ROB BRAYSHAW PREVAILS IN EPIC BATTLEAGAINST TALLAHASSEE POLICE: LEGALITY OFRATEMYCOP.COM POSTINGS AFFIRMEDPOLITICIANS RESPONDED BY ATTEMPTING TOSUBVERT THE CONSTITUTION IN VIOLATIONS The opinions in this article are based upon Rob Brayshaw and his supporter’s withoutfootnotes to this situation as they have all displayed or given as their own opinions. CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH TRUMPS GOVERNMENT OBSESSION WITH SECRECY Federal Judge upholds Citizen’s Constitutional Right to post public information pertaining to Florida Police on the Web Tallahassee, June. 2010 (AN EDITORIAL)-- A website posting on Ratemycop.com contained vast quantities of “allegedly” personal public information regarding police officer Annette Pickett Garrett in Florida State. This posting can remain on the Internet after Federal Judge Richard Smoak upheld the legality of the posting on the Ratemycop.com website under the 1st Amendment. For the Third Time in Court Rulings, Rob Brayshaw, a Tallahassee Citizen, has emerged victorious from a groundless though very well-funded attack mounted by the City of Tallahassee and State Of Florida against him. In fact, this Run-Away Tallahassee Government Wasted Over $100,000.00 in the Tax Payers Money for two false criminal charges and defense of their use of an Unconstitutional 1972 Statute of 843.17. It was Unconstitutional, Outdated and A Relic! Two False Criminal Charges of “publishing an address” were dismissed in a one year period during May 2008-April 2009 among three judges, three prosecutors and four public defenders funded by the tax payers that pay these public servants to work for us. This was in the Leon County Kangaroo Court that obviously lacked knowledge of the US Constitution and Bill Of Rights. These Police Officers, Prosecutors and Judges along with their Lap-dogs in Legislature are always hugging, kissing and holding hands while jumping off a cliff together like lemons’ with government obsession of secrecy pertaining to public information. May we remind you that WE LIVE IN THE SUNSHINE STATE WITH OPEN GOVERNMENT FOR THE YEAR 2010 THAT CERTAINLY ISN’T 1972. Infuriated by their inability to defeat Rob Brayshaw in court on false criminal charges, the cops and their cohorts in Tallahassee’s political establishment
actually had the nerve to refile the false charges again after dismissal. Theyoriginally turned to the legislature for revenge against the public in 1972 with thewriting of the Unconstitutional Law 843.17 even at that time. This was before theInternet, Florida Sunshine Laws, and Jury Member Lists of Names and Addresses.Many Supreme Court Cases have obviously existed in 40 years for Free Speechand Free Press Cases that would make the law completely relic and obsolete evenwhen it had unconstitutional First Amendment Flaws as written now in theInternet Era of 2010 since 1972.Joined by police unions from all across Florida State, the police have mounted amassive lobbying campaign to help ram through a future ugly piece of custom-tailored special-interest legislation during the next Legislation in Session inTallahassee.In response to Brayshaw’s High courtroom victory, (and the lobbying of the cops), Florida State is sponsoring future legislation which would subvertthe Constitution, set aside the decision of the court, and establish Secret Police in Florida State.The Tallahassee Police again want to sponsor legislation which would effectivelytransform Florida’s law enforcement officers into shadowy Secret Police.The future bill provision for a new Florida Statute of 843.17 would grant thepolice unconstitutional benefits and special privileges; confer wholesaleimmunity upon them; create exceptionally broad and should have beenpreviously non-existent as rights exclusively for their benefit; and furtherexpand their elite status relative to the common citizenry. None of thesenewly-proposed rights would be afforded to any other citizens. To thecontrary-- each of these so-called rights would decimate vital, historically-consecrated, Constitutionally-protected rights of common citizens.Passage of this unconstitutional bill of Florida Statute 843.17 again would make acomplete mockery of the oath taken by Florida Police and Florida StateLegislators to uphold and defend the US Constitution. Already, a grass-rootsmovement has sprung up by Brayshaw and his sponsors to ensure the defeat ofthis future plan in the making for the next elections in the Florida Legislation todefeat their plans. The Florida Police Benevolent Association stated that theywould try and craft another law for their members since the ruling will stand.Unsuccessfully attempting to defend her assault on the Constitution, AnnetteGarrett along with the Tallahassee Police and State Attorney’s Office of WillieMeggs offered this wholly irrelevant and baseless statement, "You dont have aFirst Amendment right to harass and intimidate." Don’t you work for citizens?
