14 March 1997
Source: Anonymous
Wednesday March 12, 1997 10:52
CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Louis Freeh, Director
Federal Bureau of Investigation
535 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20535
Dear Director Freeh:
Purpose of this letter is to appeal a Freedom on Information Act (FOIA) denial,
My FOIA request,
Wednesday February 5, 1997 11:24
Certified - Return Receipt Requested
James K. Weber
Special Agent in Charge
Federal Bureau of Investigation
415 Silver SW
Albuquerque, NM 87102
Dear Mr. Weber:
Purposes of this letter are;
1 seek verification of information learned from US Marshal Arthur Lester,2 present applicable criminal statutes,
3 seek information.
Friday January 24, US Marshal Arthur Lester showed me two fax cover sheets. One contained your name. The other Third Circuit Court of Appeals clerk Toby Slawsky's name.
March 11, 1996 I informed District of Northern California judge Fern Smith that Sandia patent lawyer Gregory Cone had committed Title 18 felony perjury in an affidavit submitted to New Mexico District Court regarding the Atari v Nintendo decision. I received no response from Smith.
Therefore, on May 31, 1996 sent a criminal complaint affidavit to Smith to have Smith issue a Warrant of Arrest for Cone.
June 13, 1996 your predecessor, Thomas J. Knier, and Fern Smith, dispatch agents Kohl and Schum visited my home to investigate me for threatening Smith.
I did not threaten Smith: I sent a valid criminal complaint affidavit to Smith.
Conclusion was that Kohl and Schum were sent by Smith and Knier in an attempt to intimidate me.
Therefore, I filed criminal complaint affidavits against Knier and Smith with judge Wallace.
Now apparently you are involved in yet another attempt to intimidate me. This time apparently you, Smith, again, and Slawsky sent US Marshals Lester and Lopez to attempt to intimate me.
Lester and Lopez did not properly serve me with notice for an investigation. Lester had no letter of authorization for an investigation when we asked him for one. And Lester stated that I was under investigation for "Inappropriate communications," which surely is not a proper reason for an investigation by US marshals.
Nonetheless, I cooperated with Lester and Lopez. At the end of the investigation, I asked Lester, "Have I done anything wrong or improper?" Lester responded, "absolutely not."
But Title 18 felony violations appear to have been committed by Lester, Lopez, Smith, Slawsky, and you.
Obstruction of Justice, Article 1512, as amended states,
Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant(b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation ... threatens, ... or engages in misleading conduct toward another person with intent to -(3) hinder, delay or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense ...(c) Whoever intentionally harasses another person and thereby hinders, delays, prevents, or dissuades any person from -
(1) reporting to a law enforcement or judge of the United States the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense ... or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned ...
Lester and Lopez have a prima facie case against of attempted intimidation them for the reason they apparently did not follow rules.
Article 1512 states,
(d) In a prosecution for an offense under this section, it is an affirmative defense, as to which the defendant has the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence, that the conduct consisted solely of lawful conduct and that the defendant's sole intention was to encourage, induce, or cause the other person to testify truthfully.
Slawsky and other Third circuit clerk, Bradford Baldus, attempted to mislead me by insisting that I file a judicial misconduct report when I was attempting to report a criminal act on the part of Third Circuit judge Joseph Weis to Third Circuit Chief Judge Dolores Sloviter. The American Judicature Society advised to me report to Sloviter.
Since you, Slawsky, and Smith were identified by Lester as causing Lester and Lopez to attempt to intimidate me, it appears you have violated my civil rights in an attempt to prevent me from filing a criminal complaint affidavit.
I am entitled, as a citizen, under the Constitution and Rule 3 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to file a properly prepared criminal complaint affidavit. I have done this with selected magistrate judges Bunton, Wallace, and Edwards.
Therefore, it appears to me that you, Slawsky and Smith have violated Article 241, as amended, Civil Rights, Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure, Conspiracy against rights
If two or more person conspire to injure, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; ....They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned nor more than ten years or both; ...
If you did not conspire with Slawsky, Smith, or others to have Lester and Lopez attempt to intimidate me, then I ask you to write me and tell me this.
If I do not receive a response from you within ten working days after you receive this letter I will assume [on information and belief] that you were involved in this attempt to intimidate me.
Now I seek information: Under the provisions of the Privacy Act, 5 USC 522a and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 USC 552, I request access to:
1 All documents or magnetic recordings containing the names of William H. Payne, Bill Payne, etc contained in any FBI file index number which corresponds to my name or personal identifier held in the Albuquerque FBI offices between the dates of January 1, 1991 and February 5, 1997.
As you know, the Act permits you to reduce or waive the fees when the release of the information is considered as "primarily benefiting the public." I believe that this requests fits that category and I therefore ask that you waive any fees.
If all or any part of this request is denied, please cite the specific exemption(s) which you think justifies your refusal to release the information and inform me of your agency's administrative appeal procedures available to me under the law.
Marshals Lester and Lopez were so well-versed about the facts stated in my criminal complaint affidavits that it appeared that they were investigating or helping to investigate for parties, unknown to me, the factual correctness for probable cause under Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Warrant or Summons Upon Complaint(a) Issuance. If it appears from the complaint, or from an affidavit or affidavits with with the complaint, that there is probable cause to believe that an offense has been committed and the defendant has committed it, a warrant for the arrest of the defendant shall issue to any officer authorized by law to execute it.
FOIA Exemption (7) permits withholding records.
(7) records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information (A) could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, (B) would deprive a person to a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication, (C) could reasonably be expected to constitute a unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, (D) could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source, including a State, local, or foreign agency or authority or any private institution which furnished information on a confidential basis, and, in the case of a record or information compiled by criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a criminal investigation ...Any reasonably segregable portion of a record shall be provided to any person requesting such record after deletion of the portions which are exempt under this subsection.
(c)(1) Whenever a request is made which involves access to records described in subsection (b)(7)(A) and -(A) the investigation or proceeding involves a possible violation of criminal law; ...
So, if the FBI decides withhold any records for reason of Exemption 7, then I ask that you state this. And provide the remainder due me under the law.
I would appreciate your handling this request as quickly as possible, and I look forward to hearing from you within 10 working days, as the law stipulates.
Special Agent in Charge Weber, signed by H. Douglas Beldon, returned my FOIA request to me with a form, stating
Your letter asking for records maintained by the FBI concerning yourself is being returned to you. It did not contain all of the items and background information needed by the FBI in order to conduct an accurate search of FBI records.
I completed the form and had it notarized on February 21. The form and my original FOIA request was sent to Weber on this same day.
As you possibly may be aware,
The law allows a requester to consider that his or her request has been denied if it is has not been decided within the time limits.
Since Title 18 felony violations committed in writing by personnel within the US court system, the FBI, and the US Marshals Service, I feel that we must pursue this latest example of the FBI's disregard for the laws of our country in an expeditious manner.
The law allows you 20 working days to respond to this appeal.
You can ask for an additional 10 day extension for a valid reason.
Sincerely,
William H. Payne
13015 Calle de Sandias NE
Albuquerque, NM 87111
See related documents at:
http://jya.com/nsasuit.txt