from: Lion News lionnews00@gmail.com
to: Kurt Freitag kurt.freitag@co.freeborn.mn.us,
david.walker@co.freeborn.mn.us,
irigg@ci.albertlea.mn.us,
jcarlson@ci.albertlea.mn.us
date: May 3, 2021, 10:09 AM
subject: Chapter 13 Data Request - Data On Investigation Into Perjured Statements Made By
mailed-by: gmail.com
Kurt Freitag, Freeborn Co. Sheriff 507.377.5205 & David Walker County Attorney Email 411 Broadway S PO Bx 1147 Albert Lea MN 56007 Phone: 507.377.5192:
Chapter 13 data request: Please email/file share me the following readily available, free, electronic, public data in its original searchable pdf format from your respective offices pursuant to 13.03 Subd. 3(e) and Gen. Rules Prac. Rule 14:
1. Chapter 13.82 Subd. 3. Request for service data for March 17, 2021 incident involving Freeborn County Deputy Ron Wacholz and Melissa Lynn Hanson DOB: 7/14/1964 aka Lisa Lynn Hanson. Please include computer-aided dispatch reports and incident reports.
2. Freeborn County Co. Attorney's office general policy and procedure manual and prosecutor's policy and procedure manual.
3. Copy of any signed letter from judicial officer Joseph A. Bueltel notifying Freeborn County law enforcement of the alleged perjured statements made by City of Albert Lea City Attorney Kelly Martinez 507-377-4320 kmartinez@ci.albertlea.mn.us in her court documents entitled "March 24, 2021 Application For Order To Show Cause For Contempt Of Court And March 30, 2021 Motion To Correct Paragraph 11 Of State’s March 24 Application For Order To Show Cause."
4. Contact information for the outside agency and lead investigator to whom you forwarded the criminal investigative data into the alleged perjured statements of City of Albert Lea City Attorney Kelly Martinez 507-377-4320 kmartinez@ci.albertlea.mn.us.
Terry Dean, Nemmers 320-283-5713
P.S. Which is the greatest threat to public safety: A local city prosecutor aka a law enforcement officer engaging in a felony or a local business owner engaging in a misdemeanor?
P.S.S. Does or doesn't Freeborn County law enforcement enforce the perjury laws of the state of Minnesota?
P.S.S.S. Will you or won't you allow Lisa Hanson to file a criminal complaint against City of Albert Lea City Attorney Kelly Martinez for allegedly making perjured statements? (CASE NO. 24-CR-21-137 State of Minnesota vs Melissa Lynn Hanson CASE NO. 24-CR-21-188 State of Minnesota vs Melissa Lynn Hanson) Hmm? Inquiring minds want to know, don't they?
P.S.S.S.S. Would or wouldn't Freeborn County law enforcement honor an arrest warrant for City of Albert Lea City Attorney Kelly Martinez? Hmm? Inquiring minds really want to know, don't they?
Application for Order to Show Cause – Affiant, Kelly D. Martinez, for the Plaintiff, being duly sworn states: That she believes Kurt Frietag, Freeborn County Sheriff, violated the Court’s March 10, 2021 Warrant requiring the Sheriff of Freeborn County to apprehend, arrest, and bring Defendant before this Court without unnecessary delay for the following reasons(s): … 10. On March 17, Defendant gave an interview on Unsafe Spaces. Approximately 33 minutes into the interview, Defendant stated she recommended Deputy Wacholz contact Sheriff Frietag because the Sheriff guaranteed she would not be arrested on the warrants and he would not be taking her to jail on this issue. See Unsafe Spaces – Interview Lisa Hanson at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxX1yHOHYdo 11. On March 18, Sheriff Frietag emailed the Court and admitted to knowledge of the Court’s March 10, 2021 Warrant. He asserted Defendant has been a “resident of Albert Lea for decades” and she is a “current business owner”. He further asserted law enforcement has used its discretion where an “upstanding person in the community” has a low level warrant for his or her arrest. 12. To date, Sheriff Frietag has failed to execute and/or order his deputies to execute the Court’s March 10, 2021 Order. 13. Minnesota Statute 588.01, subd. 3, states constructive contempt may arise from, among other things, the following acts or omissions: the willful neglect or violation of duty by a sheriff to perform a judicial service; disobedience of any lawful judgment, order, or process of the court; and unlawful interference with the process or proceedings of a court. … The Sheriff’s conduct casts a negative shadow on the judicial system and implies “business owners” are “upstanding persons in the community” and therefore subject to differential treatment in criminal proceedings. Public confidence in the judiciary is essential to its functioning. That confidence is shattered if the Court permits unlawful disobedience of its Orders and/or interference with the process or proceedings of the Court. Upon this application and all the files and records herein, the State moves the Court to set the matter for an Order to Show Cause as to why Sheriff Kurt Frietag should not be held in contempt. I declare under penalty of perjury everything I have stated in this document is true and correct. Dated: March 24, 2021 /s/ Kelly Martinez Signed in Freeborn County at 9:41 p.m. Kelly D. Martinez, Atty Reg. 0390039 Albert Lea City Attorney 221 East Clark Street Albert Lea, Minnesota 56007 (507) 377-4320 kmartinez@ci.albertlea.mn.us 24-CR-21-137 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota March 29, 2021 State Of Minnesota County Of Freeborn District Court Third Judicial District Criminal Division Court File No. 24-CR-21-137 State of Minnesota, Plaintiff, -vs- Melissa Lynn Hanson (7/14/1964), Defendant. Page 1, 2, 3 . Application For Order To Show Cause For Contempt Of Court. Court Court File No. 24-CR-21-137 State of Minnesota vs. Melissa Lynn Hanson (7/14/1964).
