Showing posts with label Sheriff. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sheriff. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 8, 2019

Local Sheriff; Complaints About Massage Parlors, Warning; Sexually Explicit Content

(Story by; Chuck Thompson)

Tuesday, October 1st, at the Gloucester County Board of Supervisor's meeting held at the old colonial courthouse, Sheriff Darrell Warren was looking to get a public hearing on the creation of a special local ordinance that is outside of the purview of state code and equally outside of the Dillon Rule that local authorities are supposed to adhere to.  This new special local ordinance would create a new law against what is going on inside of local massage parlors making certain actions illegal in Gloucester County.  Now for some background on why the Sheriff is looking for such an ordinance.  Sheriff Warren claims that he has received numerous complaints about special services being practiced at several locations here in the county and that there are no state laws for which the Sheriff or his deputies can site against these massage parlors for these special services in an effort to stop future practices like this.

What are these special services?  (Warning, the following may be considered sexually explicit and may offend some readers. Caution is advised beyond this point).  Before we begin to explore these special services, let's define what they are not.  Vaginal, Anal and oral intercourse for a fee is considered prostitution within the state and there are laws in place that Sheriff Darrell Warren can take action on and stop these actions if they were going on inside of these massage parlors.  So, these are not the actions where complaints have been issued.  What is not covered is masturbation.  There are no state laws that forbid paying someone to masturbate or massage one's private areas, male or female.  Other complaints are also massage with nudity.  What was not said is who the nude parties are, if they are the massage therapists or the customers or both.  The indication seems to be both however.  The complaints later explained, were after mutual agreements between a customer and the massage therapist and there have been numerous complaints filed by multiple citizens.  Why is anyone's guess.

  One of the problems our forum had while discussing this is the violation of the Dillon Rule by counties in matters like this one.  How is one person to know the laws of one county to the next when traveling through them?  Once the lion is out of the bag, there is no stopping how far it will go in these situations.  One day what looks like a local ordinance to protect the county ends up with who knows how many later?   It's a very dangerous precedent once started, more will follow.  That is why the Dillon Rule is in place.

  So we sent out part of the TTC Media team to do some research and see if Sheriff Darrell Warren might be overlooking any laws to curb and or stop what he believes to be a breach of county ethics in an effort to save the people from themselves.  Why yes there is we found out.  Each massage therapist must be licensed by the state and they could very well be in violation of their state license if they are in fact giving customers hand jobs for a fee.  Besides, this is also a state matter if that is in fact not the case.

  We had a round table discussion on this matter and an interesting concept was brought up.  Could it be that Sheriff Warren wants the county ordinance in an effort to close these businesses down and force a Civil Asset Forfeiture upon them taking all of their money and assets?  We looked at that and what we see, this is an interesting question.  It would also make it impossible for the people who both own and or work at these locations to properly defend themselves as all of their money is taken from them.  In Civil Asset Forfeiture cases, rarely does anyone ever get their money back even if found to be innocent.  Great way to fund your department when the county isn't giving you the budget you would like for your department.

  Now we are not saying this is going to be the case with Sheriff Warren.  This only came up as a possible question in our discussions that makes for an interesting story.  There is also the question in regards to the timing of this.  It's re election time.  What a powerful story this could make days before the election to help sway the vote.  Not that Sheriff Warren really needs any help here anyway.  But it sure does not hurt.  Positive news spin and who knows how much in cash and assets all in one single move?

  Another interesting fact that came up in the round table discussions is that these massage parlors are believed to be owned by folks of oriental decent.  Eastern philosophy is much different than western philosophy in that orientals believe that a massage should have a positive outcome.  A question of intolerance for their beliefs may be of concern to some.  This is not brought up in defense of their practices, just an interesting note.  It was equally brought up with interest that failure to address masturbation for a fee by state legislatures may be for reasons we might not be aware of and they may not wish to discuss.  Either way, it's going to be interesting to see how this plays out over the next few months here in Gloucester. 

Wednesday, May 20, 2015

Gloucester: Potential Fake Warrant Leads To Potential Continued Harassment By County Officials?

Are Gloucester County officials trying to harass us?  Are they attempting to break the law in order to force us to comply with some hidden agenda they may have of trying to silence us?  We are going to show you a letter county officials recently sent to us and the response back.  Then we are going to show how they obtained access to private property with the use of a highly questionable warrant in debt for some person who does not live on this property and has not been on this property for over 5 years.

Gloucester County Complaint and Response from Chuck Thompson

Above is a copy of the letter sent to CRF Ventures LLC.  This is a 4 page document.  The first two pages contain the alleged county complaint and the last 2 pages are CRF Ventures LLC's response to the county.  Now how did this all come about?

The above is a copy of the Warrant in Debt that a Sheriff's deputy had that he used to intimidate some commercial tenants on the property stating they had to let him onto posted private property because he had this warrant to serve.  He told them, according to their own words, that he would charge them with obstruction of justice, if they did not let him onto the property.

  Here is a major issue.  The person on this warrant, does not and has not lived on this property in over 5 years.  That in and of itself is bad enough, but it gets worse.  The date this was attempted to serve this warrant on the property was two days after the court date listed on the warrant.  There is an arrow to show that the case was being continued on May 22nd 2015 at 9:00 AM in the General District Court.  But the question must be asked.  Where was the original warrant served before the first court date of April 24th, 2015?  It was not served anywhere on anyone on this property.  So why all of a sudden was it attempted to be served on April 26th, 2015 on this property?

  We gave the deputy a very difficult time as we had told him that there was no one here by that name and that he was in fact trespassing on the property.  He said he did not see a sign that said no trespassing.  He drove right by a very large sign that states such and has been there for years.

  Deputy John Doe threw the warrant out his vehicle window at me and said I was served.  He served me knowing full well I can not be mistaken as a female.  But he must be legally blind and he is driving on the roads?  So if the source of the complaint came from Deputy John Doe, it was not valid.  I complained to Sheriff Warren and also explained to Sheriff Warren that his deputy did not know how to conduct a proper service as the deputy failed to sign the back of the Warrant as required by the rules of the court.  (An indication that the Warrant was possibly a fraud just to get on the property?)

  Also, Deputy John Doe, throwing the warrant out his window at me, and it landing on the ground, he littered on private property.  After Deputy John Doe left I contacted Sheriff Warren as already stated and he had another Deputy come out and pick up the original warrant that Deputy John Doe came on the property with.  But not before I made multiple copies of it front and back.

  Deputy John Doe also threatened me with charges of Obstructing Justice.  I know what it lawfully takes to obstruct justice and was not committing any such act, so I told Deputy John Doe he had better look up the code and make sure he fully understands it.  He then threatened to conduct an illegal search and seizure on private property without a warrant to do such.  You bet I gave this guy a very hard time.  So it was not long afterward that the County complaint came in and that looks like its in retaliation to these events of Deputy Jon Doe.

  What was the threat of illegal search and seizure?  He said he was going to run a plate on a vehicle in our driveway to see if the name for the owner of the vehicle came back as a match for the name on the warrant.  (No it did not).  Did he conduct that violation?  I can only imagine that he did.  I can not prove it without records from the Sheriff's office.  I trust that Darrell Warren has taken care of retraining this deputy or getting rid of him.

  Had the name of the owner of the vehicle actually matched, then I would have been possibly guilty of obstructing justice.  If the person actually lived somewhere on this property and I did not inform Deputy John Doe of such, then I may have been guilty of obstructing justice.  Without those two facts, I was being threatened by an armed thug after he was told that the person named on the warrant did not reside here.  That in my book is criminal behavior by someone who is charged with holding higher standards of conduct and is being paid to serve us, not threaten us.


Friday, April 3, 2015

Fighting Illegal Traffic Tickets - Virginia (Secrets of the Courts)

Rule 3A:4. Arrest Warrant or Summons.

(a) Issuance. More than one warrant or summons may issue on the same complaint. A warrant may be issued by a judicial officer if the accused fails to appear in response to a summons.

