Monday, Dec. 22, 2008, I emailed Sen. Leahy and faxed the senate Judiciary Committee and Subcommittees the following message:
December 22, 2008
Chairman Patrick J. Leahy
United States Senate
Committee on the Judiciary
224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Fax: 202-224-9516
Re: FBI Oversight- Please associate with my Dec. 11, 2008 letter (USPS # EH 222975937 US)
Dear Chairman Leahy,
I appeared as summoned at the Holmes County courthouse (FL 14th Judicial Circuit) Friday morning, Dec. 12, 2008, for jury duty. I was prospective juror #37. After Clerk of the Court Cody Taylor explained the procedures, he asked if anyone wanted to talk to the judge about being excused from duty. I raised my hand. I intended to present the judge with evidence of my charges in his chambers. Taylor called a one half hour recess and called me over to him. He told me that the judge doesn't want to talk to me and said that I'm excused. This is the same courthouse in which another judge earlier declared a mistrial in my neighbors’ drug case that I referenced in my December 11, 2007 letter to FBI Director Mueller. The judge dismissed the case because the State Attorney and FDLE withheld evidence and testimony. I suspect that the withheld evidence would prove my charges.
The above is representative of all state officials’ responses to my charges and why I am requesting the Senate Judiciary Committee’s help. No Florida politician will intervene on my behalf. My situation is not unique. The Patriot Act just legalized what various agencies have been doing for years, and there are no effective checks and balances to the inevitable abuses. The recent DOJ policy changes regarding information sharing between federal, state, and local law enforcement only makes it easier to cover-up such abuses on all levels. If you have any questions, please contact me and I will answer any questions that you may have and provide you with whatever additional information that you may require. Thank you.
Sincerely
Joe Keegan
Government spying on its citizens isn't limited just to NSA spying on oversea phone calls of suspected terrorists. The Patriot Act considerably expanded the definition of "terrorist" to include suspected everyday crimes not related to terrorism. Despite the hype, there are no checks and balances.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Jury Duty
Appeared as summoned at the courthouse Friday morning, Dec. 12, for jury duty. I was prospective juror #37. After Clerk of the Court Cody Taylor explained the procedures, he asked if anyone wanted to talk to the judge about being excused from duty. I figured that I might as well to avoid a possible scene, because no prosecutor would allow me to sit on any jury anyway. Taylor called a one half hour recess and called me over to him. He told me that the judge doesn't want to talk to me and said that I'm excused.
Friday, December 12, 2008
US Senate Judicicary Committee
The USPS verified delivery of my EXPRESS MAIL envelope tracking #: EH 222975937 US at 11:08 AM on December 12, 2008 in WASHINGTON, DC 20510 to SENATE 20510 R6 . The item was signed for by E TURNER. A copy of the text of my letter follows:
December 11, 2008
Chairman Patrick J. Leahy
United States Senate
Committee on the Judiciary
224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
“When just one of us loses just one of our rights, then the freedoms of all of us are diminished.” - FBI Director Robert S. Mueller
Re: FBI oversight
Dear Chairman Leahy,
Despite FBI Director Mueller’s assurances, there are no effective controls to prevent the inevitable abuses resulting from the recent changes to DOJ regulations that would allow state and local law enforcement agencies to collect intelligence on individuals and or-ganizations even if the information is unrelated to any criminal activity. Federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies have an inherent conflict of interest in investigating themselves and each other. These changes are too open to deliberate misinterpretation and abuse by those with the will to do so. 28 C.F.R. Part 23 already provided all the direction necessary for law enforcement to do their job within the constraints of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights while keeping all of us safe from the real terrorists and criminals.
My situation is a case in point and serves as a model as to what to expect from these new regulations. After exhausting all administrative remedies with the State of Florida to resolve my charges of illegal electronic surveillance and harassment against the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Holmes County Sheriff’s Department, and the West Florida Electric Co-Op, I filed a complaint with the FBI Jacksonville Field Office. When Jacksonville refused to reply to inquiries regarding the status of my complaint, I mailed a more detailed one, dated December 11, 2007, to FBI Director Mueller and included a copy of a VHS tape (enclosed). Electronic surveillance experts said that the audio phenomenon that I managed to record, such as the amplification and unnatural resonance of the dog’s barking and sound of the aircraft, is indicative of electronic surveillance. Earlier three other electronic surveillance experts all verified illegally mounted electronic surveillance devices on the utility poles servicing the house and grounds, but refused to supply their reports. One expert even identified the manu-facturer of the devices as Audio Intelligence Devices, a supplier to law enforcement and government agencies. When the FBI refused to reply to my complaints, I filed a number of FOIA/PA requests in order to get an acknowledgment of my charges by the FBI. However, the FBI denied having any records related to me or my charges, even though I mailed my complaints EXPRESS MAIL and FBI personnel signed for them. The Jacksonville Field Office even denied receiving my FOIA/PA Request.
I appealed the FBI’s "no record" responses. Deputy Chief Work of the Administrative Appeals Staff dismissed my appeals as "moot" and closed my appeal files, because both FBI HQ and the Jacksonville Field Offices denied having any records. She even dismissed an appeal that I hadn’t filed yet. Consequently, I filed two separate complaints, one under the Patriot Act, with the DOJ OIG charging FBI employees with misconduct. When the IG didn’t acknowledge my complaints, I filed a FOIA/PA request with the DOJ OIG seeking records related to my filed charges against named FBI employees. I received a "no records" response to my FOIA. The IG denied receiving my complaints.
