The District Court Case

|<-Back|-|||-|Next->|


The District Court Case of 6-22-01

6-22-01 Fri.
Finally the day of the court case this took about 4 hours from my workday. I met Mary at the door when she finally arrived. I had an uneasy feeling when I saw Detective Floyd. What perjury from the police and the witnesses that they brought. How depressing I sure hope GOD is in control.

I and my wife entered into the court room early, my wife was a stay at home mom available to take care of the needs of the children when they returned home after school was willing to come to court with me. I sat at the defense table and Mary was the only person to sit on my side of the court room right behind me.

I prepared my papers that I researched for the case at hand, after all what authority did I have to take control of the accident scene until a police officer arrived? How was I supposed to make the turn with the large truck that I was driving and who do I report trouble to when there are obvious problems that could easily be corrected. What is the best way to correct issues where there is constant interference by opposing traffic and how do we cut down on the amount of car crashes and wasted time waiting for people to get their cars into the right position so that traffic can proceed? I had all these issues and more laid out ready at a moments notice if so required.

I sat in the chair all my papers before me on the table and in walked the detective suddenly I felt a cold lonely feeling pass over me. I felt that GOD who was always with me had just left the room. Where did my GOD go? Where was my confidence? I prayed to myself quietly, “GOD please don’t leave, don’t leave me here by myself alone, why are you forsaking me in my hour of need?” I buckled down and focused on the matter at hand, no matter what this is where I was and what I had to do.

I tried to collect a type of roll call and this is, who was there that day, to the best of my recollection according to my notes and memory.

Who was in the, courtroom?
1. The Judge Harold Borek
2. My wife Mary C. Landis
3. Detective Randy S. Floyd
4. The Telford Borough Police secretary
5. Officer Daniel S. Fox
6. Chief Douglas Bickle
7. Mrs. Carole Mary Allsop
8. Mr. Allsop
9. Mr. My Van Tran
10. Two women that sat together and I didn’t recognize.
a. I believe the one was Debra L. Swank, I.D. #78717
b. I’m not sure who the other woman was maybe an associate.
11. Outside of the court room hanging out in the Lobby was Officer Ritter.

The hearing went poorly. Detective Floyd commanded the courtroom, using obscenities and perjuring himself several times.

Detective Floyd called to testify;

1. Mrs. Carole Mary Allsop
a. She told of my immediately getting out of the truck and cursing at the man who crossed the stop line.
b. Then she described the event where she said she observed me in a state of “Road Rage”.
When I had the opportunity to ask Mrs. Allsop about her testimony, I asked her if she was sure she heard me curse before coming back to check on her well-being.
Her response to my question was a simple answer, she answered “yes.”

I really need to find out who the man in the car with license #(DHV-1936) is. If I could subpoena that man to testify in court I could create a defense contradicting the testimony of Mrs. Allsop because I know that I didn’t utter one single curse word that day and I’m certain that the man who crossed the stop line could have corroborated my testimony that is if I was allowed to testify.

Since the man that crossed the stop line is the one person that some people think, I cursed he should know if I cursed at him.

I’d like to question him and his wife as to the events they saw that afternoon. Even though they might have been a little concerned or even upset, by my being assertive to keep him at the scene, I believe they could confirm that I was only acting as an authority and not being aggressive or abusive. I wouldn’t have expected them to stay at the scene if I was abusive or profane.. I believe that vulgarity causes people to run away and hide. I hope I read his character correctly since he did stay at the scene and talk to the individuals involved in the accident.

At the court hearing I started to question Mrs. Allsop about her abrupt stop behind the truck. I wanted to know if she could describe the truck was it a long flat bed. She tried to avoid answering my question as though she didn’t understand what I was asking.

Then I asked her about being able to see the vehicle for which I had to stop.

The Judge asked about the car coming from which direction?

Immediately the Detective objected to my line of questioning as I asked, Mrs. Allsop about the accident.

I was asked to explain my reasons for this line of questions. As I tried to explain I started to testify, this brought about another objection. So in questioning Mrs. Allsop about this accident I began to testify or so I was told, the judge immediately interrupted and told me that I would get my chance to testify later. Then there was another objection and this time the judge told me to testify about my conduct and not the accident. But Mrs. Allsop was still on the stand.

