Granby vs. Deines
Table of contents
Overview
The Incident
The Ticket
First Motion to Dismiss -- January 10, 1996
The City Prosecutor's Response -- January 19, 1996
Second Motion to Dismiss -- February 14, 1996
Third Motion to Dismiss -- March 13, 1996
The Trial of April 10, 1996
Epilogue
First Motion to Dismiss
IN THE GRANBY MUNICIPAL COURT
GRANBY, MISSOURI
CITY OF GRANBY )
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) Case No. _________________
)
SHAWN DEINES )
Defendant )
MOTION TO DISMISS
COMES NOW the Defendant, Shawn Deines, and in support of his motion
states the following:
1. That proper jurisdiction to pursue this case is absent because the
complaint is unverified and several acts of perjury have been committed
on the very face of the complaint.
a.) Missouri Rules of Court, Rule 37.34 stipulates (a) that "All
ordinance violations shall be prosecuted by information." and (b) that the
prosecutor "may file an information charging the commission of an
ordinance violation based upon either 1) his own knowledge or information
or belief, or 2) upon a verified complaint."
b.) Since the prosecutor was not at the scene, the prosecutor needs
a verified complaint to prosecute. The prosecutor lacks a verified
complaint, therefore, this alleged traffic ordinance violation must be
dismissed.
2.) a.) Since Sgt. Brady improperly signed the complaint as being
under oath before a competent authority at the scene of the alleged
traffic violation, this complaint has not been properly verified in
accordance with Rule 37.33 (f) demands that complaints be properly
verified. In addition, since Sgt. Brady was not observed swearing an
oath at the scene, Sgt. Brady has committed an act of perjury.
b.) In addition Sgt. Brady has committed still another act of
perjury because the oath that he improperly swore to says that "THE ABOVE
CLAIM IS TRUE AS I VERILY BELIEVE." Sgt. Brady was not present when the
alleged violation occurred. Nor was a crystal ball or certified psychic
observed in Sgt. Brady's possession.
Defendant must regretfully note that Sgt. Brady seems to be a liar
and Sgt. Brady doesn't seem to know how to write bogus complaints
effectively.
3. Swarms of numerous other fatal deficiencies too numerous and
unnecessary to mention as above fatal deficiency is quite enough to get
this case dismissed.
Wherefore, the Defendant demands this case to be dismissed and for Sgt.
Brady and the City Prosecutor to pay the court costs in accordance with
the Granby Municipal Court Rules for this malicious, frivolous, and
unnesessary [sic] complaint. Furthermore, in the interests of justice,
the Defendant thinks it would be a good thing if every ticket Sgt. Brady
has written be dismissed and money be refunded.
Signature Jan. 10, 1996
_____________________________________ __________________
Shawn Deines, Defendant Date
Weaving a Web of Lies
IN THE GRANBY MUNICIPAL COURT
GRANBY, MISSOURI
CITY OF GRANBY Plaintiff )
)
vs. ) Case No.
)
SHAWN DEINES Defendant )
Route 2, Box 2008 )
Granby, MO 64844 )
RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS
Comes now the City of Granby, plaintiff, by and through its attorney,
Kevin L. Selby, and states in support of the motion:
1. That the City of Granby objects to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss.
2. That a verified Amended Complaint has been filed in this matter
pursuant to Rule 37.34.
3. That based upon that Amended Complaint the Court has jurisdiction
to hear this matter.
4. That Defendant's allegations of Sergeant Brady's commission of
the act of perjury are unfounded and do not warrant dismissal of this
action.
5. That Defendant's notions that "swarms of numerous other fatal
deficiencies, too numerous and unnecessary to mention", while interesting
verbage, are too vague to constitute a fatal deficiency and that
therefore the Court should deny the Motion.
WHEREFORE, the City of Granby prays the Court enter an Order denying
the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and for such further action as the
Court deems just and proper.
I hereby certify that a copy
of the foregoing was sent by -s- K L S
U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid _____________________
this 19th day of January, 1996 to: Kevin L. Selby
Granby City Attorney
P.O. Box 658
Shawn Deines Neosho, MO 64850
Route 2, Box 2008
Granby, MO 64844
-s- K S
___________________
Kevin L. Selby
and Bearing False Witness
IN THE GRANBY MUNICIPAL COURT
GRANBY, MISSOURI
[stamped] Filed Jan 29 1996
CITY OF GRANBY Plaintiff )
)
vs. ) Case No. [written] T-555-95
)
SHAWN DEINES Defendant )
Route 2, Box 2008 )
Granby, MO 64844 )
AMENDED COMPLAINT
Comes now __Ken Brady__ and being duly sworn on oath complains that
on or about the _29th_ day of __November__, 199_5_, within the
jurisdiction of this Court the above named Defendant did, then and
there unlawfully: __Failed to keep Right_______________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
in violation of the ordinances of this City.
-s- Ken Brady
____________________________
Complaintant
STATE OF MISSOURI )
)
COUNTY OF NEWTON )
Subscribed and sworn to me on this date.
Dated:_____1-24-96____
-s- Kay May, Court Clerk
____________________________
[hand printed:]
ON INFORMATION, UNDERSIGNED PROSECUTOR COMPLAINS AND INFORMS
COURT THAT ABOVE FACTS ARE TRUE AS HE VERILY BELIEVES.
