District Attorney Report on Andy Lopez Death is a Travesty


By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Conspiracy or Stupidity?

By Jan B. Tucker

For background, you should read the District Attorney’s report with my appended PDF critique at: http://www.janbtucker.com/jb_tucker_in_action.


None Dare Call it ConspiracyIn None Dare Call It Conspiracy, the late John Birch Society theoretician Gary Allen opined that “To think that the scientifically engineered Crash of ’29 was an accident or the result of stupidity defies all logic. The international bankers who promoted the inflationary policies and pushed the propaganda which pumped up the stock market represented too many generations of accumulated expertise to have blundered into ‘the great depression.’”


The greatest problem with conspiracy theories is that it is very easy to mistake simple incompetence and gross negligence for conspiracies. All too often I find myself arguing with my leftist friends who simply don’t know how police agencies and prosecutors work – or for that matter government and industry in general – that their perception of conspiracy is based on nothing more than post hoc ergo propter hoc thinking. One event is followed by another event in time so the first event must be the causation of the second event…..which does not logically follow because there may be causative factors that one simply is unaware of.


Sonoma County District Attorney Jill Ravitch

Sonoma County District Attorney Jill Ravitch

With Sonoma County District Attorney Jill Ravitch’s investigation of the shooting of Andy Lopez however, I simply cannot believe that the investigators and expert witnesses involved were so completely inept that (a) they didn’t ask any questions of the witnesses concerning their perceptions of the weight of the replica AK-47 that Andy Lopez was carrying and (b) that they apparently never bothered to conduct a re-enactment of the incident. One caveat: maybe they did these things but those details are missing from the D.A.’s report and if they did, then it can only be because the results of a re-enactment and the answers to those questions would have run counter to the conclusion that the officers shot Andy Lopez legitimately.


An unintended consequence of the late former Assembly Member Jim Keysor's Peace Officer Bill of Rights handcuffed internal affairs investigators; I ran against Jim in 1976 for State Assembly in the Northeast San Fernando Valley

An unintended consequence of the late former Assembly Member Jim Keysor’s Peace Officer Bill of Rights handcuffed internal affairs investigators; I ran against Jim in 1976 for State Assembly in the Northeast San Fernando Valley

The District Attorney’s report (hereinafter “Report”) claims that the investigation was thorough. This conclusion on its face always has to be a qualified claim in California, because California Government Code Section 3307, a part of the Peace Officer Bill of Rights introduced by then-Assembly Member Jim Keysor in the early 70s, gives peace officers a privilege that no other government employee in the state enjoys. By reason of the Government Code Section 3307, Peace Officers cannot be required to take polygraph examinations, a privilege that does not exist for the FBI, CIA, or any other State or Federal employee. The “Methodology” of the District Attorney and the police investigators into any police misconduct begins as inherently flawed because it’s arbitrarily limited by the Government Code for strictly political reasons. That the Report fails to note such limitation represents a gross disregard of epistemology.


PolygraphBecause lie detectors cannot be used with peace officer witnesses under the Government Code, the question that needs to be asked of all investigators and expert witnesses in the matter is HAVE YOU EVER BEEN TESTED ON YOUR ABILITY TO DETECT DECEPTION IN AN INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEW OR INTERROGATION? If so, what were your personal results on the test? Who administered the test and what were their qualifications? Without a polygraph of the law enforcement witnesses the investigation is by definition neither thorough, complete nor comprehensive. Just because the law limits their ability to do this kind of investigation they should not pretend that there are other investigative techniques that could be used and which would have been used by the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility or another federal internal affairs office as examples.


The Report appears to have limited the inquiry into Deputies Gelhaus and Schemmel’s backgrounds to review of their “personnel and training records.” Why limit the inquiry to “personnel and training records” and not look at the records of their entire life histories? Why not interview their school classmates to see if they had a reputation for racism, poor impulse control or bullying?


Deputy Erick Gelhaus

Deputy Erick Gelhaus

In a November 2008 SWAT Magazine article, Ambush: Reaction in the Kill Zone, Deputy Erick Gelhaus, amongst other things wrote such gems as “You’ve got to have a mean gene in you” and “Neighborhood policing is a contact sport.” By limiting the investigation to “personnel and training records” Gelhaus basic mental fitness to be a peace officer is not even under the microscope, even though reasonable people might think he ought to have a serious psychiatric examination for making these statements. One also wonders whether, as many police departments do in the hiring and vetting process, did the Sonoma County Sheriffs Department administer an MMPI (Minnesota Multi Phasic Inventory) exam. If so, I’d really like to see what Gelhaus and Schemmel’s “L” scores were, because criminologist research over decades has shown an important co-relation between elevated “L” (generally referred to as “lie” scores, but it’s not quite as simple as that) and on-the-job misconduct for peace officers.


All sorts of "COEXIST" parodies out there and most of them tell a lot about the mentality of their creators/users.

All sorts of “COEXIST” parodies out there and most of them tell a lot about the mentality of their creators/users.

Another problem with the limitations placed on the background component of the investigation is that it ignores the purchase by Gelhaus of an overtly sick and racist bumper sticker from a right-wing and racist internet website. Gelhaus’ COEXIST bumper sticker is a spoof with a target over the “O” and a skull and crossbones for the “X.” This bumper sticker was purchased from www.patriotpostshop.com, which features amongst its offerings a whole category of “ANNOY A LIBERAL” shirts, notepads, mugs, magnets, stickers, “Tee off a liberal” golf balls, and ink stamps like “PROPERTY OF BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA,” “TAX EVADER,” and “PAYABLE TO RED CHINA.” The so-called “Humor” section of products includes official looking cards entitled “Obama Entitlement / Race / Exemption wallet cards” and other equally offensive items.


See why so-called law enforcement "gang expert" testimony is generally objectionable:  http://janbtucker.com/blog/2012/09/01/lapds-gift-to-ms-13-defense/

See why so-called law enforcement “gang expert” testimony is generally objectionable: http://janbtucker.com/blog/2012/09/01/lapds-gift-to-ms-13-defense/

The Report notes that Gelhaus had been a member of the MAGNET anti-gang team. A competent investigator would immediately wonder if he ever testified as a gang expert in court to get a “gang enhancement” charge or conviction? If so, did they review his past testimony? So-called law enforcement “gang experts” are frequently liars and/or idiots who might technically meet “Frye” standards but could not possibly meet the more stringent “Daubert” standards in a federal court proceeding.