Around this time period, I called FBI HQ mailroom, which easily tracked my EXPRESS MAIL letter to FBI Director Mueller and the room/unit where it was eventually delivered. I suspect that my phone call to the FBI mailroom and/or two complaints filed with the DOJ OIG charging the FBI with lying to cover-up and abuse of the Patriot Act may have prompted Civil Rights CID Chief Peeples’ reply. He returned my complaint and evidence addressed to FBI Dir. Mueller and wrote: "The allegations that you have brought to our attention do not warrant any action by the FBI."
My charges most certainly warrant the FBI’s action as a form of check and balances and oversight to state and local law enforcement abuses, especially in light of these new regulations. I’ve enclosed a copy of my letter, dated December 11, 2007, and evidence, including a VHS videotape, to FBI Director Mueller. I am requesting that the Senate Judiciary Committee investigate my charges and that you or your staff present my complaint directly to FBI Director Mueller for his reply. I began this letter with the following quote from Director Mueller: “When just one of us loses just one of our rights, then the freedoms of all of us are diminished.” I would like to know if he means what he said or are they just words.
Sincerely,
Joe Keegan
December 11, 2008
Chairman Patrick J. Leahy
United States Senate
Committee on the Judiciary
224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
“When just one of us loses just one of our rights, then the freedoms of all of us are diminished.” - FBI Director Robert S. Mueller
Re: FBI oversight
Dear Chairman Leahy,
Despite FBI Director Mueller’s assurances, there are no effective controls to prevent the inevitable abuses resulting from the recent changes to DOJ regulations that would allow state and local law enforcement agencies to collect intelligence on individuals and or-ganizations even if the information is unrelated to any criminal activity. Federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies have an inherent conflict of interest in investigating themselves and each other. These changes are too open to deliberate misinterpretation and abuse by those with the will to do so. 28 C.F.R. Part 23 already provided all the direction necessary for law enforcement to do their job within the constraints of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights while keeping all of us safe from the real terrorists and criminals.
My situation is a case in point and serves as a model as to what to expect from these new regulations. After exhausting all administrative remedies with the State of Florida to resolve my charges of illegal electronic surveillance and harassment against the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Holmes County Sheriff’s Department, and the West Florida Electric Co-Op, I filed a complaint with the FBI Jacksonville Field Office. When Jacksonville refused to reply to inquiries regarding the status of my complaint, I mailed a more detailed one, dated December 11, 2007, to FBI Director Mueller and included a copy of a VHS tape (enclosed). Electronic surveillance experts said that the audio phenomenon that I managed to record, such as the amplification and unnatural resonance of the dog’s barking and sound of the aircraft, is indicative of electronic surveillance. Earlier three other electronic surveillance experts all verified illegally mounted electronic surveillance devices on the utility poles servicing the house and grounds, but refused to supply their reports. One expert even identified the manu-facturer of the devices as Audio Intelligence Devices, a supplier to law enforcement and government agencies. When the FBI refused to reply to my complaints, I filed a number of FOIA/PA requests in order to get an acknowledgment of my charges by the FBI. However, the FBI denied having any records related to me or my charges, even though I mailed my complaints EXPRESS MAIL and FBI personnel signed for them. The Jacksonville Field Office even denied receiving my FOIA/PA Request.
I appealed the FBI’s "no record" responses. Deputy Chief Work of the Administrative Appeals Staff dismissed my appeals as "moot" and closed my appeal files, because both FBI HQ and the Jacksonville Field Offices denied having any records. She even dismissed an appeal that I hadn’t filed yet. Consequently, I filed two separate complaints, one under the Patriot Act, with the DOJ OIG charging FBI employees with misconduct. When the IG didn’t acknowledge my complaints, I filed a FOIA/PA request with the DOJ OIG seeking records related to my filed charges against named FBI employees. I received a "no records" response to my FOIA. The IG denied receiving my complaints.
Around this time period, I called FBI HQ mailroom, which easily tracked my EXPRESS MAIL letter to FBI Director Mueller and the room/unit where it was eventually delivered. I suspect that my phone call to the FBI mailroom and/or two complaints filed with the DOJ OIG charging the FBI with lying to cover-up and abuse of the Patriot Act may have prompted Civil Rights CID Chief Peeples’ reply. He returned my complaint and evidence addressed to FBI Dir. Mueller and wrote: "The allegations that you have brought to our attention do not warrant any action by the FBI."
My charges most certainly warrant the FBI’s action as a form of check and balances and oversight to state and local law enforcement abuses, especially in light of these new regulations. I’ve enclosed a copy of my letter, dated December 11, 2007, and evidence, including a VHS videotape, to FBI Director Mueller. I am requesting that the Senate Judiciary Committee investigate my charges and that you or your staff present my complaint directly to FBI Director Mueller for his reply. I began this letter with the following quote from Director Mueller: “When just one of us loses just one of our rights, then the freedoms of all of us are diminished.” I would like to know if he means what he said or are they just words.
Sincerely,
Joe Keegan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)