The detective objected to my questioning about the accident and the judge sustained the objection that the accident was not about my conduct.

We only just began the hearing.

I was trying to think of a way to get Mrs. Allsop to realize that the first thing that I did was to go to the back of the truck and to check on the accident victims’.

This prevented me bringing up the fact that I already gave a deposition to Mr. Trans’ insurance company.

Realizing that I had no way of disproving Mrs. Allsop’s version I stopped questioning the witness.

Mrs. Allsop believes that I jumped out of the truck cursing the man who crossed the stop line. Not true, my first concern was for the safety of the people who were involved in the accident and when I saw the little girl in the Tran vehicle I became overwhelmed with emotion from the grief of attending my 4th grade daughter’s teacher and his wife’s memorial service. Had the accident been different someone could have been seriously hurt say if a motorcyclist was involved. I also own a motorcycle.

Mrs. Allsop did testify in court that she witnessed road rage in me. I’d like to see her degree that makes her an expert to diagnose road rage. Especially from a person at least 50 feet away from her and opposite a truck, I’m sure what she is testifying to is the profanity that the driver of the pickup truck used but how do I get her to realize her mistake? Who else could have helped to piece together the missing pieces, who did I need in court, anyone? After all, didn’t I have the right to deal with the harassing and profane individual so as to keep him quiet and under control at least somewhat and to make a retort if that is all it would take? It worked for a little while at least until the man in the pickup truck drove by.

Again about the man in the pickup truck, this individual did exhibit this socially abusive behavior on another occasion.

By harassing me this individual was seen to be a threat to other individuals safety and the safety of myself.

I would like to know what Michelle Townsend thought of the individual in the Red and White Ford pickup truck behind her.

Did she even realize the profanity came from him?

My retort to this individual was a retort to keep peace. Refer to F.M.C.S.R. sec. 392.40 subsection (b) pg.#165.
a. Take all necessary precaution to prevent further accident at the scene.

As I tried to address some other issues in District court, the Detective objected stating that the other individual wasn’t on trial here. The Detective told the Judge that even if this had happened traffic started moving and he never had a chance to question the man.

I would have loved to ask Mrs. Allsop if she heard the man yell as he drove by.
I would have also liked to ask Mrs. Allsop if she feels the Detectives testimony was truthful especially when he stated for a fact that I cursed demanding to see his badge. His badge was offered I admit accepting the offer to view the badge. I had no reason to use profanity, although the earlier conduct of the detective does warrant an investigation into his mental health and what issues he might be suffering from.

The next person to testify was.

2. Mr. My Van Tran

He testified about a conversation between a man in a little truck and myself. He stated that he saw an argument.

He told the court something about the badge much of what he was trying to say was unintelligible; the language barrier was a problem for me.

I didn’t address any questions to Mr. Tran

The next person to testify was.

3. The lying detective Mr. Randy Floyd

He testified twice that he observed me yelling obscenities.

He actually used a very profane word in court at least seven times.

He said I was walking backwards and acted as if that is a crime to walk backwards in the street. I would have loved to have Mrs. Townsend there as a witness even a hostile witness as she had to be watching because she warned me about the dangerous position I was in. She yelled out to me, “Hey! Watch out!” as I pivoted around, I know my fire training and I know not to walk backwards into the unknown.

