Darrell Warren Not Supported For Next Sheriff

We can not possibly back present acting Sheriff, Darrell Warren for the next Gloucester County Sheriff.  Though we do not know much about him, he was the right hand man of past Sheriff, Steve Gentry and with all the issues surrounding Gentry, how can anyone possibly say that Darrell Warren was not aware of what Gentry was up to?  It's possible Warren didn't know anything and was kept in the dark.  Possible, not probable however.  The only thing we have come across on Warren was a receipt for motorcycle parts in his name among papers that also included an arrest warrant for a minor in a house where the minor quickly left Gloucester County.  Not enough to make a case in any direction.  Just a very odd combination of items to be found.

  We know even less about Ledbetter.  All we know is that he was a past deputy in Gloucester.  We do not know when that was though.  We will wait until August and see who all the contenders are for the final part of the race.  Who else is going to throw their hats in?

Advertisement:  Free software.  Edit MP3 and other formatted music with this easy to use software.  Audacity is the name of this software and it's incredible.  This is the no install version and can be run from your computer or even from a thumb drive.  Read the stories, follow the links, get free stuff, save money. Click Here

Gloucester Animal Control Guilty Of Cruelty To Animals

There is an old saying that a picture is worth a thousand words. Pictures are used to tell stories or support stories every day. Pictures in and of themselves can be manipulated into telling a story in a very certain way. But what happens when you open the meta data on digital pictures? A whole new story can and often does develop. Especially in legal cases. On the case we have been reporting on for the past month now we have been showing a tremendous amount of evidence of tampering and down and outright fraud by both Gloucester County Animal Control and the Gloucester County Sheriff's office to name a few.

Well now we have moved on to the pictures that were taken by two different Animal Control officers. Shaun Doyle and Jeff Stillman. In these pictures is evidence that everyone from the Animal Control office, that were there on the property May 4^th, 2010, lied about the conditions on the property and even criminally produced false evidence to support such. The pictures by themselves without the meta data revealed can be made to tell a story in any way that these people wanted to tell it. Once the meta data was revealed however, a new story came very much into play. We zoomed in on the backgrounds of some of their pictures where evidence was obvious and we were able to build a time line showing through the meta data how they produced false evidence and manipulated evidence.

The new evidence with the meta data revealed simply can not be argued. Here is some interesting information for you. A digital photo contains meta data that never changes no matter how many edits you make to it or how many times it is copied and or altered. It still maintains the time and date stamp of when the original photo was taken and what camera it was taken with along with other technical data that does not mean much to most people. The time and date stamp on Gloucester Animal Control's photo's is very much a smoking gun against them. Gloucester Animal Control was using Kodak Z885 cameras. The 885 means 8 mega pixels and 5 times optical zoom.

Advertisement:  Free Office Suite.  Open Office.  This is free software.  No gimmicks, no come on's, no sign up's.  No kidding.  Read the stories, follow the links, get stuff, save money.  Click Here.

Though we will not publish to the public all of the evidence that we are reporting about in this story, we can show you a few samples here that does not reveal anything private about the victims so you have a better understanding of what we are reporting to you. The pictures below are part of the actual time line evidence on our secure site.

Click On Image To Enlarge

Both Animal Control and Sheriff's Deputies claimed that there was no water on the property for the animals on the property.  Yet their own photographic evidence says otherwise.  This is one of a number of pictures showing such.

This picture is one of Animal Controls files of evidence that there was no water on the property for animals.  Look at the mud ring around the area of the tub and then look at the next picture.

Animal Control drained the water out of the tub and waited for it all to dissipate before taking the photo above this one.  All you have to do is note the date and time on each photo's meta data.  We don't just have one photo like this.  We have a bunch of them.  The meta data shows plenty of water on the property and then water drained out of their containers.  That's cruelty to animals as perpetrated by Animal Control and with the help of the Gloucester County Sheriff's Office.  We have a private secure site we built for law enforcement investigators and the entire time line of evidence is on that site.  There is a lot of evidence on that site that we can not post publicly as it would violate the privacy of the victims in this case.

Visit  https://sites.google.com/site/gloucestervanews/  for all the information on this case in one central location.

VDOT Wants More Of Your Money - E_Z Pass Rate Increases

Dear E-ZPass Customer,

With Virginia’s E-ZPass program doubling over the next several years as new toll roads open, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) is proposing a monthly fee of about $1 per transponder to pay for administrative and operations costs.

VDOT has the utmost understanding that E-ZPass operations brings convenience and efficiency to toll operations. E-ZPass allows for electronic toll collection at Virginia toll facilities and lessens the need for manual collection. However, there is a cost to providing the service to the participating toll facilities, most of which are not operated by VDOT. The Virginia E-ZPass program is being expanded to support several new toll facilities scheduled or expected to be opened over the next few years. The cost associated with the enhanced distribution and specialized services for the new facilities and additional transponders requires a new business model.

The proposed monthly fee would cover costs for:
• Buying nearly one-half million transponders
• Implementing a retail program where transponders can be obtained at various stores in Northern Virginia and eventually Hampton Roads
• Providing service at select DMV locations
• Upgrading information technology to accommodate the expanded program
• Account management and processing of toll transactions (managing billing of all transactions)
• Customer service and the operations of three customer service centers

The fee would also help control costs and manage the selection and demand for E-ZPass transponders. The fee would be regularly evaluated to ensure that the charge is generating just enough revenue to maintain and operate the program without generating excess revenues above expenses.

VDOT is accepting comments on the proposed monthly fee through Tuesday, 5 p.m., June 12, 2012. All comments will be reviewed and taken into consideration prior to the final decision on the proposed fee structure.

