Sharon went to the mailbox and got your letter today.
This case is crystal-clear from my perspective, since I was able to recognize the assailant when he appeared on television the Monday after the Friday evening attack.
For me, everything that happened afterwards has been a learning opportunity. Not to see if justice can be done, but to see if purposeful injustice can be undone. Few cases can be solved without police help. When that help is not forthcoming, an explanation is in order.
Others may (or may not) question the truth of one person's statements versus another, but from my perspective there's simply no question about what's going on here. The police response was dishonest from the start, abnormal and abusive, and there was a motive which was most heinous for that response -- to protect the assailant.
The CLERB seems to assume a purity of heart on the part of the police, even when the evidence clearly suggests otherwise.
Prior to recognizing the other driver (Randall Cunningham), over the weekend (11/26 - 11/27/05) I had made numerous, traceable efforts (as in, online Google and Yahoo searches, phone calls to car dealerships, etc.) to find the attacker, because I realized that the police had some reason they did NOT intend to investigate this incident and DID in fact, INTEND to cover it up (as they are undoubtedly doing).
I believe that had I not gotten a business card from Mr. Kelleher he would have denied showing up at all that night.
The CLERB presumably doesn't care, but I also believe that an undercover officer -- probably an FBI man -- drove up and while we ere waiting for the expected police response to my frantic 911 call. He pretended to be a good Samaritan, and inquired as to what we were waiting for. I told him I was waiting for the police, and he drove off.
What mattered to the SMSD (and their friends) that night was that, by the time Kelleher arrived, ALL the witnesses had finally gotten fed up with the lack of police response and left. The SMSD did not know that we knew where three of the witnesses worked and would be able to get the name and address of a fourth, who was still waiting in view when the officer REFUSED to go talk to the witness.
Or maybe that didn't matter, since they knew they could intimidate the witnesses later. These guys are, after all, professionals and I know, from experience, how good they are at intimidating potential witnesses. And they've seldom had more incentive to do so than they have in THIS case! But the CLERB clearly assumes otherwise. Perhaps the CLERB thinks that if something is UNLIKELY (Kelleher said the "chance" if it being Cunningham in the other car was "one in a million" when I spoke to him later over the phone) it is also IMPOSSIBLE.
I did not know HOW to investigate criminal police behavior, but I learned that it MUST be done. And I will continue to do it. There are hundreds of Congressmen, tens of thousands of small-town (and city) mayors, police lieutenants, and other "untouchables." They do not all deserve, and MUST NOT ALL GIVEN, automatic sanctuary, as they were in this case.
This case could be a warning to ALL police, that criminal behavior -- specifically, "Celebrity Justice" doesn't pay. Or it could be a green light for such behavior (as it has turned out to be, so far).
We believe the CLERB is either unable to look at the proper evidence, unwilling to look at the available evidence, incapable of actually perceiving police action for what it is, or perhaps the CLERB assumes that citizens who have been wronged by the police must have broken bones to show for it. Next time you talk to a man with a gun, remember he can kill you if you ask for justice and he doesn't want to give it to you, and he can lie about everything he says to you, and he can lie about what the police will or will not do for a complainant, and he can treat your wife like she doesn't exist. And all this will be APPROVED by the CLERB, later.
That's what the SMSD will do to the victims. How they treat the perpetrator is this:
They will drive the drunk, depressed, suicidal assailant home, intimidate the victims, and tamper with the witnesses (Commander Quako talking to them is a clear case of witness tampering in the real world.)
We will be recommending to whoever has jurisdiction in Sacramento that the San Diego CLERB be disbanded as ineffective as if by design. For us, the CLERB was not a last hope, a last resort, or a last chance. Instead, providing information to the CLERB simply provided us with clear proof that the CLERB system is ineffective.
Nevertheless, thank you again for the opportunity to appear before the board. If we survive the next assault by the police and their drunk friends, and the state doesn't dissolve your powerless and time-consuming board, we'll see you again next time.
I'll leave you with this:
If you really don't believe my version of the attack, then if you are ever faced with the same situation, you will (hopefully) have some choices you can make, as I did.
The wrong choice will be fatal. But if you trust me, then afterwards, hopefully, your conscience will force you to demand the CLERB re-open THIS case.
And if your assailant is not a Congressman, or some other friend of the police, you will probably have the police's help in catching the assailant. Otherwise, my only advice to you would be: