Showing posts with label Police Officers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Police Officers. Show all posts

Sunday, August 2, 2020

Hannah Fizer: How Lack of Police Accountability Let an Innocent Woman Get Shot 5 Times - RTR Truth Media


Hannah Renee Fizer was the all American girl next door in small town USA. She was pretty, kind, smart, loved, and by all indications totally harmless. At 25 years old she was a hard working young lady on her way to work when Deputy Jordan Schutte allegedly pulled her over for running a red light, but what happened after that remains shrouded in secrecy. Secrecy made possible by a deep rooted culture of cronyism and nepotism with a bureaucracy designed to create excuses and an unwillingness to enter the modern age where cameras are supposed to keep police in check.

 PLEASE BE ADVISED :Cyrus Sullivan of Cop-blaster and our team prepared a video report of the information shared on the RTR Radio Show on this story. We had a major computer malfunction and are in the process of recovering the files. We expect to have the re[port ready by morning in which case we request that you come back and share the heck out of it. We make no profit  doing this. We do it for the truth, for Hannah and her family. Please help us.

Thank you

Team RTR

Initial Reports


At around 10PM on June 13, 2020, Hannah Fizer was driving to her job at the Eagle Stop convenience store in Sedalia, Missouri. She allegedly ran a traffic light on West Broadway Boulevard, was caught by a PCSO deputy, and he made her pull over in the parking lot between Lemaire’s Cajun Catfish and Seafood House, and the Comfort Inn Suites. One man, who wanted to remain anonymous citing fear of professional consequences, told the Kansas City Star that he saw a PCSO vehicle with flashing lights following a car and then he heard a man yell "stop, stop," followed by five "pops."(see Shouts and gunshots: Witness recalls fatal shooting of unarmed Sedalia woman by deputy). He did not report hearing anyone threaten anybody, but the PCSO says otherwise. The video below later surfaced on social media and is believed to be the earliest publicly available footage of the incident taken by a bystander about a block away after Hannah was killed. You can clearly see that backup had not yet arrived and there is just a single parked silver/gray SUV. The SUV had flashing lights on top, no PCSO markings on the side, and hideous chrome hubcaps.


Initial media reports the day after the shooting quoted Missouri State Highway Patrol (MSHP) spokesman Andy Bell as saying that Hannah "refused to identify herself, stated she was armed and verbally threatened to shoot the deputy" according to the Associated Press. MSHP had taken over the investigation because it involved a PCSO deputy and it would have been a conflict of interest for the PCSO to investigate it. Bell also stated that he did not know if Hannah had a gun, so initially it appeared to most reasonable people that did not know Hannah that the deputy shot her in self defense.

On June 16th, MSHP announced that no gun was found in Hannah's car. Then people started asking questions and those that knew Hannah began speaking out. Her friends and family painted the picture of a real sweetheart that would never harm let alone threaten to shoot anyone. Hannah's father John Fizer told KMBC that Hannah "was not a perfect angel by any means. She liked to drink and smoke a little weed sometimes, but by no means was she violent. She was the kind of person that wouldn't hesitate to give a homeless person $10." He also said that if she had anything in her hand at all it would have been her phone "because she always had her phone in her hand." Her phone was recovered by MSHP and sent to the state crime lab for examination, but it is not known what evidence if any is on that phone.

Radio Recording Surfaces


Cop Watch St. Louis obtained some of the radio communications from that night. It appears to be from the local Sedalia Police Department (SPD). You can hear someone talking about the situation unfolding between the PCSO deputy and Hannah. The person on the radio is obviously relaying the content of a previous call made by the PCSO deputy that pulled Hannah over in which he accused her of having a gun and threatening to shoot him. At about 25 seconds in you can hear the deputy say "shots fired."


To the untrained ear this video might seem to support the theory that Hannah threatened the deputy, that he feared for his life, and that he shot her thinking she had a gun. To those with more experien this video shows that the deputy had plenty of time to think about what he was doing. If he really feared for his safety, why did he take the time to make a call before shooting someone that he claimed was armed and threatening to shoot him? Think about this, if you were that deputy and you pulled someone over, that person yelled out that they had a gun, threatened to shoot you, and you thought you saw a gun in their hand, wouldn't you start shooting right away? Would you say to yourself "hold on a minute, I need to make a call first?" Making a call and waiting as long as he did are not the actions of someone in fear of imminent death. They sound like the actions of someone trying to create a record that supports the use of force. It is common practice at virtually every law enforcement agency in America for their members to yell out justifications for using force when using force whether or not that force is really justified. The most common example is yelling out "stop resisting" whenever they make a forceable arrest even if the victim is not resisting. By yelling "stop resisting" they can blame any injuries on the person being arrested and then refer to audio from blurry body cam footage and say "see, he was resisting, you can hear me telling him to stop resisting." Once the appearance of resistance is created then the officer is usually free use choke holds, deliver as many "focused blows" as he likes, and accuse the arrestee of assault.