Detective Floyd perjured himself several times as he testified against me.
1. He said that I came over to his car cursing.
a. Again Mrs. Townsend could shed light on this.
2. He described my reply to having him call the police on his cell phone as though I used obscenities in my response.
a. Ask Michele Townsend, (the woman who warned me of his dangerous approach)
i. Ask her if I cursed at the man who drove his car up to my leg.
1. I try to avoid cursing in every aspect of my life.
2. Another reason I wouldn’t curse was because I absolutely wanted to maintain my credibility as a witness.
ii. Don’t ask her if I cursed at the man who crossed the stop line.
1. I understand from talking to her husband that she may have some misunderstanding as to what happened when I first got out of the truck.
a. Or she just might not want to testify; I understand she might not want to take time off from work.
b. The truth would later come out in that the mechanic and his buddy were going to have a little fun with me to annoy me and get under my skin. Isn’t life wonderful in a world of bullies?
2. I am praying that the moral character of the gentleman and or his passenger will come through about the issue, of my profanity or lack there of.
3. As I said before I was very assertive that the man stay to also talk to the police and that I wanted his actions charged for causing the accident.
3. A transcript of the call into the radio room may also prove that Detective Floyd perjured himself when I asked him, “did he see the cars as they were” actually involved in the accident.
a. He denied actually seeing the cars that were actually involved in the accident.
b. I believe he actually thought the cars would need to be towed.
i. I don’t think he wanted to be bothered with a reportable accident and it turned out to his surprise that it wasn’t a reportable accident and he just made matters worse.
c. He falsely showed the position of the vehicles as he demonstrated with his charts.
i. This was his claim so as to not be able to see the cars.
ii. The accident report could prove this to be different.
1. The Allsop vehicle came close to striking the back of the truck I was operating center a little to the right of center.
2. The Tran vehicle struck the Allsop vehicle with the right front of Tran’s car to the left rear of the Allsop vehicle the bumper of the Tran vehicle lifting the rear of the Allsop vehicle making the accident look much worse than it really was.
4. He showed me his badge.
a. No I didn’t curse asking to see the detective’s badge he offered to show me his badge of his own volition. (Ask the elderly gentleman who was standing with every one else.)
5. He mentioned about his slow approach in his police cruiser.
a. I questioned him on this detail his car didn’t look like a police cruiser.
b. I didn’t mention how he traveled over 100’ and probably much further, in less than eight seconds? (That is the time taken for my retort to the harassing and profane individual.
6. I then questioned why was there all of this, talk of profanity? The citation that I received had no mention of my use of profanity.
a. It was explained to me that a special note of my use of profanity was provided at the bottom of the citation
i. This now explained the comment made to me by the Borough manager (5-25-01).
ii. I wasn’t prepared to defend myself against this lie.
4. Officer Daniel Fox
a. He testified that he wanted to know why the truck was parked by the side of the street. But this was a lie, it was the liar Randy Floyd who asked about that at the scene, they were going to play a little game with my head as though I wouldn’t know what to do by them confusing the issues and turning things around I would be caught completely off guard by the two officers being completely deceptive in court.
b. He said that he wanted me arrested on the spot to cuff me and put me in the back of the cruiser, and to tow the truck away.
c. He said I interrupted their conversation and that I was pacing around.
i. I asked him about being the officer that said to Detective Floyd that I was there as a “witness”.
1. He denied making any such comment.
i. At the hearing I believe the judge to be finding things the Detective was saying a little hard to believe.
ii. The judge asked, “Didn’t the defendant have the right to be a witness at the accident scene?”
iii. The question was asked about three times.
iv. The question was, evaded by the Detective each time.
d. An officer of the law should always tell the truth, “especially one who was just acquitted for a possible wrongful shooting”.
i. At first I was certain that the shooting was justified, the report in the newspaper made such a clear picture of a simple mistake.
1. I thought the character of the police officer above reproach.
ii. Now after seeing the other side of the man I don’t know.
1. This may explain the presence of the Detective on my job site a week after my hearing.
iii. A co-worker later after the case told me he had problems with Officer Fox lying about a situation his wife got into.
1. This same co-worker tried to warn me that the police in this community would lie to get a conviction.
2. The husband of Mrs. Townsend also told me of the police being a problem in the community and that is why he didn’t want his wife to be a witness.
3. There have been several other comments made by individuals where the police have abused their powers to manipulate other cases.
4. On (7-12-01) I learned from a customer that Detective Floyd lied in the Perkasie (Probably Sellersville) District Justice courtroom she wrote the infraction into the record of the event. I believe the situation from which Detective Floyd was caught lying involved a case where the victim was assaulted.
5. My Self
a. I was prepared to defend my conduct at the scene based on truth. When confronted by lies I became distraught. I realized right away that I needed legal representation; the police took matters beyond my ability to defend. I wanted to testify to the reasons, why I responded to the things that happened. I waited for my chance to testify, and when my opportunity came the Detective objected for this reason or that.