(b) Form of Summons. A summons, whether issued by a magistrate or a law-enforcement officer, shall command the accused to appear at a stated time and place before a court of appropriate jurisdiction in the county, city or town in which the summons is issued. It shall (i) state the name of the accused or, if his name is unknown, set forth a description by which he can be identified with reasonable certainty, (ii) describe the offense charged and state whether the offense is a violation of state, county, city or town law, and (iii) be signed by the magistrate or the law-enforcement office, as the case may be.

(c) Execution and Return. If a warrant has been issued but the officer does not have the warrant in his possession at the time of the arrest, he shall (i) inform the accused of the offense charged and that a warrant has been issued, and (ii) deliver a copy of the warrant to the accused as soon thereafter as practicable.


(Legal definition of an officer:  An individual with the responsibility of performing the duties and functions of an office, that is a duty or charge, a position of trust, or a right to exercise a public or private employment. - Why we are adding this:  arguments can be made about the phrase in the yellow highlighted area saying that the officer is NOT required to sign the ticket.  As you can see, yes he is when you know what the term officer means.  My opinion though.)


Above is one of many traffic tickets that has come across my desk.  The above ticket is not properly executed by the trooper who issued it and that makes the ticket invalid.  Problem is, getting the judge to recognize such and having the judge throw the ticket out.  Anyone have any idea how much the courts pull in each week through these bogus scams called traffic infractions?  Go sit in one of these courts one day and watch how many people go up to the bench before the judge and just give their money away as well as their rights and freedoms.

  I have sat through plenty of these just to watch in horror how many people are doing what I just described.  No one wants to fight the system that is robbing you blind.  Now lets take a really good look at this.  Just under the picture of the illegal traffic ticket are the rules of the court.  Now these rules are for criminal practice and procedure, exactly what a traffic ticket falls under.  Please note very carefully, RULE   3A:4 (b) (iii) clearly shows that the trooper or law enforcement must sign the summons.  I have at least 8 that have come across my desk in the last few weeks where not one have been signed by the trooper or law enforcement officer and they are from 4 different people.

  Look at the light red highlighted area where the trooper, M B Pope put his name.  That is not his signature.  I have a copy of his signature on file.  That makes this summons invalid.  That is just one area.  Also, a common ploy that law enforcement uses is they pull your copy out before you sign their copy and they then hand you your copy after you have signed theirs.  They count on you thinking that since the summons does not have your name on it, you do not have to show up.  Automatic ruling against you if you do not show up in court and a higher fee for the court.

  When law enforcement does not sign the summons it is a due process violation.  You have to argue the exact rule above with the judge.  If the judge rules against you anyway, you want to make sure you get that judge recused for failing to uphold the canons of judicial procedure that the judge is bound by.

  You also want to know where the Commonwealth's independent witness is against you in order to have the 4 legs of the table up for a proper case against you in a criminal traffic ticket.  If the Commonwealth does not have one?  They do not have a proper case against you.  But most of you have no clue about this and need a very serious education about your real rights.  Again, I have watched hundreds of people march up and just give the courts their money not even realizing the court had no case against them and your insurance goes through the roof causing you a great deal of financial harm.

  Hey here is a wonderful idea: spend a fortune and get an attorney who will sell you down the river.  We have seen this at least a dozen times in the past several months.  You do not end up much better off on the traffic charge, but at least you can rest assured, your attorney is happy because now he has your money in his pocket.   There were a couple of times we were asking questions as to what side the attorney was on when he was supposed to be defending his client.  If that was defense in a few of the cases we saw then run like hell in the other direction if you are thinking of hiring an attorney for traffic court.

  What we learned sitting in the court rooms?  The courts are nothing but banks.  You can only make deposits though.  Withdrawing money?  Not allowed.  Try and argue your case?  The judge is going to protect the law enforcement officer just about every time even though there is no valid case.  In order for a case to be valid there must be 4 legs to the case.  Two opposing parties are the first two legs.  Subject matter is third and forth is an independent witness.  The law enforcement officer who charges you is NOT an independent witness.  He or she is a pre-prejudiced party to the charge.

  Also lets take into consideration that the court is not going to give you a fair hearing anyway.  You are being charged by the Commonwealth and the judge works for the Commonwealth.  How is that fair and independent?  No independent witness and no independent party to hear your argument?  How are you going to get a fair hearing?  Its all a conflict of interest that is not in your favor.

