October 17, 2006
Ms. Amy Klobuchar
HENNEPIN COUNTY ATTORNEY
A-2000 Government Center
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487
Dear Ms. Klobuchar:
The purpose of this letter is to obtain an explanation as to why, as the chief criminal prosecutor in Hennepin County, you failed and refused to initiate criminal charges, and subsequently prosecute, a fellow lawyer who forged my signature (TWICE!!), stole money from me to which he had no claim or entitlement, and deposited, into his own checking account, TWO checks, belonging solely to me, on which he had forged my signature, thereby allowing him to gain TOTAL CONTROL of assets which belonged to me, a person that is the victim of criminal activity committed against me by one of your fellow attorneys.
In addition to forging my signatures, my former attorney also committed the felonious acts of Uttering A Forged Instrument (twice) and, because he took funds from me to which he was not entitled, my former attorney committed the felonious act of Theft By Swindle; all criminal acts committed against me; all criminal acts that were determined, by the Wayzata Police Department, to have been committed against me by my former attorney.
Yet, you, as Hennepin County Attorney and the sole person responsible the actions of members of the Hennepin County Attorney’s, Office, you, and the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office for which you are responsible, chose, instead, to allow a fellow lawyer escape criminal prosecution. Your refusal to act properly and responsibly in this very serious matter, is, at best, reprehensible !!
The second purpose of this letter to you is to obtain an explanation from you as to why, you, as the Hennepin County Attorney elected to your present position by the citizens of Hennepin County and paid by taxpayer dollars, refused to accept delivery of (not just one) but TWO letters sent directly to you, personally, on July 27, 2006 and again on September 6, 2006, via CERTIFIED and PRIORITY MAIL, RESTRICTED DELIVERY, asking you to explain why you, as the Hennepin County Attorney, and the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office for which you are responsible, refused to criminally charge, and subsequently prosecute, my former attorney.
I have obtained, from the United States Postal Service, official records which prove, with 100% ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY, that my first letter was mailed to you on July 28, 2006, and that their FIRST ATTEMPT to deliver my letter to you was made on July 31, 2006, their SECOND ATTEMPT to deliver my letter to you was made on August 7, 2006, their THIRD ATTEMPT to deliver my letter to you was made on August 8, 2006 and a FOURTH ATTEMPT to deliver my letter to you was made on August 15, 2006.
Because of your unethical act of REFUSING TO ACCEPT DELIVERY OF AN OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION to you and the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, my July 27th letter to you was returned to me on August 15, 2006 marked, by the United States Postal Service, as ’UNCLAIMED’!
Then, on September 6, 2006, a SECOND CERTIFIED and PRIORTY MAIL, RESTRICTED DELIVERY letter, again seeking an explanation from you as to why you failed and refused to initiate criminal charges, and subsequently prosecute my former attorney was mailed to you.
Once again, I have obtained, from the United States Postal Service, official records which prove, again with 100% ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY that my second letter was mailed to you on September 6, 2006 and that their FIRST ATTEMPT to deliver my letter to you was made on September 7, 2006 and their SECOND ATTEMPT to deliver my letter to you was made on September 14, 2006. A THIRD ATTEMPT to deliver my letter to you was made on September 21, 2006, but you refused to accept that delivery attempt also.
Once again, because of your unethical act of REFUSING TO ACCEPT DELIVERY OF AN OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION to you and the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, my (second) September 6, 2006 letter to you was returned to me on September 21, 2006 marked, by the United States Postal Service, as ’UNCLAIMED’!
Certainly, this is NOT they type of deplorable and unacceptable conduct the citizens of Hennepin County, or it’s crime victims, deserve or expect. People already in ‘public office’ or seeking to further enhance and expand their political ambitions are held to a ‘higher standard’ by their constituents and must maintain the highest possible integrity in order to gain, and maintain, the public’s trust.
You, by your unforgivable acts, in this matter alone, have betrayed that public trust and no longer are (if you EVER WERE) worthy of that trust. You have gravely, and blatantly, ‘thumbed your nose’ at all of Minnesota and it’s residents. How anyone seeking to be elected as a United States Senator can possibly conduct themselves in such an atrocious and unethical manner (and then think they will be supported by voters) boggles the mind !! Your type of irresponsible, arrogant and atrocious behavior, by an elected, public official, is ’politics’ at it’s worst !! Unquestionably, your past ‘behavior’ is surely a ‘future indicator’ of your ‘performance’ as a United States Senator from Minnesota.
At one time, your Hennepin County Attorney’s Office Website stated, "As County Attorney, Klobuchar has emphasized accountability - making the County Attorney's Office more accountable to the public and the communities of Hennepin County, as well as making sure that people who break the law are held accountable for their actions and receive appropriate consequences."