Gregorio Estevane

Gregorio Estevane

Private Investigator and expert witness on gang issues Gregorio Estevane says “that the objectives of a gang control effort depend on whether the problem is defined as gang violence, gang crime, or the gangs’ very existence. Law enforcement officials often take the public position that gangs must be eradicated. In the words of Captain Ray Peavy, who heads the Los Angeles sheriff’s homicide bureau, ‘Everyone says, ‘What are we going to do about the gang problem?’ It’s the same thing you do about cockroaches or insects; you get someone in there to do whatever they can do to get rid of those creatures’ (Garvey and McGreevy 2007).”


Estevane also argues that “the proliferation of specialized gang units has been justified as a natural response by police officials to the spread of gangs and growing public concerns over gang crime. The argument for such units is that they permit officers to develop the technical skills and expertise needed to diagnose local gang problems and to assist the rest of the agency and the community to address them. But the idea that the formation of a gang unit is ‘a result of rational considerations on the part of police agencies’ that face ‘real gang problems’ has been challenged by several researchers (Katz and Webb 2003a).“


Does this look like the kind of weapon a child could walk around carrying it in one hand?

Does this look like the kind of weapon a child could walk around carrying it in one hand?

In addition to having trained as a deputy on the use of an AK-47, the Report notes that Deputy Gelhaus “….approximately a month prior to this incident, Deputy Gelhaus participated in a firearms training in which AK – 47 rifle rounds were fired into and through a mid – size sedan. Thus, he was highly experienced in recognizing this weapon and understanding its capabilities.” I would add that he also would be highly knowledgeable about how heavy an AK-47 is and the relevance of that weight load to how a person would normally carry the weapon.


I have handled and shot an AK-47. In fact, a 1987 or 1988 edition of Penthouse Magazine has a picture of me in a photo-essay at the head of a firing line of a bunch of psychos from the Jewish Defense League (JDL) wearing my trademark Mogen David necklace and holding a Chinese made AK-47. Depending on whether it’s loaded or unloaded and what kind of ammunition magazine is being used, an AK-47 weighs somewhere between 9.75 lbs and 10.5 lbs.


Could Andy Lopez have held a real AK 47 in one hand?

Could Andy Lopez have held a real AK 47 in one hand?

According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) the average weight for American boys at that age is 102 pounds. While I have not seen Andy Lopez’s exact height and weight I have met his brother and the family does not appear to be heavy or tall, so with an average boy’s range from 80 pounds at the 10th percentile to 135 pounds at the 90th percentile, my guess is that Lopez’s weight was somewhere between 80-90 pounds. Let’s liberally estimate Andy’s weight at 100 lbs. and then contemplate just how he would have been carrying an AK-47 based upon the witnesses’ descriptions.


A witness in the Report identified as John Doe #4 indicates that when he saw Andy Lopez he had a weapon in his left hand with the barrel pointed down. The Report states:


“He thought the rifle was a toy and it looked “like a plastic” and “I think it’ s fake, but I’m not sure” it was “way too light ” and ….He said he thought those guns would be heavy and that gun “looks like very light.” [Emphasis added].


In spite of John Doe #4’s statement, it does not appear that the “investigators” bothered to ask any other witness what their perception of the gun’s weight was at any time in the investigation. If they did, they did not report what anybody said about the issue. If the issue of weight had not independently occurred to the investigators and expert witnesses used by the District Attorney up until John Doe #4 was interviewed, it would have logically occurred to a sane, reasonable, honest and competent investigator to start asking questions along these lines and to re-interview any witnesses who had not independently brought it up as John Doe #4 did.


When John Doe #7 saw Andy Lopez he indicated that Lopez was holding the gun in his right hand with the barrel facing down. He also thought it was a BB gun for a variety of reasons described in the report, but at the point he was interviewed, after apparently asking him open ended questions that elicited his responses, nobody apparently asked him about the weight factors of the gun in his perceptions. Note that while John Doe #4 saw the gun in Lopez’s left hand and John Doe #7 saw it in the right, both saw it being held in only one hand with the barrel pointed down. The question arises, could anybody of his size and weight hold an AK-47 in only one hand?


Craig Fries of Precision Simulations was hired by the District Attorney to recreate the incident as a digital animation:


The District Attorney’s Office retained the services of Precision Simulations to attempt to create a 3- D analysis of the shooting event and the path of each of Deputy Gelhaus’ bullets.  In order to provide the most accurate and complete report possible, the District Attorney Investigator measured the bullet holes to John Doe #3’s house and assisted Precision Simulations in performing the following: scene visit, including viewing the bullet holes in the fence and house; conducting a field survey to create a 3- D laser model of Deputy Gelhaus’ patrol car, an officer assuming the firing position of Deputy Gelhaus at the time of the shooting and of an exemplar hand gun; and scene view and measurements of the location the intact round which came to rest on Anteeo Way.


So, since they did a scene visit including a partial recreation of what Deputy Gelhaus did, why didn’t they take the time to do re-creations of what Andy Lopez did using the replica gun he actually had as well as a real AK-47 with a youngster of the approximate weight and stature of Lopez. Their failure to do so speaks volumes and as Robert Louis Stevenson wrote in The Truth of Intercourse:


The cruelest lies are often told in silence.….And, again, a lie may be told by a truth, or a truth conveyed through a lie. Truth to facts is not always truth to sentiment; and part of the truth, as often happens in answer to a question, may be the foulest calumny. A fact may be an exception; but the feeling is the law, and it is that which you must neither garble nor belie. The whole tenor of a conversation is a part of the meaning of each separate statement; the beginning and the end define and travesty the intermediate conversation.


So, by producing a 3D animation with the selected facts and inputs that the District Attorney’s office chose to offer to Precision Simulations, they guaranteed a recreation of a partial truth and within that truth is the suppression of the facts that could just as easily have been ascertained.


Dr. William Lewinski

Dr. William Lewinski

Dr. William Lewinski, the District Attorney’s (whose name is misspelled as “Lewinsky” throughout the report) police force expert cited in the report, has been thoroughly exposed as a ‘prosecution whore’ in a brilliant piece of investigative journalism by reporter Bob Egelko (http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Expert-witness-in-toy-gun-case-has-history-of-5614736.php).


L to R:  Lo Barnes, Jan B. Tucker, Marge Buckley, Alex Salazar

L to R: Lo Barnes, Jan B. Tucker, Marge Buckley, Alex Salazar

Private Investigator Alex Salazar who worked on behalf of the Lopez family for their ongoing civil matter is unable to comment on the specifics of the case because it is still under litigation. However, he is disturbed by the justification for the murder of 13-year-old Andy Lopez given by expert witness Bill Lewinski whose testimony always sides with the use of force by police. Lewinski interviewed only one witness in the Andy Lopez case, although he claims to have looked at statements made by several witnesses.


Salazar is not alone in criticizing Lewinski’s obvious bias in support of police force which has been publicly expressed by a number of attorneys who have fought police brutality cases voiced in the Bob Egelko’s SF Gate article and at http://sfist.com/2014/07/11/expert_in_andy_lopez_shooting_also.php and http://www.citypages.com/2010-04-28/news/bill-lewinski-defends-cops-accused-of-excessive-force/. “At what time has Lewinski ever been on any side except in favor of police excessive force? How can this be construed as being impartial or fair?” Salazar laments.


Nick Pinto’s City Pages article explains that “In most cases, Lewinski is called upon to present a scientific-sounding justification for what looks on its face unjustifiable.” [Emphasis added]


Lewinski thinks that 4th & 5th Century Philosophy is more important to mention in his analysis than the Heisenberg Principle or the Impossibility Theorems.  Go figure?

Lewinski thinks that 4th & 5th Century Philosophy is more important to mention in his analysis than the Heisenberg Principle or the Impossibility Theorems. Go figure?

Dr. Lewinski’s first statement in his analysis of “Decision, Act & Time” in the Report begins with the contention that “Since the time of Aristotle, Western culture has accepted that reasoning is virtuous. The tenor of his teachings, which were further reified by Augustine and Descarte was that morally acceptable decisions were only possible when we renounced passions and emotions to the quest for rationality in all endeavors.” Pinto’s characterization of Lewinski as making “scientific sounding justification” is spot on; this is my analysis of Lewinski’s pedantic explication of his philosophy of science:


This expert should spend more time on Heisenberg’s “Uncertainty Principle,” “impossibility” theorems, and “Ockham’s Razor” than St. Augustine and Descarte, especially because Augustine is applicable to Roman law (Napoleonic Code) system and not necessarily to Anglo Saxon common law systems of justice. He should also consider whether Descarte’s cogito ergo sum is more relevant than Jose Ortega y Gasset’s “I live therefore I think.”


The title tells it all:  Staussians like Dr. Lewinski have their heads in an ideology that lost relevance over a thousand years ago.

The title tells it all: Staussians like Dr. Lewinski have their heads in an ideology that lost relevance over a thousand years ago.

My bottom line in that analysis is that while jurors without a minimum four-year degree in one of the social sciences who got at least a “B” in their methodology requisite course and who hopefully had a professor who emphasized “philosophy of science” as opposed to statistics will have no basis to understand the implications of what Lewinski’s talking about, other than that it sounds like he must be really intelligent. Anybody who actually has an appreciation for the finer points of methodological debates on epistemology and ontology would immediately recognize that Lewinski is simply taking the position one of three major schools of thought within Political Science methodology and asserting that his school is correct and the other two schools are wrong. Lewinski’s pseudo-scientific opinion is straight out of the smallest of the schools of thought, i.e., he exposes himself with that statement as a “Straussian” or follower of Political Scientist and philosopher Leo Strauss. The other schools of thought are the Behavioralist (or logical positivist, the largest) and Phenomenology (the school that I happen to adhere to, smaller than the logical positivists but bigger than the Straussians). That Lewinski begins by claiming that his methodological philosophy is widely accepted in contemporary civilization sounds okay to average jurors, but not to other social scientists and epistemologists.


The late Dr. Maureen O'Sullivan of the University of San Francisco was one of the pre-eminent researchers on the science of detecting deception.

The late Dr. Maureen O’Sullivan of the University of San Francisco was one of the pre-eminent researchers on the science of detecting deception.

Lewinski makes much of his interview with Erick Gelhaus, the sole witness he personally interviewed (why as an expert witness he relies on secondary sources almost exclusively is beyond belief, and would be outright rejected as inappropriate, certainly by Behavioralists, Phenomenologists and probably even by Lewinski’s fellow Straussians). My critique appended to the Report, mindful of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and the Impossibility Theorem, is “Have you [Lewinski] or anybody else who actually spoke with Gelhaus TESTED in detecting deception in an interview? I am. I got 8 out of 9 correct in a blind test by the late Dr. Maureen O’Sullivan of the University of San Francisco.” For Lewinski to rely on his own ability to determine whether Gelhaus is truthful or not in the first place is arrogant beyond the pale.


Lewinski’s sixth conclusional area involves the “research” into the relation of officer reaction times to the ability of people to raise a firearm in a given time period into a firing position. Nowhere does he analyze whether any of this research involved the ability of juveniles weighing under 100 lbs to bring an approximately 10 lb gun into position to fire. What may be valid for adults might be relevant to the conclusion he’s drawing. If there were no juveniles in the study then at best the relevance is peripheral to what Lewinski wants the public to believe.


Switch hitterI am a “switch hitter” when it comes to criminal, civil and administrative proceedings involving law enforcement. I do both prosecution work and defense work, e.g., civil plaintiff’s work and civil defense work; pro-prosecution investigation in criminal trials and defense investigation; and I have both brought complaints against peace officers and defended peace officers in administrative and other legal proceedings. I cannot be characterized as either a “plaintiff’s whore,” “a defense whore,” or a “prosecution whore” because I am available to give the best truthful advice and testimony for any side who needs me and who wants an honest opinion.


A signpost of who is a “whore for hire” in this business is whether you only work for one side; likewise, does only one side ever seek out your services and another side won’t have anything to do with you. Lewinski works only for the police, that is, for the governments who hire the police…..because he does testify against the interests of peace officers who have been shot by their brothers in blue on behalf of the government agency that employs the shooter. In one such case Nick Pinto’s City Pages article notes that “After Minneapolis police shot fellow officer Duy Ngo half a dozen times with a machine gun in 2003, Lewinski testified that the shooting may have been justified. The city ended up settling for $4.5 million.”


John C. Burton III

John C. Burton III

In fairness to Lewinski, several articles about him have quoted John C. Burton III, an attorney whose own reputation is tarnished, denouncing Lewinski’s court conduct. While Burton’s criticisms of Lewinski are spot on, he himself is no angel. A fanatical Trotskyist from the Healyite Socialist Equality Party, Burton has been repeatedly sued by former clients for sexual harassment.



My conclusion is that there can and should be no conclusion of the investigation into the death of Andy Lopez. Anybody who finds the District Attorney’s Report to be credible is susceptible to being talked into buying the Golden Gate Bridge, believing in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy, supporting Richard Nixon’s Vietnam policies, and believing that there were Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq before we invaded.


The Report demonstrates the inherent truth of two statements about the role of law enforcement authorities from the 60s:


The police aren’t there to create disorder. The police are there to preserve disorder.”–Richard J. Daley, Mayor of Chicago, 1968
Justice in America means ‘Just Us’ White Folk.”–H. Rap Brown.

Posted in Anecdotes & Adventures, Ideas & Opinions, Private Investigation Industry, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

In Memoriam to Andy Lopez


By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Elbert “Big Man” Howard July 17, 2014

Big Man (far right), Black Panther demonstration, Oakland CA, July 1968. Photo courtesy of Pirkle Jones

Big Man (far right), Black Panther demonstration, Oakland CA, July 1968. Photo courtesy of Pirkle Jones

Thirteen-year-old Andy Lopez was an aspiring musician when he was shot and killed on October 22, 2013 by Sheriff’s deputy Erick Gelhaus. Andy played the trumpet. Unfortunately, the world will never have the opportunity to see what he could have become or how far his talent might have taken him. However, rather than just bury his memory, those of the living, including those responsible for his loss of life because they work in some capacity in this injustice system, can make his memory mean something, especially to young people as they struggle towards adulthood.

I am proposing that a fund or funds be set up in his name to help students, especially Latino students and other disenfranchised students of color, who are in need of financial support and are struggling to achieve the goal of higher education. I strongly urge that the District Attorney, the Sheriff, the City Council and the Board of Supervisors, as well as all Law Enforcement agencies contribute to these efforts. At this point, none of them have publicly expressed any meaningful regret that Andy was shot and killed under their watch, nor have they accepted any responsibility for his senseless killing. The public has a right and also a responsibility to be outraged by all of this.
However, over time, even the deepest outrage tends to subside and many tire of going to rallies and taking part in protest marches. No one wishes for this, but human nature and time being what they are, this just happens. I say that before this occurs, before coalitions and committees start to disband, I am hoping that they evolve into constructive organizing. People would have to be willing to do the consistent hard work involved in order to organize events, such as concerts, scholarships and other events which would create lasting monuments and programs in the memory of Andy Lopez. How about focusing on getting serious about the Memorial Park and playground? These efforts could achieve a lasting legacy and some kind of Justice for Andy.
I also propose arranging a Jazz Festival which would consist of local high school and college jazz bands, and include student musicians such as those from Healdsburg High, El Molino High, Santa Rosa JC and others. Ask venues to donate their facilities; ask local businesses to donate goods and money. Ask local media to donate ads in papers; ask DJs to make announcements on local radio and television programs. Ask local printers to donate posters and flyers. Promote these events locally and throughout the Bay area heavily so that this event will be successful and so that no one will ever forget Andy Lopez.
Funds which are raised can then be utilized to help young people in need of help – with educational assistance , legal defense needs, and with basic needs for shelter, clothing, food and medical and dental care. They need help – we could make a difference in their lives. What has happened to young Andy Lopez has created a tragedy, not only for his family and friends, not only for the community in which he lived, but for so many of us in so many communities. It is time to focus on taking actions which will allow us to start the healing process. I feel there are many ways to start this process, including the ones I have suggested here. In order to achieve our goals and create positive and lasting change in our struggle for freedom and justice, it would require each of us to take an evolutionary leap into consciousness and recognize the need to commit to each other as human beings. We must set the example – our children and grandchildren are depending on us.
Elbert “Big Man” Howard Santa Rosa, CA
Elbert “Big Man” Howard is a founding member of the Black Panther Party and is an author, lecturer and community activist in Sonoma County.  For more information about Big Man:


Posted in Anecdotes & Adventures, Ideas & Opinions, Private Investigation Industry | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Boxing: Enforce & Strengthen Regulatory Laws


By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

For background on this issue, see my blog on the Conspiracy In Restraint of Trade in the Boxing Industry:


AG ltr_001 AG ltr_002 AG ltr_003 AG ltr_004

Use the below form to email the blogmeister.  To post comments, first use the link at the top to subscribe to the blog first.

Posted in Ideas & Opinions, Private Investigation Industry | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Sonoma County D.A. Report on Andy Lopez Shooting


By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Here are some choice quotes from my commentary on the Sonoma County District Attorney report on the shooting of Andy Lopez:

By reason of the Government Code Section 3307, Peace Officers cannot be required to take polygraph examinations, a privilege that does not exist for the FBI, CIA, or any other State of Federal employee. Their “Methodology” begins as inherently flawed as arbitrarily limited by the Government Code for strictly political reasons. That the report fails to note such limitation represents a gross disregard of epistemology.


As a member of the MAGNET team did he ever testify as a gang expert in court to get a “gang enhancement” charge or conviction? If so, did they review his testimony? So-called law enforcement “gang experts” are frequently liars and/or idiots who might technically meet “Frye” standards but could not possibly meet the more stringent “Daubert” standards in a federal court proceeding.


Remember, supposedly this is happening with a 10.5 pound weapon. There is an obvious difference between a kid with a replica and a kid with a 10.5 pound real weapon in how they will handle it.


For them to editorialize like this they should have been tested to detect deception in investigative interviews and found competent. Were they tested? What were the results?


A test needs to be performed re-enacting the difference with several males of similar stature and size to Andy Lopez of doing this with the replica weapon and with a real AK 47. This is obvious and nobody should have drawn this conclusion without doing such a test.

So click below for the keyword searchable report in three parts, with my side note PDF commentary:


Posted in Anecdotes & Adventures, Ideas & Opinions, Private Investigation Industry | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

What Would Emma Lazarus Say About Emigrantes?


By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Emma Lazarus Meme_001 Emma Lazarus Meme_002 Emma Lazarus Meme_003

Posted in Ideas & Opinions | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

US Justice Dept Touts US Record on Criminal Defense for the Poor


By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

No comment….yet….see my subsequent blogs on the issue and the platitudes this statement touts…..

Associate Attorney General West Delivers Remarks at the International Conference on Access to Legal Aid in Criminal Justice Systems
~ Wednesday, June 25, 2014
Assistant Attorney General Tony West speaking at the Legal Services Corporation Black History Month event

Assistant Attorney General Tony West speaking at the Legal Services Corporation Black History Month event

Thank you, Jennifer [Smith of the International Legal Foundation] for your kind words.  On behalf of the United States, it is a privilege to be here with all of you today at this historic international convening on criminal legal aid.  I want to thank Minister [of Justice and Correctional Services Michael] Masutha, Judge President Mlambo, the Government of the Republic of South Africa, Legal Aid South Africa, the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime, the United Nations Development Programme, and the International Legal Foundation, for coordinating this important gathering so that we may, together, explore how to strengthen and improve access to criminal legal aid around the world.


And equally important, I want to thank all of you — the gathered Ministers, Deputy Ministers, Attorneys General, Supreme Court Justices, and criminal legal aid providers and experts — for participating in this conference.  Your presence here epitomizes the dual truths that all free people, wherever they may live, lay valid claim to equality in the eyes of the law, and that the majesty of the law finds its best and highest use in the service of justice.


Two years ago, I had the privilege of being in New York, during the opening of the 67th Session of the United Nations General Assembly, to participate in a side-event to the High-Level Meeting on the Rule of Law hosted by the Permanent Mission to the U.N. of the Republic of South Africa.  And during that event, I was honored to express the United States’ strong support for the U.N. Principles and Guidelines on Access to Legal Aid in Criminal Justice Systems.  The principles articulated in that document affirm that criminal legal aid “is an essential element of a fair, humane and efficient criminal justice system that is based on the rule of law.”


And now we have come here, to the land of Madiba and in the spirit of Ubuntu, to rededicate ourselves to the urgent task of making real the principle at the core of the U.N. Principles, articulated in the Lilongwe Declaration a decade ago, and reiterated in so many of your national constitutions, as well as mine: a criminal justice system is not just if it fails to guarantee a right to competent counsel through legal aid.


For the United States, that constitutional right to counsel is a cornerstone of the U.S. criminal justice system.  And my country’s best articulation of this fundamental principle originated not with an august conference of learned judges and justice ministers, or by a declaration of universal rights and aspirations; its origins were much more humble than that.  It started with the arrest of a man once described as a drifter and petty thief.


Clarence Earl Gideon and his handwritten petition to the U.S. Supreme Court

Clarence Earl Gideon and his handwritten petition to the U.S. Supreme Court

His name was Clarence Gideon.  And in 1961, he was arrested for breaking into a pool hall and stealing about five U.S. dollars in change from a cigarette vending machine.  At his trial, Gideon asked the judge for a lawyer, saying he was too poor to hire one himself.  The presiding judge denied Gideon’s request, and, after representing himself at trial, Gideon lost and was convicted and sentenced to five years.


From the confines of his jail cell, Gideon wrote a simple, five-page plea asking the United States Supreme Court to grant him a new trial with appointed counsel.  “It makes no difference how old I am or what color I am or what church I belong to if any,” Gideon wrote.  “The question,” he said, “is very simple.  I did not get a fair trial.”


The U.S. Supreme Court ultimately heard Gideon’s plea and, in a milestone judicial opinion that bears his name, the justices established the principle that our Constitution guarantees defendants in criminal cases the right to a lawyer whether that person can afford one or not.  Gideon received a new trial – this time with the assistance of a court-appointed lawyer – and this time, he was acquitted.


I think it speaks volumes that if you visit Washington D.C. today — and I know that many of your countries will be represented in Washington soon for the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit that President Obama is hosting in August — you will find Gideon’s humble, handwritten five-page petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, penciled on prison stationary, sitting in our National Archives, alongside our Nation’s most treasured documents: the Declaration of Independence that created our country; the Bill of Rights which protected our liberty; and the Emancipation Proclamation that eradicated the scourge of slavery from our land.


And in the five decades since the Gideon case was decided, the U.S. Supreme Court has continued to refine this important and basic right — expanding the right to counsel to juveniles and in certain misdemeanor cases.


So for the United States, the right to counsel is a principle that represents the most basic notions of fundamental fairness.  But it also reflects the aspirations of a Nation that is still very much a work in progress.


Because the challenge of effective criminal legal aid and fairness in the criminal justice system are issues that the United States has been grappling with since its founding.  At times, we have made great strides, committing resources, energy and ideas to the task.  At times, we have fallen short of our own ideals.  And with each triumph and setback, we are reminded that justice is as much a journey as it is a destination — as much a process as it is an outcome — and that the fairest criminal justice system gives equal attention to both.


Addressing this challenge is something that our nation’s Attorney General, Eric Holder, has made a priority of his tenure in office.  In his first year, he launched the Access to Justice Initiative — an effort that I oversee at the U.S. Department of Justice and which seeks to ensure basic legal services are available, affordable and accessible to everyone in the United States regardless of wealth or status.   Much of the work of this initiative is directed at strengthening criminal defense for the poor by focusing on many of the same values outlined in the U.N. Principles and Guidelines.


Our work through the Access to Justice Initiative has helped to raise awareness about the urgent need that exists in indigent criminal defense in the United States.  The lawyers who provide legal aid to criminal defendants — we call them public defenders — too often they are overworked, underpaid, and overwhelmed by the need for criminal defense services among the poor.


In response, the Access to Justice Initiative — which is fortunate to have the leadership of Maha Jweied, the Acting Deputy Counselor of Access to Justice and a participant in this week’s conference — has supported piloting programs that test innovative indigent criminal defender services throughout our country and identified best practices that can improve the way we serve indigent clients who need legal representation.


There are other steps we’ve taken to make real our commitment to legal aid in the criminal justice system.  One of the most comprehensive is an effort launched by our Attorney General aimed at reforming and improving our criminal justice system in ways that not only improve access to justice and public safety, but also saves money and more effectively deploys our limited criminal justice resources.


We call it the “Smart on Crime” initiative.  It’s a reform effort based on the premise that while aggressive enforcement of our criminal statutes remains our Justice Department’s central law enforcement mission, experience teaches us that we cannot arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate our way to becoming a safer nation.  Over the last three decades, the United States has enjoyed great success — for a variety of reasons — in bringing down violent crime rates.  Yet over that same time period, our prison populations have exploded by more than 800 percent, requiring the commitment of greater and greater resources.


And for those offenders who are non-violent and low-level, it’s not clear that spending increasing amounts of our nation’s treasure to incarcerate them is a sound investment in public safety; indeed, there may be better, less expensive ways of keeping our communities safe while at the same time holding offenders like these accountable and reducing the likelihood they will return to prison after they’ve been released.


So to truly be effective, our Smart on Crime initiative encourages our law enforcement officials at both the federal and state levels to focus on other aspects of criminal justice, like crime prevention, reducing over-incarceration and facilitating the successful reentry of individuals back into their communities after release.


Because if our experience in the United States teaches us anything, it is that building a better criminal justice system is always unfinished business.  Like our nation itself, our criminal justice system is in a state of constant self-evaluation, constant self-improvement, constant reform.  And our participation in this important conference is but one part of that infinite process.


So let me close where I began: by thanking all of you for your participation in this conference.  Because at the end of the day, after all of the keynote speeches are forgotten and resolutions adopted; after the outcome document is written and this conference center is empty, what will be left is the hard work of engaging in what I call “doing justice”:  building criminal and civil legal systems that deliver the promise of dignity and equality before the law for every individual, regardless of who they are, their color or class, the god they worship or the person they love.


