This document is part of a series about Randall "Duke" Cunningham's attempted murder / suicide on November 25th, 2005

Home page for "Cunningham's Last Battle" web site / Contact the author / victim / witness Russell 'Ace' Hoffman

Re: CLERB tomorrow (Tuesday Feb 13th 2007) about 5:30 pm

February 12th, 2007

To The Editor,

I am writing you to let you know that tomorrow the San Diego Citizen's police review board, called CLERB, is supposed to look at our case against the San Marcos Sheriff's Department, about them applying "celebrity justice," and protecting, rather than arresting, Randall Cunningham on the night of November 25th, 2005, for his attempted suicidal / homicidal assault with a deadly weapon (his car) against my wife and I.

Of course, we have reason to believe CLERB's investigation will result in a crude and heavy-handed whitewash of the truth, having made no real attempt to investigate the matter properly.  (IA interviewed us for several hours one day last August; we haven't heard back from that investigation, except to hear that it's been passed on to San Marcos for review (and I doubt they're in any hurry to release it, one way or the other).)

I have no idea how much time they will permit citizens to speak tomorrow, but apparently it will probably be not more than about three minutes.

Since I'm a veteran of at least 100 Nuclear Regulatory Commission and related meetings, I'm used to being abused by toadies.  But I feel it's my duty to show up anyway.  Even though this county has proven its corruption to me in the most vile of ways, I still have hope that the truth can come out.

Below is what I submitted today to the CLERB.  I have no idea what I'll say tomorrow.  Probably just tell what it was like during those seven seconds Cunningham drove his car directly at the one my wife and I were in, hell-bent for leather, and seeking an end to his problems.

I hope that a reporter from your paper will attend tomorrow's hearing, and I hope you will pass them the document shown below as soon as possible.

Thank you in advance,

Ace Hoffman
Carlsbad, CA

==============================================================

February 12th, 2007

Mr. Parker,

The question we have tried to put before the CLERB is NOT whether police procedure was proper or not on the evening of November 25th, 2005 in San Marcos, California, about 8:35 pm.

The police response was NOT appropriate.  We have talked to a lot of police since that night.  We are absolutely sure it was bizarre and abnormal.  We also are sure that fact can be proven conclusively in a court of law.  We are equally certain the SDSD's attorneys are EQUALLY aware of that fact.

The issue we brought before the CLERB was one of INTENT on the part of the police that night.

The intent of the police that night was to implement a "catch-and-release" program for a Congressman who had just attempted to commit a most heinous crime.

Unlike my wife, I looked into the other car just before it clipped us.  I didn't realize WHO the other driver was until I saw him again on television three days later.  He didn't look much different and he didn't look like he had slept much since then.  He still looked distraught and unwilling to look up.  He did not look me in the eye that night as he passed, but I saw him, and with proper police action after my 911 call, I surely would have caught him, too.  And I believe I did, but, contrary to every sworn oath they have ever taken, the San Marco Sheriff's Department immediately let him go again.  They aided the criminal.

Congressman Randall Cunningham has made statements which have been published in the press saying that he wants to come clean, admit his faults, and be welcomed back into society.

He hasn't successfully committed suicide as of today, as far as I know.

I have no idea what he will do tomorrow and neither do you.  Justice has been denied to my wife and I over and over in this case.  Justice is being denied to him too, as is concern for his actual mental state.

My own mother died less than two weeks ago, at age 78.  Her death was probably ALSO a suicide (we are waiting for the toxicology reports to be more certain).  She lived in Delaware with my younger brother and his family, in a separate apartment.  She had discussed suicide with all the family members numerous times.  (She lived her entire life in intense pain from a defect in her connective tissue.)  Still it SEEMED unexpected when it happened.

Cunningham discussed suicide with the Capital psychiatrist so much that the psychiatrist got a promise from him NOT to act on those "ideations."  I certainly was not aware of THAT when I first accused him of being the other driver, the day he resigned.  The SMSD claims to have lost the fax I sent them after I recognized our assailant.  I sent them a fax because the email address on the business card the "responding officer" (one of many terms I've learned since the event) gave me at the scene WAS WRONG.  (I was surprised to see a .com email address, but assumed it worked until the email I sent BOUNCED.  I had already learned that talking to the SMSD was pointless, of course, and it was also already obvious they were protecting the criminal, and so I wanted a permanent record of our interactions.)