What these individuals pretend not to realize is that Mr. Brayshaw has revealedNO demonstrable intent to harass or intimidate, notwithstanding the subjectiveimpression of the cops. Furthermore, (and this is the crux of the matter), it isindefensible and unconstitutional to create any criminal or civil offense type oflaw which is grounded solely on the unpredictable, irrational, emotional responseof vindictive officers to the completely benign and perfectly legal act of postingon the Internet publicly-available information regarding government employees.Constitutionally prohibited from legally defining Brayshaw’s activity as acriminal offense, they are still attempting an end-run around the 1st Amendmentby inventing a brand-new criminal offense with some other law on the futurebooks. The unconstitutional bill would always allow any hypersensitive cop whoclaimed to “feel intimidated” by the innocuous content of Brayshaw’s posting orany other citizen. They would file unconstitutional criminal charges againstBrayshaw or any other Floridian in complete violation of any Citizen’s FreeSpeech and Free Press by Trampling The First Amendment Of Our Constitution.Tallahassee Police along with the State Attorney’s Office maneuver not onlydefeats the express intent of the 1st Amendment, it neatly strips the suspect ofcrucial Constitutional protections while at the same time permitting a convictionto take place upon a much lower standard of proof. Even any Malicious Intent isnot based upon any “True Threat” based upon Constitutional preponderance notprotected by the First Amendment as already ruled in a Federal Court of Law.For example, the 5th Amendment is applicable only to criminal, not civildefendants. Compounding this disadvantage, the defendant in a civil trial is heldliable if it merely seems more likely than not that the alleged offense wascommitted. On the other hand, guilt on the part of a criminal defendant must beestablished beyond a reasonable doubt (a very difficult standard to meet). Ratherthan the 98-100% certainty of guilt required for a criminal conviction, a civiljudgment only requires 51% certainty. For the False Charges of Rob Brayshaw,there was not even a 50% Probable Cause with the False Arrest Warrantwritten by Michael Edward Dilmore. Anyone could have made the postingfrom a wireless internet service at a home that was protected by the FirstAmendment and “did not constitutionally allow” any investigation by corrupt anddirty cops involved in the investigation which was baseless, weak and deminimus.Annette Garrett and Mike Dilmore (Along with all Tallahassee Officals Involved)despicable subversion of the Constitution left any potential defendants in anextremely weak position-- easy prey for the omnipotent State’s designated pinch-hitters which was based on corruption of the actual facts and unconstitutional.As Americans, we should not be required to care if ANYONE, let alone anycop, feels intimidated or harmed when we engage in Constitutionally-protected activity. If the activity itself is legal, we cannot and should not beheld responsible for anyone else’s subjective high emotional response to our
actions as a citizen. Police Officers certainly need a tougher skin than thepublic citizens considering their line of work for handling what they do.Without question, it is perfectly legal to post publicly-available information on theInternet especially when Officers like Mike Dilmore and Annette Garrett placesuch information in public domain for the world to see with their own websites.Whether or not someone is alarmed or intimidated by that information, in theabsence of any threats, is not the responsibility or concern of the individualposting the information. To hold otherwise is to defy rationality and cede controlof society to the emotional vagaries of specially selected individuals.For all we know, Tallahassee Police Officers Annette Garrett or Mike Dilmore arecraven, sniveling cowards who would break down in tears if they suspected thatyou wrote their name and phone number in a bathroom stall. If Tallahassee’s billpasses, Garrett and Dilmore can arrest you again just for intimidating them andthese officers have less protection (not more than citizens) to the FirstAmendment! They work for us and paid by tax payers dollars as public servants.Another problem with this proposed law is the matter of intent for subjectivethought-policing. Absent a clear statement of intent from the suspect himself, it isCOMPLETELY IMPOSSIBLE to ascertain the motive of anyone who is doingwhat Brayshaw did by merely posting any name, address or phone number asAmerican’s do everyday without any false arrest. Note that Brayshaw has neverissued any threats, nor encouraged his readers to engage in any illegal activities.To the contrary-- he has consistently maintained that the website postingrepresented a joke or an effort to humanize the cops and foster accountabilityamong their ranks by illustrating some of the innumerable characteristics theyshare in common with the rest of society. Under these circumstances, how cananyone who is not privy to Rob Brayshaw’s innermost unexpressed thoughtsdetermine whether the information was being posted in order to encourage policeaccountability, or in order to intimidate the cops? However, intimidation iscertainly not a crime as declared as a matter of Federal Law in Federal Court .What’s more, it’s exceedingly obvious that ANY serious attempt to fosteraccountability with the ranks of police officers will INEVITABLY beinterpreted by the cops as intimidation or police harassment as a matter ofcitizen rights. That being the case, are we required to refrain from all activitieswhich might possibly annoy any police officer, no matter how hypersensitive,hypochondriacal, or paranoid? If Tallahassee’s future bill becomes law, no onewill dare take the risk. Law-abiding citizens will be dissuaded from exercisingtheir 1st Amendment freedoms out of fear that vindictive police officers, slaveringwith eagerness to wield their newly-granted private censorial powers, will slapthem with false state-sanctioned criminal charges or lawsuits for any complaint.
