Print Version; Tort Claim Against Metro Louisville re: Chief Robert White (7/30/07)
Metro Louisville Risk Management Claim #15068350320
Certified Mail No.: 7007 0220 0001 0618 5414
A 'SECURITY' [15 USE et esq.]
U.S.S.E.C. TRACER FLAG
(not a point of law - under necessity, per
agreement of the parties and / or in
violation of the Bill of Rights - 2nd para.)
FROM: Daniel L. Cobble
3401 Lesway Ct., #12
Louisville, KY 40220
502 / 499-5249
NOTICE OF TORT CLAIM, & Tort Claim
TO: Metro Louisville Risk Management
c/o Kevin O'Donnell, Director
611 W. Jefferson St.
Louisville, KY 40202
Mailed: July 30, 2007
Claimant: Daniel L. Cobble, the Secured Party
Date of Occurrences and Injuries: beginning April 20, 2006 to the present.
Dear Mr. O'Donnell,
Claimant, Daniel L. Cobble, is the injured Secured Party of the Debtor, DANIEL L. COBBLE, and herein submits and files this claim, w/ completed Metro Louisville Risk Mgmt. claim form attached, for damages and remedies from injuries as a matter of right, arising out of violations of: DUE PROCESS OF LAW, OATHS-OF-OFFICE, MISAPPLICATION OF THE STATUTES, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, COLOR OF LAW, DISREGARD FOR ALL MANNER OF LAW and other violations and injuries to his person and property, to wit:
1. Complicity w/ the unlawful taking of property
2. Emotional, physical and mental anguish
3. Emotional and physical stress
4.Violations of the Constitution of the United States / denial of rights under the Bill of Rights including Section #1, 1st and 14th Amendments
5. Violations of 18 U.S.C. §241, §242 (Color of law to take away rights), and § 245
6. Violations of Sec. 2 of the Kentucky Constitution
7. Violations of Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS): KRS 522.010, KRS 522.020, KRS 522.020
8. Violations of Federal Rules of Civil Procedures
9. Fraud
10. Injury harassment
11. Breach of the Debtor contract
12. Wanton negligence
Notice of Tort Claim & Tort Claim, Claimant: Daniel L. Cobble, the Secured Party
1. On or about March 28, '06, the Secured Party ordered and paid $1154.00 to Value City Furniture (VCF), in Louisville, Kentucky, for a new Valencia furniture suit, complete w/ tables. However, on April 20, '06, when the "new" furniture arrived, VCF delivered to the Secured Party's home a worn, used demo furniture-set from its showroom floor. VCF then placed the Secured Party's newly ordered furniture on its showroom floor to replace the used demos. These actions can be verified by photos and videos taken of both sets of furniture, appropriate affidavits, and observing the illicit furniture that is still in the Secured Party's home. As of July 20, '07, VCF's demos are still in the living room of the Secured Party, approx. 15 months later. - VCF has refused to remove the furniture from his home, at the behest of Chief Jefferson County Attorney, Irv Maze, and Metro Louisville Chief of Police,
Robert White.
The Secured Party continues to suffer from the wanton negligence of these officials.
2. Though initially suspicious of the furniture's condition on the day of delivery (4/20/06), by April 24, '06 the Secured Party and his family realized that the furniture was not new. So, he 1) filed a criminal complaint with the Jefferson County Attorneys Office, and 2) attempted to file a police report with the Metro Louisville Police Dept. (MLPD). However, the County Attorneys office responded by issuing its April 28, ?07 "form letter" in specifying that it would not take criminal action against VCF, because, the form letter stated, "[Cobble] may seek remedies through civil action." MLPD officers, D. Sheppard and Sgt. E. Thomas, simply refused to take a report of the crimes when arriving at Cobble's residence on 4/24/06.
3. The Secured Party then follow-up with a verifiable letter to Attorney Maze on May 2, '06 (Exhibit 1). That letter explained that his office has a duty to prosecute a case where a crime is shown to have harmed the complainant. Mr. Maze did not dispute the letter specifying that VCF committed the felonies of fraud and theft-by-deception. Yet his office did not respond to the Secured Party. Redress of a grievance is required under the First Amendment, most especially if a citizen is harmed from the criminal acts of a perpetrator. To do otherwise is complicity with the crime.
4. The Secured Party follow-up with two verifiable letters to Chief White on April 28 and May 8, ?06 (Exhibit 2), but Chief White did not respond. These letters reminded Chief White that his office has a duty to "take a report" and investigate a case where a crime is shown to have harmed the complainant. Chief White did not dispute those letters that also specified that VCF committed the felonies of fraud and theft-by-deception. Again, redress of a grievance is required by the constitutional contract, under the First Amendment, most especially if the Secured Party is harmed by those criminal acts.
