts here it is alleged until a jury passes it judgment) rapping of a child by a Police Officer under his command leans more to a cover up than investigation! Time is critical in any rape investigation. The longer it takes the less of a chance of conviction. However, it takes time to cover up a crime. The more time, the easier it is to hid, remove, or destroy the evidence!
The booming metropolis of North Slope Borough and Point Barrow…
As an experienced crime scene photographer, maybe you can help clarify some things for us. First, as a minor in a statutory rape case, who is the legal victim? From my understanding, it is the parent. If the parent does not bring charges against the suspect/boyfriend, then there is nothing to charge from a legal standpoint. We see this in different cultures and religions. For example, minors getting married in FLDS ceremonies, or arranged marriages. From a moral and ethic standpoint for a police officer to do this, parental approved or not, it’s disgusting. Was the stepfather the stepfather at the time of the alleged incident? If not and he was just a boyfriend, then he has no legal standing. Only the mother or biological father would have standing. If they did not file charges, then there is no legal victim and thus no chargeable crime.
RR,
As for legal advice, you need to spend some of your own buck$ and talk with your Attorney. I can’t see how anyone could not think of you if not so now as an advocate for anyone that wants to commit the crime of rape of a child. If we accept your interpretation of the law, if a father is sexually abusing his daughter or son with the mother’s knowledge and permission you can’t file charges unless they are the ones to file.
Sorry bucko, but you will find a large number of people that are sitting in prison today without the filing of charges by the mother and/or father! Medical personal, teachers, public service, and yes Police Officers are required to report such criminal activities even if it is just suspected and there is no sound proof of the charges.
In this one case, (I have talked with the stepfather) they tried to report the “Statutory Rape” of their daughter/stepfather and Chief Jeff Gilbert refused to take the report against his QPD Officer. These facts will not change and Chief Jeff Gilbert will have to live with this MAJOR mistake along with the others that he still faces. There has been talk of a Major Legal Firm that has already agreed to represent a Quartzsite Resident with a Civil Suit against Quartzsite and I’m sure that they will take the time to listen to this family’s complaint against the Town of Quartzsite, Chief Jeff Gilbert, and the QPD Officer involved in this complaint. As for your argument, it fails the smell test…
13-1403. Public sexual indecency; public sexual indecency to a minor; classifications
A. A person commits public sexual indecency by intentionally or knowingly engaging in any of the following acts, if another person is present, and the defendant is reckless about whether such other person, as a reasonable person, would be offended or alarmed by the act:
1. An act of sexual contact.
2. An act of oral sexual contact.
3. An act of sexual intercourse.
4. An act of bestiality.
B. A person commits public sexual indecency to a minor if the person intentionally or knowingly engages in any of the acts listed in subsection A and such person is reckless about whether a minor under the age of fifteen years is present.
C. Public sexual indecency is a class 1 misdemeanor. Public sexual indecency to a minor is a class 5 felony.
13-1405. Sexual conduct with a minor; classification; definition
A. A person commits sexual conduct with a minor by intentionally or knowingly engaging in sexual intercourse or oral sexual contact with any person who is under eighteen years of age.
B. Sexual conduct with a minor who is under fifteen years of age is a class 2 felony and is punishable pursuant to section 13-705. Sexual conduct with a minor who is at least fifteen years of age is a class 6 felony. Sexual conduct with a minor who is at least fifteen years of age is a class 2 felony if the person is the minor’s parent, stepparent, adoptive parent, legal guardian, foster parent or the minor’s teacher or clergyman or priest and the convicted person is not eligible for suspension of sentence, probation, pardon or release from confinement on any basis except as specifically authorized by section 31-233, subsection A or B until the sentence imposed has been served or commuted.
C. For the purposes of this section, “teacher” means a certificated teacher as defined in section 15-501 or any other person who directly provides academic instruction to pupils in any school district, charter school, accommodation school, the Arizona state schools for the deaf and the blind or a private school in this state.
13-3554. Luring a minor for sexual exploitation; classification
A. A person commits luring a minor for sexual exploitation by offering or soliciting sexual conduct with another person knowing or having reason to know that the other person is a minor.
B. It is not a defense to a prosecution for a violation of this section that the other person is not a minor.
C. Luring a minor for sexual exploitation is a class 3 felony, and if the minor is under fifteen years of age it is punishable pursuant to section 13-705.
