Introduction

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

Hello,

I was trying to make a right turn after waiting for the green light, which was waiting for traffic to come from the other direction and that traffic had to come and cross over that stop line or mark on the roadway. Well now, that the traffic was at the otherwise empty intersection and was interfering with my progress, I couldn't complete my turn. I had to wait for the man to back up his car so I could proceed. The car tailgating me through the intersection didn't expect me to have to stop and she nearly rear ended me and she was rear ended by the car behind her. I saw the impact and thought that I was crashed into. So I tell the man that just backed up that he needed to stay because, I felt that he was responsible and the cause of the accident. I told him to stay put. I went to the back of my truck to check on the people involved in the crash, and make sure if I was involved or not. I wasn't, but I was a witness with information to offer at the scene of the accident.

Who was charged with the only violation cited at that accident scene?

To view a picture of the truck and read a little more of the story you can follow this link...


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

*Other Links:

• The Accident and my Conduct


• What happened in District Court


• 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


• Evidence and Confessions

Back To:

1. Title Page of My ebook --- - Freedom of Speech and Religion, an International Crime for the most minor offense that another person can commit!
2. My Self
3. Indexing and Organizing My Writings and Posts

The Accident and my conduct

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

Accident Date: 4/19/01
Accident Report #20010419M4
Citation No. A68666
Telford Police Dept.: 215-723-6700



THE ACCIDENT AND MY CONDUCT

1. Prior to the accident on this particular day (4-19-01), at least four other incidents of people crossing beyond the stop line had occurred. The incident prior to this one involved a woman, driving a minivan (one and a half vehicle lengths) beyond the stop line. While watching for her to acknowledge that the length of my vehicle would be hindered with her stopped where she was, I observed she was ignoring (me and the truck) I was driving. She finally looked in my direction as my vehicle slowly approached her vehicle, she looked at me with such contempt, but she refused to move her vehicle. Slowly I completed the right turn, I was able to complete the turn but I was out of my comfort zone because I had to place the truck much too close to the vehicle that was in the way. I was turning from southbound route113 making a right turn onto westbound Ridge Pike. I made my delivery nearby and was returning to our facility.




2. The accident.




1. I was coming through the intersection east bound Reliance Rd. to a right turn onto south bound County Line Rd.


2. There have been several close calls at this intersection in the past, in regards to having my vehicle struck from behind by other motorists. Even to the point on other occasions that I’ve had to get out of the truck to make sure the truck didn’t actually get hit or rear-ended. People are not expecting the truck that I am driving to have to stop, before completing my turn, due to motorists coming north bound on County Line Rd. and not stopping behind the stop line.


3. I had to stop for the changing traffic light. Although I was close, I was not yet into the intersection.


1. I stopped where I was supposed to: behind the marked stop line.



4. When the light changed to green, I checked the intersection and;


1. I proceeded into the turn appropriately according to the Commercial Drivers Manual pub. 223 (10-95) pg. 2-30 fig. 2-11 and pub. 223 (8-00) pg. 2-25 fig. 2-8


2. I saw a car approaching from the north bound lane of County Line Rd. coming up to the red light he had for his direction.


3. I saw that an elderly man driving a car with a woman passenger about his own age had stopped just over the stop line.


4. I had to stop: I couldn’t complete the turn.


5. While I was waiting for the elderly gentleman to back up, I was watching in my mirror to see that I wasn’t getting rear-ended;


1. I saw that my vehicle was close to being struck from the car directly behind me.


2. I saw the car behind me make an abrupt stop.


1. At 11:30 AM. 5-02-01 I left a message on Officer Fox’s voice mail asking to have the plates of the elderly mans car run so I could receive his information. He was responsible for the accident. And I asked for an addition to the accident report to be made with regard to the abrupt stop Mrs. Allsop made.


2. To this point I gave a deposition to Mr. Trans insurance company 5-02-01 @ 7:15 Reference # 3811J673706.


1. They contacted me and said they were not requested to call me by Mr. Tran. I spoke with a woman in the Tran household about 6:00 AM. (5-01-01). I requested to speak with a claim handler.


3. I saw the car that almost hit me get hit by the car behind her.



6. I set my parking brake and my four-way flashers and I went to the back of the truck to make sure everyone was ok (as per sec. 392.40 pg. #165 of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (referred to here after as F.M.C.S.R.)).



1. I saw everyone was ok.


1. Mrs. Allsop, the woman behind me, said she was ok.


1. She had reached into her handbag and held her cell phone in her hand. (A small one like a Nextel type cell phone.)


2. I didn’t talk with her too long as I felt she needed time so she could call for police assistance.


2. Mr. Tran, the man operating the vehicle that struck Mrs. Allsop’s vehicle, told me that he was ok and that his daughter also was ok.


3. Taking note that Mr. Tran had a little girl in the car with him, I was flooded with emotions from dealing with Mark and Rae Ann Wieder’s memorial service and how I was dealing with telling my daughter, a student in Mark Wieder’s 4th grade class, how he died in a car accident.


1. The memorial service was just the Saturday before this accident (4-15-01).


2. The day of the accident was my first full day of work because of the long lay-off this past winter.


• The partial unemployment went from 12-16-00 through 4-19-01.



2. I made certain I was not involved.



3. I went back to the front of my truck and told the elderly man to “stay put; don’t go anywhere,” and that I felt he should be charged for causing the accident.


1. I wanted to compel him to stay and give his drivers information to the police.

I had been coached by a Souderton police officer in the past as how to handle such a situation. I was told it would make things easier for the police if the driver that crossed the stop line were compelled to stay at the scene.

2. I knew I had no right to keep him there by physical force and I would not consider assaulting anyone not at all I am a pacifist. My intentions were to set a precedent for this case.


3. I told him in a very assertive way.


4. I didn’t use profanity in talking to anyone.


1. If I were profane it would not be reasonable, to expect the elderly man, to remain at the scene.


2. My use of profanity would ruin my credibility as a witness.



4. I went back to the cab of my truck to get a piece of paper and then back to the rear of the elderly man’s car to record his license plate number (DVH -1936) PA registration.



7. Getting back into my truck;


1. I moved the truck through the intersection, and parked the truck to the side of the road to the best of my abilities without leaving the scene.


1. I very much wanted to talk to a police officer about how hard it is to make turns at this intersection, it is my opinion that the intersection should be marked better so that even if a inattentive motorist stops on or just over the stop line there presence would not interfere with the egress of traffic through the intersection.









3. As I got out of my parked truck, a male voice yelled in my direction in a very derogatory way using very profane language.


1. I looked and saw, the operator of a vehicle, which I recognized as making harassing and profane comments to me before. He drove a red and white Ford pickup with contractor racks, (or at least it looked like a contractors pickup truck.)


2. I looked northbound County Line Rd. to make sure no traffic was currently coming in my direction;


1. From the intersection, I saw the cars that had just rear-ended each other just preparing to move.


1. As I stated the first thing I did was to check on the individuals in the cars. And the cars did look rather peculiar with the bumper of the Allsop vehicle over top of the bumper of the Tran vehicle.


2. I retorted, “Just hold on a minute; I want the old man to stay. I feel he was just as responsible for causing the accident, as the man who hit the woman behind me.”


1. Didn’t I have a right to show that I was offended by the remarks and use of profane language, coming from the Red and White Ford pickup truck?


1. This individual did exhibit this socially abusive behavior on another occasion.


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


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


2. Did she even realize the profanity came from him?


3. 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.


1. Take all necessary precaution to prevent further accident at the scene.








3. I took one step back so as to turn around and-.






4. A green car pulled up behind me close enough to almost hit me.



1. The operator showed no intention of stopping at the scene by displaying four way flashers.


1. The displaying of his hazard flashers would have let me know that he was a professional.


2. Refer to F.M.C.S.R. sec. 392.22 subsection (a) pg.#162.


1. Whenever a motor vehicle is stopped upon the traveled portion of a highway or the shoulder of a highway for any cause other than necessary traffic stops the driver of the stopped vehicle shall immediately activate the vehicular hazard warning signal flashers.


2. He pulls up to a stop at the same time as I turned around.


3. I saw the car as I turned around-


1. I was warned about the impending danger by a woman motorist (Michelle Townsend) who was stopped behind the elderly man and in front of the pickup truck (the person who was harassing me), she warned me at the same time as I turned around, she said “Hey, watch out”


1. I responded back “yes, I can see him.” My response was quiet and calm.


2. As I turned around to look at the car I saw no four-way flashers and the car was close enough to kneel on its bumper.


1. I thought if I fainted I probably could have hit my head on the cars windshield.


3. As I was trying to put my case together I heard many times from different people that the police are supposed to be there for public safety.


1. How is it in the best interest of public safety to drive a car in such a manner?


1. He drove his car in such a manner as to cause an accident sec. 396.7 pg. #314 (F.M.C.S.R.)


1. 396.7 Unsafe operations forbidden (a) General - A motor vehicle shall not be operated in such a manner as to cause an accident –


2. He didn’t use safe vehicle control sec. 383.121 pg. #50 and #51


1. (c) Safe Vehicle Control. (6) (ii) communicating presence, e.g. using horn or lights to signal presence-


2. It’s hard to say exactly how far Detective Floyd’s car really was coming from on the approach to my position standing by the cab of my truck.


1. I stated that I had checked the intersection the only cars moving were from behind my truck, (those cars involved in the accident). There was a red light displayed. The cars were moving into the parking lot behind the truck and on its right side.


2. I believe the report to be correct that the truck was pulled past the intersection 50’


3. My truck is 36’ long and the bed is 29’ long.


4. Standing by the cab of my truck and adding 29’ for the bed of the truck plus 50’ for pulling past the intersection and then add the distance of the intersection, you get a minimum distance the Detective had to travel as I gave my retort.



4. I looked at the driver as I walked over to his drivers’ window. His window was down just a little bit (1.5”-2”)



5. I was upset 1st the stop line, 2nd the nearly getting struck from behind, 3rd the profanity and now 4th I was assaulted by a vehicle driven by some guy who put his car in such a position as to nearly cause me harm.



6. I spoke firm and loudly to the driver of the green car, I asked a question, “What, are you doing trying to hit the pedestrian standing in the street; as if we don’t have enough problems here?”



7. He then retorted something concerning the possibility of my not watching where I was walking as I stepped back to turn around, and that I might have walked backwards into his car possibly hitting it.


1. I stated in court that with ten years of volunteer firefighting experience I knew not to walk backwards into the unknown.



8. The driver then asked, “Why are you standing in the middle of the street yelling at people?”



9. I had no idea who he was to ask me that question. I figured that didn’t matter; he didn’t have to drive so close to a pedestrian in the street. At least if I was in his way he should have given me some kind of warning: using his horn or voicing some kind of pardon.


1. At this point I was looking for a police officer even as earlier when the accident occurred.


1. This whole thing to me is improper police conduct the man became a participant instead of putting public safety first.


2. It is on this one point I felt the District Attorney should have been notified, prior to the perjury in court.


2. Certainly having someone crowd my personal space especially with their car was something that would not help the circumstances at that moment.



10. He pulled off around me yelling or angrily shouting, “Do you want me to call the police?” he quickly parked in front of my truck opening up his car door and showing me and others his cell phone.


1. This individual to me looked like many other individuals who you can spot frequently, the ones irritated that they have to share the road with anyone that might hold them up for a few seconds.


