Letter Sent To Hennepin County Attorney Amy Klobuchar
March 6, 2006
Ms. Amy Klobuchar
Hennepin County Attorney
C-2000 Government Center
300 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487
RE: Criminal Prosecution Of Former Attorney
Dear Ms. Klobuchar:
This letter addresses you, and your office’s, refusal to criminally prosecute my former attorney as a result of the criminal acts that he committed against me. You will vividly recall that after a very thorough, and complete, criminal investigation by Detective Michael Murphy of the Wayzata Police Department, Detective Murphy conferred with his Chief of Police, Mr. Michael Risvold regarding the findings of the investigation.
Both Detective Murphy and Chief Risvold, based on their numerous years of law enforcement experience, concluded that sufficient evidence existed to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that I was (am) the victim of criminal activity, I sustained monetary losses as a result of said criminal acts committed against me, and the person responsible for this criminal activity against me resulting in my financial losses, was, in fact and by his own admission, my former attorney.
At the conclusion of their review of the evidence, testimony, both verbal and transcribed and documents available relating to this matter, the Wayzata Police Department submitted that evidence, testimony and documents to you, and your office, and requested that my former attorney be criminally charged, and prosecuted, for Aggravated Forgery, (2 counts), Uttering A Forged Instrument (2 counts) and Theft By Swindle, as a result of his criminal acts against me.
This request by the Wayzata Police Department to criminally prosecute my former attorney was made to your office on or about September 28, 2004; some EIGHTEEN MONTHS AGO !!
Yet, you, and your office, instead of ensuring that a common thief, cheat and criminal (my former attorney) is held accountable for his criminal acts against me, you, and your office, chose instead, to PROTECT A FELLOW ATTORNEY FROM BEING CRIMINALLY PROSECUTED, and ARE SHIELDING HIM FROM PROSECUTION by WAITING FOR THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR HIS CRIMINAL ACTS TO EXPIRE !!
That conduct, by you, and the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, an office which is under your DIRECT supervision and direction, is REPREHENSIBLE !!
One does not have to be versed in law to plainly see what you, and your office, are attempting to accomplish: Once the statute of limitations expires, my former attorney can no longer be criminally charged for his acts against me.
So that you may be reminded of what took place, my former attorney accepted two ‘settlement checks’ that I was awarded by the Scott County District Court (and upheld by the Minnesota Court of Appeals in January 2003), as the result of my filing a civil lawsuit against a former employer, My Brother’s Keeper, for reporting abuse, maltreatment and neglect of developmentally disabled adults living in a ‘group home’ which they operated.
Upon learning, in early January 2003, that the Minnesota Court of Appeals had upheld the lower court’s decision, I inquired, of my former attorney, when I could expect the settlement check to be received by me.
For the next four months, my former attorney continued to provide nebulous and evasive ‘excuses and explanations’ as to why I hadn’t received my settlement check. I became increasingly suspicious, and concerned, that my former attorney had ‘converted’ the settlement funds, that were rightfully mine and to which he had ABSOLUTELY NO CLAIM, forged MY endorsement signature on MY settlement check and deposited said settlement check INTO HIS OWN CHECKING ACCOUNT!!
It would later be determined that my former lawyer intentionally withheld the existence of a second ‘settlement check’ on which he ALSO forged my signature and deposited into his own bank account!
In so doing, my former attorney gained TOTAL CONTROL of MY settlement funds, AWARDED TO ME by the court.
This criminal activity, committed against me by my former attorney, occurred on approximately April 21, 2003; NEARLY THREE YEARS AGO!! I have been advised that the ‘statute of limitations’ for the criminal acts committed against me by my former attorney, is three years. Once that ‘statute of limitations’ expires (on APRIL 21, 2006; NEXT MONTH!!) my former attorney will be IMMUNE FROM CRIMINAL PROSECUTION !!
There are fewer than 45 days left before the statute of limitations, relating to my former attorney’s criminal acts against me, expires. This letter is my FINAL DEMAND, as a CRIME VICTIM, for your office to criminally charge, and vigorously prosecute, your fellow lawyer that, 1) FORGED MY SIGNATURE TWICE, 2) Deposited TWO forged documents, containing my FORGED SIGNATURE into HIS OWN CHECKING ACCOUNT and stole money from me to which he had no legal right or claim for his OWN FINANCIAL GAIN AND BENEFIT!!