Your middle initial is not “O” is it? Here is what I find most disturbing, you call “M” and I spin doctors, and you blast an “overzealous” district attorney for not having all the facts, but you rush to the same judgment based off a conversation with the stepfather. Only slightly less despicable than a crime against a child, is if the police department fails to act. You and I agree on that. You are forming an opinion, be it unbiased, open-minded and fair, based on one side of the story combined with your, once again unbiased, open-minded and fair, opinion of the police department. The combination of those two could possibly not lead to a skewed opinion Mr. District Attorney.
Wow, Mr. Staudt references a few sections of law and all R.R. can think to imply his middle initial is O? As in P.O.S. you know Piece Of SH&T? funny guy. Responds to intellectual conversation with vulgarity. This is a REAL La Paz County resident. Must work in the County Attorneys office.
The “O” stands for offensive, as in I find it offensive Mr. Staudt would claim I am an advocate for crimes against children. Any correlation between that and the acronym you stated is mere coincidence.
I asked the question of who is the legal victim? If the mother consented to the relationship, then by law there is no victim. Legally paraphrased, no victim, no crime. Instead, I received a fancy cut and paste job from Arizona law. That is not in dispute. If there is a legal victim, and no investigation was conducted, the lack of investigation is criminal and a betrayal of public trust.
And yes, I agree, the legal victim idea does stink. We have lawyers to thank for that.
Okay, I am big enough to admit when I am partially wrong. The age of consent in Arizona is 18. There are three defenses by law to statutory rape. They are: 1) the suspect and victim are married 2) the suspect did not know the victim’s age and 3) if the suspect is under, and not more than 24 months older than the victim. So I was right about the marriage, but wrong about parental consent of an unmarried sexual relationship for their minor child.
“O” for offensive, like we buy that here????
The conversations with the mother AND step father were numerous. AND Chief Of Police Jeff Gilbert continued to harass the step father when he went to talk about it with the citizens at a Quartzsite town council meeting. Are you starting to see a pattern here buddy?
RR,
With all due respect, I was there and I was the Lead Investigator on the case. We pleaded with the District Attorney to give us just a few more days as we were not certain with the facts we had that the boy was guilty by the evidence. In the words of My Chief of Police, “If he refuses to sign the complaint, I sure as hell won’t”!
The end result was an 18-year old boy with an arrest record showing that he was arrested for forcible rape! This will follow him the rest of his life. No one will want to know that he was not guilty or found innocent by the jury. This in many cases will keep him from many jobs and keep him from a number of security levels and jobs in government. All because of an “Overzealous Attorney” looking at placing another conviction at any cost on his bragging stick!
There was a time when Police Officers, Detectives, Criminal Investigators took great pains and time to go over our cases with the Attorney assigned with our cases to insure that we were not sending an innocent man to prison. I guess our bread of “Old School” Peace Officers are a dying if not dead breed that had honor and pride in our work and the law.
Maybe I missed it, but I think that a violation of the Mann Act was also involved, as the officer and consort were allegedly crossing from AZ into Blythe to use a motel there. Too late to find eyewitnesses now, I suppose…
Numerous complaints have been made about alleged criminal activity involving the QPD, but the Police Chief and Town Manager like to get their stories straight before telling the citizens that their own investigation did not warrant the assistance of outside investigators. If a report wasn’t taken, it’s often because it may then be treated as if it never happened. This is common protocol under this Chief. Reports are filed enthusiastically against anyone who speaks out (like Mr. Roth), while no report is taken against certain “protected” individuals. Many citizens worry about retribution and now, do not want to even swear out a complaint for fear that it will just be covered up.
How sad that someone would be so quick to defend this Chief’s actions, or lack thereof, when he clearly has not had first hand experience with the man.
RR,
Since you are so much on the defense for Chief Jeff Gilbert, maybe you would like to read and explain this little item that many have view as one of the charges that he could be facing in the near future…
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.
This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her color or race.
Acts under “color of any law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under “color of any law,” the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
Paul,
you mean like when Chief of Police Jeff Gilbert conspired with acting Mayor Huntley to eliminate my freedom of speech at a town council meeting?
