ࡱ> []Zq Zbjbjt+t+ |AAV](((((((<<<<<P<<$(((B((<<((((4 |((o<<2vOn December 4, 2000, I went to the office of Justice of Peace, Precinct 1, Decatur, Texas, and requested access to the criminal docket as defined by Article 45.13 Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. Judge Ann Morrow told me I couldnt see the docket as her computer was down. On December 15, 2000, I returned and again requested access and was again denied by the Judge on the claim her computer was still down. On December 19, 2000, I went to the office of the District Attorney for the 271st Judicial district, Janna Jones and was referred to Allen Williamson, Assistant District Attorney. I gave him a verified criminal complaint complete in accordance with Article 15.05 Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. Art. 15.04. Complaint. The affidavit made before the magistrate or district or county attorney is called a "complaint" if it charges the commission of an offense. Art. 15.05. Requisites of complaint. The complaint shall be sufficient, without regard to form, if it have these substantial requisites: It must state the name of the accused, if known, and if not known, must give some reasonably definite description of him. It must show that the accused has committed some offense against the laws of the State, either directly or that the affiant has good reason to believe, and does believe, that the accused has committed such offense. It must state the time and place of the commission of the offense, as definitely as can be done by the affiant. It must be signed by the affiant by writing his name or affixing his mark. I alleged that Judge Morrow violated the clear mandate contained in Section 27.004 Government Code, which directs her to keep the criminal docket open for public inspection by all interested parties at all reasonable times. 27.004. Records (a) Each justice shall arrange and safely keep all dockets, books, and papers transmitted to the justice by the justice's predecessors in office, and all papers filed in a case in justice court, subject to the inspection of any interested party at reasonable times. This act denied me in my right to a public court and thereby constitutes Official Oppression on the part of Judge Morrow. 39.03. Official Oppression (a) A public servant acting under color of his office or employment commits an offense if he: (1) intentionally subjects another to mistreatment or to arrest, detention, search, seizure, dispossession, assessment, or lien that he knows is unlawful; (2) intentionally denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power, or immunity, knowing his conduct is unlawful; or As to the part about knowing his conduct is unlawful, this is what the Supreme Court has to say about that in SCREWS ET AL. v. UNITED STATES : Ellis v. United States, 206 U.S. 246, 257, as follows: "If a man intentionally adopts certain conduct in certain circumstances known to him, and that conduct is forbidden by the law under those circumstances, he intentionally breaks the law in the only sense in which the law ever considers intent." He who defies a decision interpreting the Constitution knows precisely what he is doing. If sane, he hardly may be heard to say that he knew not what he did. Of course, willful conduct cannot make definite that which is undefined. But willful violators of constitutional requirements, which have been defined, certainly are in no position to say that they had no adequate advance notice that they would be visited with punishment. When they act willfully in the sense in which we use the word, they act in open defiance or in reckless disregard of a constitutional requirement which has been made specific and definite. When they are convicted for so acting, they are not punished for violating an unknowable something. I subsequently recieved a letter from Allen Williamson informing me he decided not to take action on my complaint (see attached). The mandate of Article 2.03 Texas Code of Criminal Procedure is clear: Art. 2.03. Neglect of duty. It shall be the duty of the attorney representing the State to present by information to the court having jurisdiction, any officer for neglect or failure of any duty enjoined upon such officer, when such neglect or failure can be presented by information, whenever it shall come to the knowledge of said attorney that there has been a neglect or failure of duty upon the part of said officer; and he shall bring to the notice of the grand jury any act of violation of law or neglect or failure of duty upon the part of any officer, when such violation, neglect or failure is not presented by information, and whenever the same may come to his knowledge. This article establishes a ministerial duty on the part of Mr. Williamson. The key operative word in the above statute is shall. I looked it up, it does not mean may, might, or can if he wants to; it is obligitory; it means must. Mr. Williamson, without regard to his personal or professional opinion, had a clear duty to act as follows: Art. 2.04. Shall draw complaints. Upon complaint being made before a district or county attorney that an offense has been committed in his district or county, he shall reduce the complaint to writing and cause the same to be signed and sworn to by the complainant, and it shall be duly attested by said attorney. Art. 2.05. When complaint is made. If the offense be a misdemeanor, the attorney shall forthwith prepare an information based upon such complaint and file the same in the court having jurisdiction; provided, that in counties having no county attorney, misdemeanor cases may be tried upon complaint alone, without an information, provided, however, in counties having one or more criminal district courts an information must be filed in each misdemeanor case. If the offense be a felony, he shall forthwith file the complaint with a magistrate of the county. Mr. Williamson had a clear duty here to file the complaint with a magistrate of the county and, as the complaint fell under Article 2.03, to present it the Grand Jury. He was also directed to file the complaint, along with an information, with the Grand Jury. Art. 21.22. Information based upon complaint. No information shall be presented until affidavit has been made by some credible person charging the defendant with an offense. The affidavit shall be filed with the information. It may be sworn to before the district or county attorney who, for that purpose, shall have power to administer the oath, or it may be made before any officer authorized by law to administer oaths. This is not hard to understand. If you will read the Code of Criminal Procedure, you will find no place in law where a criminal complaint is directed to anyone other than some magistrate, or the Grand Jury. Mr. Williamson, being learned counsel, can hardly claim he did not know that he was commanded to act in a certain way in this matter, it is Article 2.03. It is the third article listed under Duties of Officers. It is not like he had to go far to find it. By the above, Mr. Williamson was directed to present a government document to some magistrate and the Grand Jury. That he failed to perform an administrative function, he secreted my complaint from some magistrate and the Grand Jury in violation of Section 37.10 Texas Penal Code. Sec. 37.10. Tampering With Governmental Record. A person commits an offense if he: (3) intentionally destroys, conceals, removes, or otherwise impairs the verity, legibility, or availability of a governmental record; (d) An offense under this section, if it is shown on the trial of the offense that the governmental record is described by Section 37.01(2)(D), is: (1) a Class B misdemeanor if the offense is committed under Subsection (a)(2) or Subsection (a)(5) and the defendant is convicted of presenting or using the record; (2) a felony of the third degree if the offense is committed under: (A) Subsection (a)(1), (3), (4), or (6); The courts have held that a prosecution commences when a complaint is made and prosecuting attorneys are specifically forbidden to dismiss a prosecution. Art. 32.02. Dismissal by state's attorney. The attorney representing the State may, by permission of the court, dismiss a criminal action at any time upon filing a written statement with the papers in the case setting out his reasons for such dismissal, which shall be incorporated in the judgment of dismissal. No case shall be dismissed without the consent of the presiding judge. The Legislature did not bandy words here. The prosecutor had a specific duty and a specific demand that he not do what he did. It is therefore clear he acted to dismiss a prosecution in violation of a specific law relating to his office, the separation of powers by impersonating a judicial officer. Sec. 37.11. Impersonating Public Servant. (a )A person commits an offense if he: Impersonates a public servant with intent to induce another to submit to his pretended official authority or to rely on his pretended official acts; or knowingly purports to exercise any function of a public servant or of a public office, including that of a judge and court, and the position or office through which he purports to exercise a function of a public servant or public office has no lawful existence under the constitution or laws of this state or of the United States. All this, I allege and do maintain he did to shield Judge Morrow from prosecution in violation of Section 38.05 Texas Penal Code. 38.05 Texas Penal Code, Hindering apprehension or prosecution. A person commits an offense if, with intent to hinder the arrest, prosecution, conviction, or punishment of another for an offense or, with intent to hinder the arrest, detention, adjudication, or disposition of a child