  Now lets get into one of the secrets of the courts.  You have to read the canons of judicial procedure that judges are bound by in order to understand why most people do not succeed in court.  A judge must not independently investigate facts in a case and must consider only the evidence presented.      The highlighted area here comes from Canon 3.  So what you are being told here is that the judge can not use his or her own knowledge of law to help you win your case.  You must present the proper argument before the judge in order to win.  This is huge folks.  If you fail to understand this you are in trouble.  The judge knows the law very well but you are being told here that even if the judge knows you should not be found guilty of whatever charge or claim the judge can not rule in your favor unless and or until you provide the proper argument.

  So if you are trying to fight an illegal traffic ticket or whatever else your case may be unless you are presenting the facts and the law you are going to be ruled against.  THE JUDGE CAN ONLY CONSIDER THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED.  Most people convict themselves.  If you think you have done something wrong then you are going to do something to convict yourself in just about every case.

Let's look at a new ticket that just came in today.  Here is the charge:

   § 46.2-830. Uniform traffic control devices on highways; drivers to obey traffic control devices; enforcement of section.

The Commissioner of Highways may classify, designate, and mark state highways and provide a uniform system of traffic control devices for such highways under the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth. Such system of traffic control devices shall correlate with and, so far as possible, conform to the system adopted in other states.

All drivers of vehicles shall obey lawfully erected traffic control devices.
No provision of this section relating to the prohibition of disobeying traffic control devices or violating local traffic control devices shall be enforced against an alleged violator if, at the time and place of the alleged violation, any such traffic control device is not in proper position and sufficiently legible to be seen by an ordinarily observant person.

The driver was pulled over by law enforcement for no apparent reason and the above is the statute he was charged with.  The trooper did not sign the summons and pulled the usual trick of holding the copy of the summons out from the original so that the defendant's signature does not appear on his copy.  

But lets look at the statute that is a so called violation.  All drivers of vehicles shall obey:  wait and hold that concept right there.  Shall?  Anyone know what the definition of "SHALL" is?  It does not matter that the word is common, the word has at least 3 different meanings.  Shall can mean sometime in the future.  So sometime in the future anyone driving a vehicle will obey?  May obey?  Must obey?  Consider obeying?  What does shall mean here?  Legal codes and statutes that use ambiguous wording is not law.  Its garbage.  Look at the above statute very closely.  Read it numerous times.  The commissioner of highways "MAY"?  now what does may mean?  Must?  Can?  Will?  Might?  What are they really trying to convey here?  Now what are lawfully erected traffic control devices?  Toasters?  Radios?  Light poles?  You are only assuming you know what they are.  You convict yourself when you assume.

  Now lets dig a little deeper.  "Such system of traffic control devices shall correlate with and, so far as possible, conform to the system adopted in other states."  I'm sorry, but so far as possible, I shall, at sometime in the future, consider obeying some form of a traffic control device that may be put up by the commissioner of highways.  Court over.  Charges nullified.  

  Oh, and one more thing, if you do get a summons, you have been arrested and charged but you were released on your own recognizance.  Were you read your Miranda Rights?  No?  Why not?  That law enforcement officer is going to testify against you.  Can anyone say judge Dredd?  Roadside court?

All of the above are observations and research over the past several months.  None of this is legal advice in any form.  If you need legal advice, spend a ton of money on an attorney, and good luck as you are going to need it.  These are only my own opinion and that of a number of others.   I recommend everyone do their own research and learn as much as possible so you are no longer being made the bank to enrich the courts.  If everyone would fight against the so called charges, the courts would collapse and crumble into dust under the weight.  


Thursday, February 5, 2015

You Do Not Need A Driver's License For The Average Man or Woman

Here is yet another must watch video, showing that the average man or woman, does not need to have or posses a driver's license to travel down the road or highway.  That means when you get a ticket, they are robbing you at gunpoint.  That also means that the judges are also robbing you at gunpoint.  You need to be armed with the knowledge on how to stop these criminals from infringing on your rights.