[…………………………………………] Try again, Michael, without the personal insults. -Ed
We must be understanding of those that have not been exposed to Chief Jeff Gilbert, Quartzsite Town Council, and Quartzsite Town Manager Alex Taft. If they had the experience as we the victims have suffered under, heard the evidence, and researched the multitudes of criminal violations of both Arizona State and U.S. Code they would be the ones calling for tar, feathers, and a rope!
Justice takes time and in time Justice will be served in a Court of Law and NOT at the end of a rope. Chief Jeff Gilbert, Town Manager Alex Taft, and the six Town Council Members face total removal in the up coming “Recall” election. We believe in the Judicial System and our “Power of the Vote” to force the compliance of the Laws of the State of Arizona, United States of America, Constitution, and Bill of Rights! With repeated warnings they willfully ignore the Law and only do what is in their interest.
Have their eyes been clouded with graft to such a point that they forget that this is a government of the “People,” by the “People,” and for the “People”?
There’s the insult police again. Funny how county guy R.R. can get away with calling someone else here, my side, a POS but when I simply repeat it, (what R.R, said, then lied about when caught) but I say it iin a different more direct (read honest) way, you delete it. But what’s truly sad is you delete my comments without letting others know what was said, just that YOU thought it was bad, or insulting or OMG mean! And the other side did the same thing.
You are doing exactly what Chief of Police Jeff Gilbert did the night he arrested me (Illegally) You see, there were people at the Quartzsite town council meeting, Jeffs friends, who were more vocal, more rude, more threatening than I, but because Chief of Police Jeff Gilbert did NOT LIKE what I was saying about him, he arrested me. To a patriot like me who believes in letting people speak freely, what you do here is no different.
PC KILLED AMERICA!
FWIW, a Chief of Police is a public figure and everyone in Quartzsite knows who, and more importantly, WHAT Jeff Gilbert really is. (Dan Field hired him, does that tell you anything?) We prefer to tell the truth about him instead of talking around the obvious. We also believe more needs to come out about this man because if he gets fired here we have a strong suspicion that the Sheriff has a special spot for him at County. (That’s how it works around here, isn’t it? If you are compromised you get promoted!)
Everyone knows QPD is as crooked as a dogs hind leg! AND this SHOULD be discussed in the most honest, glaring, truthful light possible or NEXT TIME it’s YOUR (or a relatives or a friend of yours) daughter getting messed up for life!!! Or YOU get the boot of tyranny on YOUR head! Don’t say we didn’t try and warn you!!!
Roth- I won’t explain my moderation decisions anymore; work them out for yourself. You can’t call someone a piece of shit on this site…. period. RR didn’t do so. I take no side in this debate, despite your paranoia.
And where do you stand on the Easter Bunny and Santa Clause John?
You also said I couldn’t say “M”att had a cheap suit, but you let others say it. What was the reason for deleting THAT one? Because your reasons for deleting comments (only mine) seem to be arbitrary, capricious.
If I remember correctly, it was then a conversation about the appropriateness of saying it, rather than an assertion “M has a…” Intentions are important. If your clear intention is to insult with some particular comment, it’ll probably disappear like fairy dust. (The moderation process isn’t an exact science either, but I’m sure you understand we want to generally keep our house a welcoming place with basic manners. Moderation won’t ever be executed perfectly.)
I hope this helps you understand more, cause it’s exhausting explaining every little thing. Let it go! 🙂
It’s hard to just “let it go” because Alternative Media is all real Americans have for Freedom Of Speech! I hope you understand.
To All,
I have learned that when someone calls me names, tries to slander me, or even make fund of my training, experience, and education they have lost the debate. I learned as a child that these kinds of attacks are fruitless and a hurt response from the people uttering them. I was trained as a Police Officer to just let it go, as there were more important fish to fry. Of course we broke this rule as soon as a knife or gun came with the verbal assault!
One person that thought that he would just run around and shoot up the homes of the local Police while the wives and children were helpless to defend them selves as the bullets came crashing in soon found out that personal feelings NEVER came into the picture as we tracked him down. My own home with newborn son came under live fire attack and I was the lucky one that made the arrest and retrieved the weapon used. We went by the book and during the whole investigation, arrest, and trial I NEVER let my personal feelings enter into the case or trial. Rest assured, I can’t state what the wives wanted done with this person.