Official Response


Pettis County Sheriff Kevin Charles Bond addressed the lack of a firearm in Hannah's car in an interview with The Kansas City Star (see video below). In that interview he defended the actions of his deputy by saying "obviously it was a non-compliant situation." He went on to explain that his deputies do not wear body cameras and that their vehicles do not have dash cameras, "we do not have body cameras nor do we have uh, in car video, um uh, about three years ago we did have however technical difficulties, we had that a failure and we also had problems with the devices and those devices have not been replaced." From that explanation one can reasonably conclude that those devices technically made life difficult for deputies by deterring them from doing their jobs however they want to do them, so learning how to use devices that are user friendly is not a priority. Bond concludes the interview by claiming to lack funds to fix the problem and trying to get those funds. That is typical bureaucratic rubbish from someone that just wants to pass off the blame.


Protests


The people of Sedalia, Missouri did not buy Kevin Bond's explanation, they did not believe that Hannah threatened the deputy, and they took to the streets demanding justice. Sedalia, Missouri is a small tightly knit rural mid-western town with a conservative population of about 20,000. It is not so small that everyone knows everybody, but it is so small that everybody knows someone that knows people that know everybody. According to Best Places, 70.4% of Pettis County voted Republican in the last election and they have voted Republican in the last five Presidential elections. They are predominately Christian and pro-law enforcement. Despite living in one of the last places one would expect to see an anti-police brutality rally, the people of Sedalia took to the streets demanding justice. In the video below you can see people peacefully picketing PCSO headquarters demanding the name of the shooter.


Trying to Get Records


The video above concludes in part by mentioning false accusation made by Sheriff Bond against CopBlaster.com in an open letter that he published online and sent to the media. In that letter Kevin Bond said "last night I received an extortion email to release my name and home address on social media if I do not comply with unreasonable demands." That is not true. Cop Blaster addressed Bond's accusation in an article titled "Pettis County Sheriff Kevin C. Bond Refuses to Comply with FOIA" which contains copies of communications between the site's owner and Kevin Bond. It began with a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request sent directly to the PCSO through their website. The FOIA request read as follows:
"I request a copy of your current staff roster and hiring dates for all employees under the Freedom of Information Act. I also request the staff schedule for all shifts for the date of June 13, 2020."
The reason for requesting those documents specifically was that Kevin Bond had already admitted in his interview with the Kansas City Star that the deputy that shot Hannah "has been an employee of the Sheriff's office since 2007." From that information Cop Blaster believed that if we could get the requested documents that it would not be difficult to figure out which deputies have been employed by the department since 2007. The PCSO is a small department, so there probably are less than a handful of deputies that were hired that year and it would not be surprising if there is only one deputy that was hired in 2007 that is still working there. If there were more than one then the shift schedule would probably show which deputy was both hired in 2007 and working on June 13th. Kevin Bond obviously knew this and personally responded to the request first thing the following morning. His response read:
"Thank you for your inquiry. I am the custodian of records for the Pettis County Sheriffs Office. Under 610.100.3RSMO, portions of a record or document of a law enforcement officer or agency that contains information reasonably likely to pose a clear and present danger to the safety of a person shall be closed. As a result, I cannot comply with your request at this time." - Kevin Bond
Sheriff Bond's response may appear like a boiler plate denial for information, but the timing and manner of his response was unusual. Cop Blaster has sent FOIA requests to several agencies for various things in recent months. Those agencies include police departments and sheriff's offices. Not once has the head of those organizations responded personally and the people that do handle public records requests have responded with a decision in less than 24 hours. Bond's personal involvement creates the appearance that he is personally controlling the flow of information for the purpose of preventing people from finding out who shot Hannah.

Cop Blaster responded to Bond's denial by writing an article about him that included information from public records about him. A reply was then sent to Bond containing an offer to remove some of that information should he either name the shooter or comply with the FOIA request. At no time did Cop Blaster threaten to release any of his information if he did not do something. As a result of Bond's non compliance with FOIA and the Missouri Sunshine Law, no one was able to name the shooter for some time. Protests continued on about a weekly basis.