  If you do not exercise your rights, then you have none.  So you must know and exercise them in order to actually have them.  Watch this video and understand it to the fullest.  Research the information.  We have been researching this for some time and now we are sharing as much as we can to help you protect yourself.

  This video shows you a number of illegal statutes that are in the what are called law books?  So called laws that you may be violating?  Codes, statutes and or ordinances are strictly the color of law and not actual law.  But they rob you with very nasty tricks they created for you to purposely not understand.  This is by design.

  Now the word is getting out.  You can legally ignore these statutes, codes and or ordinances with impunity according to the laws of the united states Constitution of America.  We will cover that in the future.  The criminals are wearing uniforms and or robs or suits.  They claim to be upholding the law, yet they violate it at every level.  And they wonder why we no longer trust any of them?  Really?

  Let's be fair.  There are some very decent people locked into this criminal system being used against us.  They are being forced to do their jobs in order to keep food on their own tables and roofs over their heads and their families.  They know what they are doing is wrong and try to do what they can to protect people.  But there are others who only view you as chattle and they want to take everything they can from you.

  If you are facing a traffic ticket and think you cannot defend yourself, you must realize that you can.  Everything you need is right here.  If you are saying to yourself that someone should do something about all of this, then why not be that somebody?  You be the somebody to do something about it.  We are fighting this everyday.  We can't be the only ones doing so.  The more people who fight these folks, the better we will all be.  We are all fighting for our rights.  If we do not stand up for our rights, then we have none.  You surrender them by your own inaction.  That means you can only blame yourself for the loss of your rights.

  Are you willing to keep paying these folks for crimes you have not committed but they have?  They are committing the crimes against you and you are letting them?  You deserve no rights if that is the case.

This of course is not legal advice.  If you want legal advice, you must contact a British Bar attorney who unlawfully practices a franchise within the borders of the united states of America against the laws of the united states Constitution and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia.  You are then free to pay them for advice that will not work in your favor for the most part.  You are then free to have that attorney cut some form of deal on your behalf that will not help you in most cases.  But at least you think you have gotten the best deal you could get.  Good luck with that.

Monday, October 27, 2014

Gloucester, VA County Government Document Shows Illegal Ordinance AC 3-18

Gloucester, Public Hearing, Nov. 2014 from Chuck Thompson

All you have to do is go to page 6 in the document above.  We downloaded this from the Gloucester County government website.  They show the illegal ordinance they want to force on everyone.  There are no state codes that match this making it a made up ordinance which is a blatant violation of the Dillon Rule.  The folks running this county have no regard for the rule of law yet they expect you to?  How does that work?

  Now one of the kickers in all of this is that the county attorney, Ted Wilmot, knows this is illegal, but he does not care.  He is just creating an income opportunity for the county.  That's how the county views it.  Never mind the fact that they are going to turn innocent victims into criminals.

  Let's go even further, the county is purposefully putting Animal Control and potentially, the sheriff's deputies at life threatening risk if they are forced to enforce this illegal law.  If someone breaks a window on a vehicle, there could be a big dog in the vehicle who is not going to like this violation and may maim or even kill someone.  We the tax payers are the ones who will have to foot that bill as well.

  Now where is the local media on any of this?  Anyone think they do not know about it?  Sure they do.  They are complicate in all of this through their silence and they wonder why their following keeps dropping?  They no longer report any real news.  They become just as guilty for victims created by this illegal ordinance if they refuse to report on this.

  The Board of Supervisors took an oath of office before they could start on their jobs, now we see what they think of that oath.  It meant nothing to them if they allow this kind of garbage.

We are putting up this video to remind the three new board members what they said when they were running for these Board of Supervisors posts.

County Attorney, Ted Wilmot has been known to lie to the Board of Supervisors in the past, this video is a very interesting study on that.  Ted has worked very hard ever since with his body language but still has many tells.  Sorry, at this point, Ted Wilmot needs to be fired for cause trying to push through illegal ordinances that will wreck total havoc everywhere, even with county employees.

Gloucester, Virginia Links and News, GVLN
Gloucester, Virginia's Best News Source

Wednesday, October 1, 2014

Gloucester, VA Animal Control Retaliates Against Us For Exposing Them (Part One)

Retaliation.  Above what you see is Animal Control officer Jeff Stillman taking pictures of me while I was at a local Animal Swap meet at Tractor Supply a couple of weeks ago.  I was with a couple of friends and met with other people who I know at this meet.  The pictures were taken of not only me, but also a couple of the friends I was with.  What set this off?  Nothing that I did.  I could care less that he was there.  I was not even aware that he was doing this until one of the people I was talking with told me he was taking my picture.

Once I was made aware of what he was doing, it became a battle of the cameras.  It would seem clear that this is retaliation for my reporting issues surrounding other Animal Control officers and how they seem from every appearance, to be following made up illegal county ordinances as well as reporting on them as they use government vehicles for personal use.

After several minutes of the Battle of the Cameras, he pulled behind Tractor Supply and called in the Sheriff's department.  Numerous deputies showed up.  After about another 10 minutes, several Sheriff's deputies get out of their vehicles along with Jeff and then they walk up to where I am with a friend and stare us down.  Since that did not work for them, they removed themselves to the middle of the swap meet and it became a Mexican standoff.  I was not about to leave just because they wanted to be intimidating.

Now is this stalking by Jeff Stillman against me and my friends?

That is a tough one.  Technically, Animal Control in the state of Virginia are not considered law enforcement in one area but are in other areas.  They are not police.  Do they have the authority to conduct public investigations?  Not from what I could find.  What right did he have to do this?  If he was out of uniform?  Who cares.  But he was in uniform and on county, hence, taxpayer time.  Am I even someone who needs to be checked out for animal issues?  Don't you have to own animals first?

So if I can not be considered someone who needs to be watched for past animal abuses, then why is he doing this?  All we can come up with is this is pure retaliation.

This picture above is from a story we did on Animal Control where this deputy was about to break into a vehicle and take someone's personal property.  The owner came out just in time.  She was acting on what we have shown to be an illegal county ordinance in our view based on all available state codes and the Dillon Rule research.

That illegal ordinance is in the sign above, again, based on our research and reported here on this site.

Jeff Stillman still has a job even though we reported this issue to county officials.  What did they do, just slap him on the hand while patting him on the back for this retaliation?  This is only part of the story.  There is more coming soon.  This guy carries a gun.  Do I feel safe knowing he is still on the road?  No.  But there seems to be no state law against what he has done.  That means we are all in danger with this guy being out there and county officials don't seem to care.  Who is next?  You?  Will he decide to not use a camera the next time and use his gun?  Who knows?  Either way, it seems clear that he is unstable.

Steve Baranek from another story we did on Animal Control.

This picture was taken inside of Buying It Used, owned by yet another Animal Control deputy.  The above is of County property.  How was it acquired?  It's against county ordinance for county employees to buy county used goods from the county auction site which is how county property is supposed to be disposed of.  The projector says Petsworth School on it's side.

Wednesday, September 10, 2014

Gloucester, VA Animal Control Breaking and Entering? What About "YOUR" Rights? (Part 3)

Now for more information we have not covered.  When Laura Dickie, animal control deputy, responded to this call, after talking to the owner of this vehicle with the dog inside the car, while she was preparing to leave, another vehicle pulled in to a parking space the next lane over with a dog in the car.  The dog's head was sticking out the rear window of the car and the dog was barking at Laura Dickie.  Ms Dickie ignored this new incident and did not even bother to talk to the owners of the new vehicle that pulled in.  Why did she only speak to the one and then ignore the other?  Something is very wrong with this incident at so many levels.

Moving back to the poster on store entrances;

Let's look at some issues here.  The sign pictured above can be found at the following locations and is posted on the main entrances of the respective sites.  Wal Mart, Tractor Supply and Dollar Tree in the courthouse area.  No other areas have we found these posters.

  First issue.  The locations where these signs are found are private property parking lots.  The sign requests that anyone can report a pet being left in a car at these locations.  Well, if you see someone pull into a handicapped parking space in these same locations, and the person is not handicapped,  you can call a tow truck but one will never come as you are not the owner of the store or property and have no authority to make the request.  You can call a Sheriff's Office, but again, the same issue.  You are not authorized to report the claim as you are not the owner of the property and therefore a deputy can not do anything about the so called violation.  Only a store manager who's parking space is being violated can file a complaint about someone parking in a handicapped space who is not handicapped.