While all of that rhetoric sounds impressive, that’s just what it is: rhetoric ! You simply ‘pick and choose’ which cases your want to prosecute depending on how favorably they will ‘advance’ your personal agenda.
Unquestionably, your unforgivable and inexcusable behavior certainly documents and supports your own, personal, self-serving agenda and motives.
And as long as I’m seeking explanations for your misconduct and the misconduct of your staff, please provide an explanation as to why it took SEVEN MONTHS to respond to my previous request for information regarding contributors to your 2004 re-election campaign as Hennepin County Attorney.
Additionally, please provide explanations to me as to why you, and the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, failed to initiate any investigation whatsoever of my formal complaint of abuse, maltreatment, neglect and physical assault taking place against a developmentally disabled, physically handicapped adult, by staff working at the Day Training and Habilitation facility that he attended. This formal complaint was made to you personally, and to the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, both via e-mail and in writing on August 22, 2002.
Once again, you, and the entire Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, chose to ignore criminal activity when it was brought to your attention. Where is the accountability of you, personally, and the members of your office? The very thought of you being a United States Senator from Minnesota is, at the very least, scary !!
Unlike my other letters to you and because of the seriousness of the content of this letter, I trust that you will have the courtesy, and responsibility, of personally responding to, and provide explanations for, the points, topics and questions contained in this letter.
The purpose of this additional letter to you is to obtain from you personally, as a crime victim, explanations as to why you, and your office, failed to criminally charge, and subsequently prosecute, a fellow lawyer who twice forged my signature on two civil suit ‘settlement checks’, deposited the funds of those two forged ‘settlement checks’, by conversion, into his own bank account, stole money from me, deposited, into his own bank account, the funds he illegally obtained as a result of forging my signature, and swindled me out of IN EXCESS OF $11,000.00; money to which he had no right or claim and to which he was not entitled.
You are familiar with the facts of this case:
In approximately April of 2004 and as I had suspected for some time, I was able to determine, unequivocally, that my former lawyer, whom I had known both personally and professionally for over thirty years, had committed the criminal felonious acts of Aggravated Forgery, Uttering Forged Documents and Theft by Swindle against me. Upon my discovering what had taken place against me, I contacted my local county attorney, Carver County Attorney Mike Fahey, and explained to him what I had discovered to have taken place.
My reason for contacting County Attorney Fahey was to determine the criminal ‘prosecutorial jurisdiction’ of the criminal acts that had taken place against me. My original civil lawsuit in which my former lawyer had (mis)represented me, was filed and heard in Scott County, he maintains his office in Wayzata which is in Hennepin County and I am a resident of Carver County. Upon being told the facts of my complaint, County Attorney Fahey advised me that your office, the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, was the agency that had ‘prosecutorial jurisdiction’ and also had the responsibility to criminally charge, and subsequently prosecute, my former attorney for his criminal acts committed against me.
On approximately March 1, 2004, I wrote a letter to you outlining the criminal acts that were committed against me by my former attorney. I also called to your attention the fact that the Office of Lawyer’s Professional Responsibility had conducted an investigation of my former lawyer’s conduct and that my former lawyer TOTALLY IGNORED the lawyer’s board’s request for explanations relating to the disposition of the ’settlement funds’ of my lawsuit.
Also in my March 1, 2004 letter to you, I called your attention to the fact that my former attorney had also concealed from me, the existence one of the two ‘settlement checks’ on which he also had forged my signature, for nearly one year!! My former lawyer, only after being directed by the Investigator for the Office of Lawyer’s Professional Responsibility assigned to investigate my complaint to produce various documents, provided a copy of the second ’settlement check’ which he had concealed from me and on which he had also forged my endorsement signature and had also deposited into his own bank account allowing him to have complete control over funds that were rightfully mine and to which he had no legal, or other, claim!
In response to my March 1, 2004 letter described above to you, I received a letter dated March 12, 2004 from someone within your office named Darwin S. Williams who identified himself as ’Citizens Information Hennepin County Attorney’s Office’ In his letter to me, Williams directed me to contact the local police department where the criminal activity took place and file a complaint with them regarding what had taken place. In compliance with Williams’ direction, I contacted the Wayzata Police Department, in writing, on or about August 20, 2004 and described to them, in great detail, what had taken place.
In the interim, the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility concluded it’s investigation regarding the unethical and unprofessional conduct of my former attorney. Based on their investigation of my complaint to them against my former lawyer, the Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility issued an ADMONITION against my former lawyer because of his unprofessional conduct and for his numerous violations of the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct while representing me.