Hannah Fizer's Funeral


On June 20th, Hannah Fizer's funeral service was broadcasted live on Facebook and the video of that broadcast is still available today. Unfortunately, embedding is not allowed, but if you would like to watch it you can click here.

Surveillance Camera Disclosed


On June 23rd, MSHP released information saying that the surveillance camera of a nearby restaurant had recorded the entire incident, but did not have any audio. MSHP has not released the video to the public, but KMBC has described the description of the video as :
"Missouri State Highway Patrol investigator described the surveillance video as showing the Pettis County deputy make contact with 25-year-old Hannah Fizer on June 13 before drawing his gun. Fizer, who had been pulled over for speeding and careless driving, can be seen moving in her car before the deputy fired his weapon" - KMBC
If that description is accurate, then it contains no evidence to suggest that Hannah posed any threat to the deputy whatsoever. Moving around your car during a traffic stop does not justify unleashing a hail of bullets on your car. Assuming for a second that Hannah threatened the deputy as described, even Kevin Bond admitted that threats do not justify the use of deadly force. The KMBC article goes on to say that the deputy himself stated that Hannah was trying to film him with her phone. If that is true then the deputy knew or at least should have known that the object she was holding or reaching for was probably her phone. This also raises the question, did Hannah say she was shooting him with a video camera? If that is what she said then there is no justification for shooting her. Even if the deputy could not tell what she was holding and thought it could be anything including a gun, that does not justify opening fire like that.

The passage or time and lack of answers made the family frustrated and worried that they may never find justice for Hannah, but they also did not want to appear anti-law enforcement, so they continued picketing and voicing their concerns so that Hannah's memory would not fade away. They have been waiting patiently for the system to do the right thing as the video below shows:

The Killer's Name Revealed?


On July 8th, Hannah's father had obviously become tired of waiting and posted the name of the man he believes killed his daughter on Facebook. John Fizer's post read as follows:

"Got his name finally...Now I just need to know WHY? The name came from a very reliable source, and if he, or she, wishes to put themselves out there, that's fine with me, but I wont. But you cannot get any closer than 99.9 % sure. So I'm going with it; and if it isn't the right cop, then I apologize in advance, and Pettis County can come forward and once again protect their man by saying this isn't the guy, otherwise we can take it to the full 100% that this IS the officer that murdered my beautiful child; my only biological seed, that will never bare me grandchildren, as the last of my DNA lies dead in a cold grave. Officer Jordan Schutte, you killed more than one person that night, I just want you to know that. You crushed me and that beautiful girls mother, brother, boyfriend and best friend, and several others. Our lives will never be the same again. You made a horrible mistake that night, one that can never be undone. And there is absolutely no excuse whatsoever for you putting ONE, let alone FIVE slugs into my precious little harmless, 140 pound beautiful baby girl. But your name is out there now. Your buddies did a good job hiding you for awhile; longer than I would have expected actually, for such a high profile case as this, but now we know who you are. And if for some crazy chance it's not you, then we will see how long it takes for them to clean your name up. But I have a feeling we wont be hearing from them. So with that, that's all I have to say for now. You'll have your day in court just like I always did. And, like you, I was guilty, and justice was served..." - John Fizer


Mr. Fizer removed his post quickly but not before several people copied it and sent it to Cop Blaster. He then posted a follow up which reads:
"I'm so beside myself, that if I'm not careful I will lose myself in this. I jump the gun. I shouldn't have posted that. I have lawyers that tell me to just stay calm and let them WORK. It's just so hard for me not to take off like a mad man pursuing this issue. And the very thought of this man getting away with this, with cop immunity, just makes me plum sick. So I apologize for jumping the gun. I need to just chill and let justice work, as I pray it will. I let my pain and hurt finally turn into anger, the one thing I was trying so hard not to let happen. And when I got his name, I just flipped. I'm better than that, and I apologize. I'm just sick over this, and I miss my daughter so much that I can't even imagine life without her, and she's only been gone a short while. So once again, thank you ALL for all your love and support. You people have been so good. You have paid probably half of this funeral bill already. I cannot tell you how much I appreciate that. The love and support has flooded us. Hannah would be so proud of all of you, because your hearts have proven to be as good as her's. Love and appreciate each and every one of you. God bless..." - John Fizer
That follow up post is still live on Facebook. That post made it obvious to Cop Blaster and any other reasonable person that the post multiple people had copied was most likely genuine or at the very least did in fact name a name. Hannah's entire family has conducted themselves with the utmost patience and dignity throughout this ordeal. They have shown that they are not the kind of people that would just throw a name out there unless they were absolutely sure. To just throw a name out there would be entirely inconsistent with the character that they have demonstrated so far. The PCSO and MSHP remain silent on this of course, so Cop Blaster decided to put faith in the Fizer family and help them spread the word. Within hours, an anonymous source contacted Cop Blaster with a link to what the source called "his mother in law's Facebook page" which contained a picture of an individual that has since been identified as Jordan Daniel Schutte. Cop Blaster compared that picture with PCSO staff photos found online and found a match. That match was wearing a jailer uniform in a staff composite photo dated around the same time that Schutte is listed in public records as working at the jail (click here to learn more about Jordan Schutte). That photo was then shared on social media. The next day, someone believed to be associated with the family created the following meme using a composite image created by Cop Blaster:


This post was shared online by members of the Fizer family one of whom said something like "f*ck it, why not?" Oddly, the family members later deleted the image from their Facebook profiles, but other members of the community continued to post it. We find this pattern of posting information, removing it, and never disavowing its accuracy to be very suspicious. We believe that this is the behavior of a family that still wants to have a little faith that law enforcement will do the right thing and do not want to piss off the PCSO, while at the same time doing what they can to make the truth heard. The reluctance to piss them off could be out of hope that their good faith will be rewarded, or possibly out of fear of reprisal from a department that can literally do whatever they want.

Responses to the naming of Schutte were suspicious. Kevin Bond was quick to release a statement denying that another deputy was the shooter when random people not associated with the family were circulating a different name during the days following the shooting, but Bond has not released any statement at all to confirm or deny that Schutte is the shooter. We believe that if he were innocent that Bond would have said so by now. Members of the Schutte family have been silent as well. They have been deleting their social media accounts. In one case, Schutte's wife removed his last name from her Facebook profile before deleting it entirely. Sources on the ground in Sedalia have reported that Schutte himself has not been seen since the incident. Those sources are members of the community that have been working with Cop Blaster by providing information. Some of those sources claim to live near Schutte.

Does Freemasonry Play a Role?


Cop Blaster was contacted by the creator of the Fight for Hannah Facebook Group with an unusual theory. She wanted to know if we could figure out how many PCSO employees are also members of the local Masonic Granite Lodge. We viewed this theory with great skepticism at first because the internet is full of conspiracy theories involving Freemasonry, but decided to look into it because we thought that if we could show that the shooter and other members of the PCSO were part of the same fraternal organization that it might explain the efforts to protect the shooter. Sedalia is home to Masonic Granite Lodge #272. The new SPD station has a plaque dedicating the building to that lodge, they hold several banquets for law enforcement each year, and one ceremonial photo contains a man that looks a lot like Kevin Bond.

When Jordan Schutte was named by the Fizer family, members of the community were quick the point out that Schutte is a legacy deputy. By that we mean that his father was a well known and respected member of the PCSO for many years before his death. According to his obituary, Denny Schutte was a member of "Granite Lodge 272." Kevin Bond has been with the PCSO in one form or another since the 1980s so he has probably known Jordan Schutte all his life. The PCSO is a tightly knit organization, so Bond and Denny Schutte were probably friends or at least had an amicable professional relationship. It looks like Jordan Schutte had big shoes to fill and was not living up to his legacy. That would explain whey he worked at the jail for so long and brings one to question how he became an actual deputy? Did he go through the training and selection process that everyone else does, or were those just a formality for someone destined to be hired because of his connections? Could this shooting be the result of just an incompetent deputy that did not know what he was doing and should not have been working there at all? We may never know.

MSHP Finished Its Investigation


MSHP officially finished its investigation this past week and turned their findings over to Pettis County Prosecutor Phillip Trent Sawyer. MSHP did not release the name of the deputy or any more new information. Activists are now trying to put public pressure on Sawyer to do the right thing.



Conclusion


Hannah Fizer should be alive today and a killer is on the loose getting paid for "administrative leave." When a department is plagued with cronyism and nepotism, deliberately fails to wear body cameras or put dashboard cameras in their vehicles, and treats the word of a fellow deputy like the word of god then everyone has a problem. This is America and in America everyone is entitled to basic inalienable rights, those rights include the right to move around your vehicle during a traffic stop without being shot five times no matter what you are accused of saying. The PCSO is just one example of an organization riddled with problems that are systemic nation wide. Allowing these problems to persist in our country endangers the lives of every American. As long as deputies like Hannah's killer are not held accountable the next Hannah Fizer could be anyone, maybe even you.