As a very interesting sidelight, the HENNEPIN COUNTY CONCILIATION COURT, in a suit I filed against my former attorney to recover some of the money stolen from me by my former attorney, RULED, without hesitation, IN MY FAVOR and AWARDED ME the FULL AMOUNT of money which I was attempting to recover, PLUS THE FILING FEE I was required to pay to initiate my recovery action against my former attorney!!
In addition to ‘foregoing’ your own personal, political actions, decisions and agenda to further your own political career by criminally charging, and prosecuting my former attorney, I invite you to appear on my Internet Show, heard both locally as well as throughout the world, to explain your personal lack of responsibility, and that of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, for refusing, to this point, to properly execute your Oath of Office by bringing criminals to justice, regardless of who they are, their status or their affiliation with you and the public office of which you currently hold.
I wish to call your attention to several important points of this matter as well as to some blatantly false statements made by members of YOUR office; the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office.
First, I was able to positively determine that my suspicions of criminal acts of Aggravated Forgery, Uttering Forged Documents and Theft By Swindle had been committed against me by my former attorney. Because my former attorney practices law in Hennepin County; because my civil lawsuit was conducted in Scott County and because I live in Carver County, I contacted Carver County Attorney Mike Fahey to get his opinion as to which agency had prosecutorial authority to criminally charge, and subsequently prosecute, my former attorney.
County Attorney Fahey advised me that because my former lawyer’s office was in Hennepin County, that is the most likely location where the forgery(s) of my signature, and other criminal acts, took place. Further, I was able to ascertain, unequivocally, that my former attorney had uttered these two forged documents into his checking account at Anchor Bank in Wayzata. And because my former attorney maintains his law office in the same building as his bank is located, he was able to deposit, unchallenged, my settlement checks, on which he had forged my signature, into his checking account. In so doing, he was able to successfully convert MY funds for his own personal financial gain and benefit and obtain absolute control over MY settlement funds.
Based on County Attorney Fahey’s advice, I contacted your office on or about March 1, 2004, and advised your agency of what had taken place and described the criminal acts committed against me by my former attorney. In my March 1st letter to you, I told you of how my suspicions that my former attorney had forged my signature were confirmed, that he had intentionally withheld from me, the existence of a second ‘settlement check’; on which he also forged my signature. In forging my signatures, my former attorney was able to totally convert, for his own financial gain and benefit, monies, belonging to me, that he had unlawfully deprived me of.
Additionally, when questioned by the Office of Lawyer’s Professional Responsibility (a state agency that regulates the conduct of attorneys and holds them accountable for their unethical acts and negligence and an agency that you may soon become intimately familiar with), my former lawyer TOTALLY IGNORED any inquiries as to the financial aspect of my settlement monies. At the hearing before the Hennepin County District Ethics Committee, as well as in response to the official inquiry by the Office of Lawyer’s Professional Responsibility, my former lawyer blatantly lied to exonerate himself from his criminal acts.
In response to my March 1, 2004 letter to you, I received a letter dated March 12, 2004 from someone within your office who identified himself as Darwin S. Williams of ’Citizens Information; Hennepin County Attorney’s Office’. In his letter, Williams advised me that I should contact the ‘local police department’ where the criminal activity took place. Williams further goes on to state, “They can take a complaint, investigate and determine whether or not the conduct described rises to the level of a chargeable offense.”
On approximately August 20, 2004 and as directed by the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, I submitted a detailed, seven page, written report to the Wayzata Police Department outlining to them exactly what had taken place.
As stated previously, the Wayzata Police Department did conduct a criminal investigation as to my allegations of criminal conduct against me by my former attorney. As also stated above, the Wayzata Police Detective, upon the conclusion of his investigation, conferred with his Police Chief and together, they discussed the facts, merits and conclusions of the criminal investigation against my former attorney.
Also, on approximately September 15, 2004 and at the request of Detective Mike Murphy of the Wayzata Police Department, I forwarded additional evidence and documentation further substantiating my case.
After reviewing all of the information, documents and information submitted, both the Wayzata Police Chief and his criminal investigator, concluded that I had been the victim of criminal activity and that, unquestionably, my former attorney was the person wholly responsible for those criminal acts. Hence, the results of the criminal investigation by the Wayzata Police Department were forwarded to your office for criminal charging, and prosecution, as described above.
