Monday, July 31, 2006
FOP-Florida State Lodge
The Fraternal Order of Police's most recent solicitation for donations was this past Friday, July 28, 2006. The cops don't call you themselves,but hire someone that does it for them. A Tom Crosby from one such firm in Tallahasse called this past Friday. Mr. Crosby was polite and professional and advised me that he was recording our conversation for my protection. I interrupted Mr. Crosby before he began his "pitch" and asked him if he could give me a number to call to verify his company's legitimacy. Mr. Crosby said that he didn't have a personal number, but to call 888-268-8029, which was his company's toll-free number. I then asked him for the FOP's URL and told him that I wanted to check out the organization and that I'd get back. Mr. Crosby gave me the following website: http://www.floridastatefop.org . Mr. Crosby was polite, professional, and most importantly above board. When you ask someone that is honest and above board a direct question, they'll give you a direct answer. What I didn't ask Mr. Crosby was why was he calling me since this number is on the no-call list?
Saturday, July 15, 2006
FDLE OIG
I still haven't received a reply to my email from either FDLE OIG Inspector Keith Wilmer or his boss, IG Dennis. I wonder if these gentlemen, unlike State Attorney Steve Meadows, save their emails? Meadows said that he didn't because he doesn't type and thought that the server in Tallahassee would save his emails. At any rate, I guess that Inspector Wilmer didn't find any material misrepresentations or misstatements in my recap of our conversation. I also asked Wilmer (and Dennis) what would they do if I supplied them with direct evidence of illegal electronic surveillance by the FDLE? That's not a trick question. It's simple enough, especially since they're supposed to be investigating my charges or something. For that matter, Inspector Wilmer could just ask some FDLE officials if I'm bugged or not. They know because they're covering-up. Another way is just do a simple accounting of their "bugs." Most law enforcement "bugs" have serial numbers and they're inventoried. Just check the records. If they are investigating anything, I wonder what or rather whom? Hmmm, I could I be under another double secret investigation? They'll have to find another secret witness, because the last one they used as needed is away for awhile.
Wednesday, July 05, 2006
FDLE OIG Inspector Keith Wilmer
A Kim Likens from the Governor's OIG left a message sometime Monday (July 3rd)morning to call her. I returned her call around 1:00 p.m. Central. A Mr. Fred Wollet answered. Ms. Likens wasn't available. Wollet said that she was with the Chief Inspector's office. I left a message. Ms. Likens called back within an hour. She told me that her boss, Dawn Case, wanted her to call me and tell me that she had forwarded my letter to the Governor to FDLE OIG Al Dennis earlier in the day. Ms. Likens said that this matter belongs with the FDLE. FDLE OIG Inspector Keith Wilmer called me a short time afterwards. Inspector Wilmer said that his call was in response to an earlier email to IG Dennis and that he didn't know anything other than that or about my letter to Gov. Bush. Yesterday morning (July 4th) I emailed Inspector Wilmer with a courtesy copy to IG Dennis a recap of our conversation from the day before and I asked him to advise me regarding any material misrepresentations or misstatements in my message. I've pasted the text of my email to FDLE OIG Inspector Wilmer below.
Mr. Wilmer,
This is a follow-up to your phone call yesterday afternoon. I'll briefly recap our conversation. You said that you were calling about an email that you received from IG Dennis regarding a Dodge minivan. I asked you if you were a Criminal Investigator and you replied that you were. You stated that you were not recording our phone conversation. I asked you what OIG you were affiliated with. You said that you were with the FDLE OIG and calling about my email to IG Dennis regarding a remote transponder in a Dodge minivan. You denied that you saw any other correspondence, such as my letters to Gov. Bush or FL AG Crist or had any other prior knowledge of my complaint. You said that your inquiry just involved the email concerning the minivan. You asked me who the vehicle belonged to, why would law enforcement put a remote transponder in it, and who verified that there was a tracking device in it? I told you that the minivan belonged to a family member, I didn't answer your question regarding why, and I told you that I would have to check the record to see the expert who verified its presence. I did tell you that the expert said the FDLE had a warrant and would have to tell me about it and the bugs on the pole within 30 days. I told you that it's been more than 30 days.
I asked you directly if there were any Florida law enforcement "bugs" on the utility poles servicing the house and grounds. You said that you didn't know. You added that you didn't know anything regarding this matter other than what was contained in the email that you received from IG Dennis. Again you said that you didn't know anything about my letter to Gov. Bush.