UNLAWFUL DISMISSAL OF THE
SECURED PARTY'S LAWSUIT TO PROTECT OFFICIALS
5. With these persistent yet acquiesced refusals to address the illegal actions of VCF, on May 11, '06, the Secured Party filed a civil Complaint w/ affidavit and photos ( DN 1) in federal court (case 3:06cv-228-H) against Attorney Maze and Chief White. The reason for that lawsuit is that Attorney Maze, and his office, and Chief White, and the MLPD were being complicit w/ the criminal acts of Value City Furniture (VCF). As stated, MLPD refused to even take a criminal report. The lawsuit's objective was to have the court compel Attorney Maze and Chief White to do their jobs by addressing VCF's illicit practices, for no punitive damages were claimed by the Secured Party.
6. A "motion for injunction" (Exhibit #3, DN 4) was attached to the Complaint, demanding that the furniture be removed from the Cobbles' home. However, the federal court, without due cause, dismissed the Secured Party's lawsuit, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, even though that court (Judge John G. Heyburn, II), Attorney Maze and Chief White (by Counsel) acknowledged that VCF committed crimes and that the Secured Party was harmed. The motion-for-injunction was denied as being moot when Judge Heyburn dismissed the case.
7. Again, the furniture still sets in the Secured Party's home, wrapped in brown paper and marked "EVIDENCE." (Evidentiary photos of the wrapping and the furniture sets, uncovered at Cobbles home and VCF's showroom, are included with the Complaint.) The Cobbles have not utilized / enjoyed their living room since 4/20/06. Thus, the Secured Party and his family are still suffering from these injuries and inequities, since Attorney Maze and Chief White have refused to do their sworn duties of upholding the law / state and national Constitutions, that comprise investigating and prosecuting apparent criminal acts. Judge Heyburn is complicit in this matter by refusing to force these officials to do their jobs. These law-enforcement officials are in stark violation of their oaths-of-office.
8. In their May 31, '06 motion-to dismiss the Complaint (DN 5, Exhibit #4), [Defendants] Attorney Maze and Chief White, by Counsel, stated the following in footnote 2 (page 1): "For purposes of this motion only, the Defendants will assume the facts alleged in the complaint are true. . ." Here, Attorney Maze and Chief White legally acknowledged that VCF harmed the Secured Party from the furniture scam. Therefore, they were required by the First Amendment (REDRESS of grievances) and due process of law (Fourteenth Amendment) to prosecute the criminal complaint. But again, the civil Complaint was unlawfully dismissed by Judge Heyburn, that otherwise demanded such prosecution from law enforcement.
9. In their 5/31/06 motion-to-dismiss (supra), [Defendants] Maze and White improperly state that Defendant Maze ". . . enjoys absolute immunity from § 1983 suits for damages when he acts within the scope of his prosecutorial duties. . ." But this brought on two legal problems for the defendants.
10. First, § 1983 inherently violates the DUE PROCESS clauses of the federal and state constitutional contracts of the Debtor Party, the Fourteenth Amendment and Section 2 of the Kentucky Constitution. Here, Maze and White claim that § 1983 allow prosecutors to
arbitrarily select which cases they will pursue, even when harm is done to the complainants. But state and federal due process require that all complaints with merit be pursued. Government officials cannot lawfully allow material harm to come to a citizen.
11. Second, a prosecutor commits "prosecutorial misconduct" and "complicity" when walking away from a complaint where the complainant is harmed, because the crime persists in its activation. As stated in above paragraph 3, the prosecutor becomes complicit with that crime by allowing the [criminal] to escape without due prosecution / punishment. FOR EXAMPLE, VCF's furniture is still in the Cobbles' home after over 455 days.
12. Judge Heyburn's Aug. 15, ?06 order (DN 12, Exhibit #5) memorandum and opinion (DN 13) clearly colored the law when dismissing the Secured Party's Complaint, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 242 and the First Amendment of the constitutional contract. He dismissed the case in falsely stating that ". . . the complaint must be dismissed in its entirety for failure to state a claim, . . . (Pages 1 and 4 of memorandum and opinion, DN 13). Yet, the Secured Party's Complaint was simply that VCF delivered to his home used demo furniture as the new furniture that he paid for. The complaint continues by specifying that VCF committed "theft-by-deception" and "fraud" by "switching" the furniture, of which Maze and White refused to prosecute. Hence, this is most obviously a claim for which relief can be granted.
13. In that unlawful 8/15/06 judgment, too, Judge Heyburn denied the Secured Party's May 11, ?06 motion-for-injunction for compelling an immediate investigation of the furniture and for having the furniture removed from the Secured Party's home.
14. Again, the most glaring aspect of this matter is that none of the foregoing parties have NOT denied that the Secured Party is being / has been harmed (per Exhibits #4 and #5). In fact, as stated, Maze and White have affirmed that he was harmed (Exhibit #4). And again, this furniture is still in the living room of the Secured Party, that bars the full use and enjoyment of his home and his family, in violation of Section 1 of the Bill of Rights, the Secured Party is being denied the "pursuit of happiness" in his home.