Some time after September 15, 2004 after the documents, evidence and information pertaining to this case were submitted to your office by the Wayzata Police Department, I received a telephone call from a Dennis Casey; who identified himself as an attorney within the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office. Casey advised me that he had ‘lost’ some of the documents and information that were forwarded to him, and your office, by the Wayzata Police Department regarding this pending case.
When I heard that, I was absolutely appalled that the largest county attorney’s office in Minnesota loses pertinent information relating to a case currently being investigated !!
Casey asked me to FAX him copies of the documents that he had lost, which I did on October 24, 2004.
In mid-November 2004, I received a telephone call from Casey advising me that the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office was refusing to criminally charge, and prosecute, my former attorney for his criminal acts against me. I took exception to that decision and, as a crime victim, find it more than a mere coincidence that the criminal is a fellow attorney, from a very affluent Lake Minnetonka suburb.
Further, the investigation by the Wayzata Police Department provided irrefutable evidence of the criminal activity that took place against me, who committed it and how it was done!! Yet, the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office chooses to ‘protect one of it’s own’. It’s a ‘code of silence’.
Further and more negligence of the handling of this case by the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office was evidenced in a letter dated December 27, 2004 from Andrew M. LeFevour who identified himself as an Assistant County Attorney.
In his December 27th letter, LeFevour states “I am familiar with this case since I consulted with Mr. Casey at the time he declined this matter in November 2004.” LeFevour goes on to state, “I obtained the case file from the Wayzata Police Department in order to review the entire file myself.”
In paragraph two of LeFevour’s December 27, 2004 letter, LeFevour continues, “I reviewed the entire case file and all of the related documents.”
That is a totally false and fabricated statement !!
Had LeFevour read all of the documents; the ‘ENTIRE FILE’ as he (erroneously) claims to have done, he could clearly substantiate that my former attorney did, in fact, take money from me, to which he clearly wasn’t entitled!! The evidence, documents and Police report submitted to the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office CLEARLY SHOWS THAT!!
Yet, for whatever reason, LeFavour refuses to acknowledge the irrefutable facts and fabricated a false statement instead !!
LeFavour further goes on to state in the second paragraph of his December 27, 2004 letter, “In order to support an allegation of check forgery, the facts must demonstrate an intent to defraud.”
Look: My former attorney KNEW that I wasn’t at all satisfied with the way he represented me in my lawsuit. A subsequent investigation by the Office of Lawyer’s Professional Responsibility determined that my former lawyer committed numerous violations of the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct, cited those violations and ISSUED AN ADMONISHMENT against him because of his conduct!!
My former attorney also KNEW that when I received MY (not his) settlement check, I had no intention of paying him for his poor, unprofessional and unethical representation; poor, unprofessional and unethical representation that was later affirmed by the Office of Lawyer’s Professional Responsibility. And, because I was the SOLE PLAINTIFF in this case, he had ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT OR CLAIM to ANY of the funds of my settlement. The money belonged to me. And only me.
But, that didn’t deter his intent to commit criminal acts against me in order to defraud me.
Because my former attorney KNEW that I wasn’t going to pay him for his substandard, grossly incompetent representation (as further determined by the Minnesota Court of Appeals and the Office of Lawyer’s Professional Responsibility), he devised a deceptive ‘scheme’ in how to defraud me out of over $11,000.00!! He carefully planned his criminal actions against me thinking that I was too stupid to realize, or understand, what he was doing.
My former lawyer asked me to meet him in the dimly lit parking lot of a bar in rural Scott County at 10PM on a Friday night. I ask you: How ‘normal’ is that?
His reason for ‘luring’ me there was so that I would be a ‘captive’ audience and there would be no ‘witnesses’ of what he had ‘planned out’ to do.
And, ultimately, did.
Because of the length of time that I had known him, and, further, because he SPECIFICALLY TOLD me that he would give me the (actual) ‘settlement check’ I agreed to meet him; even though I thought his request to be highly unusual.
How right I was!!
Once we met in this dimly lit parking lot, instead of my former lawyer giving me the actual settlement check as he had told me he was going to do, he handed me a hastily drafted, hand-written document delineating a ‘breakdown’ of how much of the ‘settlement funds’ that HE calculated that I was entitled to receive.
WAIT A MINUTE!!
I was the SOLE PLAINTIFF in my lawsuit. The Scott County District Court awarded ME (only) a specified monetary amount. Yet, my former attorney, in a criminal act to ensure that he could receive what he thought belonged to him, DECEIVED me into meeting him in this very remote location, where there would be NO WITNESSES, under the pretext that he was going to turn over a check that rightfully belonged to me.