The Complainant submits this complaint to the Court and states that there is probable cause to believe Defendant committed the following offense(s): COUNT I Charge: Perjury-Court Document Minnesota Statute: 609.48.1(4), with reference to: 609.48.4(2) Maximum Sentence: Five years imprisonment and/or $10,000 fine Offense Level: Felony Offense Date (on or about): 09/28/2020 Control #(ICR#): 20004503 Charge Description: On or about September 28, 2020, within the County of Swift, State of Minnesota, the defendant, Kyle Lee Rose (D.O.B.: 05/10/1990), did make a false material statement not believing it to be true in any writing made according to section 358.116. Statement Of Probable Cause Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 10/30/2020 The Complainant states that the following facts establish probable cause: On September 29, 2020, the defendant, Kyle Lee Rose (D.O.B.: 05/10/1990), filled out an Application for Public Defender while in custody at the Swift County Jail, Swift County, Minnesota. Upon completion, said Application was filed with the court for judicial review. In his application, the defendant answered “No”, under penalty of perjury, that he was not currently working. The defendant also left all spaces blank which asked about specific employment information. At a subsequent bail hearing held on the same day at the Swift County Courthouse, the defendant admitted on the record to the court that he did, in fact, have a job. The court asked, “Why do you check the box that you’re not working on your Application for Public Defender?” The defendant replied, “I assumed I...would not have a job.” Therefore, the defendant was currently employed at the time he filled out his Application for Public Defendant. 76-CR-20-401 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 10/30/2020 State of Minnesota County of Swift District Court 8th Judicial District Prosecutor File No. Court File No. State of Minnesota, 20CR00208 76-CR-20-401 COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Summons vs. KYLE LEE ROSE DOB: 05/10/1990 238 E Thielke Ave. Appleton, MN 56208 Defendant.
March 29, 2018 Chief James DeMann Eden Prairie Police Department 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 RE: State v. Timothy Holmes (27-CR-17-23450) & Detective Travis Serafin Dear Chief DeMann, I would like to bring to your attention a matter of concern to me involving one of your detectives that occurred at a suppression hearing involving a serious case, Timothy Holmes. Mr. Holmes was charged with Third Degree Murder and First Degree Drug Sale after providing drugs to someone who died of an overdose. The investigator assigned to this case was Travis Serafin. During the course of the investigation, he applied for a search warrant to search Mr. Holmes and his residence. That search warrant (Exhibit C) was signed by Judge Jay Quam. As you can see, Detective Serafin never requested to search the vehicles at that residence, and the authorization to search the vehicles was specifically crossed out by Detective Serafin. Detective Serafin apparently realized that he forgot to include the vehicles in the first search warrant so he prepared another search warrant (Exhibit B) which was identical to Exhibit C in every respect except that he also requested to search any vehicles associated with the residence (he requested to search for other things that are not relevant here). What he did then, from everything I can tell from reviewing the two search warrants and listening to his direct and cross-examination, was take the signed search authorization from Judge Quam and then simply added that page to the new search warrant request without bringing it to Judge Quam for review or signing. As you can see from the two search warrants, the search warrant affidavit form signed by Judge Quam is identical in every way, including the judge's signature, Detective Serafin's signature and the date. You can also see that the search warrant authorization pages of the two search warrants are also identical, including the fact that the authorization to search the motor vehicles was still crossed out (crossed out by Detective Serafin) which is further evidence that hesimply made a copy of the first search warrant authorization and affidavit pages and included them in the second search warrant which was never presented to Judge Quam. What this means is that he searched the vehicles at that residence when he knew he did not have prior judicial authorization and mislead everyone by representing that he got Judge Quam's authority to search the vehicles. Maybe Detective Serafin will have another explanation for what happened, and I'll leave it up to you to decide what happened in this case. I do not think Detective Serafin has appeared in my courtroom before, and I have nothing against him personally, but it's important that things like this do not happen in the future. The parties knew I was prepared to suppress the evidence (drugs) found in the car and the case eventually settled. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Fred Karasov Judge of District Court.
Ian Rigg, City of Albert Lea City Manager 507-377-4330 & JD Carlson, City of Albert Lea Director of Public Safety 507-377-5665:
Chapter 13 data request: Please email/file share me the following readily available, free, electronic, public data in its original searchable pdf format from your respective offices pursuant to 13.03 Subd. 3(e) and Gen. Rules Prac. Rule 14:
1. City of Albert Lea police department policy and procedure manual
2. City of Albert Lea personnel handbook
3. 13.43 Subd. 2. (a)(1) actual gross salary (3) date of first and last employment (4) the existence and status of any complaints or charges against the employee (7) work-related continuing education from date of first hire or appointment until today's date.
4. City of Albert Lea City Attorney's office general policy and procedure manual and prosecutor's policy and procedure manual.
5. Appointment of Kelly Martinez as City of Albert Lea City Attorney, signed employment contract for Kelly Martinez as City of Albert Lea City Attorney.
6. If appointed and no contract, then payments to Kelly Martinez by the City of Albert Lea for prosecution of criminal cases for the years: 2017-2021.
7. Contact information for the outside agency and lead investigator to whom you forwarded the criminal investigative data into the alleged perjured statements of City of Albert Lea City Attorney Kelly Martinez 507-377-4320 kmartinez@ci.albertlea.mn.us.
Terry Dean, Nemmers 320-283-5713
P.S. Has or hasn't City of Albert Lea Mayor Vern Rasmussen, Jr. 1426 Edgewater Dr. 507-377-1540 mayor@ci.albertlea.mn.us asked for the resignation of City of Albert Lea City Attorney Kelly Martinez 507-377-4320 kmartinez@ci.albertlea.mn.us?
P.S.S. Has or hasn't City of Albert Lea City Attorney Kelly Martinez 507-377-4320 kmartinez@ci.albertlea.mn.us be given the option of resignation in lieu of prosecution?
P.S.S.S. Are you or aren't as sick as I am of hearing Melissa Hanson rant and rave about jurisdiction in her cases?
P.S.S.S.S. Will you or won't you allow Lisa Hanson to file a criminal complaint against City of Albert Lea City Attorney Kelly Martinez for allegedly making perjured statements? (CASE NO. 24-CR-21-137 State of Minnesota vs Melissa Lynn Hanson CASE NO. 24-CR-21-188 State of Minnesota vs Melissa Lynn Hanson) Hmm? Inquiring minds want to know, don't they?
P.S.S.S.S.S. Would or wouldn't City of Albert Lea law enforcement honor an arrest warrant for City of Albert Lea City Attorney Kelly Martinez? Hmm? Inquiring minds really want to know, don't they?
THE DEFENDANT: I'm aware of my rights, Judge. The first question that I have for you, Judge, is: Is this a court of record?
THE COURT: Ma'am, we went around on that at the last appearance, and we're not going to address that again.
THE DEFENDANT: Judge, I'm asking for an answer to my question for clarification purposes so that we can validate jurisdiction of this court.
THE COURT: This court has jurisdiction over this case. Page 6. State of Minnesota vs. Melissa Lynn Hanson. Transcript of January 28, 2021 Arraignment Hearing for Court File No. 24-CR-21-137
THE DEFENDANT: Judge, I don't understand the nature of the jurisdiction, and I require a response.
THE COURT: Here is my response, ma'am: This is a District Court in the State of Minnesota, Third Judicial District. I am a District Court Judge, and this matter is before the Court under the jurisdiction of this Court. And I will tell you, as I just indicated in your – in the rights I gave you, everything here is on the record. There is a record being kept by the court reporter. So I really don't want you to talk about the facts of the case because there is a record being kept, and it could be used against you. I'm just trying to be very honest and direct about that. State of Minnesota vs. Melissa Lynn Hanson. Transcript of February 4, 2021 Arraignment Hearing for Court File No. 24-CR-21-137 and 24-CR-21-188.
THE DEFENDANT: Sir, the Court cannot proceed without establishing jurisdiction. Facts not in evidence.
THE COURT: I'm not going to argue with you, ma'am. I have jurisdiction. This is a District Court in the State of Minnesota, Third Judicial District. We have jurisdiction. And I am trying to proceed with this arraignment and get you done with this today. Page 8. State of Minnesota vs. Melissa Lynn Hanson. Transcript of February 4, 2021 Arraignment Hearing for Court File No. 24-CR-21-137 and 24-CR-21-188.
THE DEFENDANT: That means Judge, I understand that the facts need to be entered into the record to establish jurisdiction. That has not been done.
THE COURT: And I have indicated to you: This is a District Court in the Third Judicial District in the State of Minnesota. I believe we have jurisdiction over this case and over these charges Page 16. State of Minnesota vs. Melissa Lynn Hanson. Transcript of February 4, 2021 Arraignment Hearing for Court File No. 24-CR-21-137 and 24-CR-21-188.
APPEARANCES Kelly Martinez, Albert Lea City Attorney, appeared via the Zoom platform for and on behalf of Plaintiff. David Walker, Freeborn County Attorney, appeared via the Zoom platform with and on behalf of Respondent Sheriff Kurt Freitag. …
MR. WALKER: Yes, Your Honor. And I believe that this affidavit is facially invalid, and that's my point. I think in a lot less than 30 minutes I can demonstrate to the Court that the Court should not proceed with an allegation of contempt against Sheriff Freitag in this case. Because when the Court applies the law to the facts, even if you assume every fact in that affidavit is correct, you should find that there is no purpose for a hearing and that the allegations do not warrant a hearing. And that's the Court's first obligation in a contempt case. Page 1, 4 Transcript Of Proceedings April 1, 2021 1:12 p.m. for Order to Show Cause Hearing for Court File No. 24-CR-21-137 and 24-CR-21-188. State Of Minnesota District Court Criminal Division County Of Freeborn Third Judicial District State of Minnesota, Plaintiff, vs. Melissa Lynn Hanson, Defendant. The above-entitled matter came on for hearing before the Honorable Joseph A. Bueltel, District Court Judge, at the Steele County Courthouse, Owatonna, Minnesota.
MR. WALKER: Your Honor, that argument is irrelevant to what this Court has to decide. It also misstates the law regarding the importance of the affidavit that a person submits before this Court. Prosecutors do not ordinarily in the course of their prosecution submit a signed sworn affidavit alleging certain facts are true before the court. A criminal complaint is an allegation that the prosecutor is authorized to prosecute that case. There is a peace officer who signs to the truth of the content of a criminal complaint. Ms. Martinez personally swore to this Court that every statement in her affidavits were true. Every statement in those affidavits were not true. And it is insufficient for her to now attempt to amend her order a day after the Court granted the relief that she requested. Namely, she requested in that affidavit an order to show cause in which the sheriff was called before this Court to explain why he did not execute the warrant. That affidavit was filed with the Court and Court granted the order to show cause, she then filed with the Court another affidavit. The Court did not grant the motion that she made which was to amend paragraph 11 of the first affidavit. That leaves all of the paragraphs that are still inaccurate statements to this Court still in there. Your Honor, a sworn statement has legal effect when it's filed – Page 14. Transcript Of Proceedings April 1, 2021 1:12 p.m. for Order to Show Cause Hearing for Court File No. 24-CR-21-137 and 24-CR-21-188. State Of Minnesota District Court Criminal Division County Of Freeborn Third Judicial District State of Minnesota, Plaintiff, vs. Melissa Lynn Hanson, Defendant. The above-entitled matter came on for hearing before the Honorable Joseph A. Bueltel, District Court Judge, at the Steele County Courthouse, Owatonna, Minnesota.
SHERIFF FREITAG: This is not anything new that law enforcement has never done in the past. In fact, the Director of Public Safety, J.D. Carlson, I believe is attending this hearing, and I talked to him yesterday. His entire police department does this procedure. We respect the order of the Court. There's no question about that. When we receive an order – when I receive an order from the court, we're going to carry that order out. Sometimes we need to use some discretion. When I talked with Lisa Hanson, she told me that she had not received any court notice with a date and time for her hearing, and she told me that she had not been served. Sometimes mistakes are made. And I asked her, "If we don't arrest you, will you either call the court administrator's office and explain what happened, get a new court date, or show up in the jail and post bail," and she would get a new court date that way. And she told me reluctantly that she would do that. She failed to do that. Ms. Martinez has said, even in her affidavit, which I don't know how she can swear to this, but she said to this date -- and I'm just paraphrasing. I don't have it right in front of me -- that the sheriff has failed to take her into custody and/or order his deputies to arrest her. That is patently false. I've had talks with my chief deputy, one of my patrol sergeants who was on duty on the 17th. We were aware of the gathering at Ms. Hanson's residence that was going to be held on the 19th. We're not going to make a spectacle out of this whole thing. And on the – let's see -- the 19th I ordered a deputy to take a look at her house, see what kind of activity is going on. I've had deputies over at her house to attempt arrest. This is all prior to Ms. Martinez's affidavit where she swears that everything in her affidavit is correct and accurate. That's patently false. Page 29, 30. Transcript Of Proceedings April 1, 2021 1:12 p.m. for Order to Show Cause Hearing for Court File No. 24-CR-21-137 and 24-CR-21-188. State Of Minnesota District Court Criminal Division County Of Freeborn Third Judicial District State of Minnesota, Plaintiff, vs. Melissa Lynn Hanson, Defendant. The above-entitled matter came on for hearing before the Honorable Joseph A. Bueltel, District Court Judge, at the Steele County Courthouse, Owatonna, Minnesota.
from: Lion News lionnews00@gmail.com
to: kpals@cgcounty.org,
proth@cityofclearlake.org
date: May 3, 2021, 4:08 PM
subject: Open Records Request For Melissa Lynn Hanson DOB: 7-14-64 AKA Lisa Lynn Hanson Data
mailed-by: gmail.com
Peter Roth, Clear Lake Chief of Police & 641-357-2186 & Kevin Pals, Cerro Gordo County Sheriff 641-421-3000:
Open Records Request - Please email/file share me the following readily available, free, electronic, public data in it's original searchable pdf format pursuant to Chapter 22 Examination of Public Records:
1. Computer-aided dispatch reports and incident reports for the arrest of Melissa Lynn Hanson DOB: 7-14-64 AKA Lisa Lynn Hanson
2. Booking data for Melissa Lynn Hanson DOB: 7-14-64 AKA Lisa Lynn Hanson.
Terry Dean, Nemmers 320-283-5713
P.S. Did you find my blog, Lion News, by yourself or did you have help from either Freeborn County or the City of Albert Lea?
P.S.S. Which one of you belongs to IP address 159.242.40.51?
https://www.albertleatribune.com/2021/04/the-interchange-owner-arrested-in-clear-lake/ The Interchange owner arrested in Clear Lake, posts bail By Sarah Stultz Email the author Published 3:57 pm Thursday, April 29, 2021 Clear Lake police on Thursday afternoon arrested the owner of Albert Lea’s The Interchange Wine & Coffee Bistro, Albert Lea Public Safety Director J.D. Carlson said. ... The Freeborn County Sheriff’s Office in a news release Thursday afternoon said the Sheriff’s Office and Albert Lea Police Department had been conducting surveillance of an Airbnb in Clear Lake. After Hanson was seen leaving the Airbnb by surveillance, she was then arrested by the Clear Lake Police Department and transported to the Cerro Gordo County Jail.
http://lionnews00.blogspot.com/2021/05/why-oh-why-is-city-of-albert-lea-city.html Why Oh Why Is City Of Albert Lea City Attorney Kelly Martinez Making Perjured Statements In High-Profile Case No. 24-CR-21-137 State of Minnesota vs Melissa Lynn Hanson? Let's See If Local Law Enforcement Is Launching A Criminal Investigation Into Martinez's Crimes, Shall We? If Hanson Is Going To Be Prosecuted For Alleged COVID Crimes, Then Shouldn't Martinez Be Prosecuted For Committing Criminal Acts During the Prosecution Of Hanson? FYI: You'll Get Extremely Sick And Tired Of Hearing Hanson Rant And Rave About Jurisdiction In Her Cases 24-CR-21-137 and 24-CR-21-188, Won't You?
https://ipib.iowa.gov/faq/are-computerized-records-treated-same-public-records-paper Question: Are computerized records treated the same as public records on paper? Answer: Yes, Iowa defines public records (22.1) to include “all records, documents, tape, or other information, stored or preserved in any medium . . .,” a definition that plainly includes electronic data. Further, Section 22.3A addresses several issues regarding access to data processing software and public records. So far, court decisions and common sense suggest the following: A government agency cannot force a requester to take or pay for a computerized record in a prohibitive or expensive format. Chapter 22.3 limits the fees that agencies may charge for records to the actual cost of providing the service. Simply because information could be available via a government computer does not make the information a public record. Government agencies do not have to create data through cross tabulations or selective analysis of data. They could do so if the requester is willing to pay for the staff time. An advisory opinion by the Iowa Public Information Board (Dec. 18, 2014) said that there is no obligation for a government body to provide information in a form other than that which exists at the time of the request. However, the IPIB urged "a cooperative approach as a best practice" that fulfills the legislative objective of access to public information. The record custodian should be the agency that generated the record in the first place and not the computer processor or administrative unit that oversees computer services for a public agency. In Iowa, the law provides no distinction between a citizen's right to access information stored on paper or stored electronically. With a few exceptions, Iowa law treats all records requests the same. That is, it doesn't make any difference who the requester is or whether he or she intends to use the record for personal or commercial use.
https://ipib.iowa.gov/faq/what-police-and-sheriffs-records Question: What police and sheriff’s records are open to the public and press? Answer: Access to law enforcement records is spelled out in detail in an Attorney General’s opinion, Weeg to Holt, 82-10-3. That opinion interprets Chapter 22.7(5), which provides public access to “the date, time, specific location, and immediate facts and circumstances surrounding a crime or incident.” The opinion notes that a news reporter or citizen does not have to know about a crime or incident to obtain information about it. The request could be a general one, to review the public record of police activities during the past 24 hours: “A citizen may request [Chapter 22.7(5)] information for a particular day or time, or for any number of days or times. The request is not required to specify the particular criminal incident for which the information is requested.” Generally, the opinion calls for routine access to all “date, time, specific location and immediate facts and circumstances” information, and the record custodian carries “the burden of establishing facts necessary to withhold public records. . . .” Furthermore, the Iowa Supreme Court held in Mitchell et al. v. Cedar Rapids et al., that investigative records keep their confidential status after an investigation closes. 926 N.W. 2d 222, 232 (Iowa 2019). In Mitchell, the Supreme Court used a balancing test to decide which records constitute information relating to the date, time, specific location, and immediate facts and circumstances. The Court held that certain facts such as the absence of any confidential police informants named in the record, absence of named but innocent suspects, a completed investigation, and the presence of heightened public interest can weigh in favor of disclosure.
from: David Walker David.Walker@co.freeborn.mn.us
to: Lion News lionnews00@gmail.com,
Kurt Freitag Kurt.Freitag@co.freeborn.mn.us,
Ian Rigg IRigg@ci.albertlea.mn.us,
JD Carlson JCarlson@ci.albertlea.mn.us
cc: Erin O'Brien Erin.Obrien@co.freeborn.mn.us
date: May 3, 2021, 4:52 PM
subject: Chapter 13 Data Request - Data On Investigation Into Perjured Statements Made By
mailed-by: co.freeborn.mn.us
security: Standard encryption (TLS) Learn more
: Important mainly because it was sent directly to you.
TO: LION NEWS
SUBJECT: CHAPTER 13 DATA REQUEST
You request: “Freeborn County Co. Attorney's office general policy and procedure manual and prosecutor's policy and procedure manual”. There are no such manuals. We rely upon the constitution, statutes, ordinances, and case law generally for legal guidance. We rely upon certain specific policies governing certain specific areas of concern.
I might be able to help you if you could be more specific about the data that you are seeking from this office. I see from the content of your email below that you are interested in the case involving the Interchange in Albert Lea. You already know that the case is being prosecuted by the Albert Lea City Attorney, not the Freeborn County Attorney. The policies of the Freeborn County Attorney’s office would not govern the City Attorney’s conduct.
The Freeborn County Attorney’s office has no specific policies governing the issue that I addressed in court on April 1, 2021, namely the City Attorney’s recommendation to the court to hold the Sheriff in contempt for failing to execute a warrant. You have quoted some of the salient portions of the Order to Show Cause hearing in which I stated the clear position that the affidavit alleging contempt was false. I could say that with confidence because the affidavit contradicts itself. You question whether it might not be appropriate to conduct a perjury investigation followed by a prosecution. Your email gives as an example of a perjury prosecution a man who lied about his job in a public defender application. Such a person would likely recognize the falsity of their assertion in the affidavit and would stand to gain from that falsity. That tends to demonstrate criminal intent in such a case. Furthermore, the false job-related information didn’t involve internal inconsistency that suggests confusion rather than the criminal state of mind that is necessary for a charge of perjury. Falsity alone is insufficient for a perjury conviction.
David J. Walker Freeborn County Attorney 411 South Broadway Avenue Albert Lea MN 56007 Phone: 507.377.5192 https://www.co.freeborn.mn.us/100/County-Attorney
email signature
IMPORTANT NOTICE:
This e-mail and all files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or the individual responsible for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient, please be advised that you have received this e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of the original message and all attachments.
from: Lion News lionnews00@gmail.com
to: David Walker David.Walker@co.freeborn.mn.us
cc: Kurt Freitag Kurt.Freitag@co.freeborn.mn.us,
Ian Rigg IRigg@ci.albertlea.mn.us,
JD Carlson JCarlson@ci.albertlea.mn.us,
Erin O'Brien Erin.Obrien@co.freeborn.mn.us
date: May 3, 2021, 5:10 PM
subject: Re: Chapter 13 Data Request - Data On Investigation Into Perjured Statements Made By
mailed-by: gmail.com
David Walker County Attorney 507.377.5192:
You said: "There are no such manuals. We rely upon the constitution, statutes, ordinances, and case law generally for legal guidance. We rely upon certain specific policies governing certain specific areas of concern." Clarification: Are the readily available , free, electronic, public data that is found on your website (The Criminal Justice Process (PDF) https://www.co.freeborn.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/278/The-Criminal-Justice-Process-PDF Charging Guidelines (PDF) https://www.co.freeborn.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/279/Charging-Guidelines-PDF Plea Negotiations Guidelines (PDF) https://www.co.freeborn.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/280/Plea-Negotiations-Guidelines-PDF) figments of my imagination or proof that you are a very poor liar?
Didn't your Freeborn Co. Sheriff Kurt Freitag 507.377.5205 inform you that he called me up on 03-23-21 and harassed me with a simliar retarded harassment script? And Freitag found out the hard way that I wasn't the village idiot, didn't he? Oh, and Freitag did finally cough up my readily available, free, electronic, public data, didn't he?
Terry Dean, Nemmers 320-283-5713
P.S. Give me a call and you'll find out the hard way that I am 10 times smarter than the "Constitutional Lawyer" Rick "The Village idiot" Martin, won't you?
P.S.S. When is all that readily available, free, electronic, public data going to be hitting my email inbox, huh?
P.S.S.S. Did your buddies Clear Lake Chief Of Police Peter Roth & Cerro Gordo County Sheriff Kevin Pals let you know that I've already been in touch with them?
https://www.co.freeborn.mn.us/100/County-Attorney County Attorney The Criminal Justice Process (PDF) https://www.co.freeborn.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/278/The-Criminal-Justice-Process-PDF Charging Guidelines (PDF) https://www.co.freeborn.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/279/Charging-Guidelines-PDF Plea Negotiations Guidelines (PDF) https://www.co.freeborn.mn.us/DocumentCenter/View/280/Plea-Negotiations-Guidelines-PDF The Freeborn County Attorney’s Office is organized into five areas of work. The work is shared, but the office staff have primary responsibilities. Adult Criminal - The County Attorney's Office prosecutes adults charged with felony crimes, as well as misdemeanor and gross misdemeanors that occur in the unincorporated areas of the county and other limited areas as defined by statute. Civil - The County Attorney's Office advises and represents the County Board of Commissioners and other county departments on civil legal matters. Family - The County Attorney's Office provides legal direction and advice to the Freeborn County Child Support Unit. The County Attorney's Office also brings actions to obtain or enforce child support, medical support, and child care support obligations, or to establish the paternity of a child. Juvenile Criminal - The County Attorney's Office prosecutes juvenile delinquency matters involving juveniles accused of committing crimes within the county. Protective Services - The County Attorney's Office initiates petitions to protect abused or neglected children, as well as initiates involuntary commitment actions to provide necessary treatment for individuals who are mentally ill, chemically dependent, or mentally handicapped. Neither the County Attorney nor his staff is allowed to represent or provide legal services to private citizens. For more information, see County Attorney Duties (PDF). David Walker Contact Us David Walker County Attorney Email 411 Broadway S PO Bx 1147 Albert Lea MN 56007 Phone: 507.377.5192 Fax: 507.377.5196
THE COURT: All right. Well, it seems like it is diminished. We'll press on. And so I have called the case. Ms. Hanson, I did not ask: Are you represented by counsel?
MS. HANSON: I am represented by assistance of counsel.