You can go to www.virginiadot.org/e-zpass for information on the proposed monthly fee increase and provide their comments online. You can submit your comments directly to vdotinfo@vdot.virginia.gov or mail them to:

Office Communications – Third Floor/Annex Bldg.

Virginia Department of Transportation

1401 E. Broad St.

Richmond, VA 23219

VDOT expects to have a final decision in June.
Thank you for being a valued E-ZPass customer.

Sincerely,
E-ZPass Virginia

Collecting tolls is a for profit business.  Let the ones making the profits from collecting these tolls pay VDOT.  We are already taxed and fee'd to death now.  $1.00 today, tomorrow it goes to $2.00 and continues to go up.  Voice your opinion.


Advertisement:  Free Computer Game, AForce, For XP, Vista And Win 7.  No sign ups, no gimmicks no kidding.  Read the stories, follw the links, get stuff, save money.  Click Here.

Gloucester Court And Attorney's Collude In Conspiracy

Gloucester County VA, Court Transcript Files

View more presentations from Chuck Thompson.

Gloucester Court And Attorney's Collude In Conspiracy

As we see from the presentation above, Judge Shaw, Monique Donner, Esq, Edwin Wilmot, Esq, and local attorney Michael T Soberick were all involved in the above. Each one of these people had a legal obligation to throw this case out before it even went into the courtroom. To allow this case to have been argued in the slightest is a complete disregard for the law and is a mockery of the judicial system.

These people have made up their own laws outside of actual law. Your hard earned tax dollars paid for this mockery. As we pointed out before, Judge Shaw and Michael T Soberick were once law partners. It was more than an observation that we pointed this out in the past.

This is shear collusion with the intent to defraud. Michael T Soberick took money from the victim in this case and then proceeded to feed her to the wolves. He did not represent his client, he betrayed his client. Monique Donner, Esq, Edwin Wilmot, Esq, both for Gloucester County and Michael T Soberick covered up what they knew were fraudulent recordings and evidence along with a fake search warrant, they helped each other out in this courtroom to hang the victim. There is a lot more in the court transcripts that we will continue to publish that prove this point. All of these people still have their jobs. Does that worry you? It worries us. Also, to date we have not heard a single word from even one of the Gloucester Board of Supervisors on any of this. That too worries us. So now we have to move above them in order that proper investigations and action take place.

See the entire story here.  https://sites.google.com/site/gloucestervanews/

Advertisement:  Free MP3 Album music.  Free download.  No sign up's no questions, no gimmicks, no kidding.  Click Here for DavidKDB Album.  Read the stories, follow the links, get stuff, save money.

Gloucester VA News New Web Site - Chronological Order Of Our Stories

https://sites.google.com/site/gloucestervanews/home  Is a link to our newest site.  This site is a chronological order of the story we have been reporting on for the past month now.  We just finished all the updates on the site and now just need to go back in and fix a minor issue in a few areas.  It's ready for public view though right now.  We will be updating that site as often as we update this site.   We will be adding this into our side bar as a link very soon.

USERL Thinks You Are Stupid

Take a look at the above video and please pay special attention to the fence around the horses on this property.  Now we are going to show you pictures from the USERL site claiming that the pictures on their site are the horses on that same farm.  Notice the background fences in their own pictures.  They do not match.

I see a lot of issues here.  Is it possible that USERL is trying to con everyone to pull in funds?  Why is there such a disparity in the video and these pictures?  Do they really think we are all this stupid?  You decide.

Here is a link to their site with these pictures.  http://www.userl.org/DinwiddieCountyHorses.html

Gloucester, VA Links and News.  GVLN Website.

Gloucester Animal Control Audio Audit Testing Shows Serious Issues

The above audio shows some very serious issues with the Gloucester Animal Control file DW_C0152 and Steve Baranek's claims about the audio.  We were granted permission by the victims in this case to go back to their property and conduct a number of simulation tests.  Our objective was to see if any area of the audio could be even considered somewhat authentic.  All of our simulation tests failed to show any accuracy with the audio, DW_C0152, as could have possibly happened the way the audio claims it did.  We loaded the audio onto one of our tablets and tried numerous recreations to validate any area of the audio.  Every simulation we tried just did not stand up.

  Let's start with this above audio.  Steve Baranek would have you believe he is driving down a road and then into the driveway of the victims property.  Yet you do not hear any motor running nor do you hear any tire road noise.  In fairness, we cut out tiny sections of audio file DW_C0152 where the victims names and later address was used.  In our own simulation, we used a pocket recorder like Steve was using.  It's a Sony digital recorder.  We did not talk during the taping as we were just looking to see if we could even pick up any road noise.  Sure enough we picked up all the road noise, the turn signal used to turn into the driveway, the difference in the road noise between the main road and the driveway, all the sounds of turning off the engine and opening and closing our doors.  We were in an SUV for our tests.

  What we also find very interesting is the photographic evidence above.  If Steve was the first person at the gate, as he states when he is pulling up, that the gate looks like it is locked, why is the first car in this picture a Gloucester County Sheriff's Office patrol vehicle?  Also, how could Steve see the gate with this patrol vehicle in the way?  Super human powers?  So just within the first thirty seconds alone, we see evidence that Steve Baranek started manufacturing false evidence.  He was not driving in a vehicle as he would have others believe.  That means everything beyond the first thirty seconds is without question garbage.  It's meaningless.  Has no use and no value.  The moment Steve Baranek started recording was a complete sham.    And still we have so much more on this.

Gloucester, VA Links and News.  GVLN Website.

Holli M Cohoon's Time Now Officially Up

Holli M Cohoon was offered a special deal if she would come forward and tell the truth about the 911 call recording and her testimony.  Holli was the 911 dispatcher in this case.  In an earlier post we showed how the 911 recording does not match her testimony and the 911 call also does not match Animal Control's file DW_C0152 audio.  So we know that all the evidence is falsely manufactured.  We gave Holli 2 weeks to come forward with the correct information on all of this.  Well her time is up and the offer is now fully withdrawn.  She can now be fully accountable for her testimony and her place in this case.

Gloucester, VA Links and News.  GVLN Website.

Gloucester County Board Of Supervisors Being Given A Chance

Gloucester County Board Of Supervisors Being Given A Chance

On Tuesday, May 15^th, 2010, the Gloucester County Board of Supervisors each received an email from us regarding the information presently being presented on this site. We are hoping to give them a chance to properly investigate these issues as well as eventually address many other issues we have in this case and do what needs to be done. We expect to be updated with developments as they go along.

Here is an overview of this case as it presently stands. Both a victim and her husband suffered an illegal raid on their home and property. The husband was out of town at the time the raid took place. The raid was highly traumatic for this victim and her husband and they both suffer greatly from it to this day. The victim was highly abused the morning of this raid however evidence of such has been removed by the criminals in this case. The victim was illegally arrested, never read her Miranda rights, and was later forced to post an incredibly high bond to be released from jail. While in jail, the victim was horribly treated and denied her medications until the county nurse stepped in and demanded that the Sheriff's Office do something about her condition. She was hospitalized the next day.

This couple was later railroaded by the court system here in Gloucester. The victim was never allowed to speak on her own behalf and all witnesses were denied standing. The victim was forced into a guilty plea by extremely underhanded measures. The victim lost her security clearance for the government job she had held for over twenty four years and lost her job because of such. The victim is unable to get a job and has been denied jobs she was being offered based on negative information stemming directly from this case. All of this is well documented.

To date, the culprits in this case have gotten away with these acts. This is the first time anyone is seeing the evidence of this case. We have only presented a very small part of what we have. We also have pictures from the raid that were taken by Animal Control and let me say that some of them are despicable. We will be publishing those in the future. We have video footage and we have all the testimony from the actual kangaroo court. And we are still no where near done with this story.

We are dramatically slowing down our publishing of evidence in a goodwill gesture for the county Board of Supervisors to catch up and start acting on these findings. We expect to hear from them soon and will update this site with such.


Advertisement:  Are You Tired All The Time?  Check Out This Free Report.  Click Here.

For all the latest news, please click on the Home button towards the top of this site.

Have a news story? Submit it above.

Some of Gloucester's most incredible history is found on this site in detail.

Gloucester, VA Links and News – A GVLN Website.

We cover what no one else will.

More From Lt Hawkins And Animal Control

More From Lt Hawkins And Animal Control

In this little clip we have Shaun Doyle talking to Steve Baranek commenting that, “Hawkins in there. Don't go in there”. Then both Shaun and Steve are laughing about whatever they are addressing. This was not in or around or even by a bathroom. What exactly was Lt Hawkins doing? This part of the conversation was in or around a barn.

This is off of Gloucester Animal Control file DW_C0153.  

Gloucester, VA Links and News.  GVLN Website.

Gloucester Animal Control and Gloucester Sheriff's Deputy Collude To Manufacture False Evidence.

Gloucester Animal Control and Gloucester Sheriff's Deputy Collude To Manufacture False Evidence.

The above video is taken from Gloucester Animal Control file DW_C0153 and in the first part you hear Shaun Doyle talking to Steve Baraneck saying to Steve, “Your gonna love these pictures I'm gonna getcha”, Take everything straight outta the bedroom.” This part does not make sense except to say that it was accidentally cut in by Gloucester's very own mashup expert. The second part of the video however was a major mistake in the fact that this little section of the audio was never taken out.

We have Lt. Hawkins of the Gloucester County Sheriff's Office whispering to Steve Baranek, telling him, “Nothing, Nothing”, as an order to produce false evidence to say that there was no running water anywhere on this property. Yes I have the proof it was Lt Hawkins. This is what you call a smoking gun when it comes to evidence. Gloucester Animal Control and the Gloucester County Sheriff's Office have colluded in a conspiracy to produce false evidence against the victim in this case. Any and all negative evidence supposedly found by the Gloucester Animal Control and the Gloucester Sheriff's Office in this case was all manufactured. None of it was true in the least bit. They illegally raided this home for two reasons as we have already reported.

So we are looking at a fake search warrant, collusion between Gloucester Animal Control and Gloucester County clerks to produce false documents. We are looking at a fake 911 call. We are looking at several pieces of evidence that collusion has taken place to produce false evidence and we also have a false arrest in this case. We also have fake recordings used as evidence. Does it get any worse? Well yes it does. We have a lot more yet to come.

For all the latest news, please click on the Home button towards the top of this site.

Have a news story? Submit it above.

Some of Gloucester's most incredible history is found on this site in detail.

Gloucester, VA Links and News – A GVLN Website.

We cover what no one else will.

Fake Phone Call Message Embedded On Gloucester Evidence File

Fake Phone Call Message Embedded On Gloucester Evidence File

The above audio file clip was never supposed to be heard by you or me or anyone else except for Steve Baranek. It's a clip from Animal Control Audio file DW_C0153 and was a personal message sent to Steve Baranek by the person who creates these false audios for Gloucester County. How do I know it's fake? Listen to the audio again. When Steve answers the phone and says hello, the response is a well placed dog bark insertion. You do not hear anyone on the other end of the phone line and also there are some words cut out to make the conversation lean in a certain direction. Where Steve states he has been a real good dick today, the word dick is manipulated to fool the ear into hearing just that exact phrase.

The entire phone conversation is a fraud. It's not worth producing all the forensic evidence on this small clip as it already speaks for itself.

Gloucester, VA Links and News.  GVLN Website.

Gloucester 911 Call Was Fraudulent - More Evidence

The above video contains audio extracted from Gloucester Animal Control audio file, DW_C0152 and this audio has numerous people discussing what Holli M Cohoon had said about the one call that came through her watch.  What these people are discussing does not match the 911 audio call we have already published.  Some of the information matches, other areas show information that has been both removed from the 911 call and is also evidence of Gloucester County officials conspiring to produce false evidence against the victim in this illegal raid.  We have a lot more to say about all this in a future article.

Gloucester, VA Links and News.  GVLN Website.

Evidence Released Of Fake Search Warrant

We just got the green light to release this document.  We only subtracted a tiny part which is whited out that has the victim's address on this document.  This document came in from our Freedom Of Information Request filed with the county.  A copy of this filing is already published on this site.  Included in that request was a request for evidence that the documents provided were valid.  The county either ignored that part of the request or could not provide it.  Why would they ignore that part of the request?  Maybe they do not have the evidence?  Or is it because what evidence they have shows this document to be a fraud?  Or it simply never existed?

  Again, because we did in fact request proof and no proof has been given, we have been given the green light the make the following contentions about this document and the people who have signed it.

1.)  This document does NOT have a valid time and date stamp on it.  Therefore the contention is fair to say that it is illegally back dated.
2.)  This document does not have a valid case number assigned to it.  10.45 is not a case number.  Circuit Court of Gloucester already confirmed that to us.  We contend that 10.45 is actually the date of true creation.  May 4th, 2010.  10th year, 4th day, 5th month.
3.)  Based on the last posted article, we contend that this document was produced based on the audio that was created earlier that day of May 4th, 2010.
4.)  We contend that Steve Baranek and Gloria Owens have colluded and conspired to commit fraud, creating a false document to be used as evidence against the victim of this case.

See what happens when you do not follow proper procedures when it comes to legal documents?  These contentions are all fair based on the information above.  Any idiot can back date a document.  Where is the proof that it was not back dated?  Because they say so?  I don't think so.  To be fair, this document does not have to have a valid time and date stamp on it in order to prove validity.  VA Code 19.2-56  Posted below on another article.  However, no validity has been provided by Gloucester County when requested.  The other area that may have shown some form of validity would have been a valid case number.  There is no valid case number here though.   Contention stands.

Gloucester, VA Links and News.  GVLN Website.

Fraudulent Audio Recordings Produced By Gloucester County Authorities?

The above video clip was produced to show you how easy it is to produce and manufacture false evidence.  It is no longer our opinion that Gloucester Animal Control File DW_C0152 is a complete fraud, it's our contention of such.  In our last article we told you that we would be publishing the audio where Gloucester Authorities manufactured the wording for the fake search warrant, but that we would also include the forensic audio audit with such.  Well here it is.

Just listening to the first part of the audio clip you will hear a lot of issues.  The second part only contains 4 forensic audio audits.  More can be produced from this less than one minute clip.  Again, to be fair, I removed one little section of the clip where Gloucester Authorities use the victim's address.  Because this is a victim, we are protecting this person.  Again, I can produce these same results using the county's copy of the audio.  The next article will shed more light on the fake search warrant.

  It's sad.  I can continue to spend months and produce a huge amount of forensic evidence that file DW_C0152 if a complete fraud.  I already have over 40 hours into the audio now.

Gloucester Illegal Search Warrant? Last Words, Maybe

For the most part, we consider the argument about the search warrant over.  In our opinion, the search warrant is in fact fraudulent at every level and at every angle of argument.  The reason we bring it up yet again is for two reasons.  One, there is still another area where the search warrant was not valid, and two, is because this is where the next part of our story begins.  So we are going to detail one from above and show yet another angle where the search warrant was never valid.  If you have not been following this story, you need to start from the beginning to play catch up.  There are two affiant's to this search warrant which is perfectly legal.  The original affiant's identity does not have to be legally disclosed to the defendant.  No issues here at this time.  We have already argued that the original affiant was not a trustworthy affiant.  What we have not argued, because we did not have the information until now is that the original affiant's affidavit could have only given both Animal Control and The Gloucester County Sheriff's Office, access to the inside of the house and no outside areas whatsoever if the original affiant was even considered reliable.

  Remember, we already stated that the defendant/occupant - victim, never received a copy of the affidavit attachment that was required by law.  What is also interesting is that the victim's attorney did get a copy of the affidavit but refused to show it to the defendant/occupant - victim, the attorney being, Michael T Soberick.  The victim has just seen it for the first time ever, today.  The search warrant was written out as follows, areas to be searched - a single family dwelling, it's curtilage and environs.  The so called search warrant was written way to broadly to be valid based on the original affiant's complaint.  Funny thing is, Mike Soberick saw this and both the victim and husband argued that the search warrant was not valid with him on other areas, never even knowing about this area.  I have yet to see any part of this search warrant where anyone can state it is valid and actually mean it.

Due to the nature of the confidential information on the affidavit, we are not posting it.  It will be made available only to the following entities.
1.)  Law enforcement - No Conditions or exclusions of facts
2.)  News Agencies - Conditions that certain information be kept confidential.  Details upon request.

  An area we find very interesting is that it was Judge Jeffrey W Shaw who heard this case.  The Honorable Judge Shaw and Michael T Soberick, Esq. were once law partners.  Hmm!  So what am I getting at?  It's just an observation............................Maybe.

Now could it be that the reason why the search warrant was written much broader than it should have been was because of some kind of vendetta?  A case can be made for that.  The real reason though exists in the DW_C0152 audio file.  The file we have shown in our forensic audits to not be valid in our professional opinion.  Can you guess yet what our next story is going to cover?  DW_C0152 audio with an included forensic audit report showing where the concept for how the search warrant had to be written came into play and the forensic report showing how the audio was doctored in this area.  It's really pretty hilarious when you hear the forensic audio.  You get to hear how the organic background changes in the middle of the conversation.  It's not possible for that to happen unless of course you alter the recording.

  Did we mention the go to person yet who creates these audios for Gloucester County?

Wait;  The legal stuff.  Our lawyers wanted us to mention that we are not lawyers.  So here it is.  We are not lawyers.  Now our lawyers are happy.

Gloucester County Case Update - Sgt Paul Emanuele

To date we have two highly questionable audio files provided by the county and used in a Gloucester County Court.  We have a 911 Dispatcher's testimony that does not match up to the 911 call.  We have an Animal Control officer who has testified that his audio recording, DW_C0152 is a true and accurate account of the days events yet as we continue to look real close at it, we just do not see how that could begin to be possible.  We have only grazed the evidence of Deputy Sheriff Sgt Paul Emanuele and this is where we are going to pick up today.

  If you have been following this story, below is a four minute and thirty second audio, made by Steve Baranek of Animal Control.  On the audio you hear Steve say that Paul Emanuele has just been made Sergeant.  What it takes to make it to that rank is very tough and you have to be a real sharp individual.  You not only have to qualify for the position, you also have to take and pass tests for the position.  It's not something that's just handed to someone.  So it would only be fair to give credit where credit is due.  We say that it is a very fair evaluation that Sgt Paul Emanuele is a very sharp person.

So let's again revisit his incident report for the events of May 4th, 2010 along with his involvement.

Now let's look at Sgt Paul Emanuele's statement above.  He was at the victim's address assisting numerous Animal Control Officers with a search warrant.  Let me repeat this.  Sgt Paul Emanuele was assisting Animal Control with a search warrant.  Okay.  I'll buy that for now.  Keep in mind, Sgt Paul Emanuele is a very sharp guy.

Now right above is Virginia law showing who has the power to do what.  Only a Sheriff, Deputy Sheriff or a Police Officer has the power to conduct the search.  Not Animal Control.  Looking above again at Sgt Paul Emanuele's own report, he was dispatched to this location and did not have previous orders to be there to serve a search warrant.  His own statement is that he was there to assist Animal Control, not head the search according to Virginia Law.  Is Gloucester County really going to try and argue that Sgt Emanuele made a mistake on his report?  Remember, this guy just made Sargent so you know he is very sharp. We believe this is Proof once again that there was no search warrant in place at the time both Animal Control Officers were there and the Gloucester County Sheriff's office was there.  (We now know by what Gloucester County sent us, there was no valid search warrant at that time).

  In our opinion, Sgt Paul Emanuele got caught up and sent into the middle of something very nasty.  He was doing the best he could in trying to produce something that matched the official story that the powers in Gloucester wanted told, and at the same time keep himself out of the middle of it all.  He has had to walk a very thin tight rope.  You have to feel sorry for this guy.

Gloucester Animal Control File DW_C0152, More Issues

The above is an audio file clipping made after about 9 minutes into the audio.  The file is Animal Control file DW_C0152.  It is a very small clipping that under normal circumstances most people dismiss as mere chatter background noise.  I repeat the clip 9 times in the above video.  What you hear are chopped up voices.  These are remnants from splice-outs.  Evidence that this recording is in fact altered.  Now I can show anyone in Gloucester County that what the courts are sitting on is in fact altered evidence.  I can use their files and show this all to them with no tricks at all.  In fact, I would welcome that challenge.

This is a screen shot image of the working area where I am deeply auditing the audio file.  From the clip above, this is the image used in that video.

This picture pretty much says it all.  Again, a screen shot from my working area on this audio file.  You can click on any of the images to enlarge them.

When listening to this section of the audio, there was a very drastic background inorganic noise shift that proved was a direct marker that this part of the audio was spliced in.

In the yellow highlighted box above, we have an inorganic break in the noise spectrum that is evidence of a splice.

In this section, the voice patterns had an inorganic sound to them.  So we opened the recording visuals on an expanded mode.  We found an inorganic splice in.  The voice record has also been tampered with.

Someone somewhere went through a lot of trouble to doctor this recording.  I have found tons of evidence like this throughout the entire recording.  This is just a mere sample of what is here.  Did someone in Gloucester County guess that no one would ever figure this out?  This isn't rocket science.  It is technical yes, but not rocket science.  

Gloucester County Has Us Speechless - Sends Evidence Of False Search Warrant?

Click on image to enlarge

From our requests through the Freedom of Information Act, Gloucester County just sent us most of the information we have been looking for.  For the most part, this is enough for us.  What they sent us and we received today has us pretty much speechless.  Above an updated version of the search warrant has been sent to us.  Look at the bottom right hand corner.  The search warrant was filed, hence validated at 3:14 PM on May 4th, 2010.  Below,in our last post, you hear Steve Baranek state he was on the property at 9:06 AM which was May 4th, 2010.  You also see Sgt Paul Emanuele also stated he was on the property at 8:58AM as well as others on the property already.  There was no search warrant at this time.  No search warrant existed.  It's right in front of us.  This search warrant was not valid to begin with and they sent us the proof of such.  The original affiant was NOT reliable.  Evidence is in our possession and we have now put this evidence into various areas of the cloud for protection.

  The original complaint shows that the original complainant went into areas of the defendant's home that were not within his work zone.  Therefore the original complainant conducted an illegal search.  The county had a legal obligation to check that but did not.  This invalidates the search warrant in and of itself.  Even though the  the search warrant was invalid, the search warrant was not created until many hours after both Animal Control and The Gloucester County Sheriff's Office were invading this property.

I have been told that both the DOD and Homeland security are monitoring this site.  I hope they are now monitoring this post.  On the one hand, this closes the case, on the other hand, this is also where the case begins.  I have a lot more evidence that Gloucester Animal Control audio file DW_C0152 is completely fabricated, I will show further that the 911 call is a complete fabrication.  If there were in fact a search warrant or even valid evidence for a search warrant, which we now know is wrong, why would Gloucester County go through so much trouble to fabricate these audio recordings?

  As I have already said, our inside person in the Gloucester County Sheriff's office told us, this was not the purpose of why they were there.  This started off as a "Fun Raid", and it was meant to also produce another end result.  Here is what went wrong during the "Fun Raid."  One of the sheriff's deputies found the defendant/occupant - now victim, in bed, asleep.  When news of this got out, the off duty deputies did not know what to do.  Animal Control was called in to take over the raid because the victim has animals.  Animal Control was happy to help out.

  Your tax dollars hard at work against you and are we really protected?  Are the criminals wearing the badges in this town?  The implications are enormous.  Is anyone safe from being raided?  Does this mean that every criminal case must now be re evaluated?  Every person in Gloucester County should be very concerned here.

Steven Baranek Of Gloucester Animal Control Audio File DW_0152

Gloucester Animal Control With More Fake Evidence?

I have to make this statement before going any further. If one digs enough, one can always find fault in any legal case. Overall a legal case should be very sound despite fault being found. In this particular case, I continue to find so much fault and so little sound evidence from where I am looking that one can not help but to trounce all over it.

The above audio is four minutes and thirty seconds long. Using Gloucester County's own documents, we see some very serious issues here that can not be ignored. This is audio file DW_0152 and was produced by Steve Baranek of Gloucester County Animal Control. This audio was produced using a pocket digital recorder. The date of this audio is May 4^th, 2010. The entire length of this audio track is one hour four minutes and fifty five seconds long. This exact file was used as evidence in a Gloucester County Circuit Court to prosecute the defendant/occupant of the home we have been reporting on.

Below is a snapshot where Steve Baranek testifies in court that this recording is a true and accurate recording. (That also goes for the other audio clips we have already produced from this main audio).

Keep in mind that Monique W Donner, Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney was well aware of this recording before going into court and she accepted this recording as evidence as did the attorney for the defense, Michael T Soberick, Esq. 

Now let's look at a section of Sgt. Paul Emanuele's Offense/Incident Report for this same case.

When we listen to the audio recording above, Steve Baranek would have us believe he is driving up to the defendant/occupant's house. Steve states that the time is 9:06. (AM). Now look at what Sgt Paul Emanuele states for the time of his dispatch and the time of his arrival at the residence. Sgt Emanuele states he was there at 8:58 (AM). That means when Steve Baranek pulls into the driveway, he should have seen Sgt Emanuele's police car and Sgt Emanuele. Yet Steve never acknowledges seeing anyone in the audio clip above that is four minutes and thirty seconds long. But wait, Steve should also be meeting a number of other people there as well according to Sgt Emanuele.

Steve should be also meeting Carl Shipley, Jeff Stillman and Shaun Doyle. Yet he never says anything either to or about these guys. How can that be? How can anyone possibly be expected to believe this recording unless Sgt Emanuele got his facts very wrong or maybe, the recording is a false and inaccurate piece of evidence? In our professional opinion, the recoding is very false and highly inaccurate. Our opinion is that the recording is so chopped and manipulated that it's not worth a thing as evidence for the county and should have been thrown out.

These days most courts do not even allow this type of evidence into the court because it is so easy to manipulate the recordings. Now what I will tell you is that I did make a few minor cuts in the above recording. The cuts I made were to the personal information that I removed to protect the defendant/occupant of this case. I also cleaned up the sound track to make the audio easier to hear and understand. No other changes were made by us.

Let's move on to the next issue. Steve Baranek starts to play with his phone and you can hear the phone keep repeating, “Say A Command”. That means you can hear what's going on through the ear piece of the phone. Yet, when he claims to be making a call, you do not hear anyone on the other side.

I find that highly unlikely and believe he was faking the call. I would love to see the phone records for that call. The time of that so-called call took place was 9:09 (AM). The proof is on Animal Control to prove this call and time is accurate as it has to 100% match up with the recording for the recording to be a true and accurate record of events. Anyone care to bet that the county can not produce this evidence? Anyone care to bet that the county does not even try?

Also, if you listen to the above audio very closely, you do hear a number of people in the background talking as well as their radio dispatches broadcasting. These are people Steve Baranek never acknowledge. Another issue, if Steve Baranek claims that he trimmed areas out of the recording because they were just not needed, well, then that is not a true and accurate record of events then is it.

Further, if it could even possibly be imagined that the above call did take place, why didn't Steve Baranek state the reason why he was there? He was there with a search warrant? He had a legal obligation to state just that or his phone call could be considered nothing more than harassment. Are you seriously going to tell me that those who are charged with investigating and must do so with the use and tools of a search warrant is not trained in the laws of such? Could this possibly be evidence that the concept of a search warrant had not even been thought of yet? See the last article and ask yourself that exact question.

So what we are looking at here, in our opinion, Steve Baranek's testimony is false and misleading and needs to be expunged from this case. The same with Holli M Cohoon's testimony. That only leaves Sgt. Paul Emanuele's testimony. In the future we will be re printing the entire 96 page court report. Sgt Paul Emanuele's testimony is pretty much nil and contributes about nothing to the case. The entire case needs to be thrown out and all charges removed in our opinion. We will elaborate on Sgt Paul Emanuele's statements and report in the future as this too has holes that are huge gaps.

I can not begin to understand how Michael T Soberick, with all the same evidence we both have and have looked at, could not begin to see any of these issues? Or did he and he just didn't do anything about them? Did he throw his client to the wolves? Come on now. Mr Soberick is a highly esteemed Gloucester County attorney. It's like we said, this case has more turns and surprises around each corner than you can ever possibly imagine.

Shaun Doyle of Gloucester Animal Control Statement?

Gloucester Animal Control File DW_0152 Clip

What we are presenting here is a small clip where there is a discussion going on between Animal Control Officer Steve Baranek and we believe Officer Shaun Doyle. The above audio has been cleaned up as much as we could clean it up so that we are able to hear the entire conversation. This audio starts at exactly 6 minutes and 36 seconds into Steve Baranek's audio recording. We have played this audio over and over and have spent hours on making sure we know exactly what was said. Steve Baranek's participation in the audio is self explanatory where Shaun Doyle's is written out.  Shaun is a fast talker.

Here is what Shaun Doyle is saying to Steve Baranek;

Shaun; “Call her again and tell her we have a search warrant. With that search warrant legally we can kick the door in by then. We have opportunity to do it in the night.”

Okay, so Steve Baranek's own recording shows without question, that he never tells the defendant/occupant of this home that he is there with a search warrant. That fact is well established. What we find difficult is why the discussion for calling her again to tell her they have a search warrant? By law, that is what they were already supposed to have done. Second, why the discussion, “With that search warrant we can legally kick the door in by then?” This part makes some sense yet it does not. These guys are already supposed to be there with a search warrant aren't they? Third and most disturbing, Shaun's statement, “We have opportunity to do it in the night.”

What? Why would anyone suggest coming back in the night to kick a door in based on a search warrant that is supposed to be for Animal Control to check on the condition of animals? Is it better to search a property and the condition of animals in the middle of the night? This conversation makes no sense and is way out of context. In fact it is our opinion and that opinion is based on what we have been told by our source inside the Gloucester County Sheriff's Office, that there was no search warrant at this point and this is where the idea first came up. Thanks Shaun.

  Now Shaun Doyle is no longer with Animal Control and also no longer living in Virginia.  He moved to California with his wife.  When this audio recording happened, May 4th, 2010, Officer Shaun Doyle was fairly new to the position.  We are wondering if he left both Animal Control and Virginia because of issues just like this one?

We believe more was said here than should have been. But let me tell you, if you find this disturbing, wait until the next story.

911 Dispatcher Liability?

911 Dispatcher Liability?

As we have shown in our last article, the testimony from Holli M Cohoon falls way short and inaccurate. There are legal liabilities for giving false and misleading testimony in a court of law, especially when said testimony proves to harm any person against whom the false testimony was given. Holli may just find herself working the rest of her life to pay restitution for the harm caused, and reporting and accounting for every dollar she earns every month.

Arrangements have been made to forgive any and all potential damages in exchange for her true and accurate testimony. This is a very short time offer as her testimony isn't really needed. She has two weeks from today's date to come forward. After the two week period, all bets are off.

The Castle Doctrine

The Castle Doctrine

The above is a direct link to the Castle Doctrine stated in the last story.  Thought you should know and understand every aspect we are talking about in this case.  

Evidence That 911 Dispatcher Lied In Court?

Evidence That 911 Dispatcher Lied In Court?

As we said, we would get back to all of this. The above video again is made for the audio recording. This audio clip came from 9 minutes into the clip. It's file number is DW_0152 and was recorded by Steve Baranek. To put it simply, how do you mistake a shovel for a gun? You were probably thinking that in the last story, I may have lost my mind. Well I guess not after all. Looks like it's Holly who can not distinguish between a gun and a shovel. That now puts the 911 call into some very serious questions. And we are getting a lot closer to showing that maybe the two calls that came through Holly's watch have been turned into one to produce false evidence after all.

What is sad is that all of this was right in front of the attorney and he missed it. Or did he?

Some facts to keep in mind.  The defendant/occupant witnessed an intruder on her property chasing one of her dogs and trying to do bodily harm to that dog.  He was chasing the dog with a pipe.  Look at the castle doctrine, one has the right to use whatever force is necessary  to protect one's home and property.  This is highly enforced here in the State of Virginia.  

911 Call Operator Holly M Cohoon Testimony

911 operator call testimony

View more presentations from Chuck Thompson

911 Call Operator Holly M Cohoon Testimony

Our last story presenting the 911 call audio created a lot of questions and concerns. It is our opinion that the call is altered. Here is her court testimony above presented as a slide presentation. The smoking gun is right in her own testimony. She states that she remembers having a second conversation with the defendant/occupant and the defendant/occupant claiming to go out the door with a shovel. You see, it never made sense why she kept saying in the 911 call presented in this court as evidence why Holly, the 911 dispatcher, kept saying do not shoot out that door during the call. (Yes I know there is a difference between a shovel and a gun. But our upcoming story is going to clarify this).

Now it's looking more like that 911 call has been altered.

In cross examination of Holly, the attorney asks if Holly listened to a second tape of the voice recordings of the 911 calls made that day regarding this specific case. Holly states no. The attorney asks why not. Holly states she does not work there anymore. But wait, Holly did state to the prosecuting attorney that she did in fact hear this first tape recording in preparation to this proceeding. Is anyone scratching there heads yet? I sure am. Could it be that the reason a second tape was never presented is because the Sheriff's Office doctored two tapes to make one? Go back and listen to that 911 call recording again and then look at Holly's testimony. A lot of questions sure surface now.

Holly also testifies that she did not speak with any deputies at one moment of the cross examination and then states that she did speak with them via radio the next. Which is it? In an upcoming article, we are going to show evidence that Holly was not a trustworthy witness here. In fact, we will show she blew her side of the story that she was supposed to present. This was all staged in our opinion and we are going to present you with that evidence.

Holly made it very clear that she no longer works as a 911 dispatcher. Could it be because she is aware of all the mis-deeds going on at the Sheriff's Office? Was she so scared that she was willing to lie on the stand?

Gloucester County Forged 911 Call?

Gloucester County Forged 911 Call?

The above video has been produced mainly for the audio recording that was used in a court of law right here in Gloucester County, Virginia. This recording was both submitted and accepted as evidence. The 911 operator, one  Holly M Cohoon, even testified to it. Well if you have played this once already, did you actually hear what was being said? There are way too many issues with it to be authentic. It is our professional opinion that this is a forged recording. You may want to play this a few more times and  listen carefully to the recording.

Before we go too far, I must state that I have also altered this call in a slight way. I removed a very tiny section where the caller states her address. This was done to protect this party. Other than that, the call is exactly what was played in a local court. So let's look at some of the issues.

1. The caller to the 911 operator goes through at least five different emotions during a brief one minute and 6 second call.  Even in a mental institution, the worst patients do not go through that many emotions in that fast a period.
2. The 911 operator, Holly M Cohoon, tells the caller not to shoot out the door. The caller never stated she was even by a door. The 911 operator, Holly M Cohoon, does not state that once, but instead she states it multiple times so you know she isn't making a mistake.
3. In less than 40 seconds, the 911 operator, Holly M Cohoon, breaks every form of protocol and states that there is already a sheriff's deputy outside. She does not radio for a patrol car, she does not stop the conversation to verify that there is a deputy outside. She flat out states it.

We had a 911 operator from another area analyze this call and we were told that there was no way it could possibly be authentic in their professional opinion, which matched our opinion.

Now this has everything to do with what we have been reporting about. This does tie into the reports of Gloucester County Officials ignoring our requests for information and also our report on the search warrant. This call took place on May 4^th, 2010. Numerous off-duty sheriff's deputies were all over the property. What alarmed the caller to the 911 operator was The fact that an unknown male called to the defendant's telephone screaming for the defendant/occupant of this home to get out of the house immediately. The reason was never stated. (Yes, we will show that a reason was never stated in a later article). What further alarmed the defendant/occupant was that when she looked out the window, she saw an unidentified intruder beating a dog in the front yard with a metal pipe. 

The occupant of the home hung up on the unidentified caller and called 911. There was no reason whatsoever for anyone to be calling the occupant and ordering her to get out of the house.  

Now this next part is only what we have been told from a person inside the Gloucester County Sheriff's Office and we have no way to prove it. In fairness, we can only report what we were told. This was a "Fun Raid," ordered by sheriff Steve Gentry. This "Fun Raid" had dual purposes. One, the occupant of this home had made a complaint about members of the Gloucester Sheriff's Office via a letter to Steve Gentry. Two, the home was within a certain demographic in that the owners/occupants were known gun owners and in an upper economic bracket.

What we were told is the "Fun Raid" was for the purpose of grabbing the guns and whatever cash and/or other valuables could be easily taken. What went wrong? First, no one expected anyone to be home in the house.  Second, because the owners/occupants own animals, Animal Control was called in to take over and legitimize the so-called "search."

Okay, in all reality, that seems pretty far fetched even for me to fully grasp. We were told by the person inside the Gloucester County Sheriff's Office that this is fairly common and the way they normally get away with it is by creating a shoot-out with whomever the target is and killing them. This particular victim lived --through a series of good luck and cooperating at the right times. Again, I have no way to verify these statements made but it does make sense as to why the search warrant is so sloppy and full of errors. It was produced during this event to cover tracks is what we believe. It would also start to explain why the 911 call, in our professional opinion, is forged.

Now if you really consider this that hard to believe, we are nowhere near the end of the story. It continues to get a lot worse and there is so much more.

New synthetic drug is dangerous - Amped

New synthetic drug is dangerous

The Above is a link to the story on-line.  Amped is the newest craze and it is sold over the counter, including right here in Gloucester, as Lady Bug attractant.  It's bad news.  There have been a number of stores popping up around Gloucester and their main business and income come from selling these synthetic drugs.  It's serious money for these purveyors.  Check out the article and keep an eye out for anything unusual with your children or loved ones. 

Understanding Meta Data

We have added this file on Meta Data so that people who are reading the present posts understand what it is we are asking for when we say we are asking for meta data on files.  Meta data can say a lot or say nothing at all.  The meta data can seriously put reports into question or they may just add to confusion.   There are plenty of reasons to look at the meta data of a document.  It can be used as evidence in a court.  It's also very difficult to alter meta data without creating new meta data of altering the previous data.  Meta data is on every computer everywhere.  We will go into further detail about all this in a later article.