In early September 2004 and as a result of my August 20, 2004 letter to his police chief, I received a call from Detective Michael Murphy of the Wayzata Police Department. The purpose of Detective Murphy’s telephone call to me was to obtain additional information regarding my former attorney’s unprofessional, unethical and criminal conduct against me to aid him in his criminal investigation of my former attorney. On or about September 15, 2004, I submitted, in writing, the additional information that Detective Murphy had requested.
Detective Murphy subsequently concluded his criminal investigation regarding the criminal acts committed by my former attorney against me. After conferring with his Police Chief, their conclusions, based on their combined experience, investigation and evidence available, were that, 1) I was the victim of criminal activity committed against me, 2) I had sustained monetary losses as a result of those criminal acts against me, and 3) That the perpetrator of those criminal acts, as determined by the impartial criminal investigation conducted by the Wayzata Police Department, was, in fact, my former attorney !!
Further, when directly confronted by the Wayzata Police Investigator with the evidence and findings of their criminal investigation, my former attorney ADMITTED that he had, in fact, committed the criminal acts against me that I had alleged!! Based on the results of their criminal investigation of my former attorney and also because of his subsequent admission, the Wayzata Police Investigator, and his Police Chief, concluded that my former attorney had committed the felonious acts of Aggravated Forgery (2 counts), Uttering Forged Documents (2 counts) and Theft By Swindle (1 count) against me.
The Wayzata Police Department, on or about September 28, 2004, forwarded the results of their criminal investigation to the Office of Hennepin County Attorney seeking to have my former attorney criminally charged and prosecuted for his criminal acts committed against me as described above.
On or about October 27, 2004, I received a call from someone who identified himself as Dennis Casey associated with the Hennepin County Attorney’s office. Mr. Casey explained to me that he had ‘lost’ some of the documents relating to the criminal investigation of my former attorney sent to your office by the Wayzata Police Department. In compliance with Casey’s request, I Faxed him the information that he requested that he stated that he had ‘lost’.
1) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, a written explanation and justification as to how, and why, you and your office ’lost’ information submitted to it in an active (felony) investigation of my former lawyer by the Wayzata Police Department.
2) Additionally, please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of Minnesota, information regarding other instances of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office ‘losing’ other information relating to active investigations submitted by other Police Departments or the Sheriff’s Office in Hennepin County.
Sometime in early November after repeated (and unreturned) telephone calls to Casey, he finally called me and stated that the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office would not be criminally charging, and subsequently prosecuting, my former attorney for his criminal acts (described above) against me. Casey’s ‘excuse’ given to me for your office’s refusal to criminally charge, and subsequently prosecute my former attorney for his criminal acts, was because there was ‘no intent’ on the part of my attorney’s actions.
3) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written summary of all cases presented to you and your office by Police Departments within Hennepin County and the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office for criminal charging and subsequent criminal prosecution wherein said prosecution was declined by the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office. In this requested summary, please include the name of the agency requesting prosecution, the alleged crime(s), the date that the request was made to your department, the date that your department declined criminal charging and subsequent criminal prosecution and the reason(s) for denying the requesting agency’s request for prosecution.
I made numerous requests, and then, finally, demands, for my former attorney to allow me to physically inspect and for him to physically show me the actual check(s), that belonged to me, that he received on my behalf, forged my endorsement signature thereupon and then deposited into his own bank account.
4) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written explanation and justification as to why you, and your office refused to criminally charge, and subsequently prosecute, my former attorney who took, without any authorization whatsoever, two checks totaling $20,000.00, forged my endorsement signatures on both checks, deposited both checks containing my forged endorsement signatures into his bank account and refused to return the monetary amount of the checks, $20,000.00, to me.
5) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written explanation and justification as to why you, and your office, deemed it appropriate and proper for an attorney to intentionally withhold the existence of a ‘settlement check’ from his client for nearly one year, convert the funds of that ‘settlement check’ for his own personal financial gain and benefit by forging the client’s endorsement signature on said ‘settlement check’ and depositing said ‘settlement check’ into his own bank account.
6) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written explanation and justification as to why, after it was discovered what had taken place against me and as admitted to by my former lawyer as to what he did, you and your office refused to criminally charge, and subsequently prosecute, my former lawyer as dictated by the findings of, and requested by, the Wayzata Police Department.
7) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written explanation and justification as to why, after the Wayzata Police Department Investigator determined, and my former attorney admitted taking without my authorization, an additional amount of money in an amount in excess of approximately $200.00 to which he wasn’t entitled and to which he had no legal right or claim, you, and your office refused to criminally charge, and subsequently prosecute, my former attorney for his criminal acts.
