Monday, March 30, 2015

This Isn't CSI Folks!

For the "start of the story", visit the Jon Massey Case.

Crime scene shows are very popular these days - CSI, NCIS, Criminal Minds, True Detective, there are even modernizations of old favorites with Sherlock, nerd versions like Numbers, and Steampunk style shows like Murdoch Mysteries. But before you get all bent out of shape because I didn't include your favorite (and before rushing off to Netflix the ones that I listed that you hadn't heard of)  please take a few minutes to read through what you don't know about the investigatory process.

Most of us learned about the scientific method in school. You form a hypothesis, possibly conduct an experiment, collect all the data and evidence that you can possibly find, and then evaluate what you have to determine whether your hypothesis is supported.

Police don't work that way. Ever. Can you think of the time and resources that are utilized in just one episode of your favorite crime drama? Now imagine if that were done for every case that is presented to law enforcement. Police departments would have a debt load larger than the national debt, and employ more people than any other entity. 

Here is how police actually work. They get a report, and if it includes a likely suspect, they focus on collecting any and all evidence and only interviewing those witnesses who will corroborate that the suspect is guilty. They will ignore (or possibly destroy) any evidence that contradicts their theory. They will do what they can to suppress any witnesses who will provide contradictory testimony. If there is no suspect, they will rattle around and see what they can find, and then it becomes a "cold case".

CPS actually functions in an identical manner, except they already have a "smoking gun" so to speak - the parents or "caregivers". Anyone who dares to stand up to them becomes a fresh target for their charges and false reports. Family members are turned against each other and encouraged to provide information that would lead to additional charges.

This is not cynicism, this is reality. We have lived this for the past three years.

Examples? My youngest child was placed in the custody of her father (Ken Shaw) who lives in Canada. Ken Shaw immediately began filing false reports against me (as well as my middle daughter and my friends) with CPS, as well as Homeland Security, various Canadian police agencies, our local police department, and who knows where else. It is amazing that with all the reports filed, not only did nobody get arrested, but one of the Canadian police agencies actually told our local police force that they believed that my youngest daughter had been "coached", and they told me that they thought the father was "mentally unbalanced" and a "pathological liar".

Because none of my family backed up Ruby's claims, in fact they all contradicted her allegations, my oldest three children have been systematically denied any visitation with my youngest daughter, at the urging of CPS.

My son was threatened with arrest by the local Sheriff's department (under Burns and Trudeau) if he disclosed the information and evidence he had collected that contradicted Ruby's allegations. The detective involved also threatened to have me arrested and told my son that she would do so if he continued to cooperate with Jon and I. We have notes provided in the CPS discovery that prove these issues.

I've already discussed the police raids on my house that were a method of intimidation. At the first grand jury, the DA not only made false claims that my son was a "convicted felon" and "convicted drug dealer" to prevent him from being called and his evidence from being presented, he also disclosed information about my son that placed his life in jeopardy, and this disclosure was a violation of US law.

One of the friends of Ruby who was initially a defense witness and could testify as to motivation and behavior changed her story after a year and a half. Even though she voluntarily signed an affidavit for Jon and then a second affidavit with the Sheriff that reaffirmed her first affidavit, somehow she was "persuaded" to change her story. It possibly had to do with the fact that some of the evidence obtained by my son could be used by CPS to go after her parents.

Most telling about this whole situation are two incidents. 

There was an issue with one of the police statements - it had my signature on it. You would think that you are entitled to a copy of any legal document that has your signature on it. Apparently, according to our local police, you are not.


When I requested a copy, I was shuffled from person to person until being told that I had to talk to the detective about it. When I asked the detective for a copy, I ended up with a police lieutenant screaming at me so hard that his spit was on my face, physically towering over me in a threatening manner, and telling me that I had to leave a public government building or he would have me arrested. This document later became the topic for a young police officer to commit perjury over - although the judges involved have conveniently sealed up half the testimony so that we can't prove the contradictory statements at this point in time.

The second incident involves the "evidence collecting" against Jon. Jon had absolutely NO record at all at the time of the allegations, and none afterwards either. No speeding or parking tickets, nothing. (I find this amazing - what person hasn't gotten at least a parking ticket?) The same detective mentioned above went to Jon's landlord for the initial time period requesting property rental records. The landlord, who is also a friend of ours, asked for a warrant. The detective said he didn't have one and the landlord told him to come back when he did (which never happened). As an attempt to persuade the landlord, the detective made the statement, "If we don't get him for this we will get him for something."

The irony of this entire situation is that even though we had documentation of the statutory rape that had occurred between Ruby and Mike (recorded admissions from Ruby, text messages, etc), CPS wouldn't touch it ("That's not our job"), the local police wouldn't touch it ("If it didn't happen in city limits, it isn't our job"), and even the Sheriff's department wouldn't touch it ("she says it didn't happen"). The reality is that a conversation going on behind the scenes (which CPS gave us partial documentation regarding) demonstrated that all three agencies knew that to pursue the statutory rape issue meant that they would lose the case against Jon. Since it was coming up on an election year, as well as high-level vacancies occurring in CPS and the police department, the "high profile" effect of prosecuting an adult male who abused a minor would benefit them more than a "low profile" statutory rape of a 14 year old by a 21 year old.

Once again, politics and the desire for fame outweighs truth and the administration of true justice. This isn't CSI, it is a game where the only winners are the best manipulators, and the losers are truth, justice, and the innocent.

1 comment:

Rainbojangles said...

Sounds like a terrible miscarriage of justice. I hope you somehow find resolution. Every time I cam close to being more deeply involved with the County "Human Services" I was terrified. My son's mother and I managed to work things out, fortunately, and he is a well adjusted 26 year old today.