2. At least I knew for certain that the police would soon be here and I would have my chance to talk to an officer.


3. I would like a copy of the transcript from police dispatch regarding this incident.


1. When Mrs. Allsop called and what was said.


2. When Detective Floyd called and what was said.



11. I said, “Yes, I want the police here.”


1. In court he testified that I used profanity in replying to him.


1. Again I look to what Mrs. Townsend heard at this point.



12. He then added that he wanted me charged with disorderly conduct; did I want to be arrested? And he again commented something about walking into his car.



13. As the green car pulled over, I also recorded his license plate number (YBB 0969) PA registration, and;


1. If the individual could have identified himself as a police officer sooner I would not have had to write down his license number.



14. The woman, who warned me about his reckless approach, turns to me in response to what she just saw and heard. She says, “What is His problem?”


1. I later found out the identity of this woman to be a Michelle Townsend.



15. I turned to assist the elderly gentleman park his car figuring to talk to the elderly gentleman and to safely get his car off of the street.


1. By this time traffic was about to start moving and I didn’t see the Elderly gentleman’s car. But then to my surprise-.


1. I spotted the elderly gentleman standing at the back corner of my truck.


2. I walked from the center of the street to the back of my truck to the sidewalk at the back of the truck where the elderly gentleman was talking with the individuals involved in the crash.



16. At some point as traffic started to go, the driver of the red and white F150 yelled while passing by something to the effect of, “That’s what you get for doing 50mph through a turn!” This comment caused the man from the green car to stop his walk as he was about half way along the passengers side of my truck walking to the group of us gathered at the back of my truck.


1. I definitely was not going too fast, because I knew there was a great probability I would have to stop. Though even with my experience I wasn’t sure, since the elderly gentleman stopped just over the stop line.


1. I needed just a little forgiveness from the people marking the intersection (Penn DOT) because too many people will cross over the white line, crowding the intersection.


17. Even with all of my experience, I was not sure of whether or not I could complete this turn with the position of the elderly man’s car just over the stop line.


1. While making the turn, I positioned the truck perfectly as instructed in the Driver Training Manual (Pub. 223 (10/95), pg. 2-30, sec. 2.7: Managing Space- Right Turns, Fig. 2-11)


1. And also from this publication: All drivers are instructed to stop behind the stop line. (Sec. 12.1, pg. 12-1)

===========================
Note to: Penn Dot
==============================

1. It would really be a great help if someone could move the stop lines a few feet further away from this intersection in all directions.

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





2. In regard to the fact that there is no law about crossing the stop line it is an automatic failure when taking a driver’s test, and the state appeals court opened the door for police to follow through in the fact that we have enough driving laws in this state to cover any driving offense. This was a recorded fact when the Hilltown Ban on driving while talking on the cell phone was challenged on appeal in the state court system. The state justices said it would not be right for local municipalities to make such legislation.



3. And then the man in the green car, that had harassed me just minutes before, finally joined the group of us at the back of my truck. That is when he started to introduce himself as a Detective Floyd of the Telford Police Department.


1. Because of his conduct, I asked, when offered, to see his badge.


1. I said, “Yes I would like to see that please.”


2. I watched Mr. Tran, Mrs. Allsop and the Gentleman who crossed the stop line decline to view the Detective’s badge when he offered to show it to them.




2. He began questioning my conduct asking why I was yelling in the middle of the street. I began to explain saying “the man in the pick up truck” and he silenced me, he began lecturing me, he started with the statement that “he saw the whole thing.”




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


4. ((On (9-8-88) at about 6:45 am. I had received a written warning from the Warminster police department about this very issue.


1. Because I attempted to help a stalled motorist.


1. The light had cycled several times before I finally got the opportunity to make this turn.


2. The officer saw me get out of my truck to help.


3. The officer didn’t write me a citation of violation.




2. I was informed that I made an illegal turn against the traffic control signal because my vehicle didn’t break the curb line of the intersection.


1. Even though I was well past the stop line.


2. This led me to believe that indeed I was in the middle of the intersection.


3. Of course if I had pulled the truck beyond the curb line as the officer intends then the large vehicle wouldn’t have been able to complete the turn without having to back up or run over the curb and sidewalk when exiting the turn.




3. In this matter I was instructed to contact my congressman to enact legislation in regards to the stop line.))








5. After Detective Floyd introduced himself and had some words with me.


1. Officer Ritter pulled up,


2. and then Officer Fox


3. They greeted Detective Floyd


4. The officers looked over the scene


5. I was asked for my driver’s I.D.


6. Detective Floyd then apologized to the other two officers for having to have them come out and fill out the accident report, since the accident was a non-reportable one. He said, “I could have done this myself.”


1. Based on Detective Floyd’s conversation, he seemed to think at the time that there might have been more damage to the cars than there was.


2. Detective Floyd then spoke of a meeting he was trying to get to.


1. That may explain his impatience to, get past the accident scene and myself without introducing himself first as a police officer.


3. Then Detective Floyd asked why it was that if I wasn’t involved in the accident that I was stopped here on the highway? Why wasn’t I on my way? Didn’t I have work to do? Why is this truck sitting here blocking traffic? What is this man doing here?



7. Thankfully, one of the officers spoke in response to say exactly what I was thinking in answer to his question, “He is a witness”. I gave the officer a very confirming look.


1. I was flabbergasted; I couldn’t believe an officer of the law was asking such a question.


2. I believe that Officer Fox was writing up my license information at the time.


3. I believe Officer Ritter was close by.






6. At this point officer Ritter took me off to the side to question me about what happened. I tried to hold our conversation as quickly as possible, and immediately identified a visual obstruction. A few more steps closer to the side walk or even on the sidewalk and I could have pointed to that which we were about to discuss.




1. I started walking over to the sidewalk where we would have a better view.


2. I was trying to explain to Officer Ritter that I saw we did not have a clear view of the intersection. I knew what I wanted to show him and possibly where we could stand to see this.


1. Officer Ritter asked me to come back to where he was standing


2. This was in the middle of the parking lot.


1. I was definitely and normally upset.




3. This created a question and answer session that I was trying to avoid, over the details of the intersection that could not be visualized.


4. I answered the rest of Officer Ritter’s questions to the best of my ability.


5. I asked Officer Ritter some questions in return.


1. Confirming that it was better to move the vehicles out of the intersection?


1. He said yes.


2. Was it Penn Dot’s responsibility to mark the intersection?


1. He said yes.


3. Who notifies Penn Dot when there is something obviously unsafe?


1. He said it was up to the public, not the police department


4. I suggested that maybe by pressing this issue a good alternative might be to stop all truck traffic through this intersection.


1. I was relieved that at least in his opinion, that wasn’t really a practical solution.




6. While Officer Ritter and I were discussing the problems I saw with the intersection, we witnessed a ten-wheeler traveling south on County Line Rd. making a right turn onto west Reliance Rd., and having to drive his right- side tires over the curb because of a car that was ½ car length over the white line.


1. After observing this, I made the comment, “That sounded really bad for the sidewalls of that driver’s tires,” and how that can cause premature tire failure. It also causes economic mayhem to the consumer.




7. Officer Ritter and I had moved to where I wanted him to see what the problem was when the truck had the issue of getting through his turn, his vehicle was much smaller than the one that I operate.


8. I was trying to explain the problem to Officer Ritter when he was called away and told to go on another police call.







7. After talking with Officer Ritter, and officer Ritter had left then Detective Floyd came over and lectured me for a third time.


1. He commented to me how maybe we should just stop trucks from coming through these streets.


1. That was a classic response I was surprised to hear him make. He made this remark with the typical discrimination toward trucks and their operators that I see and hear from motorist on a regular basis.


2. He explained how he felt my behavior was inappropriate. He talked about shouting in the street, making the Company look bad, etc.


1. To this I said that my conduct might have appeared egregious.


3. He then told me that his Dad was a truck driver.


4. Then he walked away, asking pardon, to go to his meeting, from officer Fox.






8. After being left to myself, I walked to Officer Fox.


1. I asked if they were finished with me so that I could get back to work, and the truck on it’s way


2. He seemed pleased at the suggestion, and affirmed that they were finished with me.

|<-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:

• What happened in District Court


• 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. Introduction and the main body of work
2. My Self
3. Indexing and Organizing My Writings and Posts

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

What happened in County Court a letter to the religious

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

WhatHappened in County Court 1-03-2002

1. As you know I needed some real help and support! We can add my name as another "innocent victim" to be punished by our corrupt judicial system. You would think that after the events of 9-11 people would show signs of moral conscience. Instead of morality we had more perjury. But this time we were given an even more significant twist (read the list below 1-13).



2. As a man that has attended the last two Promise Keeper rally's, I went the Distance and I tried to Turn the Tide. Why? Because I believed that I was called to do so by divine interpretation of Christian values. (From reading the Bible and interacting with other Christians and listening to wonderfully presented ministries; and oh, how each person was so in touch with the very situation I was going through).



3. On cross examination, I spoke of being a Christian and that early in my life I made a decision to not use profanity in public. (Ever since this event, I don't think that I ever want to speak another profane word for eternity!) I used to take pride that when I pulled up on to an obscene job site suddenly, with rare exceptions the level of profanity went down. This was not because I ever said anything to make people aware that they were cursing around me, I didn't encourage others to curse and this caused the type of language used to come up out of the gutter. Now you notice I don't say I have never cursed, and I might have even joined in once in a while in private, just to show I wasn't a prude or maybe because I let my guard down. But absolutely if I didn't want to curse I could make a conscious decision not to, and that is what I did! At the scene of the accident there were definitely moments where I needed to make a conscious decision not to curse.
   My resolve was fortified by the incident 13 years ago, when I received a written warning and was told to enact legislation for stop lines to be considered the starting point of an intersection. I carried with me a desire for vindication and to expose the absurdity of the officer back then to interfere with my duties. He threaten me with a citation, after watching me sit out a traffic light 3 times due to the stalled motorist in front of me. Of course his reasoning to give me a warning (and not a citation) was because he saw me get out of my truck to help the stalled motorist. I really wish I could have stated everything just like that in court. I was able to mention about the warning but it wasn't followed up.
   On 1-4-02 as I was working, (and I don't know if it was better that I didn't have a radio with me but I did forget to bring it along today.) I was struck with a very profound thought. What does it mean to me not to use profanity? And, why do I feel this way? It seems to me this issue might just be the very start of perversion in our justice system. The issue that each and every Christian must come to grips with, is just how convicted are we not to use profanity or swear or curse? God forgive me for being weak in the court room and not standing convicted to just describe the type of language used. I was forced into actually testifying about the profanity that was yelled at me. In trying to come to a proper understanding of the situation that I was just put into and how to respond in a Christian manner I failed to be firm. The issue was that if I didn't repeat the profanity I'm sure that I was being threatened with contempt of court. It frightened me to have that thought, implied by the prosecution. If I have to testify that way again I might very well find myself in contempt of court. Because, as of today it has been written on my heart that I will not speak in that manner any more. I showed, righteous indignation at the scene, I was opposed to that type of language. And then I compromised my very own religious beliefs in court. I wish I could have had more back bone, but that wasn't the issue or precedent that I was after, I can't fix everything in one shot can I? But resisting on religious beliefs is how we stand up for Christ!
   Why didn't my Lawyer generate the petition for all the people that were so surprised to hear that I was charged with using profanity like I asked him to! You see these people (employees, former employees, employers, former employers and customers) told me that they would sign a petition to the fact that no one can remember making profane outbursts or using profanity.
   Now knocked off balance, I became ripe to be plucked, I felt compromised and that I was taken advantage of. Then the prosecutor wanted a yes or no answer to this question; "did I then calm down after the detective identified himself"? I answered the question stating that I was not upset the whole time. I started to explain and I was cut short. Upset with my answer he then expanded upon his question stating that I just testified to calming down after the detective identified himself. I saw where the prosecutor was going with his line of questioning, and I knew that he had a foot in the door to convict me for perjury. By just having my values compromised and being asked to repeat the profanity in court, I was caught off guard with misrepresented facts, I was questioned to a fact when I answered a question in general, (a statement as testified to by others was somewhat true,but not entirely) it was a very minor detail and now it was going to be used as a fact from which I could be considered a liar. (I want the transcript.)


4. As closing arguments were given and the time came to make a decision in the matter I was fined another $100 and called a liar twice by the judge.



1. We had a preoccupied judge, his book that he was reading was more important than listening to the facts.


2. My Lawyer really dropped the ball, as far as I am concerned, by not contacting and bringing forth my witnesses.


1. He didn't feel that he needed them.


2. He didn't feel their testimony would be relevant or substantiated. That would have been acceptable if I only knew of one person at the scene, but we could have had three and a fourth to corroborate that the other officer the conspirator was also known to lie. A fifth person you'll read about latter. And we might even be able to include the prosecutions own witness described in #7. below. (Remember he knows that I was trying to help him.)


3. He didn't study my documents very well and he didn't prepare me for what was to come. Not only that, I had a copy of every document that I gave to him, and they are in Outline form for quick reference. He should have had me use these documents on the stand. The only exception is that even on the Outline's I didn't include the verbatim account of what was yelled at me. When I wrote the Outline many months ago I knew the profanity didn't have to be repeated.


1. When I was forced to testify to the profanity yelled at me as questioned by the prosecutor, my Lawyer never redirected my comment in return to the harassing individual, my retort is proof that I didn't use profanity, it was at this point a moment in time when I was really vulnerable to the use of profanity.


2. Let my words spoken at the scene exonerate me. I believe my words were heard and someone of many should recall what was said. I know exactly what I said, and so does my LORD.






3. My Lawyer explained to me that he really did not want to pursue the perjury, so now I want to take this case to Dick Marsch the D.A. that works in the office of public complaints.


4. My Lawyer must not have understood Mr. Tran's testimony he didn't even explore that comment in #7a.


5. I tried not to say to much, although I am surprised how much I was permitted to say. I am very aware that my testimony could have been objected to for this reason or that. I wanted to be guided, I put my faith in my counselor instead of my LORD!




5. My Lawyer told me he wasn't happy with the judge because the judge didn't even know what my lawyer had objected to?


6. The judge let me be heard for the most part.


7. I don't feel that my lawyer brought out enough details that could have clarified answers to the prosecutions questions, these details would have been substantiated by the testimony of my invisible witnesses (the ones that should have been there).


8. My wife was mad at my lawyer for not even talking to the people willing to testify on my behalf.


9. The prosecutions witnesses;



1. Even though the Vietnamese witness (the man that I tried to help) Mr. Tran was hard to understand;


1. He really did, on the stand speak pretty clearly; that the detective did have opportunity to observe a harassing individual in a truck drive off making and yelling a derogatory comment. (I wonder what the court stenographer got out of his testimony?) and this time he didn't insinuate that I used profanity at all.


2. He did have the events out of order, and some of the events were misconstrued (as in they didn't happen that way).


3. He gave the very testimony my star witness was to give. (wait until I get a chance to view the transcript.)





2. I wonder if Mrs. Allsop still considers my being provoked by that harassing individual as "road rage" or "self defense" as it really was.


1. Why didn't my Lawyer recall Mrs. Allsop to question her about this if he understood we had an opportunity here as well.





3. I can forgive these people for their misrepresentation of facts after nine months, but I was definitely insulted and disappointed when the detective couldn't or wouldn't tell the truth.


.

10. The testimony of the detective started out truthful and then he went into the lies. And we had no proof in the courtroom of his flagrant misconduct (not that it couldn't be proved).
    One point to be made is that upon being recalled to testify the detective testified earlier that he didn't allow me to speak, he told me to calm down and be quiet at the seen as he was introducing himself. On this cross examination a key point brought out was that I didn't discuss with him about, and identifing the man that crossed the stop line. Now how if I was told to be quiet could I have identified a missgiving of another individual? As the detective took control and he knew everything he released the individual from the scene.


1. The head dressing that he was wearing was a really interesting touch, self applied with wires sticking out the top.


2. The judge and the detective had a giggle as they talked about his attire and the judge called the detective a cone head.


3. The strange part about this is I made up a signature that said, "When the Rafters Rock and the Timbers Shake, I would stand firm on my God's Grace". (It seems that the detective has been suffering from tremors.) Isn't that strange?(And how about those two earthquakes earlier this morning?)


4. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that his tremors were just a ploy.


5. I wonder where his buddy was? The officer that perjured himself in District Court.


6. I wish we could have had the fifth witness, the one that told me about the detective's reprimand in his court case. That is where the judge supposedly wrote the reprimand into the case file for his lying to her! He was caught in the past not long ago. I should have been able to access this fact from the court document. (Not having to rely on or convince someone who really doesn't want to put his statement as fact in court against the "Police". This is where our system is so corrupt. It protects the guilty and punishes the innocent and sometimes the innocent victim. What is this case really, VOCATIONAL PROFILING! I am GUILTY! because I drive a truck, and I claim Christ as my Savior.





11. When I asked my Lawyer about those civil liberties that were violated, he tried to tell me that I came to him with those ideas. The civil liberty violations were the basis for which he told me; "I should immediately go and appeal this case".


12. Now that this case has been heard, my obligation to my Lawyer should be finished. Even though I still have questions and if any one cares about or if they would please consider explaining to me and help me understand how First Amendment rights and Wm. Penn's 1681 New Years Eve speech or prayer could have been used to effectively bring about a moral understanding to the judge. Or even how my civil liberties were violated. Maybe I could give guidance to other individuals if anyone should ever get into a similar situation.


13. My Lawyer tried to patronize me with the fact that the world needs more individuals like myself. He said, don't be to down trodden.


14. ***12. I realized that this still could be used to glorify God's Kingdom, and that he is sovereign. And then I received a phone call from one of the members of our Church staff who was very encouraging and supportive as I explained what had happened.


1. This person explained that I now know how Paul felt and after writing this document I really see what they mean.


2. I graciously accepted that point of view and explained that my favorite verse comes from I Peter 1:3-16, I definitely feel as though I am being refined. I feel the rough edges being made smooth.




15. One of the things that I realized after it was all over was that detective Floyd, when telling the truth, contradicted the testimony of his own witnesses. (I would really like a copy of that court transcript!)


1. Mrs. Allsop said the detective pulled up and spoke with me in the middle of the intersection.


2. Mr. Tran testified that the detective had me move my vehicle.


3. But then the detective testified similarly to my version that he came up to me after I moved the Truck off to the side of the road and upon exiting my vehicle and seeing me having some kind of dispute with some other individual.



4. In the first courtroom the judge mentioned that he didn't have any video evidence of what had happened.


1. Three weeks prior to this incident I was inside of a camera store looking for a video camera to mount inside my truck to document some of the outrageous things people in society do to us the servants of our society. (I would like to pilot a program to show just what I am talking about.)


2. The men driving those big vehicles are our servants, and they definitely get trodden upon. I am a servant for man and also HIS Kingdom. Look at it this way if you were a truck driver, before you get behind the wheel you will be automatically guilty if anything happens around you. You will be cursed at, you will be interfered with, cut off, passed, cut in front of, and pulled over by the police to be inspected, make one mistake and you will probably be cited. You will be required to handle the vehicle beyond the limits of physics, including stopping and starting and turning and not enough clearance in all directions, (front, side, back, up and down) it is easy to be a Christian but not when you are a professional driver. It is really no wonder why the accidents that occur on our highways do, many times it is just inches from disaster. The mariners got it right, maritime law stipulates that the larger vessel has the right of way. Consider slowing down, being courteous and leaving extra room, for a person going from here to there, with the materials we all need.





5. I lost; an entire summer of my life due to these charges, I almost lost my job, the stress I put on my poor family, my bank account is diminished, and I am seriously disillusioned about our judicial system more so now than ever before. Everything that I was to believe this country stood for and all of the victimization I received in my past, the trials preparing me for this moment. And how many times I was punished then, for being the victim and still this hour it continues. Wouldn't I have been better off just to give in to the desires of the world, to just give the hood of the detectives car a really good kick or two. It probably would have been a lot less painful and a lot less expensive than to stand up for what I believed was right. I am almost sorry I wrote this but isn't there some real truth here?



6. In the end I give this all over to God and his workers, my intent if I would have won I would have only kept 50%. The other 50% I was to give to many different ministries. But this is God's problem and I completely wash my hands of it, I only want to work for his kingdom. If I need to testify in truth I would. But I have no intention of taking this matter any further on my own. Will there be a book forth coming I don't know It has been quite an adventure. I can't believe how the songs and the ministries of WBYN can touch so deeply the chords of my heart. They truly are inspirational and life changing, affirming and equipping. I also want to Thank the ministering staff of my Church, and the Congregation those that suffered through my testimony, and those that didn't even know what I have been going through these past 9 months. Last Easter set a series of events in motion we just can't imagine how the LORD can use each and every one of us. I wondered what gifts did I really have, I am not certain but I feel there is a revival coming like we have never seen before, can you see it? Let's ask the restaurant owner who was jailed, because the police Chiefs hamburger was not made correctly?

After reading about this entire mess, I want you to consider HOW MANY PEOPLE could be won into the Kingdom of Christ, through the knowledge and fear of his awesome power. For if you do not fear the LORD you will TREMBLE! Think about that.

In his service, calling all people to know our LORD AND SAVIOR (This is a cry by a lamb, from the wilderness!)

Revive us Oh, LORD


Blessed be our LORD!
Keep Looking Up!
For; When the mountain trembles,
when the Rafters rock,
and the Timbers shake,
we will be able to stand firm on God's Grace.

Thank You,

Gary L



|<-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:

• 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. What happened in District Court
2. My Self
3. Indexing and Organizing My Writings and Posts

The Transcript

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS IN AND FOR
THE COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY, PENNSYLVANIA

CRIMINAL DIVISION




COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA NO. 4630-01

vs.
GARY J LANDIS



SUMMARY APPEAL


Courtroom 6
Thursday, January 3, 2002
Commencing at 2:00 p.m.

Paula Meszaros,
Official Court Reporter
Montgomery County Courthouse
Norristown, Pennsylvania


BEFORE: THE HONORABLE LAWRENCE A. BROWN, JUDGE


COUNSEL APPEARED AS FOLLOWS:

REEVE SWAINSTON, ESQUIRE
Assistant District Attorney
for the Commonwealth

L. BRUCE HOFFMAN, ESQUIRE
for the Defendant




Date: Clerk of Courts:

la
INDEX


COMMONWEALTH’ S EVIDENCE
Witness Direct Cross Redir Re c

Carol Allsop 3 12 --



Mike Dran 20 27 --


Randolph Scott Floyd 29 45 --

DEFENDANT’ S EVIDENCE
Gary James Landis 54 61 69



COMMONWEALTH’S REBUTTAL EVIDENCE

Randolph Scott Floyd 71 71




EXHIBITS

COMMONWEALTH’ S

Number Marked Rec’ d



C-1 Citation 31 45



C-2 Polaroid Photograph 44 45
2


(The proceedings were commencecd
with the Court, Reeve Swainston, Esquire, L. Bruce Hoffman, Esquire, and the defendant being present.

MR. SWAINSTON: Your Honor, we

are ready. This is going to be a hearing. We have three witnesses to offer for our case. They are
Officer Floyd, Mr. Dran and Miss Allsop. They are all here today and we are ready to proceed.

THE COURT: Very good.

MR. HOFFMAN: Your Honor,
respectfully, since there’s two civilian witnesses, I would respectfully request sequestration.

THE COURT: Very good.

MR. SWAINSTON: I would ask for
mutual sequestration. I don’t know if there are any defense witnesses, but if there are --

MR. HOFFMAN: There’s no
defense witnesses.

MR. SWAINSTON: -- I would ask
for sequestration.

THE COURT: All right. It is
granted.


MR. SWAINSTON: All right.





3


CAROL ALLSOP - DIRECT

(The prospective witnesses

left the courtroom.)

COMMONWEALTH’ S EVIDENCE

MR. SWAINSTON: I will start
with Carol Allsop.

CAROL ALLSOP, having been duly
sworn, was examined and testified as follows:

MR. SWAINSTON: May I proceed,
Your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes.

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MR. SWAINSTON:

Q. Good afternoon.

A. Good afternoon.

Q. I want to direct your attention to April 19th.
2001, that’s a Thursday. Do you remember that day?

A. Yes, I do very well.

Q. At about 4:40 in the late afternoon, were you
in the area of Main and Reliance in Telford
Borough?


A. Yes, I was.

Q. All right. Were you driving an automobile?


4



CAROL ALLSOP - DIRECT

A. Yes, I was.
Q. What kind of automobile were you driving?
A. A 2001 Impala.
Q. Okay. And did there come an occasion at that intersection on that date at approximately than time that you came in contact with somebody that you see here in the courtroom today?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you identify that person?
A. Mr. Landis.

MR. SWAINSTON: Indicating the
defendant, Your Honor, by name and pointed finger.
MR. HOFFMAN: So stipulated, if that’s necessary.

BY MR. SWAINSTON:
Q. Ma’am, what happened on that day that brings you to court today?
A. It was late in the afternoon; and with the rush hour traffic, Mr. Landis was driving a concrete truck with the concrete blocks on it, not the mixer type. He was in front of me at the light.

Q. Was he directly in front of you?
A. Yes, he was directly in front of me.






5

CAROL ALLSOP - DIRECT



Q. Were you -- let’s take it one step at a time.

A. Yes.

Q. Were you stopped

A. Yes.

Q. -- behind him?
A. At the red light.
Q. Okay.
A. There was a red light and we were stopped at the red light.
I was directly behind him.
Q. All right.
A. When the light turned green, he proceeded to make a right-hand turn onto County Line Road
and because of the traffic he could not make his right-hand turn. He stopped and I stopped.
Q. You said it was rush hour traffic?
A. It was busy.
Q. So there was a lot of traffic at that time?
A. Yes, it was busy.
Q. What were the weather conditions?

A. It was a fine -- it was a nice rain-free afternoon.
Q. Sunny, clear?
A. Yes.
Q. The road was not wet?

6


CAROL ALLSOP -- DIRECT


A. No.
Q. What happened then when he was trying to make that right-hand turn?
A. Well, the gentleman behind me completely not attached to what happened here at all bumped into my bumper - -
Q. Who - -

A. - - which was completely separate.
Q. Who was that?
A. Mr. Dram.
Q. Okay. Is he here today?
A. Yes, he is here today.
Q. He is the other gentleman?
A. The other gentleman, yes.
Q. Okay.
A. And that was completely - - I got out of my car. I went back to Mr. Dran’s car to make sure was okay. He had a small child with him. Again, separate to what happened.

Q. So just so we are clear - -
A. Yes.
Q. - - what happened between you and Mr. Dram, you are saying that was separate - -
A. Right.








7


CAROL ALLSOP - DIRECT


Q. - - from why you are here today?

A. To why I am here today.
Q. Okay.
A. Mr. Landis, when I had turned back to do thac it was just a few seconds was in the intersection.
Q. You were out in your car at this point?
A. Yes, I was out of my car. He was using
obscene language with the car that was on the other side of the road to him.
Q. Let’s paint a picture for the Court.
A. Yes.
Q. Sorry to interrupt you.
A. That’s okay.
Q. Let’s paint a picture for the Court for a
minute. Where was the defendant? Was he still in the truck?
A. He was out of his truck standing in the middle of the road.
Q. Okay.
A. Was the light green or red at that point?

MR. HOFFMAN: Objection. Which
light?
THE WITNESS: Well, the light
at


8


CAROL ALLSOP -- DIRECT

THE COURT: Wait a minute.
What’s the objection?
MR. HOFFMAN: I don’t know
which light we are talking about?
THE WITNESS: The traffic
light.
MR. SWAINSTON: The traffic
light - -
THE COURT: At the
intersection.
MR. SWAINSTON: - - at the
intersection.

THE COURT: Overruled.

THE WITNESS: I couldn’t tell you if it was green or red when I turned, because by that time it probably changed several times. The traffic was stopped because his truck was there and he was standing in the middle of the road.

BY MR. SWAINSTON:
Q. Well, let’s establish a time frame then. How much time passed between the time that the defendant went in to the intersection and you observed him out of the truck after you bumped by Mr. Dran?







9


CAROL ALLSOP - DIRECT


A. Less than a minute.
Q. Okay. Now, you described the defendant in the intersection. Tell His Honor what you saw the defendant doing?
A. He was speaking obscenely, gesturing obscenely. Road rage was what came to my mind when I was observing this in the middle of the intersection. Traffic was being held up. He was clearly out of control and then - -
Q. Did you talk to him? Did you address him?
A. No, did not talk to him at all.
Q. Why not?
A. He - - actually, I take that back. He did come
up to me and at one point just to make sure that
everybody was okay. Then I backed right off
because he was out of control. It was unsafe.
Officer Floyd, who I did not
know was Officer Floyd at the time, was coming
through the intersection going straight through,
also asked Mr. Landis to please be quiet and to get
out of the middle of the intersection which he
would not do. And then he pulled - - Officer Floyd

pulled in front of the truck and got out of his

car, showed his badge at which point I was very
10

CAROL ALLSOP - - DIRECT

relieved to see there was actually a police officer
in the right place at the right time. I had my
cell phone. I was about to call the police and
Officer Floyd took care of that and called for other officers.

Q. Now, you mentioned that the defendant was engaging in some conduct you said was
obscene. Do you remember specifically anything about that conduct?

A. He was using obscene language. He was waving his arms around.
He was just obviously - -

Q. Do you know who if anyone - -
A. Ranting and raving are the words that come to my mind.
Q. Do you know who, if anyone, that was directed towards?
A. Everybody and anybody who was in the intersection at the time.

Q. Was there any traffic coming the other direction?

A. Not while he was standing in the middle of the road. There was traffic to come, but it couldn’t get by until - - because, A, his truck was trying to get around the corner this way. It was stuck; and



11

CAROL ALLSOP - DIRECT

if anybody had tried to go through the intersection, they would have risked hitting him.

Q. Okay. Was any traffic able to get through the intersection while he was in the middle of the intersection?
A. Not until Officer Floyd had him pull his truck clear of the intersection and park it on the side of the road.
Q. Okay. Did anything else occur after the officer showed up regarding the defendant, that you recall?
A. Yes, Officer Floyd asked him to be quiet and it took him three times and he finally did say, sir, if you are not quiet, that he would have him arrested; and he finally stopped.

Q. At any time did you see Officer Floyd use any kind of language
A. No.

Q. - - that you described - -
A. None whatsoever.


Q. - - that the defendant used?

A. None whatsoever.

Q. Would you describe the demeanor of Officer Floyd?


12


CAROL ALLSOP - - CROSS

A. Very professional, very courteous, very much in command on what was going on. He did what he had to do.

Q. Okay.

MR. SWAINSTON: I have nothing

further.

THE COURT: Cross-examine.

MR. HOFFMAN: Thank you, Sir.

CROSS -EXAMINATION

BY MR. HOFFMAN:
Q. Good afternoon, ma’am?
A. Good afternoon.
Q. As I understand it, there was a fairly large truck trying to make a right-hand turn that was in front of you; is that correct?
A. That’s correct.
Q. And he could not navigate the turn for what reason. Do you know?
A. Because of the size of his vehicle and the traffic that was on the road at the time. It was busy time in the afternoon.
Q. Well, was there something that was preventing his truck - - I mean, why did he not complete the turn? Was there something that prevented it that




13


CAROL ALLSOP - - CROSS

you were aware of?
A. I did not have a clear view of what prevented him because I was behind him.

Q. All right.
A. The traffic in general - -

Q. All right.
A. - - prevented him from making his right-hand turn.

Q. So as a consequence, you came to a stop and the vehicle behind you did not and it struck you, struck the rear of your vehicle?
A. Correct.

Q. All right. At that point, is that when Mr. Landis got out of his vehicle?
A. I got out of my vehicle and he got out whet I turned back he was out of his vehicle, yes.

Q. Okay. So you don’t know exactly when he got out of the vehicle?
A. The same time I got out would be fair to say.

Q. Okay. And was he walking toward you or away from you? Where was he going when he got out of his vehicle?
A. He was in the intersection. The fact that I got bumped had nothing to do with what we are here
14
CAROL ALLSOP - - CROSS
for.

Q. Okay. I am not asking about that.
A. Okay.

Q. All I asked you was was he walking away from you or toward - - or back toward where your vehicle was when he got out of his vehicle?
A. He was in the intersection. He was standing in the intersection.

Q. He was standing there?
A. He was in the intersection.

Q. And you said that he was obscene?
A. Yes.

Q. What was he saying? I am - - this Mr. Landis?
A. The exact terminology at this time I could not relate exactly word for word. He was using obscene language. He was - -
Q. Well, what language was he using, is what I at trying to get at?
A. Fuck you, God dam, et cetera, et cetera.
Q. And who was he saying that to?
A. There was a car parked - - there was a car in the intersection that he was - - as I said to the
District Attorney representative, anybody and everybody who happened to be standing there.



15
CAROL ALLSOP - - CROSS

Q. Were there other people standing there?
A. Well, the crowd that draws attention, what have you.

Q. He was yelling
A. He was out of control. He was ranting and raving and just anybody who is in a fit of temper is just going to rant and rave.

Q. And this all happened within less than a minute, is that what you said on direct examination?
A. The attorney had asked me how quickly it started happening, yes, within less than a minute.

Q. And there was a crowd that gathered within less than a minute?
A. You know, people standing around, people going home, it is a very busy intersection.

Q. Okay. But I mean, was he angry at you?
A. He was just angry at the situation.

Q. Okay. He didn’t come up to you and ask you if you were okay?
A. Very briefly, yes.

Q. Okay. And he was concerned about the driver of the other car, whether that driver was okay?
A. I would not say so.





16
CAROL ALLSOP - - CROSS
Q. Didn’t he ask if everybody was okay, that’s what he was asking you?
A. Yes, I think he said everybody okay.

Q. So he was concerned about that?
A. Yeah.

Q. And he was ranting and raving and cursing at whom? I seriously don’t understand.
A. To the situation. To everybody else that he was angry because he could not get his truck around. He was angry at the whole situation.

Q. Okay.
A. What had happened with my car and the other gentleman’s car.

Q. I understand, that’s clear. J Know if he do you know if he thought perhaps that another vehicle hit his vehicle, also?

MR. SWAINSTON: Objection.

MR. HOFFMAN: Does she know,
that’s all I am asking.

THE COURT: All right.
Overruled.

THE WITNESS: I don’t know if
he did but I certainly - - he was not hit.

BY MR. HOFFMAN:
17
CAROL ALLSOP - - CROSS
Q. Well, so he was not directing any anger or obscenity toward you?
A. Yes, by being there and making you feel afraid to be in a situation.

Q. Officer Floyd came upon the scene. Were ther any other officers on the scene before Officer Floyd came upon the scene?
A. No.

Q. How did Officer - - is it Detective Floyd, I’m sorry?
A. Yes.

Q. I’m sorry. How did Detective Floyd come upon the scene?
I mean, in what manner, did he drive upon the scene?
A. Yes.

Q. Okay. Was he in a marked vehicle or unmarked vehicle?
A. An unmarked vehicle.

Q. Was he in uniform or not in uniform?
A. He was dressed the way he is now.

Q. Okay. When he came upon the scene, where did he come from? I mean, what direction, on what road?

A. He was on County Line Road proceeding south.
18
CAROL ALLSOP - CROSS

Q. Okay.
A. I think that goes north, south.

Q. Okay. And is that where Mr. Landis was standing?
A. Yes.

Q. Where did his vehicle come to a stop with reference to where Mr. Landis was standing?
A. In the middle he proceeded into the intersection and then Mr. Landis came up to his car.

Q. When his car came to a stop, that is Detective Floyd’s car came to a stop, how far was it from Mr. Landis?
A. Mr. Landis walked up to his car when Detective Floyd

Q. I appreciate that that’s what you are trying to tell me. I am asking you, though, when Detective Floyd’s car stopped moving, where was Mr. Landis? How far away from it was Mr. Landis?
A. A foot, a couple of feet, maybe more.

Q. All right. That’s what I am asking. When Detective Floyd came up to within a foot or two of Mr. Landis, did he arrive quickly or did he come up very slowly in his vehicle?







19
CAROL ALLSOP - CROSS


A. Cautiously.

Q. Okay. I understand cautiously, meaning he was being careful. But his speed, did he just coast
or did he come upon the scene quickly because there was a scene?
A. He had been stopped at the red light and he had proceeded into the intersection.

Q. He proceeded into the intersection?
A. Just up to him. He could not go anywhere else.

Q. Okay. And he came within a foot or two of him?
A. He came up to ask Mr. Landis to please - -

Q. Well, you did not know that until he - - you did not know he was even a police officer, did you,
when he came upon the scene?
A. No, not at that time.

Q. Okay. And do you know if Mr. Landis knew he was a police officer when he came upon the
scene within a foot or two from him in the vehicle?
A. No, I do not know if he knew that.

MR. HOFFMAN: Thank you, maam.
I have nothing further.

MR. SWAINSTON: No redirect,


20
MIKE DRAN - DIRECT
Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. That ‘s
all.

(Witness excused.)


MR. SWAINSTON: Mr. Dran,
briefly.

MIKE DRAN, after having been
first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:


DIRECT EXAMINATION
MR. SWAINSTON: May I proceed,
Your Honor.

THE COURT: Yes.

BY MR. SWAINSTON:
Q. Good afternoon, sir.
A. Yes.
Q. Do you understand me? Do you speak English well now?
A. A little bit.
Q. Okay. What language do you speak?
A. Vietnamese.
Q. Vietnamese?




21
MIKE DRAN - DIRECT

A. Yes.
Q. Will you understand me if I speak slowly?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. If you don’t understand me, tell me.
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Do you understand that - - and if anyone
asks you questions in this room and you don’t
understand, make sure you tell that person. Okay?
A. Yes.

Q. All right. I am going to direct your
attention back to April of 2001. Do you remember that month?
A. Yes.
Q. And specifically on April 19th, were you involved in a car accident?
A. Yes.

Q. Okay. Was that car accident with Miss Allsop, the woman in court right here? (Indicating.)
A. Yes.

Q. Were you alone in your car or with anyone else?
A. My car?

Q. Yes
A. Yes



22
MIKE DRAN - DIRECT

Q. Did you have anyone else in your car?
A. My daughter.
Q. How old is your daughter?
A. Maybe one year and six months like that.
Q. Okay. So eighteen months old?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you at the intersection of Main and
Reliance in Telford Township?
A. From - -

Q. From Township Line?
A. Yes.
Q. Sir, do you recognize anyone other than Miss Allsop in the courtroom from that intersection on that day, that you see here in the courtroom?

MR. HOFFMAN: Your Honor, I
will stipulate my client was there that day.

MR. SWAINSTON: Very well.
BY MR. SWAINSTON:
Q. Did you see that man right there?
A. Yes.

Q. At the intersection?
A. Yes.

Q. Can you try and tell the Judge what happened?
A. From that day, I had my daughter - - my work in



23
MIKE DRAN DIRECT

a company and from him, truck driver.

Q. He is a truck driver.
A. He had indicated right.

Q. Indicating a right-hand turn?
A. Yes. And him get on to turn on and her behind a truck and behind her.
Q. You hit her?
A. Yes. Let’s him stop it and for her stop, and I behind and hit from - - for her in the back from her car.
Q. Okay. Can you tell the Judge what he did, if
anything
A. Yes.
Q. - - brings you to court today?
A. Oh, I heard him and have an accident and for
him to come in.
Q. The officer?
A. Yes, him come in and him tell him to move the car in the parking lot. And for him tell the guy move the car and the truck go on the side.
Q. Let’s take it slowly. You saw the detective
A. Yes.

Q. - - tell him to move?
24
MIKE DRAN DIRECT

A. Move the truck, go on the side and
Q. To go away you said?
A. No. Him say for her to move the car in the
parking lot.

Q. In the parking lot?
A. Yes. From him and move her car, move her
truck on the side.

Q. Okay.
A. You know.
Q. When he said move - - listen to, when the Detective said to Mr. Landis move - -
A. Yes
Q. - - what did you see him do? What did he do?
A. He was mad. Him say to - -
Q. He was mad?
A. Yes. Him say that guy, who are you.
Q. To the detective?
A. Yes. And him say, him a police at Telford and
him say where your I.D.
Q. Stop. He said, I’m a police officer from
Tel ford?
A. Yes.
Q. And he said where is your I.D.?
A. Yes.




25
MIKE DRAN DIRECT

Q. What happened then?
A. And him to in a wallet from I.D. from
police
Q. Indicating the detective holding a badge?
A. Yes. And him flipping from from the

Q. Indicating putting it in the breast pocket?
A. Okay.
Q. And then what did he do?


A. To him?
Q. Yes.
A. And him get have a fight with some people
on the other side
Q. Who was having a fight?
A. Him.
Q. The defendant?
A. Yes.
Q. With people on the side?
A. Yes, some people had to stop.
Q. How many people?
A. I think ten cars, something like that.
Q. Ten?
A. Ten cars had stopped, you know what I mean,
and long lines. Some people move it.
Q. Was he out was he walking?




26
MIKE DRAN DIRECT

A. Yes. Him move, go out of the truck. Him walking and talk a lot.

MR. HOFFMAN: Your Honor, I will object. I know that there’s a difficulty but I am going to object to the leading nature of the questions.

THE COURT: I will give him
some lead way. Go ahead.

BY MR. SWAINSTON:

Q. So he was walking by those cars?

A. Him out of the car and the back of the truck and him fighting
Q. And fighting with him?
A. Yes. And fighting with some people half stuck in car.
Q. Okay. Were those other people in their car
A. Yes.
Q. or out of the car?
A. In the car.
Q. They were in the car
A. Yes.
Q. still.
Do you remember anything that the defendant said?


27
MIKE DRAM DIRECT

A. One car go away him say you, you, you, you. Him yell and the truck and the guy stuck the car. Have him move it and him follow you. You, you, like that. Him yell at a guy driving.
Q. Okay. Thank you.
A. Excuse me, and after that, a couple of weeks and him call my house a lot of time. He say him a witness from my accident or something like that.
Q. The defendant was calling you at your house?
A. Him call my house a lot of time.
Q. A lot of times?
A. Yes. Him call say him had a witness from my accident for her, something like that.
Q. Okay. Thank you. This man right here is going to ask you some questions.
A. Yes.

CROSS -EXAMINATION

BY MR. HOFFMAN:

Q. Was he trying to help at the accident scene?
MR. SWAINSTON: Objection.
THE COURT: Overruled.
THE WITNESS: Excuse me?
BY MR. HOFFMAN:

Q. Was he concerned? Was he worried about you



28
MIKE DRAN - - CROSS

and about Mrs. Allsop at accident scene?

A. I don’t understand what you talking.
Q. The cars that were lined up on the other street
A. Yes.
Q. - - were they preventing him from turning his truck, from finishing his turn? Were they in the way?
A. I don’t understand.
MR. HOFFMAN: I have nothing
further, Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. Step
down.

MR. SWAINSTON: Sir, thank you
very much for coming in. Sorry it was so difficult

(Witness excused.)


MR. SWAINSTON: I call

Detective Floyd, please.



RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD, after
having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:




29
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - DIRECT

MR. SWAINSTON: May I, Your

Honor.

THE COURT: Yes.

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MR. SWAINSTON:

Q. Detective Floyd, good afternoon.
A. Good afternoon.
Q. Sir, I am going to ask you a few questions regarding this matter involving this defendant. Were you on duty as a police officer in Telford on the date of April 19, 2001?
A. Yes, I was.
Q. And you were actually a detective; is that correct?
A. Yes, I was. In fact, at that time, I was on my way home from work, but I take my borough car home with me and I am technically on duty until I arrive at home.
Q. Well, in any event, you are a sworn police officer in Telford?
A. Yes, I am.
Q. Did you have your badge with you?
A. I had it with me, yes.
Q. Were you in civilian clothes?





30
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - DIRECT

A. I was dressed very similar to what I am today.
Q. As a detective, so you were not in police uni form?
A. No.
Q. Did you have occasion to come in contact with the defendant on that day?
A. Yes.
Q. That was late in the afternoon sometime after
4:30?
A. About twenty of 4:00 or twenty of 5:00.
Q. That was at what intersection?
A. The intersection of Main Street and Reliance Road. Main Street just for some clarification in this case is often referred to as County Line Road because it is the divider between Bucks and Montgomery County. This was in the Montgomery County side.

Q. So it was in Montgomery County?
A. Yes.

Q. Did you have occasion to issue a citation to the defendant?
A. Yes, I did, I filed it.

Q. And what was that citation for, specifically the charge?












31
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - DIRECT

A. Disorderly conduct for all four subsections of the violation.
Q. All right. Do you have that citation with you in your case folder?

A. Yes. I believe you have my copy.
Q. All right.
MR. SWAINSTON: May I approach,
Your Honor.
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. SWAINSTON: Can I have this
marked has C-1.

(Citation, marked as Commonwealth’s Exhibit C-1, for identification.)
BY MR. SWAINSTON:
Q. Sir, I will hand you what purports to be the citation for disorderly conduct. I have marked that as Commonwealth’s Exhibit-1. Do you recognize that?
A. Yes. That’s this copy, Xerox copy of my citation I issued to Gary Landis.

Q. All right. And would you describe to the Court, you can read from the citation if there’s no objection, what it is that you cited the defendant for?


32

RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - DIRECT


A. Okay. In that the defendant did with intent to cause public inconvenience and annoyance and alarm, yell and scream, block traffic and cause a disturbance in a public place, and additionally, a the bottom block traffic Main and Reliance during rush hour, yelled and scream belligerently and continued after warning, children and others in the area, alarmed a number of persons.

Q. Now, you issued that citation as a summary; not a misdemeanor disorderly conduct, correct?
A. Yes, that’s correct.

Q. But you said you had warned the defendant. Can you describe to the Court what you did to warn the defendant from this behavior?
A. Yes. I was traveling southbound on Main Street approaching Reliance Road. Our police station is approximately three blocks from that location. I left the police station; and as soon as I left the police station, I observed up in that intersection a very good line of sight that traffic was all backed up and there appeared to be some type of problem at that intersection.

Q. How far away were you?
A. About two or three blocks. As I got closer,











33

RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - DIRECT

it appeared that there may have been a traffic accident. And as I got closer yet, I saw that there was a large orange truck, nice clean truck which I am familiar with the company. It’s a company affiliated with Landis Block Company which is right outside of our town.

Q. Describe that truck and where it was.
A. Initially, when I was further back soon after I pulled cut of the police station that truck was heading east into the intersection from Reliance Road; and then as I approached and arrived on che scene, the truck had pulled right around the come and was on south Main Street, right on the -- riqh on the intersection.

Q. You say right on the intersection -- in the intersection between the two?
A. Just off the intersection, along the street there, but it is a no parking zone and the traffic is very tight there. It was and it worsened the traffic problem. Fortunately, all the traffic in front of me made either right or left-hand turns which enabled me to get up into the intersection. As I was probably a half a block away, I saw Mr. Landis get out of the truck and go down to

















34

RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - DIRECT

Q. You actually saw him exit the vehicle?

A. I saw him get cut of the truck. Immediately saw him enter into an argument or a shouting match with a motorist that was parked in the line of traffic at the traffic light.

Q. Heading what direction in relationship to the t muck?

A. That would have been opposite heading north on Main Street. The traffic was blocked up. I believe Mr. Dran was pretty accurate when he said there was about ten cars there. I believe the car
were backed up, ten to twelve in length. There was a man

Q. What was blocking those ten cars?

A. At that - - on that side of the road, only the red light. However, there was traffic that was blocked up all around due to the truck being parked where it was. It slowed everything down. The southbound traffic did not get through. Northbound traffic was blocked up. Everybody was slowing down to look at what was going on, and the other traffic was also blocked up.

Q. When you came on the scene then, did you feel the need to ask the defendant to move his truck?









35
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - DIRECT

A. Actually, I had to ask the defendant to move himself. He had stepped out into the traffic.
Q. But did you -- did you feel that the truck also needed to be moved?
A. Initially, yes.
Q. Did you express that to the defendant?
A. At some point I believe I did.
Q. But - -
A. I am not positive at which point in the incident it was.
Q. But it was done?
A. It was done, yes.
Q. So prior to getting to that point, though, yet just stated that you asked the defendant himself
to move. Why did you do that?
A. Well, as I mentioned everything, was all blocked up. The traffic was all tied up at the intersection. Mr. Landis was himself blocking traffic standing in the road. Nobody could get through him.
Q. Could you describe what you mean by that? There were vehicles actually getting through intersection?
A. Yes. There is -- going northbound on Main














36

RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - DIRECT

Street it is a straight ahead lane and a left turn lane. He was walking in the left turn lane which kept traffic from being able to pass through if they wanted to make a left-hand turn.

The truck was parked in the southbound side, which is a no parking zone, which only enabled - - well, the northbound traffic would have to move over a little bit in order to let the southbound traffic get passed the truck. He is standing in the intersection - - standing in the roadway, not directly in the intersection, but up further and he is yelling and screaming at a man that was parked in the northbound traffic. They are having a verbal argument. The man was in his car. I was never able to identify that person.

But Mr. Landis is standing in the road at this point facing south, his back towards me, yelling. His arms are in the air, shouting and screaming at this man. He is walking backwards towards where I am coming approaching him.

As I get close to Mr. Landis,

he turns around. I am creeping. I am moving very slow. I am getting up as close as I can.














37

RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - DIRECT

At this point, he turns around and he sees my car there, starts yelling and screaming at me saying, you know, what the fuck, are you trying hit me. And he comes up to my driver’s window. As soon as he approached, he is yelling and screaming.

I said to him, you better knock

it - - I believe my almost exact words were, if you don’t knock it off right now, you will be arrested.

At that point he says, well,

you call the fucking cops, because I want the fucking cops here.

I simply replied, you got one;
and I pulled off to the side of the road.

At that point, Mr. Landis - - I pulled up in front of the truck, up on to the sidewalk as close or up to the sidewalk to not block traffic any worse; and as I am walking up, he approaches me a second time. This is about the time that I meet Mr. Dran and Miss Allsop.
Q. Were you in or out of your vehicle?
A. At this point, I am out.
Q. All right.
A. And Miss Allsop says to me something to the
38

RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - DIRECT

effect - -
MR. HOFFMAN: Objection, Your
Honor, hearsay. She was here to testify.

THE COURT: Is that - - I did
not know it is hearsay.

MR. HOFFMAN: I understand.
would argue it’s just in any event he is on the scene of an accident.

MR. SWAINSTON: It is not

THE COURT: It is not offered
for the truth.

MR. SWAINSTON: - - offered - -

MR. HOFFMAN: All right.

THE COURT: Of course not. Go ahead.
THE WITNESS: She made a statement something to the effect, boy, I’m glad you’re here. I could see in her face and I could see in Mr. Dran’s they were alarmed. They were upset with what was going on.
I could see this is a main intersection, people were stopped, they were looking out of their cars. There’s several residents - - people came out of the residence. It

39
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - DIRECT

drew - - it was a major disturbance.

BY MR. SWAINSTON:

Q. How did they know that you were a police officer?

A. At that time, around that same time I approached and Mr. Landis approached me again and he said, if you are a cop, I want to see some I.D. There’s profanity mixed in with that at which time I was already pulling my wallet - - my badge wallet out from my pocket and pinning my badge on to my coat which displayed - -

Q. Detective, you are an officer you testified before, right?
A. Yes.
Q. You said there’s profanity involved in that conversation. Describe for the Court exactly what he said, if you remember?
A. The exact words I cannot tell you, but the word “fuck” was used many times. Dam, fuck, of course, stood out. There was children in the area.
I got very firm with him. I told him, I am telling you right now, knock it off, or you are going to be arrested. When I meant being arrested, I meant being taken in to actual







40
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - DIRECT

physical custody because of his conduct around everybody.

After he realized that I was a police officer, then he did finally settle down an~ began to vent about the way the traffic patterns are and how difficult it is for him to maneuver truck around the intersection. I simply told him - - I said I lived in that community all of my life. I know how bad the traffic can be, but this is not a time to stand out in the middle of a public place with children and other people using profanity to express your views and that was stated to him.

I told him at the time he was going to be receiving a citation because of his disorderly conduct.

Q. So did you not arrest him on the scene then?

A. No. I could have and I believe his conduct certainly went beyond the summary level. I believe it was definitely misdemeanor level, and I could have taken him into custody and removed his truck. We chose not to do that simply to get the intersection cleared and get him moved on.

MR. HOFFMAN: I am going to








41
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - DIRECT
object to the legal conclusion that the witness is
drawing.
THE COURT: All right.
BY MR. SWAINSTON:
Q. What happened then?
A. All right. At that time, I had my cell phone
with me. I contacted our patrol officers who were on duty. I had them respond. I simply told them was at the scene of an accident. There was a disorderly subject and I needed their assistance right away. They came.

They - - at this time, the
officers arrived almost simultaneously. I learned at that time - - that at the same time the officers - - the patrol officers did that Mr. Landis was not even involved in the accident, that it was solely Mr. Dran and Mrs. Allsop and he had no reason to be there. He was in front of the accident. Simply got out of - - his conduct had nothing to do with the accident. He was just upset about other things.

Q. Would you describe any of the conversations that you had with the defendant? Did the subject ever relate to the welfare of the two individuals







42

RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - - DIRECT

in the accident?

A. Not to me, no. I know from talking to Mrs. Allsop that he asked about them, but there was nothing indicated in my presence.

Q. How many warnings did you give the defendant to cease this behavior?

A. I warned him at the car initially my first contact with him. I warned him a second time and then I warned him at least a third time to settle down and stop being disruptive.

Q. How many other people on the scene whether it be in the vehicles or outside of the vehicles were there?

A. I would guess there’s 15, conservatively stating that there was 15 to 20 vehicles in the intersection from all directions. It was a warm day. The windows were down. There were people who came out of their houses nearby. The parking lot, which is right at that intersection where we stood, the business -- people were in and out of that business. I did note that there were several young teenagers or even younger children who appeared at the intersection drawn to the yelling and screaming that was going on.




43

RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - - DIRECT

In addition to, of course,
Mr. Dran and Mrs. Allsop who were already there am Mr. Dran’s young daughter who were present during the whole incident.

Q. Did the defendant eventually cease that behavior that you described?
A. He quieted down. He did not cease the swearing. I would say he was still agitated, but it was more refined and that he slowed down and then I - - after he was calmed down, I actually left and the other officers appeared at the scene. Mr. Landis left with his truck.

Q. So he was sent on his way - -
A. Yes.

Q. - - and received a summons.
A. Yes. And the summons was sent to him by mail.
Q. You brought pictures, I see?

MR. SWAINSTON: May I approach,
Your Honor.

THE WITNESS: I had prepared exhibits. We had a leak in our evidence vault which made them unusable.
BY MR. SWAINSTON:
Q. And what do these pictures purport to be?

44
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - DIRECT


A. Those Polaroid photographs are simply taken of
the intersection where this incident occurred. This is the intersection of Main Street and
Reliance Road, basically, from all the directions.

Q. Can you pick one of these pictures and pull one out for the Court to get an idea of what the intersection looks like?
A. Probably will depict the best.

MR. SWAINSTON: Can I have thi.s
marked as C—2.

(Polaroid Photograph marked as
Commonwealth’s Exhibit C-2, for identification.)

MR. SWAINSTON: Your Honor, I

don’t believe there’s an objection. I would ask to publish this photo just as a demonstrative aid to the Court. Thank you, Your Honor.

BY MR. SWAINSTON:
Q. Officer, can you describe that photo that the Judge is looking at right now?
A. Yes, that’s this intersection of Main Street and Reliance Road looking from the north to the
south down Main Street. To the right, Your Honor, on that photo where the businesses are located is primarily where the incidents took place.



45

RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - - CROSS

Q. And that photograph depicts a fair and accurate representation - -
A. Yes.

Q. - - of that intersection as it existed on the date in April?
A. Yes, it does.

MR. SWAINSTON: Your Honor, I
would ask for admission of C-1 and C-2.

I have no further questions of
this detective.
MR. HOFFMAN: No objection.
THE COURT: They are admitted.
(Exhibits C-1 and C-2, received into evidence.)

CROSS - - EXAMINATION

BY MR. HOFFMAN:
Q. Officer, do you know what the defendant was upset about?
A. He was upset about he cannot make the turn for truck.
Q. Why could he not make the turn?
A. I don’t know. I believe he told me that somebody was pulled up beyond the turn mark. I didn’t witness that and I certainly believe what he

46

RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - - CROSS

said. It is a problem that happens at most intersections.
Q. Okay. And he drives a large truck?
A. I would say it’s a large truck. It is not a fifty foot trailer.

Q. I don’t mean eighteen wheeler?
A. Yes.

Q. He drives a significant vehicle?
A. Yes.

Q. And did he tell you he has this problem and you say you are aware of this problem?
A. Yes.

Q. Okay. So who -- and there was an accident caused as a result. Is that your understanding as well?
A. There’s an accident at the same time, whether it had, you know, again, I didn’t witness the accident; but from what I learned from Mrs. Allsop and Mr. Dran, yes, he was making - - trying to make the turn and Mr. Dran drove into the car.
Q. Okay.

A. Because she had to stop.
Q. Did you observe him at any time angry with Mrs. Alisop or Mr. Dran?

47
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - CROSS


A. No, not at all.
Q. And who he was waving his arms at or whatever, his activity was related to was the vehicle who was up above that strip?
A. No, that’s not what I observed.

Q. All right. What did you observe?
A. I observed him having an argument with a guy who was about seven, eight, ten cars in the back line of traffic.

Q. Okay.
A. That had nothing to do with him not being able to get around the turn.

Q. All right. So you don’t know what happened - - you don’t know what that was about?
A. With the argument that I witnessed?

Q. Yes.
A. It was just shouting. The man said to him something - - I heard the man in traffic yell something about moving the truck, you are blocking traffic up. At which time he responded by yelling, shouting back to him.

Q. Now, do you know why he stopped his truck and left it there? I am talking about before you arrived on the scene.

48
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - - CROSS

A. Not particularly, no.
Q. Did he tell you that he thought that his vehicle was struck, too, or that he was involved in an accident?
A. He may have said that, I don’t know. I initially thought he was involved in an accident. I didn’t know until later that he wasn’t, so he may have said that, yes.

Q. So it was reasonable to assume that he was involved in an accident on his part and your part?
A. Yes.

Q. And it would be correct not to move your vehicle if you were involved in an accident, would it not, especially a commercial vehicle?
A. He did move the vehicle, though. He did. He moved it around the turn and he parked it where it obstructed the traffic even more.

Q. I mean, removed your vehicle from the scene?
A. (No response.)

Q. In other words, to leave the scene of an accident?
A. Yes. No, that would be improper, certainly.

Q. So if he were involved in an accident or if he thought he was involved in an accident, his




49
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - - CROSS

behavior was not only legal but required, that is to leave the truck there?

A. Yes. But that had nothing to do with the disorderly conduct citation that he was cited for.
Q. I am not - - I’m just asking you this one question now. Would you agree with me that it would be appropriate for him to leave the truck there?
A. If he was in an accident, to stop and move hi2 truck and get out and exchange information, certainly.

Q. All right. So now, you come upon to the scene. He is not even out of his vehicle yet; is that correct?
A. Yes.

Q. You see him get out of the vehicle?
A. I see him get out of the vehicle.

Q. How long of a time elapsed between the time when you saw him get out of his vehicle until you arrived at the scene?
A. I would say it was within a block or two. I was driving probably 30 seconds.

Q. Okay. About 30 seconds?
A. Yes.




50
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - CROSS

Q. So that’s when you saw this behavior going on; is that right?
A. It continued. As I got closer to the intersection, it was going on. So I observed him for probably a minute acting disorderly.

Q. Okay. His back was towards you, as I understand?
A. Yes, it was.

Q. And you drove your car how close to him?
A. I would say I creeped up. I was moving up until about maybe five, eight feet. Then I stopped and he was moving back towards me. In fact, I thought he was going to walk into me. We were close but I saw him walking. I got up as close as I could to the incident without striking him.

Q. Let’s think about this. For whatever reason - - from his point of view, for whatever reason, either he is walking backwards or you are coming forward, there’s that feeling that he is going to be struck by a vehicle, both by him and by you. You were afraid you were going to hit him or he was going to walk into you.
A. No, I was not afraid I was going to hit him.

Q. You were afraid he was going to back up into









51
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - - CROSS

the vehicle?
A. Exactly.

Q. You were that close?
A. He was not paying attention to what he was doing. He was walking towards me. I stopped.

Q. I understand that.
A. And I did not - -

Q. I understand your testimony. I am not trying to say that one way or the other. All I’m trying to say it would be reasonable from his point of view as he turns around and finds out he is within inches of a vehicle to think he was just going to be struck by a vehicle?
A. That’s possible, yes.

Q. Okay. Now, the vehicle is not marked. You have not identified yourself as police officer and there’s no way to identify yourself as a police officer; is that accurate?
A. That’s correct.

Q. He is upset. And you tell him two or three times to quiet down?
A. That’s correct.

Q. Then he quiets down?
A. Right.

52
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - - CROSS

Q. All right. Any further difficulty from him o anything like that?
A. He was agitated the whole entire time. After I finally laid it out for him that if you don’t knock it off right now, I am going to take you into custody. Then he finally settled down. I actually had one of the other officers talk to him while I talked to Mrs. Allsop and Mr. Dran.

Q. Okay. How long would you say - - how long a period of time elapsed from the time you identified yourself as a police officer until the time when, you know, he quieted down, so to speak?
A. A minute.

Q. Okay. So this all took place within a minute’s time?
A. No. That’s not right.

Q. After you identified yourself as a police officer, I mean?
A. Yes.

Q. What was his purpose in being there? I mean, was he - - he is a truck driver, he is on the road all of the time?
A. Right.

Q. And there was a motor vehicle accident which







53
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - - CROSS

may or may not involved him. But in his mind we don’t know that yet. But is he - - there were no other police on the scene?
A. No, not at that time.

Q. And he was not wrong for not moving his vehicle from the scene if he was involved in an accident?
A. Right.

MR. HOFFMAN: Nothing further.

Thank you.

MR. SWAINSTON: Thank you.

(Witness excused.)



MR. SWAINSTON: Your Honor, the
Commonwealth has no further evidence. The Commonwealth rests for the purpose of this hearing.

THE COURT: Very well.

MR. HOFFMAN: Your Honor, I
call the defendant to the stand.


DEFENDANT’ S EVIDENCE


GARY LANDIS, after having been
first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
54
GARY LANDIS - - DIRECT
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. HOFFMAN:
Q. Mr. Landis, did you ever use profanity at the scene of this situation?
A. I had a reason not to.
Q. First answer me if you ever did?
A. No, I did not.
Q. And why would you - - why did you not - - what reason did you have not to?
A. Thirteen years ago I received a warning for making a stop line violation. The officer observed me sit a traffic light out three times.
MR. SWAINSTON: Your Honor, I
will object to this. Anything regarding anything that happened three 13 years ago I don’t believe is relevant to what happened on April 19th of last year.

BY MR. HOFFMAN:
Q. My question is: You said you did not use profanity at the scene?
A. I did not.

Q. Tell us if that’s -- this - - you stated you did not use profanity at the scene. I ask you why?
How do you know that?



55
GARY LANDIS -- DIRECT
A. I wanted to be a witness to this accident.
Q. Mr. Landis, is there any way you would have used profanity at the scene of this accident?
A. I’m not a perfect person. I could but not in this instance. I am a Christian. I made a promise to myself not to use profanity in public.

Q. Okay. You were trying to make a right - hand turn. What prevented you from making a right -hand turn?
A. A vehicle that crossed the stop line in front of me, I had to wait for him to back up.

Q. Okay. So your vehicle came to a stop and there was a motor vehicle accident. Did you feel you were involved in the accident?
A. I thought I was struck from behind, the car was so close behind me.

Q. So what, if anything, did you do at that point?
A. I wanted to testify as a witness that the man who crossed the stop line caused the accident.

Q. Okay. The man who crossed the stop sign which was not Mrs. Allsop or not Mr. Van Dran; is that correct?
A. No. This was another individual who was







56
GARY LANDIS - - DIRECT

approaching a red light and failed to stop in an appropriate place at the intersection for the large vehicle to clear the turn.

Q. Okay. So he was the man that was preventing you from completing your turn. Was that man still at the scene?
A. Yes, he was. I asserted myself to have him stay at the scene.

Q. All right. That’s the person who you were in contact with or talking to when the detective came upon the scene?
A. No. The detective had to be further back. He may have observed me talking to that individual. I had still not moved my truck off from the scene off to park it to the side of the road. At that point nobody was there.

Q. All right. So you were in your own mind involved in a motor vehicle accident. There was a vehicle that you -- a driver of a vehicle who you felt was a probable cause involved in this accident and you wanted to get that man’s identity?
A. Yes, I did.

Q. Your back is to the approaching traffic including the detective?








57

GARY LANDIS - - DIRECT

A. After I cleared the intersection with my vehicle to allow traffic to move past, I exited my vehicle to go back and help the individual who I just asserted to stay at the scene. I was walking in that direction when from over my shoulder I heard harassment and profanity coming in my direction.

Q. From whom?
A. This was the vehicle - - it would be the third car in line. We had the man that crossed the stop line, we had another vehicle in between and there was this guy in this pickup truck who I recognized to have cursed at me on another occasion.

Q. And he was the one yelling and cursing?
A. Again.

Q. At you?
A. Yes.

Q. Because - -
A. And the man that crossed the stop line who was not moving his vehicle because I told him to stay put until the authorities so that he could exchange information with the people who just had the accident.

Q. What happens next?



58

GARY LANDIS - DIRECT

A. Well, when I heard the profanity and the harassment coming from in my direction, I took a couple of steps back in the middle of the road; and from my firefighter training, I recognized that if I stayed close to the cars I would be a hazard. Somebody could try and slide by between the truck and the traffic. I took two steps back to get in the center of the traffic, so that I wouldn’t be a threatened.
So I turned to the individual and I yelled at him, so that he would stop yelling at me and the other people.

Q. All right. And Detective Floyd’s car comes from where?
A. He comes from behind me. At this time I had my back towards the direction of traffic.

Q. That’s what I am trying to get to. And did you recognize Detective Floyd as police officer?
A. Not at all.

Q. What did you think rightly or wrongly was going to happen when Detective Floyd’s vehicle was approaching you from the back?
A. I thought Detective Floyd was another motoris that was trying to get through and was interfered














59
GARY LANDIS - - DIRECT

with in his progress of day to day routine. As a truck driver, I suffer harassment from that direction many times.

Q. Okay. And when Officer - - Detective Floyd identified himself as a police officer, what, if anything, did you do?
A. That was awhile later. When Officer Floyd first pulled up on the scene and he drove his car up behind me, I had only put my foot back to turn around as a pivot maneuver not to walk backwards; and when the lady in between - - the guy that was harassing him for profanity and the guy that was crossing this stop line, she warned me about Officer Floyd’s approach.

Q. Like watch out?
A. Yeah, hey, watch out.

Q. All right. And so what, if anything, did you do at that point?
A. Well, I turned around and squared up on Officer Floyd’s car to realize that he was so close I could kneel on his bumper.

Q. You had been walking backwards?
A. Not at all. I just pivoted.

Q. When Officer - - when Detective Floyd





60


GARY LANDIS - - DIRECT



identified himself as a police officer, did you stop talking to him as though he was an outsider on the scene?

A. Well, he didn’t offer himself as a police officer. In fact, I wasn’t - - I calmed down and I cooperated with him immediately once I saw his badge. He offered his badge and he offered it to everybody else and nobody wanted to see his badge.
I said, yes, I want to see the badge. I didn’t use profanity then. I asked to see his badge because I couldn’t believe that he was a police officer when he approached me. He never used his four ways, his headlights, his horns, the things that professional drivers is supposed to do when approaching a situation.


Q. What was your intention, the intention of you activities on the scene?

A. I wanted to remain on the scene. I wanted to

be a witness to the guy. I wanted to give a statement to the police and get on my way.

I just wanted to tell him, hey, the guy that crossed the stop line I felt he was the primary

cause of how this accident enveloped, that the state needs to move those lines back a

little further and then



61
GARY LANDIS - - CROSS

they need to enforce people staying behind those lines.

Q. Okay.
A. I had the intersection cleared if everybody would have parked where they were supposed to. I would have been able to get that particular truck through the intersection. It is tight.

Q. How long have you been driving a truck?
A. Fifteen years.

MR. HOFFMAN: I have nothing
further.

CROSS - - EXAMINATION

BY MR. SWAINSTON:

Q. Mr. Landis, you testified just a few moments ago, it’s fresh in my memory, I will ask you abouE that first. You testified a few moments ago that as soon as you saw Detective Floyd’s badge you calmed down; is that correct?
A. I was calm with anybody who was calm with me.

Q. Just answer my question. You testified a few minutes ago that as soon as you saw Detective Floyd’s badge you calmed down?
A. I would say I was calm even before I saw Detective Floyd’s badge.
62
GARY LANDIS - - CROSS

Q. That’s not my question and we will try it one more time.
You testified a few moments ago when your lawyer asked you the question as soon as you saw Detective Floyd’s badge, you testified in front of His Honor that you calmed down, correct or not correct? We can read it back.
A. Yes, I was upset, and - - but I was calm.

Q. All right.
A. Even at the scene, Detective Floyd - - when he offered his badge, I had already calmed down. It wasn’t a matter that I was out of control the whole time. There was only two people that I was assertive with.

Q. I understand that. But I am just talking about what you testified to a few minutes ago. We will move on now. Is that okay?
A. Yes.

Q. Now, when you testified just a few moment ago that after you saw his badge you calmed down. What did you calm down from?
A. I was upset from hearing the profanity from the individual who was harassing me.

Q. That’s the guy in the pickup truck, right?






63
GARY LANDIS - - CROSS

A. And also from Detective Floyd yelling at me for almost walking backwards into his car and wondering why I was standing in the middle of the street yelling.

Q. Okay. You did not testify on direct that Detective Floyd used any profanity to you, did you.
A. I never said Detective Floyd used profanity.

Q. But you were upset because you say you had two people yelling at you?
A. Detective Floyd and the individual in the pickup truck.

Q. Let’s talk about the guy in the pickup truck for a minute. You said that that guy used some profanity at you. He did use some profanity at you, right?
A. He used all kinds of profanity, yes.

Q. Tell us what he said.
A. Said that I was to tell the - - I don’t like t use profanity, sir.

Q. Now, this is a court of law, sir? You will have to tell us what he told you if I ask you that question, so tell us what he told you?
A. He said tell the fucking old guy to get his car moving. Tell that guy to get out of the









64

GARY LANDIS - - CROSS
intersection. Tell that fucking old man to go.
Q. Okay. And who was he referring to? You?
A. He was referring to the man that crossed the stop line that I told to stay put?

Q. That’s the guy who you were concerned about causing that accident or who you - -
A. Correct.

Q. - - thought might have caused that accident, correct?
A. Correct.

Q. And that individual was driving what kind of car? Do you recall?
A. I believe it was a Lincoln.

Q. Did that man use any profanity at you?
A. No, he didn’t.

Q. No. But you were upset with him because you thought he caused an accident?
A. Yes, I was.

Q. And, in fact, you were upset with him because you thought that he caused an accident that you were involved in, correct? Because at this point you did not know you were not involved in the accident?

A. That’s correct.
65


GARY LANDIS - - CROSS



Q. You testified that you thought that Detective Floyd - - his demeanor in telling you to stop or get out of the intersection or whatever it was he said, you said that you felt he was suffering from the same kind of interference, the day-to-day interference that people suffer on daily routine? Is that what you testified to or something like that?


A. I have noticed that in my 15 years of driving a truck, that people are getting more and more irate with large vehicles that seem to be in their way.


Q. Okay. And you testified that after that, after you - - after you showed a concern for the interruption of Detective Floyd’s day-to-day routine, you testified that as a driver of a truck of 15 years that you are used to having your day-to-day routine interfered with by other drivers; is that correct?


A. Me, personally, I just go out there and drive. I am - - whether I am used to it or it is what I get paid to do, drive safely and slowly.


Q. Well, once again, that’s not the question that I asked you. I asked you you testified earlier


66
GARY LANDIS - - CROSS

that as a truck driver of 15 years you are used to your day-to-day routine being interrupted by other drivers, correct or not correct?

MR. HOFFMAN: Your Honor, I
think that’s a mischaracterization of what he said.

THE COURT: Let him say so.

MR. HOFFMAN: All right.

THE WITNESS: But it works - - he can say that. I can say that is true because the guy that crossed the stop line in front of me it is a commonplace occurrence where I have to stop the truck and wait for people to back up.

BY MR. SWAINSTON:
Q. So that guy interrupted your day-to-day routine on that particular day, correct, on April 19th?
A. That’s the fourth or fifth time that day.

Q. Fourth or fifth time that day, that very day?
A. Not by that same individual, but by other motorists.

Q. You must have been frustrated by that point, this was the fourth or fifth time your day-to-day routine had been interrupted by other drivers?
A. But that doesn’t mean I am going to blow my
67
GARY LANDIS - - CROSS

top and use profanity when I don’t normally use profanity.

Q. And you don’t use profanity, if I am correct, because on this particular day you testified that you had a reason not to; is that correct? You testified that you had a reason not to?
A. Yes, that’s correct.

Q. Okay. And you testified that you are not a perfect person, correct?
A. I’m not.

Q. And when we were talking about the use of profanity you said, I’m not a perfect person and that you are a Christian? Is that what you testified to?
A. That’s correct.

Q. Okay. And is it because you are a Christian, Mr. Landis, that you choose not to use profanity?
A. It was a decision I made as a child a long time ago.

Q. As a child.
A. I have lived up to that promise to myself and everybody at work will tell you I don’t curse and they never heard me curse. In fact, my previous employers would tell you that. Previous people








68
GARY LANDIS - - CROSS

that I have worked with. It is rare to hear me curse.
Q. I’m sure it is. I am sure it is rare. But on this particular day, you were upset, weren’t you?
A. Not so much with the incident. I wanted to be a witness to what had happened because of the incident that happened 13 years ago.

Q. And as a Christian, have you also promised yourself to tell the truth?
A. I do tell the truth, yes.

Q. Do you think or do you want this Court to believe that the two witnesses that were called to testify about the events that took place lied to the Court?
A. The two witnesses, which two?

Q. We’re talking about Mr. Dran and Miss Allsop, the two witnesses right here?
A. I would say that some of their testimony was misconstrued.

Q. Okay. So when they testified that you used words like fuck, dam, et cetera that they were lying?
A. They may have been confused by the profanity heard from the other person. They testified they












69
GARY LANDIS - - CROSS/REDIRECT

first heard me - - that I first got out of the truck and had the interaction with the person in the pickup truck.
Q. That’s not my question. They testified and they pointed to you and they used your name and they said that you used those words. Are they lying or are they not?
A. They are lying.
Q. Do you know them?
A. No, I don’t.
Q. Have you ever met them before?
A. No.

MR. SWAINSTON: I have nothing
further.

THE COURT: Any redirect?

MR. HOFFMAN: Yes, sir.

REDIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MR. HOFFMAN:

Q. Mr. Landis, you are saying they are intentionally telling an untruth or you use the word misconstrued before or mistake?
A. I believe they are making an honest mistake. Mr. Dran never said that I used profanity here. Mrs. Allsop did, but Mr. Floyd, that’s a different story.

70

RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - - DIRECT/REBUTTAL



Q. All right.

MR. HOFFMAN: I have nothing
further, sir.
THE COURT: What’s a different story?
THE WITNESS: The way he talks about my profanity. I think he is deliberately telling a lie.
THE COURT: All right. Step down.

(Witness excused.)

MR. SWAINSTON: Your Honor, I
have one question of Detective Floyd on redirect.

THE COURT: All right. This is in the nature of rebuttal?

MR. SWAINSTON: Yes, Your
Honor, on rebuttal.

COMMONWEALTH’S REBUTTAL EVIDENCE



RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD, having
been duly sworn previously, recalled for further testimony, was examined and testified as follows:



71

RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - - DIRECT/REBUTTAL

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MR. SWAINSTON:

Q. Detective Floyd, after all of this conduct took place after you instructed the defendant to calm down, after you identified yourself as a detective, did the defendant ever express any concern whatsoever with the other driver that he talked about on his direct testimony with his attorney?

A. He said there was a problem with the guy crossing the stop line, never indicated that the guy had stopped there at the scene. I had never seen anybody. He never pointed anybody out to me, no, whatsoever.

Q. Did he have an opportunity to do so?
A. Certainly. I was standing there talking to him. And, you know, he had more than plenty of opportunity to tell me that there’s never anybody pointed out or indicated to me at all.

MR. SWAINSTON: Thank you.

Nothing further.

CROSS -EXAMINATION

BY MR. HOFFMAN:

Q. Well, Detective, how did you become aware he

72
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - - CROSS/REBUTTAL

was concerned about this fellow who crossed the stop sign?

A. After he calmed down a little bit, he started to tell me about the problems with the stop line and all of this and the problems that he has all of the time driving, people crossing the stop line.

Q. All right.

A. That’s when I told him -- as I testified earlier, I told him that’s fine. I have problems with the traffic, too. But you can’t stand out in the middle of Main Street at rush hour and make a spectacle of yourself over it.

Q. But you said he had an opportunity to talk to you about this guy that had done this or in his mind caused this accident?

A. Yes, yes. In fact, he talked to two other officers as well.

Q. So he was talking to everybody about it.

A. No, no, no. I am saying he had the opportunity to tell them more. There was nobody -he did not say to me the guy in that Lincoln Town Car there is the guy who caused this accident. There was nobody ever identified.

Q. Was that car still there? Do you know?
73
RANDOLPH SCOTT FLOYD - - CROSS/REBUTTAL

A. I didn’t see a car, and he didn’t say anything. This is the first I learned that it was even a Lincoln.

Q. All right. But he did discuss it with you at the scene; and to your knowledge, he did discuss it with other officers at the scene?

A. Not specifically. Only that somebody had crossed the line and that’s what he was upset about.

MR. HOFFMAN: Nothing further,
sir.
THE COURT: All right.

(Witness excused.)


THE COURT: Do you want to say
anything in closing?

(Closing argument by
Mr. Hoffman.)
(Closing argument by
Mr. Swainston.)
THE COURT: What’s the maximum
fine here?
MR. SWAINSTON: Three hundred
dollars.

74




THE COURT: The Court finds the Commonwealth has established beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant, Gary James Landis, committed the crime of summary offense rather disorderly conduct by engaging in tumultuous behavior making unreasonable noise, using obscene language and he created a hazardous or offensive condition by his acts on that occasion. He is sentenced to pay a fine of three hundred dollars and costs.



(At 3:25 p.m., the proceedings
were concluded.)

























75


CERTIFICATION





I hereby certify that the proceedings and evidence are contained fully and accurately in the notes taken by me in the above cause and that this is a correct transcript of che same.






Paula D. Meszaros
Official Court Reporter





Received and directed to be filed this


day of 2002.




THE HONORABLE LAWRENCE A. BROWN


Back To:

1. My Self
2. My online book
3. Indexing and Organizing My Writings and Posts