This was then followed by a ruling on the objection about the stop line.

The Judge Harold Borek then commented about the stop line. He said, “We have no laws in the state of Pennsylvania to prevent people from crossing over the stop lines in this state you can cross fourteen feet over the stop line and it isn’t against the law.” There was some joviality in this comment and the people in the courtroom chuckled.

He then added while looking at the Detective that he didn’t even know why stop lines are even painted on the roads. Maybe they shouldn’t have any at all.

This time there was outright laughter

Then he added, as he reproved me and cautioned me not to make another mention about the stop line or he would stop my testimony short and make a ruling on this matter.

I felt completely violated and stifled.

I became very concerned about the judge finding me in contempt of court.

There was much for me to say at this point. This is where I could have used the citation that the husband of our former babysitter was charged with for crossing over the stop line on a rainy night, a situation where he wasn’t blocking or interfering with the progress of traffic. I certainly understand people and their behaviors how we all miss the mark from time to time, but here these people are supposed to be looking for the truth of a matter and they are allowing lies to be promoted and built up to convict innocent people of other people’s actions. These types of convictions should be expunged they are so abhorrent to our system of justice and everything that we teach to our children to respect our elders and to respect the people enforcing our laws. This court case is so egregious and soon we will find out just how we go from one bad situation into another. I sure hope no one else ever has to go through a mock trial such as this again.

b. The judge and the Detective joked about some of the very issues I wanted to address. So I tried to avoid those issues.
i. The stop line
ii. Trucks on residential streets
1. This was a residential/commercial street.
2. The street is not restricted to truck use.
3. The truck not being an 18-wheeler. (This I left alone because of the judge’s visual cue).
c. As I started to testify the Detective found it such an appropriate time to change the tape in one of his tape recorders.
i. What a subtle distraction?
d. I tried to testify to what had happened from the beginning and there was an objection to my talking about the accident.
i. In explaining I mentioned yelling at the individual who set these events in motion and that I might have been overly emotional due to a state of grieving.
1. We heard laughter for this comment and an immediate objection.
e. Moving past the accident I tried to speak of the social abuse. This brought on some more laughter from the courtroom.
i. An objection was made to the effect that this individual was not on trial here.
f. I talked about Officer Ritter taking me aside.
i. His, insisting, that I walk back over to him.
ii. I spoke of our conversation about the stop line.
g. Immediately the Judge put an end to my testimony for talking about the stop line or the accident.
ii. Since my testimony was finished the Detective tried to follow up what I was trying to say I believe it was about this time that the comment of trucks not coming through the intersection came up in court.
i. The judge jumped in to make a statement that this was not bias but that it was an opinion.
ii. He then said while giving me a very stern look, that he didn’t want 18-wheelers coming down his residential street.
i. Again this brought out even more laughter more than his first comments about the stop line.
ii. I held fast to my chair and didn’t say anything even knowing that the truck I drive isn’t an 18-wheeler.
iii. Detective Floyd then asked about his conversation when he came over to me the last time.
i. I wasn’t sure where his question was coming from or where he was going.
ii. I asked for clarification.
iii. He started again something about when he came over to me the last time.
1. I commented “you mean when you came to Lord over me before you left.”
iv. He responded, “Yes when I came over to Lord over you the last time.”
1. I still didn’t get his question to me and I couldn’t give him any kind of answer.

I was asked if I wanted to call any witnesses for my defense.
h. I responded that nobody wanted to testify against the police.
i. I gave thought to recalling Mrs. Allsop but I figured it was better to leave well enough alone.
i. I’m thinking that I needed a lawyer.

I was given a chance to plea my case.
j. I said that I didn’t curse! And that I didn’t want to ruin my credibility as a witness.

