Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
WARDEN NOTICE OF TORT CLAIM AGAINST TUCSON CITY OFFICIALS FOR CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS

WARDEN NOTICE OF TORT CLAIM AGAINST TUCSON CITY OFFICIALS FOR CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS

Ratings: (0)|Views: 274|Likes:
Published by Roy Warden
TUCSON CITY OFFICERS CONFISCATE POLITICAL ACTIVIST'S VEHICLE TO RETALIATE FOR EXPOSURE OF THEIR SUPPORT OF PRO-RAZA, OPEN BORDER POLICY
TUCSON CITY OFFICERS CONFISCATE POLITICAL ACTIVIST'S VEHICLE TO RETALIATE FOR EXPOSURE OF THEIR SUPPORT OF PRO-RAZA, OPEN BORDER POLICY

More info:

Published by: Roy Warden on Feb 25, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/27/2012

pdf

text

original

 
Roy Warden, EditorCommon Sense II1015 W. Prince Road, #131-182Tucson Arizona 85705 roywarden@cox.net
SUPPLEMENT TO NOTICE OF TORT CLAIM FILED AGAINST THECITY OF TUCSON ON FEBRUARY 03, 2010
February 25, 2010Mayor Bob WalkupTucson City Mayor244 W. Alameda StreetTucson, Arizona 85701RE: Notice of Federal Tort Claim against Tucson Mayor Bob Walkup, TucsonCity Attorney Mike Rankin, Tucson City Prosecutor Alan Merritt, TucsonCity Manager Mike Lecher, the Tucson City Council, Tucson PoliceOfficers Dormand and Friedman, the Tucson Police Department and TheCity of Tucson.
1.
I am providing this document to supplement the Notice of Claim I filed onFebruary 03, 2010 pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act and A.R.S. 12-821.01 in response to the malicious and criminal actions that you and theother Tucson officials noted above, while acting in your individual andofficial capacities, have committed against me, including but not limited toconspiracy, defamation, false arrest, the unlawful confiscation of my  vehicle via police entrapment, malicious prosecution for driving under asuspended license, intentional infliction of mental distress, and intentionaldeprivation of my civil rights under USC 42 § 1983 and USC 18 §241-244.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
2.
Since December 2003 I have been employed as an unpaid political activist working on behalf of the people of Pima County Arizona, and as thepublisher of Common Sense II and CSII Press, political newslettersdocumenting, investigating and exposing corruption within the criminal justice system in the City of Tucson, Pima County and State of Arizona.
3.
Common Sense Two and CSII Press are currently distributed to more than1,500 local attorneys, prosecutors, public defenders and judges, some of  whom have contacted me to offer advice, opinion and specific informationto assist me in the furtherance of my investigations.
1
 
STATEMENT OF FACTSPolice Entrapment
4.
On August 03, 2009, the Tucson Police Department was called to my residence, as they had on at least four other occasions, to enforce a PimaCounty Superior Court Order regarding the custody of my roommates’
1 
minor child, and the failure of the child’s father to return the child to themother’s residence as per the schedule set forth by Order of the Court.
5.
On at least three of these occasions (1) the investigating officer had readthe Court Order and verified in fact the child had not been returned as setforth by the schedule ordered by the Court, (2) the investigating officerhad gone to the father’s house to explain to the father his requirement toobey the Order of the Court, (3) the child was subsequently returned by the father to the mother’s house.
6.
On one occasion the investigating officer returned the child himself in aTPD vehicle.
7.
On August 03, 2009 the investigating officer, (Officer Dormand, #48380)responded as set forth in paragraph 4 and 5(1).
8.
However; subsequent to reading of the Court Order, Officer Dormand toldmy roommate she (Officer Dormand) would drive my roommate to herformer husband’s residence to recover her child, even though on allprevious occasions either my roommate’s former husband or a policeofficer had brought the child home.
9.
My roommate came into our home to get my shoes and bag and explainedto me what was happening. However; when she exited and approachedOfficer Dorman, the officer suddenly changed her mind. She said. “You’llhave to follow me in your car. I am not a taxi service.”
10.
My roommate explained to Officer Dormand (1) she was legally blind andtherefore could not drive the family car and (2) the car’s registration hadexpired.
11.
Officer Dormand made some cell phone calls and then became insistent.
12.
Officer Dormand asked my roommate if I (Roy Warden) would drive thecar. Officer Dormand said if we didn’t follow her in the family car she would not go to my roommate’s former husband’s residence and my roommate would not get her son that night.
1
Due to concerns regarding personal safety, my “roommate” has requested her name not be included in this public document.
2
 
13.
In sum and substance Officer Dormand informed my roommate: “I know there are issues with Roy’s Drivers License and the car’s registration. But if he doesn’t drive, you won’t get to see your son tonight.”
14.
 At all times during the several conversations between Officer Dormandand my roommate on the night of August 03, 2009, my car was withinseveral feet of Officer Dormand, with my expired registration clearly  visible to the officer as it was illuminated by the Officer’s vehicle spotlight.
15.
My roommate re-entered our house and informed me regarding OfficerDormand’s new requirement.
16.
In sum and substance I told my roommate: “The cops all know I haveexpired registration and a revoked license. I wonder if they are setting meup?”
17.
 We exited the house and waited in our vehicle for more than five minutes while Officer Dormand spoke with others on her cell phone.
18.
Eventually Officer Dorman drove away; instead of directly following her Itook an alternative route to my roommate’s former husband’s residence.
19.
 When we got to the location we parked on the main street. Officer Dormansaid we had to wait for back-up, even though on all previous occasionsonly a single officer’s response was required. My roommate informedOfficer Dorman that her son had Cerebral Palsy.
20.
 A second TPD vehicle arrived. After consulting with Officer Dorman thesecond officer approached the car. His name tag said “Friedman.(#50459)
21.
Subsequently; we complied with Officer Dorman’s request to park our carnear my roommate’s former husband’s residence.
22.
Before my roommate’s son was brought out and seated in the car, OfficerDorman said to me: “I know there are issues with your car. I decided topersonally overlook that. Don’t worry about anything. You will be able todrive him (my roommate’s son) home.”
23.
My roommate’s son came out and was seated in the car.
24.
Officer Friedman came up to me. In sum and substance he said: “You aredriving with a revoked license in a car with expired registration. We aregoing to write you a ticket and confiscate your car. You’ll all have to walk home.”
3

Activity (2)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->