“Doing justice” means embracing the aspirations expressed in the U.N. Principles and Guidelines while at the same time being honest with ourselves about addressing those areas where we fall short, where we can learn from one another, and where we can do better.  It’s about becoming, to paraphrase an American statesman,  a society whose greatness is measured not by how it treats those at the top, but how it treats those who dance in the dawn of life, those who rest in the sunset of life, and those who struggle in the shadows of life; those who often work the hardest but have the least; those who know not the mainstream but life’s margins.


And honorable guests, our hands — yours and mine — we must do that work.  We come here from the perches of privilege — the privilege of being servants of the people we represent, and whose dreams and aspirations we strive to realize.  We must make the persuasive arguments in the halls of power for those who find no voice there.  We must take the bold steps, make the hard choices and, yes, even at times accept the political risks, because that is what building the future of fair and effective justice systems requires.


And I am thankful to you because I know you are up to the task, or you would not be here today.  And I am grateful for the opportunity to be your partner in this endeavor, for there is much we can learn from you, much we can share with you, and so much we can achieve working with you; as we, in the writer’s words, float “as riders on the earth together, brothers on that bright loveliness in the eternal cold — brothers who know now that they are truly brothers,”  bound together by a shared commitment to the majesty that is the law and the justice that it must always serve.


Posted in Ideas & Opinions, Private Investigation Industry | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment



By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

The rights of workers under the National Labor Relations Act (“Wagner Act”):

Sec. 7. [§ 157.] Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, and shall also have the right to refrain from any or all of such activities except to the extent that such right may be affected by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment as authorized in section 8(a)(3) [section 158(a)(3) of this title].

For more info on unionization rights:



Hobby LobbyCalls are out to boycott Hobby Lobby and other businesses that just won the right to refuse to pay for their employees’ contraceptive coverage in mandated health insurance plans.  That’s a nice idea, but the best way of protecting workers’ and women’s rights in the workplace is to help them to unionize so that they can protect their own rights.

Here’s my game plan for how to unionize Hobby Lobby:

  • Hobby Lobby EthicalEvery feminist organization in America like NOW, NARAL, or whoever needs to find out if there are Hobby Lobby stores in their area
  • Recruit politicized feminist/pro-labor students from Women Studies, Black Studies, Chicano Studies and Labor Studies programs at local colleges and universities to try to get summer and/or holiday vacation jobs at Hobby Lobby
  • Train them in how to organize and organize them to organize; some who get jobs lay low and wait until they’re off probation
  • Some who don’t really need jobs walk in and write on their employment applications that they’re trying to get jobs in order to unionize to demand contraceptive coverage in union negotiations; none of these employees will get hired so they immediately file charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the EEOC and local civil rights agencies like the California Dept of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) alleging they weren’t hired because of discrimination
  • After probation, some of the organizers who were hired come out of the closet as organizers; those who get fired or harassed immediately file charges with the NLRB, EEOC, etc.

These kind of tactics have been successful in other industries, such as the Building and Construction Trades.  Here’re Hobby Lobby locations to unionize in California:

Hobby Lobby - Store Locations - Text_001If you want more information on how to get involved in unionizing Hobby Lobby, use the form below to email me.  To comment on this blog, use the subscription form link at the top.


Posted in Ideas & Opinions | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Sexual Harassment: What I said years ago is still timely


By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Following is an old article I did for Claims People, a magazine for insurance defense investigators, lawyers, and claims adjustors:

Scan_20140627_175110 Scan_20140627_175110_001 Scan_20140627_175110_002

Posted in Anecdotes & Adventures, Ideas & Opinions, Private Investigation Industry | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Donald Sterling has a friend in the Black Community


By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Earl "Skip" Cooper II extolling the virtues of Donald Sterling at the BBA 2014 Awards Banquet

Earl “Skip” Cooper II extolling the virtues of Donald Sterling at the BBA 2014 Awards Banquet

The Los Angeles City Council voted to declare February 28, 2013 as “Skip Cooper Day” in the city honoring the work of Earl “Skip” Cooper II, President of the Black Business Association.  For more on how that happened:  http://www.lasentinel.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=10630:skip-cooper-day-in-los-angeles&catid=80&Itemid=170

I was privileged to attend the BBA 2014 40th Annual Awards Dinner last night:

Scan_20140626_101204Overall the event was positive.  One speaker in particular spoke eloquently about the history of civil rights activism and civil rights laws and executive orders that assisted African American business and the critical effect on African American employment.  But the event had a low mark where it started at the bottom when people realized that there was a full page ad in the program from Donald Sterling; starting at the bottom it managed to work its way down when BBA President Earl “Skip” Cooper II said that Sterling is his “friend” and claimed that Sterling “isn’t a racist.”


Seriously.  I’m not making this up:

Donald Sterling Scan_20140626_100655If you’re not familiar with my past writings about Donald Sterling, check these blog entries out:




To me, Donald Sterling is about as welcome as Adolf Hitler at a Bar Mitzvah.  Frankly, that’s the way most of the people in the audience took Skip’s remarks about Sterling:  jaw dropping; “no you didn’t just go there?” “WTF!” etc and so on….and then there was my reaction…..  “What kind of Negro said that?”

You be the judge of whether Skip’s statements about Sterling and his denial of Sterling’s being a racist is consistent or inconsistent with BBA’s claimed Mission (see below).  If it’s inconsistent, maybe BBA should change it’s name to Negro Business Association.  Of course to me, denying that Sterling is a racist is like a Jew joining the Neo-Nazi so-called Historical Revisionists in claiming that the Holocaust is a myth and nothing but Jewish propaganda….

Mission Scan_20140626_105311Scan_20140626_101204_001









Posted in Anecdotes & Adventures, Ideas & Opinions | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Take Cover: Hired Mudslinger Rides Into the 2014 Election


By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

OPPOSITION RESEARCH: “Take Cover, Hired Mudslinger Rides Into Town”

The self appointed Commisar/Fuehrer of the California Peace & Freedom Party, Kevin Douglas Akin, fancies himself to be a brilliant researcher and freelance writer. Now and then, he makes me the target of his outstanding skills and comes up with stuff that my other enemies have never accused me of before; e.g., that supposedly I’m not Jewish, was not brought up as a Jew, and my family had no known connection to Judaism. See for my refutation of that bizarre canard amongst other things:  http://janbtucker.com/blog/2012/10/30/konversations-with-kevin-7/

Kevin’s latest attack on me isn’t really worthy of analysis. It’s just too weird:

On Tuesday, June 3, 2014 9:18 AM, Kevin Akin <kevinakin1950@hotmail.com> wrote:

I am very sorry to bother the majority of you, whom I believe had no desire to receive the original e-mail from Jan Tucker that was sent to this list, but I think it necessary to inform you that his charges are entirely baseless.

