Updated: 04-17-13
The #3 page was missing on two separate copies that were purchased within a few minutes on the same day, wasn't it?
Lawless State Of Minnesota, Mankato Is Lurking & Skulking, Aren't They? (Did Sherburne Co. Sheriff Joel "The Torturer" Brott call up his crooked buddies in Mankato and ask them to peek on the website for him? Inquiring minds want to know, don't they?)
Original Post: 04-15-13
Lawless State of Minnesota, Elk River Is Lurking & Skulking, Aren't They? (Did they get an email?)
On Friday, April 12, 2013 about 2:30pm I was led to look up Greg Shartle's case on the Minnesota Public Access Remote, wasn't I? And what did I find? Greg had filed an appeal on April 8, 2013, hadn't he?
Lion News: Greg Shartle Appeals Malicious Prosecution = Sheriff Brott & FBI Framed Shartle?
The various types of gaslighting have
in common two defining features. The first is an
attempt to impair or destroy an individual's confidence in his or
her psychic abilities. After this first aim has been achieved,
the second aim is to attain control over the feelings,
thoughts, and behaviors of the victim.
By making another person feel fearful,
guilty, or ashamed, the manipulator
is in a position to gain control over the
other individual's affects, thoughts, and behaviors by substituting
his own beliefs. This is the basic mechanism of gaslighting
whether used in everyday life, in psychotherapy situations, or
in the thought-reform and mind-control manipulations of
cult leaders. Some advertising and many social interactions in
which one person attempts to gain control over another are based on
this principle.” Gaslighting, The Double Whammy, Interrogation and
Other Covert Control in Psychotherapy & Analysis, Theo L. Dorpat
(Maryland: 2004), Page 7.
With the rise of the democracies
and the dethronement and disempowering of previously powerful groups
such as the military, the nobility, and the like, there has been a
gradual shift from the conscious and explicit use of direct methods
of interpersonal and social control to one that are
more indirect, subtle, and covert. Gaslighting,
The Double Whammy, Interrogation and Other Covert Control in
Psychotherapy & Analysis, Theo L. Dorpat (Maryland: 2004), Page
xviii.
Oh, and the things that Greg told me about his backstabbing lawyer weren't very complimentary, were they? How would you like to be told that the lawyer wasn't going to look at your case this month because your next hearing was the next month? You probably wouldn't like that any more than Greg did, right?
And how would you like your attorney to refuse to show your the video statement that you made in the presence of a Sherburne County Deputy and an FBI agent? You know, the one where you were read your rights after they did the illegal interrogation? That would upset the average person, also, wouldn't it?
The reason why the video wasn't shown to Greg was allegedly because the lawyer didn't think that video disc/player could be brought into the jail, right? But, when I asked Stephanie (She's the guard who filed the malicious incite to riot charges against me, isn't she?) if Greg could watch the video with his lawyer in jail she said "Yes," didn't she?
When you are arrested today, the
federal prosecutors automatically expect that they will be able to
force you to plead guilty – whether you are or not. And their
police agents, especially the DEA, take the same attitude. It is now
quite common to see truly innocent defendants convicted and sentenced
to longer terms because the Government rewards others, often the
guiltiest parties, with shorter sentences in exchange for testifying
against the innocent. Defense attorneys know this – they see it
constantly – and it is slowly corrupting many of them.
To understand how this works you need
to understand that in the eyes of a federal agent, you are guilty. If
he arrests you, or anyone else arrested you, you are guilty. And once
they believe that you are guilty, they will tell as many lies as
necessary to convict you. Now that federal agents, especially DEA
agents, have almost all learned their trade in a judicial system
hamstrung by the sentencing guideline; they no longer think in terms
of genuine proofs when making their cases. They think in terms of how
much pressure do they need to put on the defendant to force him to
plead guilty. They think like this because they expect (with good
reason!) that every defendant will plead guilty. They do not expect
to have to testify; so they are not worried about being impeached on
their lies. And in the occasional case that does go to trial, where
they do have to give false testimony, the agents are usually up
against an appointed attorney who could not afford to do the
investigation and preparation necessary to effectively impeach them.
Busted by the Feds: A Manual for
Defendants Facing Federal Prosecution by Larry Fassler, 12th
Ed., page 108 .
And, if Greg is released, then it will only be because of people like me who have the spirit of justice and refused to allow an injustice to stand, won't it?
More to come . . .