Cunningham violated his promise to the Capital psychiatrist not to act on his "ideations."  What's to say he won't do that AGAIN?  What's to say the psychiatrist won't seek a promise from someone else not to act on their "suicidal ideations," thinking, wrongly, such a previous "contract" had worked, WHEN IN FACT IT HAD NOT?

If my wife and I let this thing go, what will Cunningham do when / if he gets out?  Does ANYONE know?

What will the SMSD do next time a drunk celebrity, be he Congressman or whatever, tries to commit suicide / homicide, fails, and needs a ride home?  Will they give him a lift home and block the VICTIM from seeking redress, playing the part of the entire U.S. healthcare system at the same time (and leaving the celebrity to harm somebody else, IF he or she doesn't get thrown in jail on other charges first, as happened to Cunningham)?

Does anyone know if Cunningham will snap again?  Will he take the lives of two of his (now former, but then current) constituents if he goes?  Or will he choose a more lumbering vehicle next time -- perhaps a school bus?

Even if we can't get justice, perhaps we can save another life or lives.  What I PROVED works CAN be taught to other drivers, ESPECIALLY since BOTH DRIVERS can describe the accident (if they want to).  A valuable training tutorial could be created based on this incident.  Our soldiers in Iraq, police, and others could use the tutorial to learn how to avoid someone doing what Cunningham did.  If BOTH the assailant AND the victims are in the tutorial, it would be extremely powerful.

Kelleher claims if what I say happened really happened, I would not be alive.  He said that over the phone, probably the last time I talked to him.  I challenged him to come out on a skid pad and LEARN how to beat a man with deadly intent like Cunningham -- and how to RECOGNIZE what the other driver is doing as quickly as possible, and what to do to SURVIVE.

Perhaps Cunningham, in ill health, will die in prison, never having been able to make peace with the people he attacked, or create an educational message based on what happened that night, because YOU -- CLERB and all the rest of the San Diego "legal system" -- are bound and determined to let him think he "got away with it."  WITH THE POLICE'S HELP.

But he didn't get away with it at all, and neither did the SMSD.

Someone got Cunningham home safely.  He didn't get there by himself, because the car was left near the scene of the crime.

Cunningham needs to deal with his actions in a proper manner.  If he does not, I'm sure he is much MORE likely to commit suicide some time in the future.  Our whole system of criminal law is based on the idea that A) Rehabilitation is possible, B) Crime doesn't pay, and C) The police exist to help the victims.

A mockery is being made of those ideals in this case.  CLERB is making a mockery, to be specific.

If Cunningham is failing to confess to THIS crime, it can only be for one of two reasons:

1) He hasn't been asked about it.  Blame the SMSD for that.

2) He doesn't believe he can be connected to it.  Perhaps he doesn't know he was identified by one of the victims when he appeared on television that Monday.  Despite my absolute SHOCK that the other driver could be my own Congressman, I am positive that my identification of the man was correct.  At first, however, I was thankful that it couldn't possibly be him because he had the world's most perfect alibi:  He was in Washington, D.C. resigning from Congress, in front of everybody in the nation.   But when my wife got through teaching online class and I told her that, she told me no, look again -- he's in San Diego.  She also asked me why he needed an alibi for something.  "Because I think he was the driver of the other car" I replied.  I had spent the weekend learning how to isolate the car based on the sticker we had recovered from his vehicle, and I had made calls to several local dealers already, told them EXACTLY WHAT HAD HAPPENED in an effort get their help to catch the danger to society I KNEW existed, and they had all been VERY COOPERATIVE.

Only the police didn't seem to want to catch this guy.  The owners of the half-dozen or so cell phones that were calling 911 ALSO wanted to catch him.  There should be a record of those attempts, EVEN IF the calls didn't go through.  I may not be an investigator or a cop, but I'm a technologist.

I was very sorry to realize it was Cunningham, but at least I then understood the reason for the strange police behavior the previous Friday night, and their strange claims about standard police procedure in a case such as this -- a hit-and-run with DEADLY INTENT.

Somewhere along the way, the system failed to do justice and rather than fix that, it has piled additional, arguably WORSE crimes on top of the original one (if only because they were committed by sober people under color of authority).  Cunningham was as determined as any human being could be to commit suicide that night, and he needs to be protected from himself even if it is more than a year later.  And the public may some day need to be protected FROM HIM.