I have not in fact telephoned anyone at all on the list of those people Jan claims as his endorsers. I did send an e-mail (a polite and friendly one, that led to some hours of friendly discussion by e-mail during the day) to one of the people he listed, whom I know. And another Peace and Freedom Party official sent an e-mail to another of his supposed “endorsers” who was an old friend.

I certainly have not threatened anyone with anything.

Jan, I have learned, totally misrepresented the situation to those from whom he sought endorsements. He claimed that he was the only Peace and Freedom Party registrant running for Board of Equalization in the Third District. And he presented an endorsement of his campaign as a way to show solidarity with the Peace and Freedom Party.

In fact, Jan Tucker is not supported or endorsed by the Peace and Freedom Party at any level. The Los Angeles County Central Committee and the State Officers (acting by prior authorization of the State Central Committee) have endorsed Eric Moren of Ventura as our candidate for Board of Equalization, and are pushing hard for write-in votes for Eric. He is the only candidate with a chance of displacing a particularly nasty race-baiting Republican, G. Rich Marshall, as the second vote-getter in the “top two” primary today.

Since 1998, two years after private detective Jan Tucker got just one vote at the California State Convention for the Peace and Freedom Party nomination for president, he has conducted a fairly incompetent but still vigorous effort to damage or destroy the PFP. I will not bore you with a long list of his outrageous trickery and lies, but I will just mention that after I was elected State Chair for this two-year term in August of 2012, Tucker sent red-baiting letters to the employers of two of my adult children, urging them to fire my children because their father is a notorious socialist activist. (Shocking, I know, but I have retained copies of these communications in case anyone doubts me.) (Jan’s red-baiting did not work, and my kids kept their jobs.)

As you should all recognize, Jan Tucker would not have a chance at a Peace and Freedom Party endorsement for any office at all, even should hell freeze over and pigs fly. His campaign is just another effort at disruption and confusion.

If any of you live in the Third District (Ventura and most of the population of Los Angeles Counties), and have not voted yet, I urge you (and the Peace and Freedom Party urges you) to write in Eric Moren for that office.

Again, I apologize for bothering you once more. The election is today, and I don’t think anyone will find this interesting after the election. With my apologies, Kevin Akin

Here are a couple of the responses of the people who received Akin’s tirade:

Jan… I just noticed this weird response in my inbox. I thought maybe you would want to have a copy of this if this person didn’t send you a copy. He doesn’t say very nice things about you, I thought perhaps you would like to respond to him personally.

Greetings all on this list:

I find it most disturbing how a person like Kevin Akin, the Party sitting State Chair can make demands of other party members to vote his way! Voting is very private matter, and while we can try to influence another person’s voting preference persuasively, we must not cross the line of intimidation.

This seems to be just what the P&FP State Chair Keven Akin has recently done with the former party Presidential Candidate Roseanne Barr! Demanding she withdraws her support for her selected pick for 3rd District Board of Equalization, which happens to be Jan Tucker. Well, I also support Jan Tucker’s Candidacy!

So does Mr. Akin feel he can force others to vote his way? This is just unconscionable for sure and does not serve the party well. No one has the right to force anyone to vote or not to vote!

This is just reminiscent of slavery times, when slaves had no rights, but once able to vote have faced tremendous intimidation to date through all kinds of machinations!

A couple of months ago, I prepared a document, which I have sent out via email and distribute at events, etc. This is how I try to influence others without demands.

There are clear choices on June 3rd 2014 CA Primaries for your consideration


It is critical to vote outside of the 2 electoral political party Dictatorship (Dems/Reps) Black box, instead choose Socialist Candidates at every cost. Because you may or not know that since 2010, two earlier propositions were pushed/passed by Democrats and Republicans to undermine/eliminate all Third (2nd) registered Candidates in California!


Socialist Candidates can be registered with Electoral Partys like the Peace and Freedom, be Independent, or Decline to State. Their challenge is greater to raise necessary funds to compete with the Top 2!!

**Read more here: “In statewide debut, top-two primary blocks third parties from June ballot” and Small Parties Sue to Block Prop. 14 And at: http://peaceandfreedom.org/home/articles/general/966-small-parties-sue-to-block-prop-14

This means that if Socialist Candidates are not elected in this June 3rd Primary cycle with enough vote support, they are then eliminated from the November wide Elections!!! They can only participate in the Primaries!!!


***Here are some Socialist candidates for your strong support, you will see on your Ballot, depending on your CA region:


Ø Cindy Sheehan for CA Governor, http://www.cindy2014.org/

Ø Howard Johnson for U.S. Representative 34th District,


Ø Mohammad Arif for 16th State Senate district, http://www.senate16mohammadarif.com/

Ø Marianne Williamson for CA 33rd Congressional District.


Ø Amos Johnson for CA Lieutenant Governor, mailto:firebourn@msn.com

Ø Emido”Mimi” Soltisik for 62nd Assembly District, http://mimiforstateassembly.wordpress.com/

Ø Nathalie Hrizi for State Insurance Commissioner, http://www.ourcampaigns.com/CandidateDetail.html?CandidateID=189595

Ø Write In – Alanso Warren for 59th Assembly District,

Ø Write In – Jan B. Tucker for 3rd District Board of Equalization.

Ø Notice: Only one candidate qualified for the ballot for the June 3 primary election for 3rd District B. of E. http://janbtucker.com/blog/2014/05/06/how-to-write-in-jan-b-tucker-for-board-of-equalization/

I’m just curious as to why he said “Hopefully your district”? By being a write in candidate for Dist 3, the same as Jan’s makes this even more weirder. The current democratic incumbent is who Eric takes issue with? When he’s also running against Jan? But what hey, what do I know?

Dina was referring to Eric Moren’s response to my request that he put a stop to Kevin Akin’s campaign tactics on his behalf. This is that exchange:
On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Jan Tucker <pfp@janbtucker.com> wrote:

Attn: Eric Moren

It was brought to my attention that Kevin Akin, purporting to act on behalf of your campaign, has been telephoning people who have endorsed me and has used threats of political retaliation in demanding that the revoke their endorsements.

If you have been aware that he intended to do this, then so be it. If not and if you disapprove of such degenerate and despicable behavior, then I demand that you put a stop to these tactics and run your campaign in a clean and transparent manner.


To all you friends of Jan Tucker-

I have nothing against Jan, I’ve never met him or her, and frankly, very suprised to see this email.

I am a Write-In Candidate for THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION- District 3, (Hopefully your District!)

I have a B.A. in Economics, years of experience in Business, Marketing, Sales, Communications and am now pursuing a career as a Business Consultant here in my new town of Ventura, CA.

I am sincerely running in opposition to the On–going Incumbent Mr. Jerome Horton, who, as a Democrat and ‘life-long politician’, has helped to Unravel and Unwind the Good Work being done by ALL Californian Businesses and Workers….that is- taking us Californians to the #5th World Economy, to about the 25th in LESS THAN 10 YEARS!!

Mr. Horton, started his long-running career with the “BOE” at age 18! And has since served several ‘2 terms’ along the many years he has been with this ‘Branch of Government’. We are BLESSED to have our country’s ONLY Board of Equalization- Tax Fees and Licenses, (think Sales License, Gas ‘spills’ Licenses, ‘Waste’ Licenses’), and Mr. Horton DIRECTLY has been Instrumental in making California WORSE w. His policies and ‘oversight’.

He is whom I challenge. HE is the one I take issue with…
Let’s Get him OUT OF THERE!!!

Eric Moren
Peace and Freedom & “Power to the People!”

Okay, that’s the background; now here’s the back story.

Moren writes in pertinent part:

“I have a B.A. in Economics, years of experience in Business, Marketing, Sales, Communications and am now pursuing a career as a Business Consultant here in my new town of Ventura, CA.”

It’s intuitively obvious that anybody with “years of experience” as he claims would have some presence on the internet but the fact is, prior to the Peace & Freedom Party’s putting out biographical information about Moren in this campaign, using Google, Yahoo, or Bing to find anything about him on the web would have proven fruitless. I tried. I failed to find anything about him using the usual methods that ordinary voters would use to find out about somebody they’re considering voting for….or against.

So, being a Private Investigator and having been dubbed by the Los Angeles Times in a 1984 column headlined “Take Cover: Hired Mudslinger Rides Into Town,” about my expertise in “Opposition Research,” I have a few tricks of the trade up my sleeve. I was also particularly intrigued by the fact that when Akin, Marsha Feinland, Cindy Henderson-Gordon and Gary Gordon first started touting Moren’s candidacy that his name was being circulated amongst PFP circles as “Ephren” or “Efren” Moren, not Eric Moren. Only after he was “endorsed” by the State PFP leadership cabal—and I have been led to understand that even at that point they verbally called him “Ephren” or “Efren” rather than his real name—did they finally start calling him Eric.

That raised big a RED FLAG in my suspicious mind. I started a more extensive “Opposition Research” project designed as we say in the industry, to look up Eric’s A-hole with a microscope.

So, I find that in Eric Moren’s background there’s a huge gap in his residential history in a data base normally used by private investigators to track this sort of thing. He’s living in San Francisco in 1994-1995. Then, he disappears off the grid until 2006 when he resurfaces in Woodland Hills in the San Fernando Valley!

Welly, welly, welly my dear droogies! Are there any other Eric Morens out there? Lo and behold, there’s another Eric Moren, aka “Eric Michael,” who also has lived in San Francisco. As an aside, the use of two usual first names, in this case “Eric” and “Michael,” always raises red flags with experienced background investigators.  Yeah, some people do happen to have surnames that are also given names, but frequently when people adopt aliases for some reason they tend to use two first names.  This Eric Moren:

A Twinkyclean.com advertising photo

A Twinkyclean.com advertising photo

1. Has used a social security number that apparently really belongs to a woman by the name of Danelle who lives in Ohio. The social security number was issued between 1992-1994, coincidentally, just before Eric Moren dropped off the map and has only been used twice on credit header records….literally just two times, once by Danelle and once by somebody using the name Eric Moren in San Francisco.
2. Is the registered owner of the internet domain, http://www.twinkyclean.com, which any reasonable person would read and suspect was a website front for underage male prostitution and human trafficking involving New York and San Francisco.

Twinky Clean’s website is associated with http://www.maleverse.com which in turn is registered through Whoisguard, Inc., a highly secretive Panamanian registered service operating out of a Panama City post office box.

Maleverse, Inc. is a suspended California Corporation which traces back to the Eric Moren associated with Twinky Clean at the San Francisco address at which he made his one and only use of the Ohio issued Social Security number also used only once by Danelle.

California Secretary of State Business Search Information

California Secretary of State Business Search Information

Inquiring minds might think that there’s something fishy with all this. For starters, in spite of Kevin Akin’s having in the past called me an incompetent and a “private defective,” were Kevin et al concerned that I might actually be able to dig all this stuff up and put together the connections? Is that the reason that the PFP leaders bandied about his purported first name as “Ephren” rather than as Eric?

Maybe it’s all very simple. Maybe, just maybe, there are two Eric Morens who just have both happened to live in San Francisco (it’s a very, very, rare name to begin with). Maybe Kevin and his cohorts were afraid that his Eric Moren would get confused with the other Eric Moren who appears on the surface to be running an underage male prostitution ring on an interstate basis, potentially in violation of the Federal Mann Act. Maybe that’s why they used an alias to get him endorsed by the PFP executive leadership.

On the other hand, maybe not.

At least two of the current PFP leaders had the sense to distance themselves from this debacle.  Cindy Sheehan listed other PFP write-in candidates but conspicuously NOT Eric Moren on her slate card circulated on the internet.   Perhaps Cindy was pissed at all the obsessive energy being spent by Feinland and Akin to defeat my candidacy which at the very least complicated the campaign for Sheehan and other serious candidates like Amos Johnson and Nathalie Hrizi.   I also hear that C.T. Weber was wise enough to abstain on the endorsement vote for Moren….maybe he suspected something was up since the information his supporters presented was so sketchy.

Following are two photos, juxtaposed of both of the Eric Morens. Are they two different people or are they the same person, one at a younger age and the other at his current age? You be the judge, because I don’t happen to have access to one of those sophisticated facial recognition programs that predicts what somebody looked like at different stages of their life; the kind of software used to catch Nazi war criminals as an example.

Eric Moren and Eric Moren:  Are they two different Eric Morens or the same guy at two different ages?  The photo of the older Eric Moren was taken on May 23, 2014 with an Apple I-phone Sc at approximately 3:51 p.m. PST.  Some people have suggested that the chins of both persons are similar.

Eric Moren and Eric Moren: Are they two different Eric Morens or the same guy at two different ages? The photo of the older Eric Moren was taken on May 23, 2014 with an Apple I-phone Sc at approximately 3:51 p.m. PST. Some people have suggested that the chins of both persons are similar.


Posted in Ideas & Opinions, Private Investigation Industry, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment