Friday, April 17, 2015

Gloucester Animal Control Evidence of Fraud?

Back in May of 2010, the Crews residence was illegally raided and an illegal search warrant was used as part of that raid.  The evidence is right here.  This is the back end of that search warrant.  How do we know its illegal?  Simple, the name on the execution and return are that of Stephen T Baranek, who at that time was a deputy Animal Control officer.  Animal Control can not under Virginia code, ever, serve or execute a search warrant.  The front was issued and signed by Gloria Owens who is a deputy clerk of the circuit court.  But the case was held in District Court.  What business did a circuit court clerk have in district court business?  Also, a circuit court clerk can not at anytime issue a search warrant in the Commonwealth of Virginia.  Yet we have shown that Gloucester has done just that.

Again, you see that the search warrant here is issued by Gloria Owens, Deputy Clerk of the Gloucester Circuit Court.  Search Warrants can only be issued by Judges or Magistrates.  Also, read how broad the search warrant is written.  Search Warrants must be very specific as to whom and or what is to be searched and or seized.  A broad search warrant is illegal.  Also note, there is no court stamp for the date of issue.  Only for the date of return.  How many violations can we find here?  

  I only recently received permission to publish this information and we are now showing all the dirt on this case.  

Above is one of the pictures taken by an Animal Control deputy showing Laura Crews to the far left with her hands behind her back because they arrested her.  They did not have a search warrant at that time like they claim in the court report.  The only thing the Crews family ever received was a copy of the front page.  I had to fight the county for over a month under FOIA to get the majority of the rest of it.  It took Congressman Rob Wittman's office to step in and force the county to provide that information which was not completed to my request.

  The picture screen shot above also shows the meta data on the camera used and the time and date the picture was taken.  They had no real cause to take her into custody.  It was an illegal raid from every area I have looked at.  What was the motive?  Land and animal theft is what we have uncovered as some of the reasons for the raid.  

Look at the ground around this bathtub.  It is wet.  On the outer rim it is very dry.  It had not rained in over 10 days during that period and we have confirmed that based on weather history sites for this area.  That tub was filled with water and Animal Control as well as several Sheriff's deputies were conspiring to create fraudulent evidence against Laura Crews and stated in court, the animals had no water.  Well of course they had no water when Animal Control and Sheriff's deputies drain it all out from the various areas around the property.

Mike Soberick never argued these facts.  Attorney Mike Soberick never argued the illegal search warrant.  This guy has now been promoted to a Judge.  Commit fraud get a promotion?  Typical in Gloucester.  Judge Shaw who had to also see the illegal search warrant and had heard the case has gone from District Court Judge to Circuit Court Judge.  What a wonderful reward system.  Illegally convict people and get a promotion for doing such?  Really?    

And its all thanks to this guy right here.  Steve Baranek of Gloucester, Virginia Animal Control.

Thursday, April 16, 2015

Gloucester, VA Animal Control Fake Audio Submitted As Evidence

The above video was created from a file provided to the Gloucester, Virginia District Court back in 2010.  This is one of several audio files.  This part of the audio was never played in court and one has to wonder why.  Listen to it and tell me that it isn't fake.  Yet Animal Control deputy, Steve Baranek, testified, under oath, that all audio he created and entered into court evidence was true and accurate.  This is from court file number DW_C0153.  Are you to tell me that a dog answered the phone?

  He also states he was shot at.  Below again is a copy of the court report from that case.  At no point was this man ever shot at like he states in the audio above.  But again, he did state, under oath no less, that the audio was not altered and is a true copy of everything that did happen.  So people are supposed to believe Steve Baranek of Gloucester Animal Control how?  He can't be lying that he was shot at, but testimony from both the Sheriff's office, and him, fail to show that even one gun shot, at any point, at anytime took place?  Did Steve for some reason just decide to suppress this fact?  Was he just being a nice guy?

  There are just way to many questions in the entire case that do not for one minute begin to make sense to any mind of reason.


The gloucester, va case that never was from Chuck Thompson

By all means, here is today's challenge.  Find where Steve states in court that he was shot at.  It's all from the same case.  Laura Crews has petitioned the court for meta data on the audio files used against her on this case and all I can imagine is that she will get it once hell freezes over for obvious reasons.  We already know from inside the Sheriff's office that the Sheriff's office has destroyed evidence in regards to this case and I challenge the Sheriff's office to prove they did not.  Nothing against the present administration as this was done under Gentry when he still held office.  As the word goes, Gentry, ordered it destroyed.

Who wants to have some real fun with all of this?  Start at page 15 and go through at least to page 23.  Its a fast read.  You won't understand what you are reading until I point out a very cleat fact here.  Animal Control at no point has or ever had the ability to serve a search warrant.  They are forbidden by Virginia Code from doing such.  With that knowledge, now go read the suggested pages above.  How did Judge Shaw allow this case to move forward?  He had a legal obligation to stop the case right there and throw it out.  He didn't do that.  Why?  Read the Canons of Judicial Conduct For The State of Virginia and you will see that Judge Shaw did in fact have a legal obligation to stop the case right there and throw it out.  But this is just my opinion here and I am not an attorney trying to practice law.  I am simply reporting on what I see and read.

  If you are not an attorney you are considered to stupid to understand the law yet ignorance of the law is no excuse.  All of that from the same group of people who administer justice?  Yup!