THE ZOOM HOST: If I could, I could try to move Ms. Hanson into a breakout room to fix her audio.
THE COURT: All right. We're going to go off the record.
(Whereupon, at 3:55 p.m., a recess was taken, after which, at 4:02 p.m., the following proceedings were had:)
THE COURT: We'll go back on the record. And, Ms. Hanson, when we were interrupted with the
communication issues, I asked if you were represented by counsel. Are you represented by counsel?
MS. HANSON: I am represented by assistance of counsel.
MS. HANSON: I am represented by Richard Martin, my lawyer.
THE COURT: All right. Mr. Martin, are you there? And for our host –
THE ZOOM HOST: I have asked him to unmute.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. MARTIN: Okay. I've lost -- tell me -- I got you on audio, but I don't have you on visual currently. This is Rick Martin of the Constitutional Law Group. And I am acting only as assistance of counsel.
THE COURT: So, Mr. Martin, by that, what do you mean?
MR. MARTIN: Under the Sixth Amendment, her rights are protected. She chooses her assistance of counsel, and I am currently acting of as assistance of counsel. That is my only capacity.
THE COURT: Mr. Martin, are you a licensed attorney in the State of Minnesota?
MR. MARTIN: Let me ask you this question before we go any further: Do you want to pursue that?
THE COURT: Yes, I do. Are you a licensed –
MR. MARTIN: You really do?
THE COURT: -- attorney in the State of Minnesota?
MR. MARTIN: I'm going to ask you the question --
THE COURT: All right. Our host can mute him.
MR. MARTIN: Listen. I've got to ask for clarity: So that we are clear –
THE ZOOM HOST: That was your wish, Your Honor, to mute him; correct? It was hard to hear.
THE COURT: That is correct, yes.
THE ZOOM HOST: Okay.
THE COURT: So, Ms. Hanson, Mr. Martin is not a licensed attorney in the State of Minnesota; he is not authorized to practice law in this court; he has not filed any motion to appear pro hoc vice. No attorney in the state has made that motion and represented that they will assist him in
this proceeding. And, because of that, I can't allow him to be your attorney. I can certainly allow him to continue to observe the proceedings as any member of the public does. Do you understand?
MS. HANSON: No, I don't understand.
THE COURT: Well, the State of Minnesota does not allow anyone to practice law unless they are a licensed attorney within the state. He is not, so he cannot practice in this court. It is that simple.
(Whereupon, an unidentified third party spoke to the defendant off the record.)
THE COURT: Are you ready to proceed?
MS. HANSON: I'm sorry. No, sir. I am not ready to proceed. Can I have a moment to look at my notes?
THE COURT: You certainly may.
MS. HANSON: Thank you.
THE COURT: Ms. Hanson, the question before you is: Are you ready to proceed? It is time to answer the question. You've had enough time to look at your notes. And, for our host, let's unmute Ms. Hanson.
THE ZOOM HOST: I have made the request, sir.
THE COURT: Okay.
MS. HANSON: Can you hear me now?
THE COURT: We can, yes.
MS. HANSON: I'm not ready to proceed, sir. Can you provide me with a copy of your license and your bond to practice law in the State of Minnesota? That would be a question for both the judge and the
prosecutor.
THE COURT: Ma'am, we are not going to do that; we don't have to do that. We are going to proceed. Is there anything else you'd like to address?
MS. HANSON: I'm asking if you can provide me with a copy of your license and your bond to practice law in the State of Minnesota.
THE COURT: And I answered that, "No," ma'am. We're not going to do that; we're going to proceed with this case. (Whereupon, an unidentified third party spoke to the defendant off the record.)
MS. HANSON: I'm sorry?
THE COURT: All right. With that, then, we will proceed. Ms. Hanson will be representing herself and her business, and the moving party is the State of Minnesota. … Page 9-13 State of Minnesota, by its Attorney General, Keith Ellison, Plaintiff, vs. MLH Enterprises L.L.C. d/b/a The Interchange Wine & Coffee Bistro, Defendant. Motion Hearing Court File No. 24-Cv-20-1788 The above-entitled matter came on for hearing via Zoom before the Honorable Ross L. Leuning, Judge of District Court, at the Freeborn County Government Center, Courtroom No. 2, City of Albert Lea, County Of Freeborn, State Of Minnesota, at 3:45 P.M. on January 8, 2021. 24-Cv-20-1788 Filed In District Court State Of Minnesota 1/26/2021 4:09 Pm State Of Minnesota In District Court County of Freeborn Third Judicial District Civil Division
More to come ...