Debate the facts of the case and keep it out of the personal area, as that has nothing to do with the case at hand. BTW, we have found a number of violations of U.S. Code that Chief Jeff Gilbert should start to worry about. IMHO, I can’t see how he can avoid a full criminal investigation, as there is just too much evidence on video and witnesses willing to come forward. He still faces the Civil Suit that will be filed soon just to point out how this is starting to boomerang back on him. If it were not for “Freedom of Speech,” and this forum to exercise it we would have missed out as Paul Harvey would say, “And now the rest of the story”!
John,
Dr. M offers the following advice:
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig enjoys it.
The corollary is:
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Hear, hear “M”att. Hear hear!!! (Nice transference BTW!)
Staudt – The “Sticks and Stones” point of view. I like it.
Staudt/Roth – You can quote federal and state law all you want. I agree with it. What is in question is your interpretation of it. I don’t think you or Roth can look objectively at the situation in Quartzsite because of your experiences there. You may have been able to in past situations, but not now. You both felt Roth was arrested unfairly, but a jury of 8 decided otherwise. You point at every possible problem (the judge, attorneys, etc.) except one, Roth’s actions. You preach about the Constitution except when it works against you. Then it’s flawed. You speak highly of Supreme Court decisions that benefit you, and mock the ones that prove you wrong. And what’s your answer to everything? Just wait, justice is coming. If the police department is really that bad, then any further delay or inaction on your part makes you just as responsible. Waiting allows the abuse of power to continue. Waiting means more victims. Waiting means you don’t yet have the evidence you need. Waiting means you are doing nothing but indirectly condoning their actions if you have the evidence. If you have the evidence, then make your complaint and save the rest of the town from the injustices you say you suffered.
When you obey the rules, you are not censored. When you obey the rules, you are not arrested and convicted by a jury. Had you obeyed the rules, your posts would have appeared in their entirety. Had you obeyed the rules, you would have never been arrested.
John, instead of coffee, let’s invite them to our weekly poker game.
RR,
Within our Judicial System it is the Case Law (the decisions of the State & U.S. Supreme Courts) that “Interpret” the Law, NOT me! We have pointed out the governing Laws in this Mr. Roth’s case and the “Interpretation” by both State and U.S. Supreme Courts. As you keep trying to do the “Texas Two Step” in an attempt to defend Chief Jeff Gilbert you sound more like a Attorney for the Defendant than a concerned citizen with what others see as violations of the Law, United States Constitution, Bill of Rights, and “Decisions” with “Interpretations” from the highest Courts of the Land!
The Appellate Courts at both the State and Federal levels are there to correct errors in the lower courts rulings that lead to wrongful convictions and violated not only the laws involved but violations of Constitutional and Civil Rights. Every State in the Union have told towns, cities, and cases in the State Courts to be retried because of errors in the Law, violation in instructions to the jury, evidence and witness testimony withheld, and errors in charging the convinced person(s) with the wrong Laws. The Appellate Courts exist as a safety valve to insure that NO ONE is wrongful convicted of any Law and that they received a fair trial! It has been long held that it is better to allow 100 guilty men to go free than to convict one innocent person!
From many of your statements it is obvious that you have yet to be a litigant or victim within either the Civil and/or Criminal Judicial System. In some cases more so than not you can plant a fruit tree if not even the seed and receive the fruit it offers before some cases are adjudicated within our Judicial System. In one case were I was to testify in a fatality accident the defense asked for and received delays for almost a full year before that case was heard. As I have stated, the wheels of Justice move slowly.
The sad truth in life is that you can follow the rules, obey the Laws, and still find yourself arrested and convicted in a Court of Law! My first experience with the Arizona State Police was in 1974 on a trip to Texas with my girlfriend and her children on I-40. The Rookie was about ready to cite me for speeding until his statement that he had been following me for over 2 ½ miles was shot to pieces when I produced a gas receipt with mileage notation and time stamp showing that I had gone less than a ¼ mile before being pulled over. You may take a note here that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that Law Enforcement Officers can lie to you so remember that next time you are in trouble with the law!
Let me leave you with this one thought. Though one proceeds to strike oneself over the head with a book and receive a hollow thump, does not necessarily mean that the book is empty…
As for your poker game, only if I can bring my brother. One night at a penny-ante game he had to borrow three cents to join in. By evenings end he had over $23 and change in his pocket.