You asked me for the names of the three experts that verified the bugs on the utility poles and why they didn't supply reports. I told you that I'd have to check the records and that they didn't supply reports because they were tampered with by the FDLE and perhaps some other state agencies. You asked me a question concerning the dates involved. I told you that the first incident to best of my recollection was either 2001 or 2002 following the bungled drug bust of my neighbors. I said that an FDLE agent disguised as a FedEx driver delivered 3.5 lb. of meth to my neighbor's wife. I told him that my neighbor arrived home as the bust was going down and ran off with the 3.5 lbs. of meth. I told you that an FDLE helicopter returned later that evening on the pretext of picking up my neighbor who ran off earlier with 3.5 lbs.of meth, but that I was the intended target. You didn't allow me to finish and interrupted repeatedly saying that this has nothing to do with your investigation. I told you that it has everything to do with it.
You asked me if I had looked for the tracking device in the minivan. I told you that I didn't. You advised me that I'd have to have some certified mechanic inspect the minivan and verify that there's a bug in it. When I asked you again if there were FL law enforcement bugs on the utility poles, you said to contact the power supplier and ask them to do a search for "illegal attachments" and supply you with their "report of findings." I told you that I had already requested that and that with the protection of the FDLE the utility later removed the original bugs and replaced them with the next generation. You told me that I'd have to pay for the experts to verify the presence of "attachments" and to supply their "reports of findings" to you. I told you that the FDLE kept threatening the experts with loss of their PI license or else they had conflicts of interest. You cut me off before I could discuss any expert's conflicts of interests, although I said that they'd lose their licenses or else go to jail. You said that's not possible.
If you believe that I misrepresented or misstated any of the above, please advise me as to what statement(s) you specifically disagree with and why.
Finally, if I did supply you with direct evidence of illegal electronic surveillance by FL law enforcement, what action could you take as an FDLE Criminal Investigator (Inspector)? And, what action would you take as an FDLE Criminal Investigator regarding illegal electronic surveillance and official misconduct by certified Florida law enforcement officers?
Regards,
Joe Keegan
Mr. Wilmer,
This is a follow-up to your phone call yesterday afternoon. I'll briefly recap our conversation. You said that you were calling about an email that you received from IG Dennis regarding a Dodge minivan. I asked you if you were a Criminal Investigator and you replied that you were. You stated that you were not recording our phone conversation. I asked you what OIG you were affiliated with. You said that you were with the FDLE OIG and calling about my email to IG Dennis regarding a remote transponder in a Dodge minivan. You denied that you saw any other correspondence, such as my letters to Gov. Bush or FL AG Crist or had any other prior knowledge of my complaint. You said that your inquiry just involved the email concerning the minivan. You asked me who the vehicle belonged to, why would law enforcement put a remote transponder in it, and who verified that there was a tracking device in it? I told you that the minivan belonged to a family member, I didn't answer your question regarding why, and I told you that I would have to check the record to see the expert who verified its presence. I did tell you that the expert said the FDLE had a warrant and would have to tell me about it and the bugs on the pole within 30 days. I told you that it's been more than 30 days.
I asked you directly if there were any Florida law enforcement "bugs" on the utility poles servicing the house and grounds. You said that you didn't know. You added that you didn't know anything regarding this matter other than what was contained in the email that you received from IG Dennis. Again you said that you didn't know anything about my letter to Gov. Bush.
You asked me for the names of the three experts that verified the bugs on the utility poles and why they didn't supply reports. I told you that I'd have to check the records and that they didn't supply reports because they were tampered with by the FDLE and perhaps some other state agencies. You asked me a question concerning the dates involved. I told you that the first incident to best of my recollection was either 2001 or 2002 following the bungled drug bust of my neighbors. I said that an FDLE agent disguised as a FedEx driver delivered 3.5 lb. of meth to my neighbor's wife. I told him that my neighbor arrived home as the bust was going down and ran off with the 3.5 lbs. of meth. I told you that an FDLE helicopter returned later that evening on the pretext of picking up my neighbor who ran off earlier with 3.5 lbs.of meth, but that I was the intended target. You didn't allow me to finish and interrupted repeatedly saying that this has nothing to do with your investigation. I told you that it has everything to do with it.