or engaging in delinquent conduct that violates a penal law of the grade of felony, he: harbors or conceal the other; provides or aids in providing the other with any means of avoiding arrest or effecting escape; or warns the other of impending discovery or apprehension. It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(3) that the warning was given in connection with an effort to bring another into compliance with the law. An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor, except that the offense is a felony of the third degree if the person who is harbored, concealed, provided with a means of avoiding arrest or effecting escape, or warned of discovery or apprehension is under arrest for, charged with, or convicted of a felony, or is in custody or detention for, is alleged in a petition to have engaged in, or has been adjudicated of having engaged in the delinquent conduct that violates a penal law of the grade of felony, and the person charged under this section knew that the person they harbored, concealed, provided with a means of avoiding arrest or effecting escape, or warned of discovery or apprehension is under arrest for, charged with, or convicted of a felony, or is in custody or detention for, is alleged in a petition to have engaged in, or has been adjudicated as having engaged in delinquent conduct that violates a penal law of the grade of felony. On May 21, 2000, I presented criminal complaints to the City of Decatur Municipal Judge Ed Winfrey, alleging that Allen Williamson, secreted complaints from the Grand Jury. Judge Winfrey, acting in accordance with Article 2.10 Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, took my complaints. Art. 2.10. Duty of magistrates. It is the duty of every magistrate to preserve the peace within his jurisdiction by the use of all lawful means; to issue all process intended to aid in preventing and suppressing crime; to cause the arrest of offenders by the use of lawful means in order that they may be brought to punishment. Judge Winfrey, being some magistrate in the County, had a clear ministerial duty as clarified by Attorney General Opinion H500: Attorney General Opinion H500. Pg. 3, Paragraph 1 It is clear that any and all offenses defined by the criminal laws of Texas, felonies and misdemeanors of whatever classification, may be make known to any magistrate, including a justice of the peace, by complaint and that any magistrate can issue warrant of arrest based on such complaint. This opinion refers to the mandate contained in Article 17.30 Texas Code of Criminal Procedure: Art. 17.30. Shall certify proceedings. The magistrate, before whom an examination has taken place upon a criminal accusation, shall certify to all the proceedings had before him, as well as where he discharges, holds to bail or commits, and transmit them, sealed up, to the court before which the defendant may be tried, writing his name across the seals of the envelope. The voluntary statement of the defendant, the testimony, bail bonds, and every other proceeding in the case, shall be thus delivered to the clerk of the proper court, without delay. I waited a year before pursing allegations against Judge Winfrey. I presented complaints to Janna Jones who recused herself. Judge Fostel then sent the complaints to Tim Cole, District Attorney in the 91st Judicial District. I talked to Tim Cole as I had went through the criminal files at the District Clerks office in Mantague, County, and found records missing from the file. I found that the Grand Jury had been handing down indictments when there was no criminal complaint or information on record. This is the same practice the prosecutors engage in here in Wise County, it is part of what I call the deal. Prosecutors routinely secret documents commanded to be in the court record so that there is no official record of arrest or the date of filing of the original complaint. This gets the prosecutors around any consideration of speedy trial and gives him all the time he needs to work the deal. I talked to the Sheriffs Department in Montague County and it was clear they present complaints to prosecuting attorneys so that they can examine into the sufficiency of the allegations. By that it was clear, Tim Cole is guilty of the same acts I alleged against Allen Williamson. I went to the District Attorneys office on December 18, 2001, and tried to leave a message with the secretary their. As Janna Jones wasnt in I tried to leave a message with the secretary telling her that the prosecutor in Montague County was equally guilty of the same acts I was alleging against Allen Williamson and, therefore, was necessarily compromised in this situation and it would behove the court to appoint an attorney who was not involved in criminal prosecutions. I didnt get to finish as Mark Patterson, who had earlier laughed at me when I tried to file the original complaints, didnt like the idea that I was screwing up there little plan to trash my complaints and arrested me. He threatened to take me down twice. I took that to be a reference to the loaded take down weapon he carried on his hip. He physically drug me from the District Attorneys office and into another office where he took out his cuffs and tossed them on the table, telling me the second time I was under arrest. He started some lecture but I cut him off and told him I had been arrested before and if I was going to jail lets get it done, and that I was, that morning, on my way to a hearing in Denton County on an eleven million dollar suit I filed against officials there for doing just exactly this, so knock yourself out. Well, surprise, surprise, he decided to let me go. I have to tell you, I was impressed. On May 29, 2002, I went to the District Attorneys office as I had found out the Grand Jury was going to meet that day. I asked the three secretaries there if the Grand Jury was going to meet that day. They looked at one another then, Judge Winfreys wife (who works there) said, We dont know. Just then, Allen Williamson, Mark Peterson, and Bailiff Wood walked in. I asked Allen if the Grand Jury was going to meet today to which he smiled real big and said, No, Mr. Kelton, they already have. I smiled back and said, Thats OK, I will catch them next time. And walked out of the office. The baliff followed less than a foot from me as he had stayed very close, staring in my face the whole time. In the hall I stopped and turned quickly and he nearly bumped into me. I asked him, To your knowledge, is there a Grand Jury Member in the building. He replied, Not to my knowledge. He then asked, Mr. Kelton, do you mind if I ask the nature of your business here? It was clear he already knew and was therefore asking for particulars so I responded, Yes I do. I have business here but it is mine and none of yours. He said, I am the court bailiff and the court security officer and I want to know what your business here is. I told him, I am faltered that you are so interested in my business, but since you are the bailiff, go into the court there and be a good bailiff; you are dismissed. If I need you I will summon you. Well, he didnt take that well and grabbed me by the arm. I jerked loose and told him to keep his hands off me. He immieditely grabbed me again and when I tried to pull loose he said, Hit, me; just go ahead, hit me. At this point Mark Patterson joined him and he drug me down the stairwell. I told him I was here to file criminal charges with the Grand Jury and he was not to interfere. He drug me to the front door, pushed it open and forcibly shoved me out. My foot hit a throw run laying there and it went out from under me from the force of the shove and I want down hard on my elbow. Before I could get my senses back or determine how bad I was hurt, Baliff Wood grabbed me and tried to jerk me to my feet. I knocked him loose and he grabbed me again. Again I knocked him loose telling him to keep his hands off me. He said he was just trying to help me up. When I told him he had done enough damage, Mark Patterson said that I just fell, he saw it and the bailiff repeated the same. He grabbed me again and again I knocked him loose, this time telling Mark I had come to file charges against him, now I would be filing against the bailiff to which they both replied, almost in unison, You wont be filing anything. I was warned prior to this by a police friend of mine that the court had fired the previous bailiff and hired this one because of me and I told him he was full of crap. I am an annoyance, but only a minor one. Maybe I underestimated things. This I want you to find out. Did Judge Fostel hire that bailiff to be more aggressive and do exactly what he did? After this incident, I went to the Montague County Sheriffs office and filed criminal complaints against Tim Cole for secreting criminal complaints from the Grand Jury. I then went to his office and asked for a copy of the letter assigning this cause to him. He said there was no letter that the Judge just sent it to him to evaluate. After reading the complaints, he refused to perform his sworn duty and trashed them. Unless Janna Jones can show some documentary evidence demonstrating that she officially recused herself, she is still responsible for the disposition of the complaints put in her hand by me. If Judge John Fostel cannot show some official authority to transfer the complaints to a foreign jurisdiction, he has violated Article 17.30 Texas Code of Criminal Procedrue and thereby, Section 37.10 and 38.05 Texas Penal Code. Tim Cole, by accepting the complaints took on responsibility for them. That he did not reduce the complaints to an information and submit them to the Grand Jury, or at the very least, present them to some magistrate leaves him criminally liable as well and more. That, on the surface, there is sufficient evidence to give a reasonable person cause to believe all these individuals acted in concert and collusion to violate well-established principals of law and thereby deny me in the equal protection of the laws, the implication is that they conspired to the acts consistent throughout. In support of my ascertion of conspiracy, you will find attached a copy of a document I call The Frog Farm Conspiracy. It contains lots of criminal complaints starting with attempted murder and aggrivated kidnapping, and goes on and on. These complaints have been trashed by District Attorneys in Wise and Travis Countys, the Attorney General, and the Texas Rangers. Attached also, you will find some 30 felony allegations against Tarrant County public officials for esentially the same things. You will also find allegations against Denton County officials, again for essentially the same behavior. All of the complaints properly filed, all summarily trashed. I have presented these complaints to agencies with state wide jurisdiction who failed to act properly. This means the conspiracy I speak of to deny citizens in the due course of the laws is a statewide action. In fact, you will be the clencher. I have no doubt you will do the same as everyone else. I have no doubt you will refuse to present the complaints to some magistrate. But dont feel too bad. I understand that if you follow law and the duty you bound yourself to by your sworn oath, you wont be a Ranger long. So do whatever it is you guys do when private citizens complain about the illegal treatment they receive at your hands, then I will simply move on to the next step. And when I file against you for essentially the same things as everyone else, dont think I hold any animosity as I realize the position this puts you in. Either you must do what is right and reguired by your personal honor and the rule of law, or do what you have to in order to protect and preserve your personal policing career. Life is full of little decisions and now you get to make one. Good luck on the outcome, but be warned, it is a slippery slope and everything goes down hill from here. Dqs$d r     =AB&$hir{t|!!!! "'"C"P"j"$$$I%%>*>*CJOJQJ CJOJQJ50JCJ>*CJ5CJCJ5CJCJH*CJSrszR       A & F rszR       ABhiqrk l !!!!!j""##$$$$$$2&3&a'b'''M(              RABhiqr & F k l !!!!!j""##$$$$$$@ pp  & F %%2&b''H((() *]*_*`***,,)-w-y.../01112[23334S5{5F667M8O8ZH*5CJCJ5 CJOJQJ>*CJOJQJCJ>*($2&3&a'b'''M())* *_*`*++,L,,00111 & F  & F p & F (DTM())* *_*`*++,L,,00111133333344R5S5{5|577e8f8;;4<5<>>t?u?oApAAABBLCCC-D.D6E7E\E]EEELFMFFFGGkHlHII2J~KKkLlLMMOO(Q)Q5R6R                 Q1133333344R5S5{5|577e8f8;;4<5<>>t?u?oApApAAABBLCCC-D.D6E7E\E]EEELFMFFFGGkHlHII2J~KKkLkLlLMMOO(Q)Q5R6RTTVVWW'Z(ZZZ6RTTVVWW'Z(ZZZ / =!"#$% [$@$NormalmH <A@<Default Paragraph Font*B`* Body TextCJ<C`<Body Text IndentCJ@R`@Body Text Indent 2CJ,o!, HTML Markup<B*@S`2@Body Text Indent 3CJxoBx HTML Preformatted7 2( Px 4 #\'*.25@9 OJPJQJV |%Z27A$1pAkLZ3568:;<M(6RZ49=--`-g-/!/33334 44499>>2@8@D D*F0FIIKKOLULLLOOBPLPPP3Q:QWQaQ SSUUQVTVV;A  z? ""b#m###N$W$(((,$-/----///|124455558:1<l=~==X@Z@{EElHH6N{OnPPQQQR[R(VgVVVVRandall D. KeltonIC:\DOCUME~1\RANDAL~1.KEL\LOCALS~1\Temp\AutoRecovery save of Document1.asdRandall D. Kelton D:\Data\LEGAL\WISE\statement.docRandall D. Kelton D:\Data\LEGAL\WISE\statement.docRandall D. KeltonIC:\DOCUME~1\RANDAL~1.KEL\LOCALS~1\Temp\AutoRecovery save of statement.asdRandall D. KeltonIC:\DOCUME~1\RANDAL~1.KEL\LOCALS~1\Temp\AutoRecovery save of statement.asdRandall D. KeltonIC:\DOCUME~1\RANDAL~1.KEL\LOCALS~1\Temp\AutoRecovery save of statement.asdRandall D. Kelton D:\Data\LEGAL\WISE\statement.docgV.J8OtYa@Yid<UFf΄D^`o(()^`. L ^ `L.l l ^l `.<<^<`. L ^ `L.^`.^`.|L|^|`L.^`o(()  ^ `o(()0^`0CJo(()DD^D`o(()  ^ `. L ^ `L.^`.^`.TLT^T`L.$$^$`.^`.L^`L.88^8`o(.UFf.gidYa8O@QVQVxQVMVV@GzTimes New Roman5Symbol3& zArial?5 zCourier New"qhf&fFif& G$$20WOn December 4, 2000, I went to the office of Justice of Peace, Precinct 1, Decatur, Texas, and requested access to the criminal docket as defined by Article 45Randall D. KeltonRandall D. KeltonOh+'00HTp|      (On December 4, 2000, I went to the office of Justice of Peace, Precinct 1, Decatur, Texas, and requested access to the criminal docket as defined by Article 45n DRandall D. Kelton0,andand Normal.dotKRandall D. Kelton0,3ndMicrosoft Word 8.0,@@d @@~8 G՜.+,D՜.+, hp  l1st Act$W1 On December 4, 2000, I went to the office of Justice of Peace, Precinct 1, Decatur, Texas, and requested access to the criminal docket as defined by Article 45 Title 6> _PID_GUIDAN{23BF975D-5278-4C6E-A955-667E5132D7E4}  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>@ABCDEFGHIKLMNOPQSTUVWXY\Root Entry F h p$^1Table?YWordDocument|SummaryInformation(JDocumentSummaryInformation8RCompObjjObjectPoolp$p$  FMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q