RR, to believe you is to defy logic. You mean to tell me that all juries make the right decision? Do you honestly believe that nobody is ever arrested falsely? So, people on death row have never been convicted wrongly? There have been tens of thousands of proven cases where prosecutors, judges and lawyers have convicted people wrongly, and you expect us to believe that all cops and lawyers and judges are good honest people who never do anything wrong? Some of these cops, lawyers and judges are even sitting in jail for their crimes against the accused.
Your BS might fly in Parker but we know the truth here in Quartzsite.
Weekly poker game? Explains why John only censors the “other” side. Sounds like it would be a fair game, NOT!
Michael, I think RR was being facetious. There is no weekly poker game (in fact, I don’t even know RR’s ‘real world’ identity).
Yes John, I believe you!
Mr. Wright,
It will break my brothers heart to hear that there is no poker game. This aside, I don’t think that any mans freedoms and violations of his Civil Rights calls for being facetious. I find it as distasteful as one Southern Sheriff’s statement after a young black was pulled from the pond when he said, “Looks like the boy stole more chain than he could swim with”!
I thought that we had been making headway in such matters and we need to remember the abuses of the past to insure due diligence in keeping it from happening again. My grandfather once told me that, “You don’t have to like a man to give him an even break.”
John and RR, I believe Roth has figured out that we all belong to the La Paz Illuminati.
Our poker game is a cover for meetings, where we decide the fates of subjects in La Paz County. Vederman is very powerful in our group as Roth has found out.
Our group (which includes one prominent Quartzsite resident) wants the town of Quartzsite to be dissolved so that the sheriff will control the town with newly appointed Lt. Jeff Gilbert (and all of QPD) running the Quartzsite district. This will come to pass. When complete, this will solidify Parker control over Quartzsite. Any dissent will be handled on Tuesdays, 10am, at the BofS meetings. All hail KLPZ!
I may be inclined to believe you “M”, as it appears you might play poker, since you seem experienced in bluffing! I will call your bluff, however, please see:
http://www.InnocenceProject.org
or
http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/2/0/6/5/4/p206542_index.html
or, from the American Bar Assoc.
“To address this issue, our survey respondents were asked to estimate, based on their experiences, the frequency with which wrongful conviction occurs. Based on the responses to our survey, we used 0.5 percent as our estimate. If our “panel of judges” is correct, this means that the U.S. criminal justice system might be accurate in about 99.5 percent of the cases of felony conviction. That suggests, perhaps, a level of accuracy that might inspire great confidence. However, one’s perspective on the magnitude of the problem might change when one considers the overall volume of cases processed through the U.S. criminal justice system. For example, in the year 2000 there were 2.2 million arrests in the United States for index crimes alone. We also know that about 70 percent of those arrested for felonies are ultimately convicted of either a felony or a misdemeanor. This means that if we assume that the system was 99.5 percent accurate in those cases and made errors in only one-half of 1 percent (0.5 percent) of those convictions, that rate of error would have produced about 7,500 wrongful convictions among those 2.2 million arrested for index crimes. So a small error rate in a very large system can result in thousands of miscarriages of justice and allow many of the criminals who actually committed those crimes to remain free to victimize others.”
http://www.abanet.org/crimjust/spring2003/conviction.html
In all fairness though Mr. Roth, I don’t believe that “M” is necessarily Matt Elias. Rather, my instinct leads me to believe that perhaps it is his boss, Sam Vederman, or maybe the second chair attempting to publicly humiliate Mr. Elias by posting as if they were him. Then having “RR” make the comment about the poor chap being a “Chippendales” exotic dancer. I’m sure that Mr. Elias just drew the short straw the day he was assigned the case. If that is so, then I sincerely hope he does the ethical thing and make a sentencing recommendation for the aforementioned $20 fine as proscribed under A.R.S. § 9-234
Imagine yourself the new guy in the County Attorney’s Office and you are ordered to prosecute a case you don’t want anything to do with and it would cost you your job if you don’t try the case? Doesn’t seem fair when it could also cost you your license to practice Law! Mr. Elias in more informed about the background, Laws, and Case Laws involving Mr. Roth’s case. Does he do as ordered even if it is wrong and places him in jeopardy of ethics violations or do the right thing by the Law that he has taken an oath to uphold?