Canons of Judicial Conduct: Virginia Commonwealth from Chuck Thompson

Because I recommend you read the Canons of Judicial Conduct for the State of Virginia, I provide them for you right here.  I don't make this stuff up.  They do.  I just show you where it all is.  Read section 3:D.  Guess who the Judge is the case against Laura Crews today.  Judge Shaw.  Are we going to see a repeat of these same shenanigans?  Actually he is about to be asked to recuse himself from the case as these matters are about to be brought into evidence once again.    

Tuesday, April 14, 2015

The Gloucester Magazine - Daffodil Festival Edition

The Gloucester Magazine vol 1 issue 1 from Chuck Thompson

We are introducing our newest creation by TTC Media.  The Gloucester Magazine covering Gloucester County, Virginia.  (We have readers from all over the world so we need to specify exact location here).  This is Volume One Issue One.  We are not producing this in print format.  This is strictly an online digital magazine.  This first edition is mostly all pictures and covers the Daffodil Festival from this past weekend.  We wanted to make it larger but due to computer issues, we had to stop at 26 pages.

  So far the feedback on the magazine is that people want it to be like a more traditional magazine with articles along with pictures.  We can do that.  Everyone is free to download and share this magazine with anyone they want however the contents of the magazine are under copyright so no part of the magazine may be printed or changed in any way without our express permission in writing in advance.   In order to download a copy you must first become a member of Slideshare itself.  Becoming a member is easy and free.  You can sign up using your Facebook or LinkedIn account or create a free account the normal way through Slideshare.  We hope everyone enjoys the latest creation.  We have a lot more in the works.

Gloucester, Virginia Steve Baranek of Animal Control - Fraud and Perjury?Above

Above is a video we just posted to You Tube that contains audio as recorded by Steve Baranek of Gloucester Animal Control on July 26th, 2014.  The audio file is DW_D0503 and was submitted into evidence to bring two counts of misdemeanor charges against Laura Crews of Gloucester.  Listen to the audio clip.  Its 33 seconds long.  Within the first 30 seconds Steve makes 3 admissions.  He admits that he is just walking around killing a few minutes.  The second admission is that there are no animals at the yard sale he is at and the third admission is that he is somewhere he should not be because he states, "I can not go shopping on company time".

  The accusations of statutory violations filed against Laura Crews are 19.2-415 for Disorderly Conduct and the second one is 19.2-460 Obstruction of Justice.  Now if you read Virginia Code and look at the annotations on how that code is to be used, in Washington v Commonwealth, 2007, S.E.2d 485, it is clear that law-enforcement must be engaged in their lawful duty in order for there to be an obstruction of justice.  A police officer sitting at a desk waiting on transportation of Washington, when Washington stated he would kill the police officer, the police officer was not engaged in a lawful duty where obstruction of justice was claimed as a violation.  The court threw out the Commonwealths accusations.

  So again, looking at Steve's own admissions above I can not begin to see where there is any valid claim on these accusations of statutory violations.  Here is the information he provided to a grand jury in Virginia Beach.

You can click on the image to blow it up for easier reading.  This is the same complaint written by Steve Baranek that is in the video above.  It seems as though Mr Baranek has committed fraud and perjury here.  He knew through his own admission that there were no animals at the yard sale but claims the yard sale was a Chicken Swap which would indicate a potentially valid reason for being there.  (I say potentially valid reason but in my view even if animals were there Animal Control has no legal right to patrol.  Virginia is a Dillon Rule state and the state, from what I have tried to find, does not allow Animal Control the ability to patrol public areas, streets, highways and or buildings).  The claim of calling the yard sale a Chicken Swap is where Steve has committed perjury in my view.  I say my view as I am not an attorney and I am not trying to practice law.  I am only a witness to just about every event of this case except the July 26th, 2014 situation.  I am only reporting the information as I know and understand it.

  The above has been reported to Holly Smith, Commonwealth Attorney for Gloucester 9th District.  We are waiting to see what she says on this.  We have so called witness testimony provided by prosecution that actually has 4 so called witnesses against Laura Crews for the accusations of statutory violations, but the records show that the testimony actually works against Steve as they all state that Steve was at a yard sale.  (Not acting in an official capacity).  I also call the so called witnesses such as the prosecution has failed to provide evidence of witnesses against the accused in violation of rules of evidence even after she stated in court she would do so.  A motion to quash was filed against any form of witnesses because of such by Laura Crews.

  What is even worse, the audio evidence was provided to Laura, by the prosecution.  I have to assume that the prosecuting attorney was to busy to listen to it to realize what the audio actually contains.  This would seem to me to be malicious prosecution by the prosecutor for the case.   A motion to dismiss is now before the court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.  A motion to show cause has also been filed to know by what authority Animal Control has of patrolling public areas, streets, highways and or buildings.  So far, not one motion filed by Laura Crews has ever been answered by anyone at anytime all in violation of court rules.  How does that work?  She was told in court that she has to follow the rules, but no one else has to?  And she is the one facing criminal sanctions?  I really do not understand how that works.  But that is the question of a reasonable person and we must not be dealing with any form of reason here.

  Who knows maybe they told her she "SHALL" follow the rules of the court which would mean that sometime in the future she may follow the rules of the court if she so pleases.  (Look up the definition of the word - "SHALL").

modal verb: shall
  1. 1.
    (in the first person) expressing the future tense.
    "this time next week I shall be in Scotland"
  2. 2.
    expressing a strong assertion or intention.
    "they shall succeed"
  3. 3.
    expressing an instruction or command.
    "you shall not steal"
  4. 4.
    used in questions indicating offers or suggestions.
    "shall I send you the book?"