When a case is settled, it is STANDARD PROCEDURE (and ANY lawyer will tell you this) for the client to go into his lawyers office (during normal business hours), sign the necessary and appropriate 'settlement agreement' and other documents, receive the funds from that settlement, then pay his lawyer for his legal services, shake hands and go their ‘separate ways’. But because of his intent to defraud me, my former attorney chose to deviate dramatically and act in a highly unusual and in a wholly inappropriate manner.
Rather than arranging a meeting at his law office during business hours, my former attorney directed me to meet him, at 10 O'CLOCK, on a FRIDAY NIGHT, in the DIMLY LIT PARKING LOT of a BAR in RURAL Scott County to receive MY settlement check!! Certainly, this seemed HIGHLY IRREGULAR at the time but because I TRUSTED this lawyer whom I had known, both personally AND professionally (he and his law firm were the city attorneys for the City of Maple Plain when I was a policeman there from April 1, 1967 until October 20, 1969 when I joined the Hennepin County Sheriff's Department) for OVER THIRTY YEARS, I agreed to meet him as he requested. He ASSURRED ME that he would 'turn over' MY settlement check to me if I would agree to meet him 'when and where' he specified.
HE LIED!!
Instead, when I met him in the dimly lit parking lot of this bar in rural Scott County, he DIDN'T give me MY settlement check !! Instead, he handed me a personal check, from HIS checking account (at Anchor Bank in Wayzata) that HE had drafted and it was for ONLY ABOUT 1/3 of the total original settlement that I had been awarded by the Scott County District Court !! (An award which was ALSO UPHELD by the Minnesota Court of Appeals!) When I expressed my disapproval of how he was (mis)'handling' my settlement funds and associated settlement check (remember; at that time and subsequently, my former lawyer (mis)led me to believe that only ONE settlement check existed), my lawyer stated that if I didn't accept his personal check that he was 'offering' then and there, than "You won't get anything!"
My former attorney also REQUIRED me to sign a hastily drafted 'agreement' that he had hand written on a piece of yellow legal paper, before he gave me the check he had written.
8) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written explanation of how the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, under your direct supervision, chose to ignore the fact that you, and your office failed to recognize the efforts, and intent described above, by my former attorney in his (successful) attempt to defraud me of OVER $11,000.00 !!
On approximately November 23, 2004, I sent a five page letter to you indicating my great displeasure of your office’s decision to let my former lawyer, who was/is nothing more than a common criminal who has lied, cheated and stolen, to escape criminal prosecution and ‘go free’ thereby allowing him to victimize other innocent victims in a similar fashion. A copy of that November 23, 2004 letter, is enclosed for your review.
In this November 23rd letter, I cited numerous examples that proved, beyond a ‘reasonable doubt’ (the ‘standard’ used to determine guilt), that my former attorney did, in fact, commit the criminal acts against me that the Investigator with the Wayzata Police Department ALSO concluded took place. Yet, in your reckless disregard to ensure that a criminal be brought to justice and held accountable for his criminal acts, you chose, instead, to protect a fellow lawyer at the expense of the crime victim.
Such unethical and unprofessional conduct by you, and your office, is reprehensible!! ANY elected official, PARTICULARLY a prosecuting attorney, is charged with acting responsibility and impartially when faced with these type of circumstances. To do otherwise, impugns the integrity of the office to which you were elected by your constituents.
At the VERY LEAST, because the accused was a fellow attorney practicing law in Hennepin County, instead of ‘stumbling around’ covertly trying to protect my former lawyer from criminal prosecution for his criminal acts and misdeeds committed against me, you should have recused yourself, and that of your office, so that I, as a crime victim, would have had some semblance of a chance of receiving justice and a criminal, being criminally prosecuted.
Yet, for whatever reason, you chose to ‘protect’ one of your own. Clearly, a ‘conflict of interest’ existed which, apparently, you think people are too stupid to recognize. How disgusting and irresponsible!!
9) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written explanation of why you didn’t recuse yourself, and the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, from criminally charging, and subsequently prosecuting a fellow attorney, who practices law in Hennepin County and, instead, request that an ‘outside’, independent agency assume the prosecutorial responsibilities of this case and comply with the request of the Wayzata Police Department to move forward with criminal charging and subsequent criminal prosecution?
In a letter to me dated December 27, 2004 by Assistant County Attorney Andrew M. LeFevour , LeFevour states “...I obtained the case file from the Wayzata Police Department in order to review the entire file myself.” LeFevour further goes on to state, “I reviewed the entire case file and all of the related documents.” LeFevour continues, “In order to support an allegation of check forgery, the facts must demonstrate an intent to defraud.”