I for one feel sorry for Mr. Elias being placed between a rock and a hard spot. For me, I once removed my badge to throw away a career in Law Enforcement to do the right and legal thing to honor my “Oath of Office” than support illegal orders of my Chief of Police and violate a man’s Civil Rights. Maybe Mr. Elias needs to reassess his ethics and “Oath of Office” and review the full evidence in this case. He should see that Chief Jeff Gilbert wrongfully arrested Mr. Roth without authority to do so. Charged under the wrong Law and in all reality drops the resisting arrest as No sane man would think giving Mr. Roth only 2-seconds to respond was sufficient time to comply.
As this was Mr. Elias’s first trial, maybe he should visit “The Fruits of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree
I neglected to thank Mr. Wright for allowing this lively debate. My apologies sir! I look forward to following the final outcome as the appeal and possible retrial unfolds.
Paul,
I am not Vederman nor Elias, nor the 2nd chair.
I stated that Elias may have been a model and Chippendales dancer; Dr. RR didn’t claim this.
BTW, the jury convicted Roth, not Elais nor Vederman.
M,
May I first start out by saying that I feel your comments about Mr. Elias was uncalled for and very unfair. I may add also an embarrassment too!
“It ain’t over till the fat lady sings is a colloquialism, essentially meaning that one should not assume the outcome of some activity (e.g.: a sports game) until it has actually finished.” You may wish to keep this in mind. You keep trying to call the game because your team is ahead but the other team is awaiting their next turn at bat!
Have you ever considered that Judge Burke could rule in the “Interest of Justice,” and set aside the conviction because Mr. Roth was convicted under the wrong Law, Chief Jeff Gilbert failed to have the authority to make ANY arrest without the Mayor’s permission with the approval of 4 Council Members, and not last the Quartzsite Town Attorney dismissed the charges in the “Interest of Justice.”
One could accuse you of suffering from Premature Adjudication!
After this evening’s observations and investigations I can no longer give Chief Jeff Gilbert the benefit of the doubt! I will admit that he is being cleaver by ordering the Police Officers under his leadership to break the Law and not him. This isn’t the first time that a Quartzsite Police Officer has told me, “I’m only following orders.” The only problem with using “I was only following orders” as your defense, it failed to save the defendants at the Nuremberg Trials.
It does no good to inform or remind Chief Jeff Gilbert or the members of the Quartzsite Police Department of the United States Supreme Court rulings or Case Law. Tonight even though informed that they were illegally taking pictures without a Court Order, they just went ahead breaking the Law. When will Chief Jeff Gilbert learn to just let it go and stop harassing Mr. Roth. There is no doubt in my mind that this will go forward to be heard before a Judge in a court of Law. However, I don’t think Chief Jeff Gilbert will be pleased with the outcome again.
The videos taken tonight will be placed on You Tube and forward to the Law Offices of Jennifer Harris-Jones’s Attorney as additional evidence of Chief Jeff Gilbert’s pattern of harassment of the citizens of Quartzsite, Arizona! Just tonight I have spent over four hours review and reading the Case Law that supports the exclusion or suppression of “Illegally Obtained Evidence” in both Civil and Criminal Cases from both State and U.S. Supreme Court Rulings.
In Mr. Roth’s retrial this will all come out point by point as Chief Jeff Gilbert will be made to answer for the continual violations of Mr. Roth’s Civil Rights. That is only if Chief Jeff Gilbert doesn’t exercises his Civil Right of invoking the Fifth-Amendment!
Just a few quotes from Case Law:
In 1928, in Olmstead v United States, Justice Brandeis questioned the use of illegally obtained evidence in court. It should be excluded, he said, to “maintain respect for the law; in order to promote confidence in the administration of justice; in order to preserve the judicial process from contamination.”
Burdeau v McDowell, which defined the role of government actors under the exclusionary rule, the Court said that “judicial integrity” was harmed by the admitting of evidence illegally obtained. “To sanction such proceedings would be to affirm by judicial decision a manifest neglect, if not an open defiance of the prohibitions of the Constitution, intended for the protection of the people against such unauthorized action.”
It was with Mapp v Ohio in 1961 that the exclusionary rule was extended to state criminal prosecutions and illegally obtained evidence, again with the mention of “judicial integrity.” Mapp was follwed by People v Owens and, in 2000’s Dickerson v United States the court said that evidence could be excluded as a matter of supervisory power.