From the correspondence you've sent us, the police seem to be saying that they didn't catch ANYBODY that night.  I believe an OVERWHELMING PREPONDERANCE of evidence shows that they did, and that they are protecting the perpetrator from justice, probably mainly to protect their own careers and reputations.  If they are right, it is at least in part because the CLERB has not lifted a finger to do its job.

When the SMSD decided to kill the case instead of capturing the criminal, they didn't know I would have a piece of the car, with a sticker which could absolutely be traced back. (I showed it to Kelleher and he refused to take it and claimed the police would NOT use it to look for the car, which was a LIE.)  They didn't know I'd recognize the assailant three days later when I saw him on television, either.  And they didn't know I'd go to my LOCAL POLICE STATION to learn what PROPER PROCEDURE should be in this case, BEFORE pressing the SMSD for (now seriously delayed but still not impossible) action.  What I learned was that visual recognition of the other driver later is a perfectly acceptable way of identifying a suspect, especially when a positive identification of the vehicle can ALSO be made, as in THIS CASE.

All this "evidence" would NOT have been ignored, were the assailant not ALREADY being PROTECTED by the police.  In ALL normal cases, the officer would have arrived in a reasonable amount of time.  We believe the SMSD waited until the LAST WITNESS LEFT to come to our aid, and even then, intimidated us and pretended not to be responding to our desperate call at all!

Nothing normal about any of it.

I strongly suspect Cunningham and I were in complete agreement on one thing that night, which was that he went by TOO FAST to be recognized.  But it wasn't true, and we both -- and ESPECIALLY THE POLICE -- should have known it wasn't true.

If you watch the History Channel, CUNNINGHAM HIMSELF, and many other of our GREATEST FIGHTER PILOTS, COMPLETELY DISPROVE the theory that we blew by each other too fast to be recognized.  When a man is trying to kill you, you CAN look at him very, very intently.  In my case, I needed to gage his reaction, and I wanted him to KNOW I saw him.  I needed to know WHY he was doing this to us. I needed A CLUE as to WHAT he would do next.

I saw a very sad old man that night, and he's still sad.  From the information I have gathered by an occasional Google search, he's angry at various reporters for bringing him down, and for hounding him.  That's pretty arrogant, considering he should be glad he's not in jail for an attempted double-murder.  But after what he's been handed on a silver platter, I guess arrogance is not surprising.

If facing a driver like Cunningham, I'm certain that very few drivers would know what to do, let alone be able to pull it off successfully (I originally thought it was, but its NOT in our California Drivers' Manual).  It took me a while to figure out HOW I knew what to do, but I finally realized that what saved our lives that night was something I heard on a driver-training video that they play on the local cable station, made with the help of the Carlsbad Police Department.  The presenter actually described what to do when a guy is playing "chicken" with you -- which sometimes is for KEEPS -- the person is intent on crashing into your car (such was UNDOUBTEDLY the case here).  The person in the video says you must keep your speed way, way down, then try to dash out of the way at the last moment.  But that alone wouldn't have been nearly enough in this case.  Too quick a dash out of the way would put the next car in the same jeopardy I was now in!

Cunningham was trained professionally in just this sort of combat, and he was undoubtedly fantasizing himself to be "back in Vietnam" or perhaps more specifically, he may have imagined he was a Kamikaze pilot or out of bullets or something, and had to ram the boat or the plane carrying a nuclear warhead or a 9-11 hijacker or something.  SOMETHING in his mind made him go into MY lane, two lanes over from HIS, stay there, accelerating the whole time, and NEVER WAVERING except to match my evasive moves during the first few seconds of the attack.  I knew I had to wait until the very last moment because I knew his car handled A LOT better than mine.  I had paid attention early, seen the other car's profile, and recognized it's type as one I knew well (as reported on the 911 tape).  This simple act some 8 seconds before impact saved all our lives.

He was matching every turn of MY steering wheel instantly (I was to learn later that at least five pilots had died before me, unable to avoid him when THEY were in his sights).  Had I continued to "play the game,", he would have "won."  So I STOPPED ALL evasive maneuvering in the hopes he would tire of the "game" when I refused to play, and go back to his side of the road.

Instead, we BOTH just went straight at each other, he gaining speed all along, and me trying to make him think I've stopped completely and am bracing for impact.  For example, when I accelerated for the final cut, I accelerated very evenly, so he hopefully would not perceive my lights coming up as I began, and would not realize I was planning ANY final avoidance maneuver until I actually started turning.  And, I did not turn until I had gained enough speed and we were CLOSE enough so he could not possibly follow my turn completely, no matter what he tried to do.  I credit being a mountainbiker (ask dozens of local park rangers, my wife and I are the ones with all the SAFETY GEAR) with training me to wait, and wait, and wait... to make my turn.  (You have to do that mountainbiking, too, because if you turn too soon, you have to UNTURN, and THAT can take you right off the trail and over a cliff.)