  So with this in mind, how can any animal control deputy ever possibly bypass these same issues when a person calls in a so called violation?

  If you have an accident in a parking lot at one of these locations, you can call the police.  The only thing you will be told is all they can do is file a report about the accident.  Since it is private property, they can not determine who is at fault.

  So what we have is what appears to be an illegal search and seizure being perpetuated by county officials against anyone they choose in certain sections of the county.  Sort of like a speed trap.  Here is a catch you are not made aware of.  If you make the call to report what you think is a violation?  You may be held just as responsible for the actions of the animal control deputy should the deputy decide to break into a vehicle and remove personal property such as a pet and it is determined that the action was highly illegal.  And you should be held accountable for such a violation.

Article 4 of the Bill of Rights reads;   IV ) The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

  Our opinion?  When you shop at any of these stores, find the store manager and complain about these signs.  They are highly misleading and may just potentially get innocent people in a great deal of trouble.  The signs do not tell you that animal control might just break into a vehicle and take personal property.  The signs also suggest that temperatures of 75 degrees is enough to warrant you to call.  The inside temperature readings on the sign are highly misleading as they do not indicate whether windows were up or down during the readings or if the vehicles were in direct sun light or in the shade.  They also fail to indicate humidity factors.

Online news story quote:

“Anytime we see (the dog’s) temperature jump above the 104 to 105 range it’s dangerous for the dog,” Montgomery told the Daily Telegraph last week. “Once we break into the 100-degree range in the car, the dog will be uncomfortable and the 110-degree range can be fatal,”

More from the web.

Is it illegal to leave your dog in a parked car? The answer to this question, of course, depends on in the state in which you live. Actually, only 16 states (AZ, CA, IL, ME, MD, MN, NC, NV, NH, NJ, NY, ND, RI, SD, VT, and WV) have statutes that specifically prohibit leaving an animal in confined vehicle. The next factor important to the question is the condition under which the the animal is left in the vehicle. Most of these laws provide that the animal must be confined or unattended in a parked or stationary vehicle. Further, the laws add that in order for a person to violate the law, the conditions have to endanger the animal's life. Some of the statutes specifically state that extreme hot or cold temperatures, lack of adequate ventilation, or failing to provide proper food or drink meet this definition. Other laws are more vague and just require that the conditions are such that physical injury or death is likely to result.

Above sourced from;  Check out all the state codes on the above link.  Virginia does NOT have this code on it's books.

Estimated Vehicle Interior Air Temperature v. Elapsed Time

Estimated Vehicle Interior Air Temperature v. Elapsed Time
Elapsed timeOutside Air Temperature (F)
0 minutes707580859095
10 minutes899499104109114
20 minutes99104109114119124
30 minutes104109114119124129
40 minutes108113118123128133
50 minutes111116121126131136
60 minutes113118123128133138
> 1 hour115120125130135140
Courtesy Jan Null, CCM; Department of Geosciences, San Francisco State University

Now checking the chart we looked up online from the AVMA.  We checked the above AVMA chart information and it's based on a vehicle in direct sunlight with the windows closed.  

We like this one a bit better.  It shows the humidity factor with heat.  

Now we do agree that leaving your pet in a hot vehicle can be dangerous and even deadly.  However, we do not think that animals have rights over humans.  We do not think pets should be treated with disrespect or even tortured.  Adding insult to injury however is madness.  We send children to school in buses with no air conditioning in the same exact conditions and nothing is done about that.

Demand Equal Rights For Our Children

Demand Equal Rights For Our Children

We put up a petition on regarding this matter.  Why are our children treated lower than pets?  Why are our rights being so blatantly violated?  

Now the Board of Supervisors knew about this before the latest BoS meeting in September.  They could have responded to this and in our view they have.  Here is the video where they address animal control issues.

A dog leash ordinance request made by a BoS member requesting more government intrusion on his neighbors they did not want or would have filed complaints themselves.  This is how they address violations to your rights?  Now that is sad.