You asked me if I had looked for the tracking device in the minivan. I told you that I didn't. You advised me that I'd have to have some certified mechanic inspect the minivan and verify that there's a bug in it. When I asked you again if there were FL law enforcement bugs on the utility poles, you said to contact the power supplier and ask them to do a search for "illegal attachments" and supply you with their "report of findings." I told you that I had already requested that and that with the protection of the FDLE the utility later removed the original bugs and replaced them with the next generation. You told me that I'd have to pay for the experts to verify the presence of "attachments" and to supply their "reports of findings" to you. I told you that the FDLE kept threatening the experts with loss of their PI license or else they had conflicts of interest. You cut me off before I could discuss any expert's conflicts of interests, although I said that they'd lose their licenses or else go to jail. You said that's not possible.
If you believe that I misrepresented or misstated any of the above, please advise me as to what statement(s) you specifically disagree with and why.
Finally, if I did supply you with direct evidence of illegal electronic surveillance by FL law enforcement, what action could you take as an FDLE Criminal Investigator (Inspector)? And, what action would you take as an FDLE Criminal Investigator regarding illegal electronic surveillance and official misconduct by certified Florida law enforcement officers?
Regards,
Joe Keegan
Monday, July 03, 2006
FDLE Office of Inspector General
I just got off the phone a short time ago (within the last hour or so)with FDLE Inspector Keith Wilmer who called about an email that he said he received from IG Dennis regarding a Dodge minivan. I asked Mr. Wilmer if he were a Criminal Investigator and he replied that he was one. I asked Criminal Investigator (Inspector) Wilmer if he were recording our phone conversation. Inspector Wilmer replied that he wasn't. I was keeping a contemporaneous record of our phone conversation just as I supposed that Mr. Wilmer was keeping one. This post is based on that record and serves as an extension of it. Mr. Wilmer caught me at an inopportune time as I was making preparations for the 4th of July holiday and wasn't prepared to answer his questions. Wilmer's call followed shortly after a phone call from Kim Likens at the Chief Inspector's Office at the Office of the Inspector General at the Governor's office. Ms. Likens told me that her superior, Ms. Dawn Case, told her to call me and tell me that they were sending some letters that they received to FDLE IG Dennis because my complaint belongs there. I asked her if these letters were from the Governor and she replied that they were. I thanked her and wished her happy 4th.
I asked Mr. Wilmer what IG office he was with because the distinctions and hierachies confuse me. Mr. Wilmer said that the hierchary confuses him, too. He said that he was with the FDLE OIG and calling about my email to IG Dennis regarding a remote transponder in a Dodge minivan. I asked him if he saw any other letters, such as to AG Crist or the Governor. He said that he was replying to an email to FDLE IG Dennis regarding a Dodge minivan and denied that he saw any other correspondence. I asked Mr. Wilmer if his call just involved the minivan and he replied that his call just concerned the minivan. I expanded the scope of Mr. Wilmer's call. I told him that I was being direct and Mr. Wilmer replied that he was being direct. I was courteous, respectful, and polite as was FDLE Criminal Investigator Keith Wilmer, who appeared to have a southern accent. I have a yankee accent.
To summarize: Mr. Wilmer concentrated on the minivan and asked me who it belonged to, why would law enforcement put a remote transponder in it, and who verified that there was a tracking device in it. I told him that the minivan belonged to a family member, I didn't answer his question regarding why, and I told him that I would have to check the record to see the expert who verified its presence, although I told him that the expert said that the FDLE had a warrant and would have to tell me about it and the bugs on the pole within 30 days. I told FDLE Criminal Investigator Keith Wilmer that it's been more than 30 days.
When Mr. Wilmer's questions grew increasingly silly, I asked him directly if there were any Florida law enforcement bugs on the utility poles servicing the house and grounds. Wilmer said that he didn't know. He also said that he didn't know anything other regarding this matter than what he received in an email from his boss. He said that he didn't know anything about any letters to Governor Bush.
He asked me what experts verified the bugs on the the utility pole and why they didn't supply reports. I told him that I'd have to check the records and that they didn't supply reports because they were tampered with by the FDLE and perhaps some other agencies.
He wanted dates and as I said he caught me off guard because of holiday preparations. After continued questioning, I told him that the first incident was to the best of my memory either 2001 or 2002 following the bungled drug bust of my neighbors. I said that an FDLE agent disguised as a FedEx driver delivered 3.5 lbs. of meth to my neighbor's wife. I told him that my neighbor arrived home as the bust was going down and ran off with the 3.5 lbs. of meth. FDLE Criminal Investigator Wilmer didn't allow me to finish and interrupted repeatedly saying that this has nothing to do with his criminal investigation. I told Wilmer that it has everything to do with it.