The Judge came back with an expected guilty verdict.
a. He did something that I didn’t expect.
i. He apologized as he was finding me guilty. “I’m sorry to find you guilty.”
ii. He said the Detective brought a greater burden of the evidence.
iii. He spoke of his decision based solely on the fact that Mrs. Allsop was a Professional Managed Health Care Supervisor.
iv. He said, “She deals with the public on a daily basis”.
1. In making this point I felt second -class.
a. I believe he implied I was less than a professional.
v. He felt that she had no reason to lie.
1. He didn’t get to hear about the deposition I gave to Mr. Tran’s insurance company.
vi. He said something to the effect that everybody tends to get things a little confused; I believe he was talking about believing she may have heard some obscenities that might not have really been there.
b. He then mentioned that I had the right to appeal his decision and suggested that I get a Lawyer.
i. He appealed to me this message three times.
ii. He told me that I shouldn’t want this on my permanent record.
iii. He told me to appeal at the Montgomery County Court House in Norristown.
c. After the hearing about my disorderly conduct there was a brief recess and I went outside for a breath of fresh air.
i. As I walked out of the courtroom I noticed Officer Ritter was also at the courthouse from what I could tell he didn’t come into the courtroom but stayed out with the secretary’s by the counter.
1. I thought about talking to him but after the incident with the chief and the accident report I stayed clear.
2. Officer Ritter never answered my call to make an addition to the accident report.
ii. Outside Officer Fox was standing there smoking a cigarette. (And looking a little annoyed).
iii. I approached him as my wife was following me outside to tell me about Mr. Tran’s comment to the Detective.
iv. I questioned Officer Fox saying, “So that’s how people get railroaded?” I felt that I was prosecuted by ambush.
v. He replied in accordance to how he testified in court that he whished he had cuffed me and put me in the back of the cruiser and had the truck I was driving towed away.
vi. My wife said to me “don’t say anything to anyone”. She took me aside and then she told me about Mr. Tran. It seems that Mr. Tran created a little scene (as I left the courtroom, for a drink and some fresh air). My wife said he went up to the Detective and told the Detective that I called him a liar. He was smiling and proud to help out or something. The Detective then told him that if I said anything else to him to let the Detective know about it.


Next the charges against the Detective were dismissed because of his testimony and some kind of immunity to government employees.

The judge allowed me to read a document where Detective Floyd was asking for some kind of immunity from the charges that I had brought against him. This was a document that I would give to my lawyer a document submitted by the insurance provider for the borough of Telford to allow the detective immunity. I had later to go back to my lawyer to regain possession of this document once and after this case went through the county court level.
d.
i. The Judge said that he had read this document earlier.
ii. The Judge allowed me some time to read the document and when he came back asked if I had any objections to what was about to be allowed.
1. I tried to object on grounds of cause of effect.
2. Boy did I need legal council, I may have been right in my thinking but it sure didn’t come out of my mouth.
3. It was later when I was rereading the document that I realized the Detectives testimony and all of his lies were on this document.
a. I don’t believe I had a fair hearing if the Judge previously read this document.
b. I came to court fighting the wrong battle. I came prepared for truth not lies.
e. After the hearing, I then approached the bench where the Judge was putting some books away.
i. I asked if I could ask a question and the Judge warned me that he couldn’t answer any legal questions. I assured him it wasn’t legal.
ii. I asked why he allowed the F-word to be used in court; nobody else had any problem finding another way to describe profanity or obscenities.

I went out of the courtroom looking for a Lawyer and the D.A.
k. My character was just attacked over an issue I am very proud of. And it is a fact that I worked very hard to not be an individual who flippantly uses profanity.
i. You can ask anyone I have ever worked with in my lifetime.
ii. This is why I would be willing to make up a petition and to see if the response would be as large as some people indicate, since so many have requested of me how they would like to come to court to testify as a character witness on my behalf.


|<-Back|-|||-|Next->|

Title Page of My ebook --- - Freedom of Speech and Religion, an International Crime for the most minor offense that another person can commit!

*Other links:

• My version of what happened in County Court


• The County Court Transcript Edited and Notated for readability and understanding


• Two Key points about the County Court Transcript


• The First Complaint that I tried to file in Eastern District Federal Court in August of 2005


• Court Case Denied


• Time Lines and convergence of separate events


• Letters and Receipts as evidence and facts for and in Federal Court


• An Open Letter

Back To:

1. The Accident and my Conduct
2. My Self
3. Indexing and Organizing My Writings and Posts