Passage of Tallahassee’s bill will bring us under the nightmarish jurisdiction ofOrwell’s 1984, in which common citizens live in constant, mortal fear of beingaccused of virtually-undefined thought-crimes. As in the novel, it will be nearlyimpossible to mount any possible defense, because no means are available todisprove the charges. What evidence can be used to disprove the allegation that animpermissible thought was contemplated; or an undesired emotion wasengendered in another; or an otherwise acceptable action was undertaken for anunacceptable reason? The presumptions are all in favor of the accuser, while thedefendant faces the futile task of proving a negative. Tallahassee has overthrownthe quintessential American doctrine, and replaced it with a perversion: Guiltyuntil proven innocent especially based on the low and corrupt police standards ofOfficers like Annette Pickett Garrett (Badge #640) and Michael Edward Dilmore(Badge #694) by attempting to use an Unconstitutional Florida Statute that didn’teven apply to the “Constitutionally Protected Actions” of Rob Brayshaw.Neither the City of Tallahassee nor their designated stand-ins should be permittedto punish us for the entirely speculative possibility that we may be harboringimpermissible thoughts or acting upon unacceptable motives that proves nothing.The citizens of Florida should respond to this outrage with a phrase that thesecops themselves have long used as an unofficial motto: This is America, you dirtbags! If you don’t like it, move to China (as they act towards us with no privacy)!Yet another problem with this bill is that it was written specifically to targetBrayshaw or any of the minorities protesting among local government’s wrongfulactions, while deliberately ignoring numerous other entities that engage in activitythat is indistinguishable from Brayshaw. As mentioned in the first article in thisseries, Brayshaw obtained all the information on the website posting from a widevariety of public sources, including internet court files, telephone books, andgovernment records. Additional information could have been obtained fromcommercial information-brokerage firms for a small fee paid available to anyone.However, under Tallahassee’s proposed law, NONE of the Public sources utilizedby Brayshaw in compiling his data for a posting would be exposed to any liabilityor false criminal charges whatsoever. Brayshaw alone would be hung out to dry,despite the fact that his activities are indistinguishable from the activities of theofficially acceptable commercial parties. This outcome conclusively reveals theinherently despicable, arbitrary, and unfair nature of Tallahassee’s special-interestlegislation and self-serving police officers that don’t protect and serve.Fortunately, Brayshaw, vows that he will not acquiesce to the imposition of thisindefensible law. Says Brayshaw, I will challenge that future bill in federalcourt before the ink by the legislation dries if there’s any question ofunconstitutionality. This is with or without the support of the ACLU.
Tallahassee Police Officer Annette Garrett stops at nothing in her frighteningly obsessive efforts to persecute Brayshaw. This all started based upon a petty and baseless trespass investigation while he was working as the property manager.Officer Annette Garrett is the one Officer who’s claims failed suits againstBrayshaw for any criminal charges that were unconstitutional and baseless. Sheoriginally and unsuccessfully sought a false trespassing charge and then also twofalse criminal charges as misdemeanors from Brayshaw in recompense for“alleged damages” caused to her by the website posting of having her name,address and phone number republished as she displayed to the world already.Presumably enraged by Brayshaw’s victory, Garrett was resorted to filing chargesagain in favor of Tallahassee’s Unconstitutional Statute for the second time and itwas even outside of the Speedy Trial Period that had ended four months prior.Annette Garrett basically made this emotional plea to the State Attorney’s Office:"But when I take the uniform off and go home, I should be afforded the sameprivileges and freedoms as everyone else, and have the right to feel safe."Unfortunately, Annette Garrett’s Basic statement is typical of the specious drivelspouted by many police officers. They consistently attempt to portray themselvesas selfless, put-upon martyrs in the service of some noble cause. It’s a transparentploy that fools none but the most gullible, willfully uninformed members ofsociety. Garrett’s false testimony in police reports regarding Rob Brayshawserves as an object lesson regarding the veracity of police testimony in general:nine times out of ten, cops will swear to tell the truth, then lie with well-practicedprofessionalism when they take the witness stand like criminals.In reality, of course, this Unconstitutional Law would not grant police the sameprivileges and freedoms as everyone else. As American citizens, the policeALREADY possess the same privileges and freedoms as everyone else. In fact,the cops already possess many ADDITIONAL privileges and freedoms which areunavailable to anyone else, and which they do not deserve at all because somecops are just plain dirty, dishonest and crooked to watch often on the news and inthe media. The Statute Garrett is lobbying for by using it as a criminal offensewould grant the cops yet another set of unique, undeserved special rights.If Annette Garrett or Mike Dilmore were being truthful when they claim to wantthe same rights and privileges as the rest of us, then of necessity they must eitherbe in favor of granting us additional rights, or of giving up some of their ownheightened rights as police officers. But as everyone knows, they are not in favorof either option- their statements are merely a carefully calculated, dishonest
sound-bite. Clearly, Annette Garrett and Mike Dilmore’s TRUE objective is thecreation of a whole new package of special privileges formulated exclusively forthe cops in violations of the United States Constitution to trample on citizens.Beyond the obvious falsity of Annette Garrett’s primary claim, what are we tomake of Garrett’s pathetic plea that she should have the right to feel safe?Contrary to Garrett’s allegation, there is no such thing as the right to feel safe.For example, none of us feel safe when flying on a commercial passenger plane.And for good reason-- planes frequently crash, killing all their occupants. Asconcerned citizens, what can we do? Our alleged right to feel safe is beingviolated! Surely the airlines are breaking the law? Let’s throw them all in jail-- orsue them, at least!In reality, the airlines are neither culpable nor liable, because they have notcaused any actual harm. You have no right to punish them simply because youdon’t feel safe. Only if they actually cause you harm you can you expect them tobe punished with criminal charges and/or reasonably sued with a civil lawsuit andthat would be with good reason.Similarly, your alleged right to feel safe, is violated every time you drive a car.Driving a car is many times more dangerous than flying, and incalculably moredangerous than being any police officer. Police are great at Propagandas formaking up problems that don’t even exist like an address re-published from thephone books. But there’s no one you can legally sue, and no one is prosecuted,because no harm has been done. It’s dangerous just stepping outside of one’sown house everyday for being hit by a drunken citizen or even a law enforcementofficer like Sheriff David Harvey as an accident. We Citizens in Tallahassee haveunfortunately lost two Great Officers in the last ten years in a decade. SergeantDale Green was killed during a burglary of doing his job. Michael Saunders wasunfortunately killed most recently by a drunk driver. These are two officers thatweren’t chasing addresses “re-published from the phone books”. The publishingof any address of public record is obviously not the weapon deployed in the City.While the deaths of these officers are a major tragedy, two officers lost doesn’tseem very high for numbers in a ten year period for a police department thatemploys over 350 at a time for the public. It would seem that selling AvonProducts would be equally as dangerous if not more dangerous for being out andabout in the City. The Florida Statute of 843.17 for criminal charges werecompletely laughable. However, it’s also scary that these alleged “professionals”that work for the citizens to protect and serve us as thugs with badges.Simply put, there is no law that grants any American the right to feel safe. FloridaStatute 843.17 is a major false sense of security for anyone based on informationall ready all over the place on the internet in a digital world for 2010. This isn’t1972 now when the dumb and poorly written law was written over 40 years ago
that didn’t contain any required threat in the writing of it by the FloridaLegislature making it Unconstitutional.Just for the sake of argument, let’s pretend for a moment that Garrett’s invocationof a right to feel safe wasn’t completely specious. If such a right truly existed,what could we do to secure its fulfillment for Officer Annette Garrett or OfficerMike Dilmore involved in the case for false criminal charges as declared inFederal Court? It actually took three officers to come to court for an address.Perhaps an armed police officer should be assigned to provide them with around-the-clock protection for each of them? Having their address in the phone book isa major threat. It’s been there for years and in the public domain as dangerous.(Of course they deserve such “Special Police” protection as coddled officers,even though it’s unavailable to any other citizens, because they are so Special andNeedy). (They should all be wearing Pink Snuggies as their new uniforms.)How would you feel about that, Mr. Dilmore or Ms. Annette Garrett? Would anarmed police officer help to make you feel safe at home for the re-publishing ofyour address by that of a citizen or even any commercial business?Since that doesn’t exist now, it must be the civil duty of Rob Brayshaw and allother Tallahassee Citizens to do a 24-hour patrol on your home daily. This is toprotect you and your family just because you have your address published in thephone book and on the web that existed solely by your own actions of disclosureto the public. This must put you in major danger with the phone books and otherdirectories while being a cop as a matter of public records in the public domain.Oops, wait a minute.. You ARE an armed police officer! Highly experiencedInvestigators even that should be exposed to run to and protect us as the citizens!And yet even with your guns and equipment, and your allegedly extensivetraining, and your supposedly well-honed instincts, and your virtuallyinstantaneous access to zealous and overwhelming backup and resources, andyour ability to dial 911 in case of emergencies, you still feel unsafe by thepublishing of your home addresses? Don’t people need it to find your address?Then please tell us, Ms. Garrett and Mr. Dilmore, how the rest of us should feel,who frequently have no access to any of your defensive assets. What about OURright to feel safe? Even on juries, you publish and Expose Every Citizen Address.You park our tax payer’s vehicles in your driveways personally markingyourselves as police officers to the public with personal advertising at home.How are we to feel when we see hypocritical and egotistical self-serving copssuch as yourself lobbying for increased restrictions on handgun ownership? How
are we to feel when we must walk through a bad part of town bereft of the abilityto effectively defend ourselves against deadly force? How are we to feel when wedial 911 for assistance and the cops do not show up until at least 45 minutes afterthe violent crime has taken place? How are we to feel when we regularly see copsconvicted of all manner of felonies and violent crimes? How are we to feel whenwe realize that such criminal cops are armed to the teeth, and that we would becompletely at their mercy if you and the police unions have your way? How arewe to feel when a cop like you, secure in the knowledge that he is virtuallyimmune from any accountability, unjustifiably treats us like crap? How are we tofeel when we realize that we have no reasonable and effective recourse for suchofficial mistreatment, not even-- should you and your ilk have your way-- theability to exercise our Constitutional rights under the 1st Amendment? Many ofus citizens don’t have family members nor ourselves are any “Black Belts” in themartial arts like many police officers and their family members.How are we to feel when we realize that YOU, Ms. Garrett and Mr. MikeDilmore, are one of the evil of Nazi types responsible for this unacceptable stateof affairs for attacking the tax payers that pay you that you work for and answerto? You have less legal protections of major criticisms as a public servant as partof your job than any other citizen as a matter of Federal Law and court decisions.Also, When government and law enforcement compiles databases full of ourpersonal information don’t they always tell us citizens that only dishonest peoplehave anything to fear? Practice what you preach! The charges were laughableand it’s even very scary that you call yourselves “professional” police officers thatserve and protect the public. Tallahassee police aren’t living up to high standardsbased upon the death of a drug informant under their own watch and putting anycitizen in jail for the mere re-publishing of an address. Rob Brayshaw is certainlyentitled to his strongly-held opinions regarding the lack of care of TallahasseePolice for their duty as sworn to uphold. Things could be done much better.I’ll tell you how we feel, Dilmore and Garrett. We feel worried, scared, andexceedingly angry. So leave us alone. If you are too scared to be a cop, findyourself another job because the public should have open access to you. Donot persist in these attempts to subvert the Constitution of the United States andtrample the Bill Of Rights to our Citizens.Do Cops Deserve Special Rights in Violation of the First and FourteenthAmendments?IN A PIG’S EYE AS IN UNDER NO CONDITION, NOT AT ALL!Garrett, Dilmore and their ilk must realize that Free Speech is the most legal andleast harmful means of expressing displeasure and dissents. If these despotssucceed in prohibiting Free Speech and Free Press, then those who opposetheir policies and actions may resort to other, less desirable means ofexpressing their discontent which could cause serious problems for them
among the “Real Criminals”. Luckily for you, Rob Brayshaw isn’t acriminal for approaching the situation with complaints and lawsuits for legalavenues as a personal option and civil right. The people that you shouldworry about are the “Real Criminals” that you could have possibly pushedtoo far in your line of work by Trampling their Constitutional Rights withoutany justification like your Unconstitutional Law of Florida Statute 843.17.Rob and Stephanie Brayshaw definitely got pushed by the City OfTallahassee and The State because of the “Connected Network” thattramples the “Supreme Law”. When every avenue of dissent is effectivelycriminalized, the very outraged members of society for whom abjectsubmission to tyranny is not an option will feel little incentive to refrain fromviolence. Just being mad and irate about Illegal, Wrongful and PoorlyHandled Tallahassee Police Officer Actions like the Brayshaw’s Family iscertainly not a crime at all by the citizens. Public Feedback is exactly whatimproves a police officer’s poor and sorry job performances with complaints andlawsuits as the only LEGAL RECOURSE. People have every right to filecomplaints and lawsuits against another that feel legally wronged from and arecompelled to do so. Such patriots are not magically transformed by arbitrary,unconstitutional legislative fiat into spineless marionettes content to swallow theiranger and follow the wrongful dictates of the State. Forget that! Far from it--repression of Free Speech or Free Press will only lead to greater, if temporarilybetter hidden, opposition to these authoritarian, Anti-American fascists.Dissidents, realizing that they will be exposed to punishment no matter how slightand inoffensive their rebellion, will perhaps feel justified in giving violent vent totheir rage, while damning the possible consequences with the police having thelack of a Real Internal Affairs for Human Resources. They really are just ajoke as a cover-up to the Tallahassee cops that don’t do anything unless forced bythe public and the media like in the Rachel Hoffman Case. This is being writtenas a protection to all of us as American Citizens because venting is alwaysimportant to everyone and very harmless. Anyone can be pushed and pushed toofar by City Unlawful, City Injustice.We guess the people who print the phone books should all go to jail forpublishing public information of an address. Oh yes and also the people at thenewspapers who publish the names and addresses of people who are arrested.And of course they are also guilty of publishing the names and addresses ofpeople who are born and die, no permission is granted there either. Oh and thenthere are the lists of people who graduate from school that are printed in thepapers. Did the paper get permission from each of them for every case as requiredpreviously by Florida Statute 843.17 for a name, address or phone number?While some of these things may not get published in the papers for Tallahassee, itdoes happen across the States in America making the cases ridiculous for RobBrayshaw for biased and selective prosecution.
We can only imagine the loss to the Hoffman Family without any justice to them.It doesn’t matter at all that their daughter was a drug dealer when she wasmurdered. She was a Tallahassee Citizen and supposedly sent out by TPDOfficers with $13,000 in cash to buy drugs and a gun from the bigger fishes in thepond in the drug world. This is while under Police Protection and care with theirpersonal responsibility to protect her. The operation was poorly botched and abad operation while other officers with TPD were chasing an address publishingfrom the phone books as legally re-published from public record. TallahasseePolice Officers Annette Garrett and Mike Dilmore had no legal or constitutionalright to investigate “constitutionally protected actions” from an addresspublishing on the internet resulting in false arrest from six weeks prior. In fact,they had no reason as police to step foot on the Brayshaw property consideringsafety is of no concern when the publishing was no longer listed and safety wasnot any issue. You can’t legally prosecute any Free Speech or Free Press unlessit’s a clear threat not based upon merely re-publishing public information that thepublic may need for legal purposes like serving legal process or protest. CertainlyPublic Information republished is not any matter of National Security as it wasn’tClassified and it was certainly legally obtained by the government and privatesources themselves like the Leon County Website and The Phone Directories.Local media refuses to grant proportional coverageto Brayshaw’s victory for the dismissal of criminal charges! Some Media in the cop’s pocket?When the City of Tallahassee announced it had filed false criminal chargesagainst Brayshaw for the second time, the story received extensive coverage inmedia outlets in the local papers and news stations.To judge from the Tallahassee Police media reporting, Brayshaw’s websiteposting was a font of pure evil for the mere “re-publishing of an address” thatwould quickly lead to the complete destruction of Southern Civilization if thepublic knew that police officers had their names, addresses and phone numbers inthe public domain of the phone books as had been for years even on the LeonCounty Court’s own website.True to their reputation as pathetic lap-dogs, NONE of the local mediaoutlets would re-publish the address listed on the website, even after thelegality of the posting was upheld in Federal Court with Honorable Judge RichardSmoak. Rather than allowing their readers to examine the controversy of thepostings on their own by providing the mere publishing of a name, address andphone number from the phone books, the editors manipulated the entire debate bypresenting thinly-veiled one-sided diatribes against Rob Brayshaw. Any Free
Speech Advocate, Professional Attorney or Legal Scholar knew the case was Sillyin violation of the Constitution for First Amendment, Due Process and EqualRight Protections to all citizens simply all over-looked by the Good Ol’ BoyNetwork of Biased and Political Connections of Tallahassee Corruption. Peoplewrite “unauthorized biographies” of people all the time and they don’t have tolike them for their actions like Brayshaw’s major criticism of Garrett andDilmore. Celebrities are in the public eye with their family members and they allhave names, addresses and their phone numbers published if legally obtained andshared from public information on Star Maps.The media bias was even more obvious when Tallahassee’s False CriminalCharges were defeated twice. The meager coverage devoted to Brayshaw’svictory for dismissals of two false criminal charges failed to even vaguelyapproximate the exhaustive coverage accorded to the initial announcement of thefalse suits for criminal charges. Only a single local paper of the TallahasseeDemocrat covered the news of Brayshaw’s defeat of Tallahassee, and they buriedthe one-paragraph story near the bottom of a multi-item Local Digest column. Stay tuned for further developments.If Tallahassee and their coalition of some corrupt cops and politicians succeed insubverting the Constitution again, thereby forcing the legal re-publishing of copsaddresses off the internet by our Citizens, Rob Brayshaw will offer information tooverseas hosts where the content of All Tallahassee Police Officers (Names,Addresses and Phone Numbers) will be duplicated in Dissent for Equal Rights ofthe 1st and 14th Amendments for Political Protest. They should have all theirinformation published because they work for us and do many crimes as well.Any freedom-loving individuals located overseas who are willing to mirror thesenames, addresses and phone numbers of Tallahassee Police Officers shouldcontact Rob Brayshaw. Your assistance is greatly appreciated. These PoliceOfficers are our Public Servants and paid by our Tax Payers Dollars. They needto be held to higher standards than that of the public citizens by having theirnames, addresses and phone numbers re-published for legal reasons as it wasrepublished legally by Rob Brayshaw. Florida has “Florida Sunshine Laws”regarding government activities for how citizen’s tax payer’s money is beingspent and these public officials answer to the citizens.Spending over $100,000 on a case for an address republished from the phonebooks is completely unacceptable to any citizen standard that isn’t biased.The issue of police accountability is certainly political and of legitimatepublic interest. Sheehan, 272 F. Supp. 2d at 1139 n.2, 1145. The publicationof truthful personal information about police officers is linked to the issue ofpolice accountability through aiding in achieving service of process,
researching criminal history of officers, organizing lawful pickets, and otherpeaceful and lawful forms of civic involvement that publicize the issue.These Corrupt Nazi Actions might win the battle, but they will lose the war.They can have their names, addresses and phone numbers published like therest of us with no unconstitutional and illegal protections in Florida. Theinternet can certainly over-ride any illegal objections with publishings inforeign countries ON GOOGLE. What started out as a joke publishing forpolice monitoring the Ratemycop.com website should have been over-looked bythe Florida authorities after removing the “protected posting” that didn’t evenhave legal authority for removal from the web in itself. This is because theyhave No Authority to Trample Constitutional Rights that became Serious Issuesin America as a Matter of Federal Law. This is in which Brayshaw won theultimate federal decision that his actions were “constitutionally protected” bythe First Amendment and no arrest was legally warranted by TPD. Ifpublishing any name, address or phone number was a crime, All Americanswould be criminals. It was really just Vindictive and Petty by Dirty Cops toTarget and Arrest Rob Brayshaw with a Selective Prosecution that wasUnenforceable under any legal terms because they can’t handle the Truth.The Truth is that they aren’t Protecting and Serving and Doing Their Jobs as Paidto Do While the Citizens Fend For Themselves Like Rachel Hoffman.There’s absolutely nothing personal against someone’s family members like MikeDilmore or Annette Garrett or her “Scrappy” the Dog, it’s merely the fact thatsome cops aren’t doing their jobs as a matter of citizen opinion that is certainlyentitled to them as one’s own opinion. (Many People Agree with these opinionsthat aren’t cops or individuals with political ties with the bias of the Blue Walland Code Of Silence.) Making false claims against any citizen of safety issuesand harassments as a police officer for expressing one’s opinions is certainlyridiculous when it costs the public citizens well over $100,000 based uponFALSE CHARGES THAT HAD ABSOLUTELY NO LEGALITY.THERE’S A SERIOUS PROBLEM WHEN ANY AMERICAN HAS TOFILE A FEDERAL LAWSUIT AGAINST THE CITY AND STATE JUSTTO EXPRESS THE LEGALITY OF ONE’S PERSONAL OPINIONS.The First Amendment Protects Anonymity of a Speaker, Major Criticisms ofPublic Officials and the “Re-publishing” of their Public Information that isn’tClassified or any Matter of National Security in the Public Domain Already.It’s only nature just like the Founding Fathers of this Country for dissent of usingAnonymity as speakers or publishers with aliases for major criticisms of theirgovernment as the majority and them being a minority of disfavorable opinionsprotected by the First Amendment.
It makes perfect sense to deny knowledge of any postings when one feels thatthey are being harassed and threatened to their family by “out of control cops”that have no legal authority to the frivolous and petty no-nothing investigation inthe first place. People publish names, addresses and phone numbers everyday andthey don’t have their personal constitutional and civil rights trampled by receivinga home invasion in the morning that has no relevance from an event six weeksago from before then based upon public opinions and public information. Thesethings get shared on the internet everyday by everyone in which police logic is allcitizens are criminals but they don’t all get prosecuted. Take us all out of ourhomes and no one will be paying you! The Brayshaw’s over-paid on their taxesbefore this non-sense because of a tax fraud employer as determined by the IRS.The Two-Month Investigation to a Property Manager doing their job was verypetty, ridiculous and biased just like Officer Annette Garrett involved in this caseas well. Causing a possible five-minute disruption to an apartment for safety andproperty concerns at the same time (unlike this investigation or charges for sixweeks later after a publishing) has no comparison at all. They were not sleepingat the time and they were harassing the tow truck driver that called the managerout of bed and to the property in the first place. They didn’t admit the facts of thecase because the police were called out because of them. Rob was just doing hisjob and looking out for any concerns to the property and the residents as notifiedthat an unknown male ran into the apartment. Under Florida Law 83.53, AProperty Manager can have their personal concerns of the safety of residents andproperty when called at home under the actions. Not the Same as Six WeeksPrior with no safety concern based upon an address “re-published from the phonebooks” for one’s personal opinions to a poorly handled police case. A Two-month false investigation with no criminal charges warrants an Apologyinstead of your Guilty and Take it as a Gift! Only a Judge Or Jury Membercould possibly have any authority for that type of assertion with a trial. It’s notbased upon a police officer’s poorly investigated and poorly written reportsthat didn’t include all witnesses based upon false police reports. Citizens haveevery right to disclose where police live at their home addresses if they haveconcerns of certain police officers that work for the public with their transparencyand accountability of their wrongful actions. There must be a reason why Dickand Andrea Duffy feel the same way as well with a lawsuit in the court systemagainst Officer Annette Garrett with Circuit Judge James Shelfer on the case. It’sbecause she over-steps her power and authority with abuse of the badge whilehaving no legal authority to do so as shown in Federal Court for anUnconstitutional Law. This Unconstitutional law as written didn’t even apply tothe constitutionally protected actions as stated by Federal Judge Richard Smoak.The mere publishing of any name, address or phone number cannot be deemed“malicious enough” without any TRUE THREAT to warrant any criminal chargesto be legally upheld. The “Imaginary Garrett Case” was never there for any legaljustification and it certainly was never there for the second time charged outsideof the speedy trial period in violation of Constitutional Rights to an American
Citizen. We don’t live in Nazi, Germany and Judge Smoak stated this loud andclear in his personal opinion of Federal Ruling.This case was a landmark in America specifically for the few dirty, arrogant,egotistical, hypocritical and self-serving cops in America that feel that theyare above the law with this ridiculous “Us Vs. Them Mentality”. There wasno trace of any computer to anyone specifically which is still speculation basedupon a wireless internet. Even Annette Garrett replied in the internet postingswithout honesty in her police reports about her personal involvements on the web.Generally and as the Majority, Police Officers are loved but they can become theenemy to the citizens that pay them. This is especially when they start harassingcitizens and trampling constitutional rights without any substantial justificationbesides “Good Ol’ Boy Network” which is strictly biased and constitutionalviolations that would never reasonably fly in any Federal Court.It was the Police that should have better handled tax payer’s funds.Attempting to move these types of cases forward absent any true threat iscompletely absurd and ridiculous. Rob Brayshaw is strongly opinionated but hasnever threatened anyone.There is a current Federal Court Case scheduled in August this Summer. HalTurner worked as an FBI Agent previously as a highly-trained governmentemployee with a great record to his country in this line of work. He was arrestedfor publishing federal judges personal information on the internet with maps,home addresses and other information with statements that they “Deserved toDie”. He claims that he is protected by the First Amendment and it was just hisopinion. Anyway, this case is much more serious and questionable than theRob Brayshaw case for Free Speech and Free Press because Rob Brayshawhas never threatened anyone. Brayshaw’s postings were so far apart betweendays and hours that they really couldn’t be combined to other postings for a mereaddress publishing. However, the absolute worst that could have possibly beeninterpreted by any police officer, prosecutor or judge would be Rob Brayshawstating that Annette Garrett is a rude, abusive and unprofessional police officerthat lives at this home address. It would seem that the public does have a right toknow as she works as a public servant and paid by the tax payer’s dollars to workfor us. Her job is to protect and serve the public. That is hardly prosecutablefor any crime for the most extreme interpretation of the matter. This isespecially to warrant two officers (Mike Dilmore and Sonya Bush) coming tosomeone’s home in the morning over one month after the publishing which isobviously of no threat at all but strictly police harassment of Citizens.Several website postings of the JusticeFiles.Org, Whosarat.com and theNuremberg Files seemed much more controversial in nature for free speech andfree press than a mere address publishing. And these sites were all
constitutionally protected among Federal Court Decisions and still on the webtoday.Rob Brayshaw does not intice violence to others or even threaten anyone basedupon a mere address publishing or publishing so-called personal information. Itwasn’t personal or classified when it was obtained based upon the officer sharingit with the public for legal reasons and serving of process.With that being said, Rob Brayshaw doesn’t have any resemblance to the HalTurner Case. The relevance is that Hal Turner has had two mistrials already oncriminal charges for publishing names, home addresses and personal informationabout Federal Judges. This is while he stated that “They deserve to die” on awebsite posting. Rob Brayshaw would never say this in his own opinions foranyone. He feels that he is owed an apology by the City Of Tallahassee and StateOf Florida while wanting to Goad them to action as a legal right as an AmericanCitizen. There is a difference in one’s opinions.However, one has to question this Hal Turner case as any American citizen on thefact that it could be a constitutionally-protected statement as he stated that “theydeserve to die” that he claims to hold as his opinion. Publishing any PublicInformation is not illegal or any crime. In fact, it helps open government fordiscussion and robust debates with legal processes. Giving an opinion is not acrime as long as it’s not a clear and present danger of a threat. The fact is that HalTurner is Innocent until proven Guilty. The Man worked for the FBI with a vastrecord and knowledge of the law that did much good for the country as explainedon the internet. He has already been declared for having two mistrials on thecharges. The majority of jury members have already favored his innocencebased upon the First Amendment on two occasions with the third trialscheduled again with a delay for August. This is certainly a run-awayAmerican Government with the tax payers paying the bills based upon an alleged“Free Speech or Free Press” Crime. It’s completely ridiculous and absurd toprosecute any American Citizen like Rob Brayshaw for their free speech and freepress based upon public information that is legally obtained and shared withpublic opinions about especially public servants. If public servants can’t takecriticisms as they have the least protection from them as ordinary citizens,they need to find another line of work. This is especially when the informationdoesn’t include any possible perception of any reasonable threat from areasonable point of view. This is besides statements of a rude, abusive andunprofessional police officer just abusing their power and authority as a privilegegiven to them. This is to work for the public while shielded by their political tiesand their buddies as the Blue Wall or The Code Of Silence. It would be rare thatanother Officer would report the wrongful actions of another because when oneOfficer looks bad, so does the Whole Department which cover-up is their solutionjust like in the Rachel Hoffman case. Even the bad officers as “spoiled apples”corrupt the good that keep their mouths shut about wrongful actions of their
buddies because it can affect everyone in the Department with fear of retributionsfor speaking out about them. We feel that the Chief Of Police, FDLE and InternalAffairs are basically all working together as one opinion. Their opinion wouldalways be the same unless someone of reasonable authority dislikes a certainOfficer with enough people in power to do so for putting them in their place withdisciplinary measures including dismissals. Many complaints are just sweptunder the carpet with no actions being taken at all as a matter of politics for whoknow’s who with their political connections.The Rob Brayshaw Story is a perfect example of things that the City ofTallahassee and State Of Florida with their Public Officials should not do.They basically all hold hands together with hugging and kissing whilejumping off a cliff as lemons’’ into government secrecies without anyquestions to others of doing so.These are certainly not the leaders that our citizens need in government withtheir “Out of Control” Dictatorships and Trampling upon AmericanConstitutional Rights. They really need to be more diverse instead of sharingthe same brain. Politics and Good Ol’ Boy Government at it’s finest becausethe criminalization of any Mere Address Publishing is contrary to aDemocratic and Free Society.Home Addresses of Public Officials are used every day to serve legal process.When this type of information gets criminalized or censored, it seems likecorruption to the tax payers by government officials paid by the public.It’s every American’s Constitutional Right to write a complaint letter or bookabout someone that includes their names, addresses and phone numbers withpublic officials. This is especially being with no exceptions to the Constitution inwhich the Constitution primarily applies to Government Officials.Tallahassee Citizens, All Americans and Especially Public Officials Paid to DoSo should risk their well-being everyday while exercising their personalConstitutional and Civil rights with their civic responsibility to America to defeatthese types of tyrant actions in violation of the 1st and 14th Amendments in aFederal Ruling By Honorable Federal Judge Richard Smoak.Accepting Free Speech and Free Press that we Deplore as much as we Admire isexactly what Defeats America having a Tyrant Government Regime in Americajust like the one of Nazi, Germany.THE FEDERAL JUDGE MADE THE RIGHT DECISION! Everyone belowFederal Judge Richard Smoak among the Leon County Court did not make theright decisions for trampling constitutional rights with no legal right and that’s a
matter of Federal Law without any arguments with No Appeal. The Case RulingStands and Unappealed.It would be great if Officer’s didn’t abuse their Power and Authority as given tothem as a privilege for working to the public as they need to Protect and Serve thepublic as paid to do. The Police Have the Right to Protect and Serve Citizens astheir First Priority as they claim. And, after that, they need to protect TheConstitutional and Civil Rights of Our Citizens that do pay them.CITIZENS HAVE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND POLICEOFFICERS HAVE PRIVELIGES. PRIVELIGES CAN BE REMOVEDMORE EASILY THAN AMERICAN RIGHTS AS DEFINED IN THEUNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS.THE PRIVELIGE OF FLORIDA STATUTE 843.17 WAS REMOVEDBECAUSE IT WASN’T EVEN USED CORRECTLY AS ANY LAW.WE LIVE IN AMERICA AS STATED BY JUDGE RICHARD SMOAK!WIRED MAGAZINE HAS HAILED THE CASE AS “THE DUMBESTCAES EVER” BECAUSE POLICE DIDN’T HAVE THE RIGHT OF ANYSUBSTANTIAL JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFERE WITH FREE PRESS!