In McNabb v United States, the court held that evidence obtained illegally should not be allowed, as it violated the “fundamental principles of liberty and justice,” and the court based their decision in that case not on constitutional grounds but on the supervisory power of the court. Elkins v United States likewise used “supervisory powers of the court” to exclude evidence.
As Ruth Bader Ginsburg said (quoting Elkins): “Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws, or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence.”
The last time I reviewed the stats it stated that only 1/10 of 1% of Law Enforcement Officers were bad. That equates out of 604,000 sworn officers there are about 604 bad cops out there. The question on most residents in Quartzsite, “Where did we rate having more that our percentage?”
These are some real bad examples of the problem out there. Look for the video on the web page. In some cases you will have to see an advertisement first. On the one Fox News report listen to what isn’t considered resisting arrest!
http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=32637
http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=32438
http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpp/news/100510-trooper-charged-for-excessive-force?=idx#
http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=32672
See “New Quartzite Police misconduct videos”
http://quartzsitearizona.blogspot.com/2010/11/new-quartzite-police-misconduct-video.html
” Quartzsite Police Officers Fabiola Garcia and Ruben Villafania are speaking in Spanish on the job, at Town Hall right before Michael Roth’s arrest for “disorderly conduct”. This is the video feed directly from officer Garcia’s badge camera, as submitted into evidence at Roth’s trial.”
More information and evidence into the character and ethics of Chief Jeff Gilbert of the Quartzsite Police Department are now coming into question via You Tube. Don’t take my word for it but listen to Chief Jiff Gilbert in his own words as he openly lies to the Private Property Manager Russell Sias while not only breaking the law and the 4th Amendment, he gets “Badge Heavy” pushing his way around.
Facts will come out later that show that Chief Jeff Gilbert was trying to cover up another violation of Arizona State Law while in the commission of this criminal behavior! See for yourself…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiT1EcDdwKw&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
Chief Jeff Gilbert is set to face criminal complaints against him by his own rank-in-file police officers. Please take the time to view the links below before you respond to this post.
The citizens of Quartzsite are being told of alleged criminal activities of Chief Jeff Gilbert and a select few loyal officers that are still trying to do his unlawful bidding. VP John Stair of AZCOPS in a presentation at the last town meeting on June 14th to present the complaints officially to Mayor Ed Foster, the Town Council, Town Manager Alex Taft, and town Attorney Pamela Wilsma was disrespected when the full Town of Quartzsite Council Members walked out on his presentation.
This isn’t over yet and I can only see IMHO that each and every member of the Town Council, Town Manager Alex Taft, and Asst Town Manager Al Johnson, along with the Town Attorney will be facing Arizona State and U.S. Federal prosecutions in the near future!
Quartzsite Police Officers Ass.
http://www.quartzsitenews.tv/QPD.PDF
AZCOPS
http://www.quartzsitenews.tv/QPD2.pdf
Mayor Ed Fosters Letter to Town Manager Alex Taft
http://qtown.us/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011-06-03-Letter-Foster-to-Taft-re-Frausto.pdf
Quartzsite Town Meeting June 14, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_ZnDS5W4O8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Mle8sEMm4jA
Paul, it’s called “Karma” All of those who conspired against us, who were simply doing the right things, will eventually get theirs!
Roth, Read your comments on Brannan on the botched prosecution Blog.
Is it Karma Brannan is new Prosecutor in Quartzsite or is that reverse Karma? From your comments it sounds like Brannan and Vederman are friends even though people seem to be trying to hide that fact. Are Brannan and Vederman both going to take turns tag team wrestling with you now?
We have our problems in Parker too!
BTW, I was surprised by your comment that you helped Vederman get elected. People in parker claim you had nothing to do with his campaign in any way, and certainly didn’t help him get elected. Are they ashamed now and trying to hide things after the fact? What did you do to help him get elected?
I regret, after the fact, that I encouraged people to vote for him while I was campaigning. I had no idea he was such a turncoat.
And yes, I think Karma is biting Quartzsite in the Butt. (Reverse Karma, that’s funny!) What’s happening here and in the rest of the County is what happens when you make bad decisions.
Next election, DON’T RE-ELECT ANYBODY!!!
Parker.for.freedom, “Welcome to awareness; I hope you’ve taken the last couple of years to become prepared.”