15. Please note that (see reference in above paragraph 3) though Maze referred the Secured Party to "civil remedies," the court still barred Cobble from governmental institutions. The justice system's denial of the Secured Party's effectual access, thereof, of both state and federal, is a quite common scenario for average taxpayers, these days, even whether or not a taxpayer is represented by an attorney. In this case, governmental officials (including Judge Heyburn) violated their oaths-of-office to the "constitutional contract" of DEBTOR, DANIEL L. COBBLE (a fiction), a contract of which the Secured Party has not agreed to. Hence, as a free man under auspice of the Declaration of Independence, the Secured Party may opt to suspend his abidance of governmental, corporate, statutory law and require that he only be subjected to common law.
The Secured Party has this "inalienable right."
16. To put another way, governments in the United States are abandoning the "rule of law," while statesmen of the United States (including the President) persistently instruct other nations that they must abide by the rule of law.
Here, the Secured Party reminds Metro Louisville's Risk Management that punitive damages were NOT claimed in his 5/11/06 lawsuit, but only that Maze and White be required to follow the law (and modest compensatory damages were claimed).
WHEREBY, Claimant herein demands that his April 24, ?06 criminal complaint filed with Attorney Maze's office be prosecuted, that includes removal of the illicit furniture from the Secured Party's home for forensics and kept for case-prosecution; and that the Metro Louisville Police Dept. take a report of the 4/20/06 delivery of illegal furniture, for its investigation, AND
the sum of Twenty-two Million Dollars ($22,000,000.00) in functional currency for damages from 1) Complicity w/ the unlawful taking of property, 2) Emotional, physical and mental anguish, 3) Emotional and physical stress; and violations of: 4) the Constitutional Contract of the U.S. Constitution including denial of rights under the Bill of Rights, Section #1, 1st and 14th Amendments, 5) 18 U.S.C. §241, §242 (Color of law to take away rights), and § 245, 6) the Constitutional Contract of the Kentucky Constitution including Sections 1 and 2, 7) Kentucky Revised Statutes 522.010, 522.020 and 522.020, 8) the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures; and committing: 9) Fraud, 10) Injury harassment, and 11) Breach of the Debtor Contract, COMMITTED BY
Irv Maze, the Jefferson County Attorneys Office, Robert White, and the Metro Louisville Police Dept.
ATTACHMENTS to this Tort Claim:
- Completed Metro Louisville Claim Form
- Affidavit in Support of Tort (4 pages)
- Affidavit of Negative Averment (2 pages)
- Exhibits:
#1, May 2, ?06 letter to Attorney Maze,
#2, May 8, ?06 letter to Chief White,
#3, Page 1 of Cobble's motion-for injunction,
#4, Page 1 of Maze and White's motion-to dismiss,
#5, Judge Heyburn's May 15, ?04 order dismissing Cobble's lawsuit (per memorandum and opinion).
- UCC Financing Statement
This notice of claim and claim is lawful, because, via the "Declaration of Independence" the above named government employees, agents, and agencies of Metro Louisville are in stark violation of the Constitutional contracts (U.S. and Kentucky Constitutions) and oaths-of-office with Debtor, DANIEL L. COBBLE, and thus are still materially and overtly harming its Secured Party, Daniel L. Cobble.
Respectfully submitted by Daniel L. Cobble (Attorney-in-fact),
Signature July 30, 08
Daniel L. Cobble, 3401 Lesway Ct., #12, the Secured Party
Louisville, KY 40220, 502 / 499-5249
Signature Signature July 30, 08
Notary Public
TRACER / Postal status: certified mail - 7007 0220 0001 0618 5414
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
A copy of the forgoing notice of tort claim and tort claim and claim form and specified attachments was served by Certified mail on or about July 30, 2008 to the following feasors with an accompanying 30- DAY NOTICE FOR A RESPONSE:
Robert White, Chief of Police
Metro Louisville Police Dept.
225 So. 7Th St.
Louisville, KY 40202
Postal status: Certified mail
Metro Louisville Police Dept.
225 So. 7Th St.
Louisville, KY 40202
Postal status: Certified mail
Irv Maze, Chief Attorney
Jefferson County Attorneys Office
Hall of Justice, 600 W. Jefferson St.
Louisville, KY 40202
Postal status: Certified mail
Jefferson County Attorneys Office
Hall of Justice, 600 W. Jefferson St.
Louisville, KY 40202
Postal status: Certified mail
Signature
Daniel Cobble
Copy to:
Metro Louisville
c/o Jerry Abramson, Mayor
Louisville City Hall
601 W. Jefferson St.
End of Document * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Louisville, KY 40202
|