K S 1/25/96
_____________
PROSECUTOR
--------------------------------------------------------------------
This information was given to Martin Lindstedt in a metered and stamped
envelope by Granby Court Clerk Kay May at 4:30 p.m on March 14, 1996 as
he was riding his bicycle by City Hall in response to his demand for the
amended complaint the court night of March 13, 1996.
Second Motion to Dismiss
IN THE GRANBY MUNICIPAL COURT
GRANBY, MISSOURI
CITY OF GRANBY )
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) Case No. _________________
)
Shawn Deines )
Defendant )
ENHANCED MOTION TO DISMISS AND A COMPLAINT
COMES NOW the Defendant, Shawn Deines, by and through his Counsel of
Choice, Martin Lindstedt and in support of his motion and complaint
responds to the City of Granby's response:
1. It is only natural that the City of Granby object to the Defendant's
Motion to Dismiss of January 10, 1996. The City of Granby is maintaining
a traffic-ticket mill wherein it steals under color of law money and
freedom from the poor and politically weak citizens who travel through
Granby.
2. Prosecutor admits that he has filed Amended Complaint pursuant to
Rule 34.34.
The previous complaint was so pathetic and bogus that it was necessary
to amend it.
3. If, as the Prosecutor states, this court has jurisdiction to hear
this matter, then it also [has] a jurisdictional duty to dismiss this
case, and any other case brought up by this dishonest police officer and
maliciously prosecuted by this prosecutor.
4. The original complaint shows on its very face that Sgt. Brady
committed no less than two acts of perjury and is incompetent to write
valid complaints. The original Motion to Dismiss discussed this in
detail. There is no need to rehash this argument.
By continuing to amend and cover up for Sgt. Brady and request
continuance of this matter in the face of law and fact, Prosecutor Selby
has evidenced a willingness to suborn perjury, to willfully and knowingly
maliciously prosecute, obstruction of justice and misprision of felony.
For this misconduct, he should be held in contempt of court and barred
from practice from this court and all others in Missouri.
5. Defendant's Counsel evidenced an unwillingness to help Prosecutor
Selby learn how to write an effective and honest information on January
10, 1996. Prosecutor Selby dishonestly tried to make Feb. 14th the venue
for an "evidentiary" hearing when it is really a simple matter of the
law as written and whether Prosecutor Selby and this court will obey it.
Defendant's Counsel's "swarms of numerous other fatal deficiencies too
numerous and unnecessary to mention" verbiage, is more than merely
"interesting" and "vague," as the Prosecutor alleges. It reflects an
accurate understanding of the criminally felonious malicious tendencies
of Prosecutor Selby to continue to keep changing the charges against the
Defendant as new ones have to be discarded. If the fatal deficiencies of
the newly minted informations against the Defendant are brought up then
prosecutorially changed one by one, we could go through 50 of the things
before this matter is ready for trial.
WHEREFORE, the Defendant demands that the Granby Municipal Court
dismiss this case, that the City Prosecutor and Sgt. Brady pay the court
costs in accordance with Granby Municipal Court Rules for this malicious,
frivolous, and unnecessary complaint, that Prosecutor Selby and Sgt.
Brady be prohibited from any further dishonest commerce before this
court, that both Prosecutor Selby and Sgt. Brady make restitution for
every dishonest and fraudulent case prosecuted and traffic ticket
written, and that the Defendant be reimbursed for time at work missed
due to this malicious complaint, and for such further action as the
Court deems just and proper.
I hereby certify that a copy -s- Shawn Deines
of the foregoing was delivered _________________________________
in person, Feb. 14, 1996 Defendant
to Prosecutor Kevin Selby.
Third Motion to Dismiss
IN THE GRANBY MUNICIPAL COURT
GRANBY, MISSOURI
CITY OF GRANBY )
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) Case No. _________________
)
Shawn Deines )
Defendant )
THIRD MOTION TO DISMISS & ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES
COMES NOW the Defendant, Shawn Deines, by and through his Counsel of
Choice, Martin Lindstedt and makes the following requests:
1.) That the City of Granby dismiss the complaint against the
Defendant and harass him no more under color of law with this bad-faith
complaint.
2.) As this procedure has cut into Defendant's time at work for three
days, that Sgt. Brady and Prosecutor Selby pay Defendant $150 at $50 per
day for three days and that $50 be paid for Defendant's time and expenses
for legal research in defending against this bogus action.
3.) That a copy of the amended information filed be turned over to
Defendant so that Defendant has option of filing criminal and civil
complaints against Sgt. Brady, Prosecutor Selby and the City of Granby
in case Defendant is not paid his $200 or the harassment under color of
law continues.
4.) That Sgt. Brady and Prosecutor Selby pay in accordance with
Municipal Court Rules the court costs and any additional fines imposed
for this dishonest complaint.
5.) Any other relief this court finds proper and just.
Defendant notes that this type of corruption takes place all the time
and should be corrected by criminal charges brought against the
prosecutor and police officers involved in fomenting injustice. However,
Defendant wishes to be left in peace, and if granted the relief
petitioned for, Defendant will surrender standing to civilly sue or
request criminal prosecution.
_______________________________ ___________________
Shawn Deines, Defendant Date
A copy was personally served upon the
City Prosecutor Kevin Selby on 3/13/96.