How much more proof of ‘intent’ could ANYONE possibly want? As previously stated:
INTENT: Having the mind and will focused on a specific purpose.
A. Upon settlement of my case, my former lawyer REFUSED to give me MY ‘settlement check’ and NEVER allowed me to see MY ‘settlement check’.
10) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written explanation of why you and the members of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office feel that an attorney who REFUSES to give his client a ’settlement check’ that rightfully belonged to his client, and TOTALLY WITHOLDS said check from his client, didn’t commit ‘intent to defraud’ his client and why he wasn’t criminally charged and criminally prosecuted.
B. Instead of just a single ‘settlement check’, there actually were TWO ‘settlement checks’!! However, my former lawyer NEVER told me about the existence of the second ‘settlement check’ and CONCEALED IT’S EXISTANCE FROM ME FOR NEARLY ONE YEAR !! It was only after my complaint about the lawyer's actions against me to the Office of Lawyer's Professional Responsibility and an investigation initiated, did I find out about the existence of the second ‘settlement check’. And, that was almost ONE YEAR after the lawyer had RECEIVED BOTH CHECKS, FORGED MY ENDORSEMENT SIGNATURES on BOTH CHECKS and DEPOSITED BOTH CHECKS INTO HIS OWN CHECKING ACCOUNT !!
11) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written explanation as to why you, and the members of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, feel that an attorney who INTENTIONALLY WITHHOLDS THE EXISTANCE OF A SECOND ‘settlement check’ from his client, FOR NEARLY ONE YEAR, forges his client’s endorsement signature giving him total and complete of his clients funds; funds to which the attorney has no lawful right or claim whatsoever, and deposited those two ‘settlement checks’ on which the attorney forged his client’s endorsement signatures, into his own checking account, didn’t commit ‘intent to defraud’ his client and why he wasn’t criminally charged and criminally prosecuted.
C. The attorney was then able to (present and) deposit the two checks on which he had forged my endorsement signature WITHOUT BEING CHALLENGED (or his criminal actions being detected) by the bank tellers because his bank (Anchor Bank of Wayzata) was LOCATED IN THE SAME BUILDING AS HIS LAW OFFICE and THE TELLERS ALL NEW HIM PERSONALLY !!
12) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written explanation of why you, and the members of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, feel that an attorney who is able to surreptitiously conceal his criminal acts by being able to commit those criminal acts by involving persons that he knows who are tellers who work at his bank where his criminal activity took place and thereby not raise suspicion, didn’t commit ‘intent to defraud’ his client and why he wasn’t criminally charged and criminally prosecuted.
13) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written explanation of why you, and the members of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, feel that an attorney directing his client to meet him at 10PM on a Friday night, in a dimly lit parking lot of a bar in a rural county area where no witnesses would be present and under the guise that he was going to give his client the ‘settlement check’(s) which rightfully belonged to the client, didn’t commit ‘intent to defraud’ his client and why he wasn’t criminally charged and criminally prosecuted.
D. When I met him when in the dimly lit parking lot of this bar in rural Scott County, he DIDN'T give me MY ‘settlement check’ !! Instead, he handed me a personal check, from HIS checking account (at Anchor Bank in Wayzata) that HE had drafted and it was for ONLY ABOUT 1/3 of the total original settlement that I had been awarded by the court !! (An award which was ALSO UPHELD by the Minnesota Court of Appeals!)
14) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written explanation of why you, and the members of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, feel that when an attorney tells his client that he will be receiving the ‘settlement check’ as this ‘unusual’ location and under such ‘unusual’ circumstances, then the attorney REFUSES to turn over said check to his client and then THREATENS HIS CLIENT, didn’t commit ‘intent to defraud’ his client and why he wasn’t criminally charged and criminally prosecuted.
COERCION: Function: noun: the use of express or implied threats of violence or reprisal or other intimidating behavior that puts a person in immediate fear of the consequences in order to compel that person to act against his or her will; also: the defense that one acted under coercion.
1. My former attorney ADMITTED to the Investigator for the Wayzata Police Department that he did, in fact, forge my endorsement signature TWICE !
2. My former attorney ADMITTED to the Investigator for the Wayzata Police Department that he did, in fact, deposit MY two settlement checks, on which he forged MY endorsement signature, into HIS checking account at Anchor Bank if Wayzata ! (Note: In so doing, my former attorney was able to gain TOTAL CONTROL of MY ‘settlement funds’ ! WHICH HE DID !! (See the definition of 'INTENT' above.)
3. The Investigator for the Wayzata Police Department determined that I had, in fact, sustained monetary losses as the result of the criminal actions of my attorney, and that my former attorney was, in fact, the person responsible for those losses.