If you want to learn more about Hannah Fizer we recommend the following archives and Facebook groups:



UPDATE: Since this article was published an anonymous source known to be connected with the recent Hannah Fizer Protests has stated to RTR Truth Media who relayed to Cop Blaster that Kevin Bond and Denny Schutte were the best of friends.

UPDATE: On August 4th, a special prosecutor was assigned to the case (see Stephen Sokoloff Appointed as Special Prosecutor in Hannah Fizer Case).

UPDATE: On August 7th, Sheriff Bond launched a smoke screen in the media by covering an arrest of a guy accused of tailing the wrong deputy back in June. The story was clearly presented in a manner intended to make people think it was recent. Sheriff Bond denied that several deputies named on social media back in June were the shooter, but Schutte was not named until July and he is the only one named by the family. Bond has not denied Schutte. Read more: Kevin Bond Launches Smoke Screen Public Relations Campaign
 
UPDATE: On August 22nd, the Director of the Pettis County IT Department spoke out against Sheriff Bond saying that Bond lied to the public about why his deputies do not wear body cameras. Read more:  Pettis County IT Director Luke Goosen Speaks Out Against Sheriff Bond
 
UPDATE: An admin of the original and largest Facebook group seeking justice for Hannah has started her own group called Justice for Hannah Fizer. Among her reasons for leaving Sign the petition Justice for Hannah include Don Hockaday's censorship of the group. That censorship has included a rule against naming names of deputies people suspect of killing Hannah, banning the Cop Blaster Facebook Page from posting in the group for posting links to pages doxxing PCSO members, and deleting comments critical of him or his actions.  

UPDATE: Special Prosecutor Stephen Sokoloff ruled this murder justified because Hannah could be seen reaching around her car, the deputy claimed she was trying to shoot him, and he thinks that would cause a reasonable deputy to fear for his safety. No evidence proves that she threatened him. This decision is essentially a license to kill any motorist that reaches for anything in their car as long as the deputy says they were threatened. Read more: Stephen Sokoloff Calls the Murder of Hannah Fizer "Justifiable"

Off topic but related Side Note: As a life-long Conservative Christian it took me a long time to come to the realization that the two party system has been, is, and will continue to be the problem. I saw something very subtle during Trump's presidency that many of his supporters either could not see because of the fractured thinking that the seeming "cult of statism" causes, or they see and have become conditioned to accept a "lesser of two evils". I not only reject the selection of evil based on the perception that at least in my flavor of political ideology that evil would be better than the other opposing ideology"s evil is... but I believe this is a very deliberate form of mind control. Our founders warned us about this ad nauseum. And the very same party that claims such a high regard for the founders makes the bitter taste of reality well known simply by looking at their near worship of the profession of law enforcer.  In truth it should disgust them all to feel the need for agencies who regularly seek military surplus to arm itself with. This is not to say in certain circumstances it is not needed. But when the culture of the entire party becomes such that it glorifies this endeavor, we have got to realize how far off the righteous path we have been taken.
1 - In the oval office he and Diane Feinstein sitting right next to him as cozy as two old friends... and moments later he was telling his vice president that like in the case of Nicholas Cruz he "likes to take the guns first and "worry about due process later" because often times it just "takes too long to get to court". Essentially and quite literally Trump just advocated for the ELIMINATION of due process which is a very Bolshevik concept. To make matters worse he was also deceiving the Union. Claiming that Law Enforcement "needed more tools" pointing to the Stoneman Douglas shooting as reason, when he failed to mention the Obama era Marxist federal grant program that has been proven inconclusively to be a corrupt failure that saw officers being told not to arrest students of "color" as with the reduction of crime stats the district would receive increasing amounts of grant money. Cruz was in the program. Cruz held a gun to someones head which in Florida is more than enough tools to justify his arrest, incarceration and by default him to have any weapons confiscated rightfully. Twice the FBI was notified about his threats. Once by a friend of a very close childhood friend of mine, so I have the full story of their communication. That should have been the end of it,That is if he wasn't being groomed for the role as well. Some have argued that Trump may not have known. I say - bullshit, not only did I discuss it with Dana Loesch's personal assistant, but the White House was well aware of it. They commented on the program (unrelated to the shooting)
2 - Trump signed by Executive Order ( * a Martial Law Totalitarian Fiat originating with EO 1 signed by Abraham Lincoln who essentially suspended the Constitution.) the largest redistribution of wealth - Socialist stimulus in not just American but in world history, doing so with little more than a few whispers from the core of the party, but thank God a few called it as they saw it like Thomas Massie who seems to be one of the few actual founding stock type morally sound individuals in DC

* Lincoln suspended Habeus Corpus, had printers jailed without charge or trial and ordered an attack without the consent of Congress upon the American people not long after deceiving the Republic with words of pursuing those who would pervert the Constitution. Our true Republic was overthrown by him, having nothing to do with the cause or purpose of the war itself. He and Judges fearful of his retaliation ruled that essentially the Declaration of Independence was perpetrated by lawless traitors when he and they declared that there was no right to reject association with a body politic i.e. the crown...as it was no different than what the Southern Confederacy chose to do with the Union that saw the Union established after doing so with the Crown. )


PUBLIC NOTICE :   Everyone who follows our work knows that we are very critical of corrupt law enforcement and authoritarianism. This DOES NOT mean that we are anti-law enforcement to the [point especially that people falsel;y assume that we in any way agree with Marxist lead protests which are subversive and destructive seeking to not merely destroy and overthrow local, state and federal governments, but they seek to impose the most tyrannical type that jhas seen the deaths of millions when they come to power. The illusion and falsity that these protests are anarchist in nature is also false. The word anarchist has seen its very definition an assault of deceit. The root etymology of the word anarchist simply means NO RULERS which BLM and ANTIFA in and of themselves could not possibly be run, supported or be conflated with Anarchy. We have heard this word used in the media constantly. The Merriam Webster definition and all other modern day definitions of the word has been altered from its actual meaning most likely at the behest of government as the word is a threat to the existence of government. With true anarchy, chaos, violence and the violation of the natural right of individuals is not synonymous. True anarchists actually not only support natural rights, but their argument is that government, founded and maintained with all of the best intentions eventually grow to become a threat to the very rights they are often formed to protect.   Anarchy simply means NO RULERS..... not NO RULES to live by.

True Anarchy is not possible without those of a moral and ethical nature being willing to voluntarily protecting themselves as well as the rights of anyone else who would find themselves in danger.


Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use. Sharing content of individuals not members of our team does not mean we agree with or stand behind everything they stand for. We share news, as well as what we believe our readers need to know. Truth is truth, whomever may speak it.

Sunday, October 14, 2018

COP TAKES TWO SHOTS at INNOCENT MAN and GETS SHOT - NO CHARGES for GRANDPA



RTR Truth Media:

Kentucky State Police say an Owensboro police officer was shot by a homeowner who may have mistaken the officer for a prowler.
We have learned that the real story is that the officer fired first unannounced.

Authorities said Officer Zachary Morris, 23, was responding to the area around 5:30 a.m. Wednesday on a report of a suspicious person possibly breaking into cars.

Investigators said Morris saw a person matching the suspect's description and pursued him on foot when the suspect fled. It is not reported what this description was or if it remotely was similar to this grandfather in his own back yard.

Morris reportedly lost sight of the suspect behind houses in the 500 block of Hathaway Street when he came upon a homeowner and fired upon him without identifying himself. The homeowner returned fire and shot Morris who was behind a fenced in area.

Officials said Morris was wearing a ballistic vest, but the bullet hit the edge of the vest and fragments struck his lower abdomen.

Morris was taken to Owensboro Health to undergo surgery and is reportedly in good condition.

The KSP Critical Incident Response Team is investigating.

The homeowner has not been charged and thank God was not killed by responding officers.

Morris is a two-year veteran with the Owensboro Police Department. Who trains these people?

No Charges For Grampa - Guns In The News
http://gunsinthenews.com/no-charges-for-grandpa-who-shot-an-officer-on-his-property-to-protect-his-grandkids/

Bitchute:



RTR TRUTH MEDIA Resurrect the Republic Truth Radio Broadcast
http://RTRTruthMedia.blogspot.com
http://ResurrectTheRepublic.com
You can check us out on the following links
Donate - https://PayPal.me/RTRTruthMedia

Dead Backup Channel after Primary TERMINATION for TRUTH
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAxy9vKN0Uh3N8kbQa5gG1A
Bitchute - https://www.bitchute.com/channel/7JV9ghYHumD3/
Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/RTRTruthMedia1776
twitter - https://twitter.com/tomlacovara
https://www.minds.com/RTRTruthMedia


Tuesday, October 2, 2018

A RIGHT CAN NOT LAWFULLY be ABROGATED - RIGHT to TRAVEL - EVIDENCE from a POLICE OFFICER and AUTHORITARIAN PROPAGANDA EXPOSED

SOVEREIGNTY & NATURAL RIGHTS

Why is freedom and the pursuit thereof so dangerous to government?



DESPITE ACTIONS OF POLICE AND LOCAL COURTS,
HIGHER COURTS HAVE RULED THAT AMERICAN CITIZENS
HAVE A RIGHT TO TRAVEL WITHOUT STATE PERMITS

By Officer Jack McLamb (from Aid & Abet Newsletter)
For years professionals within the criminal justice system have acted on the belief that traveling by motor vehicle was a privilege that was given to a citizen only after approval by their state government in the form of a permit or license to drive. In other words, the individual must be granted the privilege before his use of the state highways was considered legal. Legislators, police officers, and court officials are becoming aware that there are court decisions that disprove the belief that driving is a privilege and therefore requires government approval in the form of a license. Presented here are some of these cases:
CASE #1: "The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.
CASE #2: "The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579.
It could not be stated more directly or conclusively that citizens of the states have a common law right to travel, without approval or restriction (license), and that this right is protected under the U.S Constitution.
CASE #3: "The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.
CASE #4: "The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right." Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941.
As hard as it is for those of us in law enforcement to believe, there is no room for speculation in these court decisions. American citizens do indeed have the inalienable right to use the roadways unrestricted in any manner as long as they are not damaging or violating property or rights of others. Government -- in requiring the people to obtain drivers licenses, and accepting vehicle inspections and DUI/DWI roadblocks without question -- is restricting, and therefore violating, the people's common law right to travel.
Is this a new legal interpretation on this subject? Apparently not. This means that the beliefs and opinions our state legislators, the courts, and those in law enforcement have acted upon for years have been in error. Researchers armed with actual facts state that case law is overwhelming in determining that to restrict the movement of the individual in the free exercise of his right to travel is a serious breach of those freedoms secured by the U.S. Constitution and most state constitutions. That means it is unlawful. The revelation that the American citizen has always had the inalienable right to travel raises profound questions for those who are involved in making and enforcing state laws. The first of such questions may very well be this: If the states have been enforcing laws that are unconstitutional on their face, it would seem that there must be some way that a state can legally put restrictions -- such as licensing requirements, mandatory insurance, vehicle registration, vehicle inspections to name just a few -- on a citizen's constitutionally protected rights. Is that so?
For the answer, let us look, once again, to the U.S. courts for a determination of this very issue. In Hertado v. California, 110 US 516, the U.S Supreme Court states very plainly:
"The state cannot diminish rights of the people."
And in Bennett v. Boggs, 1 Baldw 60,
"Statutes that violate the plain and obvious principles of common right and common reason are null and void."
Would we not say that these judicial decisions are straight to the point -- that there is no lawful method for government to put restrictions or limitations on rights belonging to the people? Other cases are even more straight forward:
"The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice." Davis v. Wechsler, 263 US 22, at 24
"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491.
"The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller v. US, 230 F 486, at 489.
There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional rights." Sherer v. Cullen, 481 F 946
We could go on, quoting court decision after court decision; however, the Constitution itself answers our question - Can a government legally put restrictions on the rights of the American people at anytime, for any reason? The answer is found in Article Six of the U.S. Constitution:
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof;...shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or laws of any State to the Contrary not one word withstanding."
In the same Article, it says just who within our government that is bound by this Supreme Law:
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution..."
Here's an interesting question. Is ignorance of these laws an excuse for such acts by officials? If we are to follow the letter of the law, (as we are sworn to do), this places officials who involve themselves in such unlawful acts in an unfavorable legal situation. For it is a felony and federal crime to violate or deprive citizens of their constitutionally protected rights. Our system of law dictates that there are only two ways to legally remove a right belonging to the people. These are:
  1. by lawfully amending the constitution, or
  2. by a person knowingly waiving a particular right.
Some of the confusion on our present system has arisen because many millions of people have waived their right to travel unrestricted and volunteered into the jurisdiction of the state. Those who have knowingly given up these rights are now legally regulated by state law and must acquire the proper permits and registrations. There are basically two groups of people in this category:
  1. Citizens who involve themselves in commerce upon the highways of the state. Here is what the courts have said about this: "...For while a citizen has the right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, that right does not extend to the use of the highways...as a place for private gain. For the latter purpose, no person has a vested right to use the highways of this state, but it is a privilege...which the (state) may grant or withhold at its discretion..." State v. Johnson, 245 P 1073. There are many court cases that confirm and point out the difference between the right of the citizen to travel and a government privilege and there are numerous other court decisions that spell out the jurisdiction issue in these two distinctly different activities. However, because of space restrictions, we will leave it to officers to research it further for themselves.
  2. The second group of citizens that is legally under the jurisdiction of the state are those citizens who have voluntarily and knowingly waived their right to travel unregulated and unrestricted by requesting placement under such jurisdiction through the acquisition of a state driver's license, vehicle registration, mandatory insurance, etc. (In other words, by contract.) We should remember what makes this legal and not a violation of the common law right to travel is that they knowingly volunteer by contract to waive their rights. If they were forced, coerced or unknowingly placed under the state's powers, the courts have said it is a clear violation of their rights. This in itself raises a very interesting question. What percentage of the people in each state have applied for and received licenses, registrations and obtained insurance after erroneously being advised by their government that it was mandatory?
Many of our courts, attorneys and police officials are just becoming informed about this important issue and the difference between privileges and rights. We can assume that the majority of those Americans carrying state licenses and vehicle registrations have no knowledge of the rights they waived in obeying laws such as these that the U.S. Constitution clearly states are unlawful, i.e. laws of no effect - laws that are not laws at all. An area of serious consideration for every police officer is to understand that the most important law in our land which he has taken an oath to protect, defend, and enforce, is not state laws and city or county ordinances, but the law that supersedes all other laws -- the U.S. Constitution. If laws in a particular state or local community conflict with the supreme law of our nation, there is no question that the officer's duty is to uphold the U.S. Constitution.
Every police officer should keep the following U.S. court ruling -- discussed earlier -- in mind before issuing citations concerning licensing, registration, and insurance:
"The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller v. US, 230 F 486, 489. 
And as we have seen, traveling freely, going about one's daily activities, is the exercise of a most basic right. 