Long and short of it was that Wilmer's "investigation" didn't last more than 25 minutes. Inspector Wilmer asked me if I had searched for the tracking device in the minivan. I told him no. Wilmer advised me that I'd have to have some certified mechanic inspect the minivan and verify that there's a bug in it. When I asked him if there were FL law enforcement bugs on the utility poles, Inspector Wilmer said to contact the power supplier and ask them to do a search for "illegal attachments." I told Wilmer that I had already done that and that with the protection of the FDLE they removed the orginial bugs and replaced them with the next generation. Wilmer told me that I'd have to pay for the experts to verify the presence of "attachments" and to supply their "reports of findings" to him. I told Wilmer that the FDLE kept threatening the experts with loss of their PI license or else they had conflicts of interest. Wilmer cut me off before I could discuss any experts conflicts of interests, although I said that they'd lose their licenses or else go to jail. Wilmer said that's not possible.
I asked Mr. Wilmer what IG office he was with because the distinctions and hierachies confuse me. Mr. Wilmer said that the hierchary confuses him, too. He said that he was with the FDLE OIG and calling about my email to IG Dennis regarding a remote transponder in a Dodge minivan. I asked him if he saw any other letters, such as to AG Crist or the Governor. He said that he was replying to an email to FDLE IG Dennis regarding a Dodge minivan and denied that he saw any other correspondence. I asked Mr. Wilmer if his call just involved the minivan and he replied that his call just concerned the minivan. I expanded the scope of Mr. Wilmer's call. I told him that I was being direct and Mr. Wilmer replied that he was being direct. I was courteous, respectful, and polite as was FDLE Criminal Investigator Keith Wilmer, who appeared to have a southern accent. I have a yankee accent.
To summarize: Mr. Wilmer concentrated on the minivan and asked me who it belonged to, why would law enforcement put a remote transponder in it, and who verified that there was a tracking device in it. I told him that the minivan belonged to a family member, I didn't answer his question regarding why, and I told him that I would have to check the record to see the expert who verified its presence, although I told him that the expert said that the FDLE had a warrant and would have to tell me about it and the bugs on the pole within 30 days. I told FDLE Criminal Investigator Keith Wilmer that it's been more than 30 days.
When Mr. Wilmer's questions grew increasingly silly, I asked him directly if there were any Florida law enforcement bugs on the utility poles servicing the house and grounds. Wilmer said that he didn't know. He also said that he didn't know anything other regarding this matter than what he received in an email from his boss. He said that he didn't know anything about any letters to Governor Bush.
He asked me what experts verified the bugs on the the utility pole and why they didn't supply reports. I told him that I'd have to check the records and that they didn't supply reports because they were tampered with by the FDLE and perhaps some other agencies.
He wanted dates and as I said he caught me off guard because of holiday preparations. After continued questioning, I told him that the first incident was to the best of my memory either 2001 or 2002 following the bungled drug bust of my neighbors. I said that an FDLE agent disguised as a FedEx driver delivered 3.5 lbs. of meth to my neighbor's wife. I told him that my neighbor arrived home as the bust was going down and ran off with the 3.5 lbs. of meth. FDLE Criminal Investigator Wilmer didn't allow me to finish and interrupted repeatedly saying that this has nothing to do with his criminal investigation. I told Wilmer that it has everything to do with it.
Long and short of it was that Wilmer's "investigation" didn't last more than 25 minutes. Inspector Wilmer asked me if I had searched for the tracking device in the minivan. I told him no. Wilmer advised me that I'd have to have some certified mechanic inspect the minivan and verify that there's a bug in it. When I asked him if there were FL law enforcement bugs on the utility poles, Inspector Wilmer said to contact the power supplier and ask them to do a search for "illegal attachments." I told Wilmer that I had already done that and that with the protection of the FDLE they removed the orginial bugs and replaced them with the next generation. Wilmer told me that I'd have to pay for the experts to verify the presence of "attachments" and to supply their "reports of findings" to him. I told Wilmer that the FDLE kept threatening the experts with loss of their PI license or else they had conflicts of interest. Wilmer cut me off before I could discuss any experts conflicts of interests, although I said that they'd lose their licenses or else go to jail. Wilmer said that's not possible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)