Like the jockeying part, the straight-in portion lasted about 3 seconds, and Cunningham NEVER took his foot off the accelerator pedal the whole time, and NEVER made any attempt to go back to his side of the road for HUNDREDS OF FEET of pavement and many seconds.  This absolutely was INTENTIONAL just as I described it on the 911 tape, and he clearly planned for a FATAL head-on collision.  When I finally cut, the fact that he could not match my turn PROVED HIS DEADLY INTENT since, if I hadn't out-turned him in the last fraction of a second, he could NOT HAVE AVOIDED ME himself.

If he had succeeded, I'm sure the cops who arrived at the scene to pick up the three bodies would have found a way to explain to the media why Cunningham was in my lane.  There was a funny S curve in the road nearby which undoubted would have been blamed.  But that wasn't the reason he aimed at me.  He aimed at me because he could not flip his Chevy Tracker by itself (at the S curve) and he needed a target while he still had worked up the "courage" to kill himself.  That's when he chose our car.

I hope that we can resolve this case in such a way that Mr. Cunningham can make a formal apology -- as surely anyone would expect him to WANT to do, under NORMAL circumstances -- and begin to put his actions in their proper perspective.  I am demanding nothing more from him (although he SHOULD give up his air medals for his crime, to the BETTER PILOT (at least, better THAT NIGHT, when it counted).

But as long as he believes that there are police who will get in trouble if he tells the truth about what he did that night, he cannot reconcile his public claims that he wants to be honest now, with the reality of what he has done -- tried to kill two innocent people, then somehow (presumably just by being a celebrity and / or a Congressman) he convinced the cops to behave in ways that are utterly corrupt and despicable, and which violate their oaths to serve the public.

This is, perhaps, the best reason that police should let the chips fall where they may when things happen, and Congressmen or other famous people should not be given special treatment, as they were in this case.

In an ideal world, justice does the perpetrator at least as much if not more good than it does the victims.  In an ideal world, justice prevents there from being future victims of the same criminal.  In an ideal world, the actions of the police are to serve and protect.  They are sworn to do so, and the whole fabric of our society would crumble if our police cannot be trusted when a citizen calls 911 to report a crime.  A citizen should be able to expect the information he provides to be used to CATCH a criminal, not to HELP THEM GET AWAY WITH THEIR CRIME.

People who threaten suicide, who attempt suicide, who are hounded by their inner demons and by the press, are ALWAYS a high risk of suicide.  Cunningham is and will always remain a risk to society and to himself.

And, the police in San Marcos cannot be trusted to be fair.  It is the duty of the CLERB to recognize the REASON for the failure, and not just to assume the police are honest -- they are not always honest, and if the CLERB assumes otherwise, that assumption invalidates CLERB's reason for existence.

However, IN REALITY, in this case, police bullying under color of authority was sloppy, incompetent, illegal, immoral, and incomplete.  It was NOT successful because the other driver (me) recognized the assailant and for many other reasons.  America cannot permit such bullying of the common citizen by the authorities for ANY reason.  A certain level of competence, cooperation, and honesty should be expected by the citizens.  My wife did not look at our assailant, strongly suggesting both that she did not have much TIME to look at him, and that as a passenger she was being violently thrown around the vehicle as this driver desperately attempted to avoid virtually certain death -- the sincere intent of the other driver.

Since I saw the other driver, I KNOW exactly what really happened that night.  It's a puzzle anyone can put together who wants to.  The bystanders, who kindly waited and waited, began to suspect "Celebrity Justice" that very night.  And that' exactly what we got, in the worst possible way.

Celebrity Justice isn't just a television show or a phrase, and it CERTAINLY isn't the law.  In fact, it has NO justification whatsoever and should not occur.

I know full well that the police aren't as incompetent as they have pretended to be in this case.  But I have not seen any evidence that the CLERB wants to be any MORE competent in THEIR duty, and I expect no check on the excesses of the SMSD from the CLERB.

If I'm correct, the CLERB should be disbanded and replaced with something effective.

Sincerely,

Ace Hoffman
Carlsbad, CA