Obituary: Peace Officer Jack McLamb

Written by  Subject: Events: Arizona


Peace Officer Gerald Jack McLamb, Retired - Age 69
Our beloved friend and brother, nationally-known peace officer Jack McLamb, Ret., passed quietly into his heavenly rest on Saturday, January 11, 2014 at Evansville, Indiana, surrounded by his loving wife, sons and other close family. He had been in ill health for quite some time.

Jack was born on July 18, 1944 in Washington, D.C., and schooled there, and later in Tucson, Arizona. After attending various colleges, focusing on areas of selected studies, he served honorably in the U.S. Navy during the Vietnam War. Various successful business ventures followed for Jack, until at age 32, he found what would prove to be his main life calling, as he entered the police academy in Phoenix, Arizona. Serving as a peace officer, Jack quickly rose to prominence, and his awards were many, making him one of the most highly decorated officers in the history of his Department of over 2000 officers.

Perhaps the most disappointing, disheartening event of Jack's life was being forced into medical retirement due to severe injuries suffered in the line of duty. He nevertheless continued his life work educationally as a writer/publisher, international speaker, and patriot radio broadcaster on several networks over many years. In 1998, Jack was led to relocate his police and military education association from Phoenix, Arizona to the beautiful mountains of north central Idaho. There, he lived happily until just very near to the time of his final illness.

What most endeared so much of the nation to Jack McLamb was his great, patriotic heart, his deep love for people, and their constitutionally-guaranteed rights and freedoms, in defense of which, especially, he devoted the last 37 years of his life. Both in active service and ever since, Jack was known to many as "Officer Friendly." The title stemmed from a national school program of that name, designed by Officer McLamb, in which police officers made the rounds to school classrooms and in various fun and meaningful ways worked to build a bond of trust and friendship between the children and the police. This fine program caught on within Jack's department, and eventually grew nation-wide in scope, once it was picked up and sponsored by the Sears Corporation. But just in general, all who knew "Officer Friendly" saw him as a living example and demonstration of all that it means to be a Peace Officer - a true friend of the people and protector of God-given rights and liberties, in distinct contrast to being a mere enforcer of man-made laws.

In life, Jack married and was the father of three sons: Matt (Ginger) and Jeff (Lee) of Phoenix, and Augie (Francis) of San Antonio, and the grandfather of nine: Miles, Kelly, Grace, Nate, Nick, Natalie, Josue, Rebekah and Emily.

He was of a deeply sensitive nature. His artistic talents showed up early, in paintings dating back to his youth. He excelled in sports such as track, pole-vaulting and tennis. He enjoyed singing, and especially loved the ocean, and adventures like scuba diving and snorkeling.

In addition to his children and grandchildren, Jack is survived also by his wife, Angela, of Poseyville, Indiana, his sister, Sandra Murray, of Show Low, Arizona, and his Aunt Betty and cousins, Bob and Dudley Hasbrouck, all of Vancouver, Washington. He was preceded in death by his parents, his sister Margaret Frazier of Ashburn, Virginia, Uncle Bob Hasbrouck, cousin George Thompson of Phoenix and others.