Instead, he used trickery to deceive me, steal from me and financially enrich himself for his own benefit and gain. Then, when I told him I wasn’t agreeing to his underhanded and deceptive acts, he ‘flat out’ told me; “If you don’t sign the agreement, you’re not going to get anything.”
Yet, LeFevour, in his December 27, 2004 letter, (again) erroneously states, “The case file indicates that you received all of the money that you were awarded in the civil case.”
LeFevour’s statement doesn’t come ‘anywhere close’ to passing the ‘smell test’. If LeFevour’s statements about reading the ENTIRE FILE and stating that I received “….all of the money you were awarded in the civil case”, why, then, did the Hennepin County Conciliation Court judge that heard the facts, rule, without hesitation, IN MY FAVOR in a suit that I filed there in an effort to recover some of the monies that my former lawyer stole from me and where I provided just a ‘couple of pieces’ of evidence?
Explain how a ‘private citizen’ is able to be victorious in a suit that the local Hennepin County Attorney’s Office REFUSES to prosecute?
LeFevour’s statements, and the decision of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, reek with impropriety!!
And as a direct result of the irresponsible acts of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, my former attorney ‘walked away’ with well over $11,000.00 of MY MONEY; money AWARDED TO ME ONLY, BY THE COURT.
And your office thinks that because he is a lawyer, that is acceptable behavior. I strongly disagree with you and your agency’s erroneous decision.
As stated previously, less than 45 days exist before the expiration of the statute of limitations for criminally charging, and prosecuting, my former attorney. If the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office continues in it’s refusal to criminally charge, and vigorously prosecute, this common thief, liar and cheat that calls himself a lawyer and who ‘swindled’ me out of over $11,000.00, I shall use whatever additional county, state and federal means, resources and agencies are available to expose the ‘cover up’ that is taking place in the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office that is shielding a fellow lawyer from being held publicly responsible for his criminal acts.
Contrary to another incorrect, false and fabricated comment, this time by Deputy County Attorney Susan L. Segal of your office, I am NOT in disagreement with the results of the investigation by the Wayzata Police Department! They did their job impartially and in an efficient and professional manner. Had anyone within the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office ‘read the entire file’ as they falsely claimed to have done, they would KNOW that! Your office should be so credible!!
The Wayzata Police Department ‘built’ the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office a ‘textbook case’; COMPLETE with an admission of guilt by the accused. I further substantiated that case, but the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, because the accused is a fellow lawyer, REFUSES to prosecute the criminal who committed the crime !!
The conduct of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office in this matter raises more questions than it answers. Everyone is supposed to be created, and treated equal. Yet, the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office chooses to use ‘selective prosecution’ when deciding whether or not to charge a criminal. “Who you are” and “Who you know” in Hennepin County sure makes a difference when it comes to criminal prosecution!!
Finally, my three year endeavor to expose the criminal acts of an attorney that defrauded me and the efforts by the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office to shield a fellow lawyer from criminal prosecution and being held accountable for his criminal acts, are beginning to be realized.
Through a search of the Hennepin Conciliation Court files as well as through the popularity of my website, www.deltadickshow.com and my five day a week Internet show, this matter is now garnering the public attention that it so desperately has been screaming for.
Enclosed with this letter are copies of two letters that I have recently received from the producers of two NATIONALLY SYNDICATED TELEVISION SHOWS that have invited me to appear on the television programs.
Maybe you want the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office and your ongoing senate campaign, to receive nationwide television exposure because of the gross mishandling of this case. All I want is for a criminal to be prosecuted, regardless of the fact that he’s a fellow lawyer. It’s the responsibility of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office to do that. And I, as a crime victim, demand it.
If that requires me to appear on national television, so be it.
I await your personal response notifying my of your office’s decision to criminally charge, and vigorously prosecute, my former attorney for his criminal acts against me, no later by March 21, 2006. If criminal charges are not brought against him by then, I shall escalate my efforts to the next level.
Additionally, please call me at (952) 201-7473 at your convenience to arrange a ‘telephone appearance interview’ on my Internet show as previously referred to.
Sincerely,
Richard E. Odoms
Why, in GOD's name,
and based on her mishandling of this situation alone
would
ANYBODY
want
KLOBUCHAR
as their next
United States Senator ??