4. Evidence collected and submitted in the criminal investigation conducted by the Wayzata Police Department supports the allegations that my former attorney did, in fact, commit all of the criminal acts alleged.
5. Upon reading the transcribed interview of my former attorney by the Investigator for the Wayzata Police Department (and I have the entire Police Department file), I was able to unequivocally determine that my former attorney LIED TO THE INVESTIGATOR of the Wayzata Police Department!
6. The Investigator for the Wayzata Police Department believed that my former attorney, the suspect in this case, had intentionally been vague and less than truthful during the oral interview of his actions with him.
7. Determining that criminal acts had taken place and that the suspect (my former attorney) interviewed and investigated was, in fact, the perpetrator of these criminal acts against me, the Investigator of the Wayzata Police Department, after conferring with his Police Chief, forwarded the results of their investigation to the Office of Hennepin County Attorney for criminal prosecution.
So what we have here is an experienced Police Investigator, an experienced Police Chief and an experienced former Deputy Sheriff all concluding that the 'facts' indicate that criminal activity did, in fact, take place, and the lawyer identified, in fact, committed that criminal activity.
Additionally, we also have an admission by the accused that he committed the criminal acts alleged against him!
15) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written explanation of why you, and the members of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, feel that, based on items 1 through 7 above, that my former attorney didn’t commit ‘intent to defraud’ his client and why he wasn’t criminally charged and criminally prosecuted.
Clearly contrary to his false and fabricated written statement, LeFevour DIDN’T ‘review’ the ‘entire file’ as he stated he had. If he HAD reviewed the entire file, he would have immediately become aware of the covert actions that my former attorney devised, and committed, in his (successful) attempt (intent) to deceive me out of thousands and thousands of dollars. Of particular note is the fact that I sued my former attorney in Hennepin County Conciliation Court and the court determined that, in fact, my former attorney ‘took’ (stole) money from me that he wasn’t entitled to. I was awarded the TOTAL AMOUNT that I sued my former attorney for, PLUS I was awarded ‘court costs’ for initiating my action against him!
How can someone who bears the title of ’Assistant County Attorney’ possibly ignore something so obvious? Simple arithmetic surely disproves LeFevour’s intentionally false, fabricated, and erroneous, statement.
Further, LeFevour states in his December 27, 2004 letter, “The case file indicates that you received all of the money that you were awarded in the civil case.” WRONG AGAIN !!
And wrong again for the same reasons listed above and ‘proven’ by simple arithmetic; ‘simple arithmetic that the Wayzata Police Investigator employed months earlier to determine that, in fact, my former had ‘absconded’ with money; MY MONEY, that he had no right or claim to !!
16) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written explanation of why LeFevour can fabricate and make such false statements attesting to the fact that he ‘reviewed the entire case file’ and then make the blatantly false statement ‘You received all of the money that you were awarded in the civil case’; when, certainly, those statements by LeFavour are both fabricated, false and misleading statements.
Clearly, the evidence available, had LeFevour properly done his job and reviewed it properly, strongly indicates otherwise.
Yet, neither you, nor any of your highly (taxpayer) paid staff could find a simple, inexpensive calculator and simply ’do the math’ !!
In response to another letter I wrote to you on December 31, 2004 (a copy of which is also enclosed) wherein I again point out numerous discrepancies in LeFevour’s December 27, 2004 letter, I received a letter dated January 21, 2005 from Deputy County Attorney Susan L. Segal. Like with LeFevour’s letter of December 27, 2004 letter, Segal’s letter, too, is troubling because of the intentionally fabricated and false statement it contains.
In her January 21st letter, Segal states, very clearly, “While we know that you do not agree with the investigation results of the Wayzata Police Department….” How ANYONE in the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office can ’dream up’, intentionally fabricate and make such false, misleading and untrue statements as both LeFavour and Segal have made, is totally incomprehensible and inexcusable!!
To provide ABSOLUTE PROOF that Segal’s statement is intentionally fabricated, false and wholly untrue, I direct your attention to the enclosed copy of my letter to Investigator Michael Murphy of the Wayzata Police Department sent to him approximately six weeks before Segal wrote her January 21st letter. In my December 6, 2004 letter to him, written APPROXIMATELY SIX WEEKS BEFORE SEGAL WROTE HER LETTER, I commended Detective Murphy for the diligence he exhibited and the thorough manner in which he conducted the criminal investigation of my former attorney!!
17) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written explanation of why Segal can fabricate and make such false statements by saying “While we know that you do not agree with the investigation results of the Wayzata Police Department….’ when the evidence that is available clearly proves that statement made by Segal to be wholly and factually untrue, intentionally fabricated and entirely false.
How in God’s name can you, and the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, possibly have ANY credibility when you and members of your taxpayer supported organization intentionally, and recklessly, fabricate, and make, wholly false and untrue statements to ‘cover up’ the criminal acts of a fellow attorney?
You and your staff need some serious, extended education about ‘professional (and personal) ethics’!
If you, or anyone within the Hennepin County can’t conclude that the ‘intent to defraud’ me wasn’t clearly present in the facts of this case as outlined above, the taxpayers of Hennepin County are clearly being duped and misled. And, as the chief law enforcement officer of Hennepin County, your conduct, and the conduct of your staff in the mishandling of this matter is atrocious and an embarrassment to your agency and profession !!
You, and your staff, are obviously oblivious to, and unaware of, numerous rulings by the Minnesota Supreme Court regarding the ’ownership’ of the proceeds of a settlement in a civil lawsuit. I can’t imagine that I, a person who is not at all ’versed’ in law, has to call these rulings to you attention:
In HURSH v. LEE, the court ruled, An attorney, who is unfaithful in performance of his duties to client, forfeits right to compensation for his services.
An attorney is a court officer bound to aid in administration of justice and act with strict fidelity to his clients and courts.
An attorney owes his clients duty to act with unquestioned fidelity to their real interests.
The court further stated, By his conduct in entering into the agreement in question he forfeited his right to compensation and cannot be heard now to complain.
Continuing, the court stated additionally, Our court has denied compensation to a trustee who has not faithfully performed his duties.
Finally, the court has also ruled, An attorney is an officer of the court, sworn to aid in the administration of justice and to act with strict fidelity to both his clients and the courts. Unquestioned fidelity to their real interests is the duty of every attorney to his clients. When a breach of faith occurs, the attorney's right to compensation is gone.
Yet, even though it is CLEARLY EVIDENT that my former attorney schemed to defraud me and DID, IN FACT, take money, that was awarded to ME ONLY, and to which my former attorney had no right or claim, your office ‘condones’ this type of criminal activity committed by a fellow attorney.
Fact is certainly stranger than fiction.
18) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written explanation of why you, and the members of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, feel that, even though my former attorney committed acts that were clearly in whole, total and complete opposition to rulings by the Minnesota Supreme Court, my former attorney didn’t commit ‘intent to defraud’ his client and why he wasn’t criminally charged and criminally prosecuted.
Further evidence of criminal intent as the result of my former lawyer ‘helping himself’ to money that was awarded to ME ONLY by the courts is contained in the following, additional ruling by the Minnesota Supreme Court:
In SKOLL.
SWEDISH--AMERICAN NAT. BANK et al.
v.
DAVIS et al.
“If an attorney is guilty of fraud or bad faith as to his client in the matter of his employment, he is not entitled to any pay for his services.”
Further, the court stated, ”If an attorney is guilty of fraud or bad faith as to his client in the matter of his employment, he is not entitled to any pay for his services.”
And again, finally in this case the court stated, “A judgment for costs and disbursements is the property of the party recovering it, and not of his attorney,--subject, however, to the lien of the latter for his services.” (Emphasis added.)
Yet, clearly, and again in opposition to what the Minnesota Supreme Courts has previously ruled, my former attorney literally ‘stole’ the ’costs and disbursements’, which the Minnesota Supreme Court has already ruled belonged to the me, ‘the party recovering it, and not of his attorney’.
You personally, and members within the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office knew, or should have known, the applicable ‘case law’ that applied to my written, formal complaint that I filed with your office on March 1, 2004,as a result of the criminal acts of my former attorney committed against me.
Yet, instead of vigorously pursuing my complaint, you, and your office, ‘swept it under the rug’ hoping that I’d just ‘dry up and blow away’, thereby ‘saving you from the uncomfortable task of criminally charging and criminally prosecuting one of you own’; someone who resides and has his law practice in the very affluent community of Wayzata.
Not to mention ‘jeopardizing’ the influx of donations for your senate campaign from fellow lawyers and law firms throughout Minnesota and the United States.
All I ever wanted, and to which I, and every other American is entitled, was to have my former lawyer brought before the court to answer for his actions and let the court, NOT YOU or someone in your office, decide the guilt or innocence of my former lawyer. Our legal system is based on the concept of allowing (only) a judge or a jury of peers of the accused peers determine a suspect’s guilt or innocence.
For you or someone else within the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office to prevent someone from appearing before the court to be held accountable for their criminal acts undermines what our criminal justice system is all about. And the fact that this ’someone’ was a fellow lawyer, gives rise to even further suspicion and incongruity!
Instead of ensuring justice, you inhibited justice because of your inexcusable actions, as well as the inexcusable actions of your staff of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office.!!
As evidenced by all of the salient points outlined in this letter, the very irresponsible acts of you, and your office, alone, reek of impropriety!!!
19) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County and the people of the State of Minnesota, with a written explanation of why you, and the members of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, feel that existing rulings rendered by the Minnesota Supreme Court can be ignored and disregarded when, clearly, those rulings prove, without a doubt, that my former attorney wrongfully took money from me that didn’t belong to him and why you, and the members of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, feel that my former attorney didn’t commit ‘intent to defraud’ his client and why he wasn’t criminally charged and criminally prosecuted.
On March 6, 2006, I sent you a letter advising you that the three year ’statute of limitations’ for criminally charging and subsequently prosecuting my former employer, would expire on or about April 21, 2006. Yet, even though ‘Proof of Delivery’ of this letter was secured from the United States Postal Service, you intentionally refused to respond to, or even acknowledge, my March 6th letter to you. A copy of that March 6th letter is enclosed for your review.
As a direct result of your indifference, arrogance and irresponsibility, the ’statute of limitations’ did, in fact, expire, thereby allowing your fellow lawyer, who should be locked up in jail, to escape prosecution for his criminal acts and be allowed to ‘go free’.
‘Ignoring’ the concerns of ANY crime victim is totally irresponsible and reflects poorly on you, as the Hennepin County Attorney, the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners and all of the residents of Hennepin County who pay your salary. The mere fact that you personally, and the members of your office are aware of my impeccable, and impressive, background in law enforcement which included attaining the rank of Sergeant in two divisions of the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office, makes your irresponsible, lackadaisical, nonchalant and apathetic response to me, as the victim of criminal activity, and to the Wayzata Police Department as the investigating law enforcement agency, an embarrassment to your profession, the residents of Hennepin county and to all of the people of the great state of Minnesota.
The only thing that is more bizarre than what I endured at the hands of my former attorney, is how deplorably, and irresponsibly, you, and the entire Hennepin County Attorney’s Office ‘botched’ the (mis)handling of this case.
You ‘sold your soul’ to one of your own for your own personal gain and advantage.
Apparently, there is NO ACCOUNTABILITY within your office! Conversely, I have documents to substantiate, without question, all of my allegations and assertions regarding your misconduct and that of your office.
20) Please provide me, as a crime victim, the residents of Hennepin County who pay your salary and the people of the State of Minnesota, why you didn’t feel it was necessary, or appropriate to respond personally to any of my written communications, as a crime victim, to you, and why you chose to totally, and completely ignore, my March 6, 2006 letter to you notifying you that the ‘statute of limitations’ for criminal prosecution was about to expire.
It is very evident from the misconduct outlined above of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office in this case alone, that one of the most powerful agencies in Hennepin County, in reality, has no accountability whatsoever. And, as the public official elected by the residents of Hennepin County to oversee and direct the members of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, any failures of the Office, or any of it’s members, is YOUR responsibility and something for which you must be held accountable.
Instead of directing all of your energies and resources in recent months and years to ensure your securing being elected to replace United States Senator Mark Dayton, perhaps you should have given all of your attention and loyalty to the residents of Hennepin County and it’s crime victims. That’s what you’re getting paid to do.
In concert with that, please provide a copy of your ‘work schedule’ from January 1, 2005 to the present date showing the dates and times that you were absent from your workplace, the reason(s) for your absence and whether or not you were compensated by taxpayer dollars during your absence and how that compensation was made to you.
On a more personal note, I can’t imagine ANYBODY in Minnesota wanting you as their next United States Senator. By placing your political aspirations ahead of your sworn duties and responsibilities to those Hennepin County residents who pay your hefty salary, you’ve already proven, to me and many others, how incompetent, and irresponsible, you are. By your lack of initiative and failure to act responsibility, you are an embarrassment to yourself, your profession, your employer, your constituents, our state and everything else you purport to represent.
Minnesotan don’t need someone like you, with such a horrific and prejudicial ‘track record’ representing us in Washington D.C.
I await your personal, written responses and explanations to the paragraphs of this letter highlighted and in italicized bold type and explanations to the other questions and topics contained in this letter. And, in addition to providing the requested written explanations for your irresponsible conduct, my previously declined invitation to you to appear on my Internet Show to explain to my fellow Minnesota residents why you allowed a fellow attorney escape criminal prosecution, is still ‘open’.
Believe me, Minnesota wants to hear your explanations for your egregious conduct.
Sincerely,
Richard E. Odoms
P.O. Box 97
Cologne, Minnesota 55322
