|
Post by mdm on May 11, 2015 12:02:18 GMT -5
Probably many especially since the official word coming from overseers is that 'mangochango' is lying and that "poor Leslie is not in the work because of what seems to be a false allegation." This was said to us by two overseers who were even involved in dealing with other accusations against Leslie prior to the rape allegation. Given this is an open case and charges have not been made it would seem that there is not enough evidence for either side to move forward. What the workers say, what people writing here claim, all the hearsay stories really amount to nothing regarding the case. The only conclusion that can be reached is that we do not know all of the facts for certain and the complete truth is not being told. You are bringing up different aspects of the issue here that I did not address in my post. I'm not sure which one to reply to. But, if you think I am implying that the workers should reach a certain conclusion regarding the veracity of the rape claim, I did not. I was answering Snow's question:
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 11, 2015 14:24:02 GMT -5
Rat, that was a very nasty thing to say. Why do you think you, do not have to show any common decency on this board??? Which was this very nasty thing that you believe I have said?
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 11, 2015 14:39:41 GMT -5
Given this is an open case and charges have not been made it would seem that there is not enough evidence for either side to move forward. What the workers say, what people writing here claim, all the hearsay stories really amount to nothing regarding the case. The only conclusion that can be reached is that we do not know all of the facts for certain and the complete truth is not being told. You are bringing up different aspects of the issue here that I did not address in my post. I'm not sure which one to reply to. But, if you think I am implying that the workers should reach a certain conclusion regarding the veracity of the rape claim, I did not. I was raising the question of why anyone would be commenting or judging the situation given it is an ongoing court case and it would appear that neither side, at this time, thinks they have the facts/data/information to enable them press for a trial which they feel would have an outcome favorable to them. I was speaking to the speculation which certainly does not help the case for the defendant or the state. As to the statement of the overseers - if they have facts to prove their side of the case they should have been in CO long ago doing that.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 11, 2015 14:46:49 GMT -5
Rat, that was a very nasty thing to say. Why do you think you, do not have to show any common decency on this board??? Uh, I think that exchange was meant to be humorous. Rat and matisse are just bugging each other. (I thought it was funny.) Some times, once in a while, occasionally, many times attempts at humor and/or sarcasm slip right by when communicating via text; in a message board, for example. I am sure when marie re-reads the post to quote the very nasty thing I said she too will see that it was a tongue-in-cheek comment and apologize for her comment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2015 15:39:14 GMT -5
Rat, maybe you should remember the thread you are on. I happened to spend a fair amount of time on the phone with the victim of this case, very concerned about the victim. For you to make a joke about being depressed on a thread about someone being raped is just sick in my mind. Remember this is a public thread!!!
I happen to know all about, it's only a joke. Remember I was raised with, and still have 8 brothers!!!
You react how you want, I will react to it.
No, I will not apologize.
|
|
hberry
Senior Member
Posts: 743
|
Post by hberry on May 11, 2015 17:18:46 GMT -5
I am not a supporter of Leslie White. I have never met the man. I do not live in the United States and do not know your law nor the common practice of your law enforcement agencies. So I am interested in response from informed posters of the USA;Rational? Scott? I think either you would likely be able to answer meaningfully! I was quite surprised to see the letter issued by Sgt Heap! Wow I doubt if police in my country would issue such a letter! I'm not sure if they would be allowed to? Amongst other things I notice it mentioned 'criminal acts committed '. I am aware there has been an allegation of a criminal act. How is Sgt Heap able to say there has been criminal acts committed? Does he have proof? Why did he omit to use the word 'alleged'? I don't know your culture and practice there, so it will be interesting to read posts from you who do. Correctly or incorrectly the US has a name in our country for being the place where you can sue another for very insignificant causes. If Leslie White was so minded could he sue this police officer? I don't know you but you guys who live there will. I, (Sgt. J. Heap) would like to make it very clear that this case is still under investigation with Mr. White as the suspect of the criminal acts committed. At no point have I or the Elbert County Sheriff’s Office made any statements regarding the complaint being dropped due to lack of evidence. In fact, Mr. White has been given the opportunity to give his side of the story since the time of discovery of the allegations, however refuses to do so. ..... Did you want him to say "alleged suspect of criminal acts?" Or 'suspect of alleged criminal acts?"
|
|
|
Post by Greg on May 11, 2015 17:28:36 GMT -5
Neither of the two you suggest are correct. LW is a suspect of alleged criminal acts. She wrote that.
|
|
hberry
Senior Member
Posts: 743
|
Post by hberry on May 11, 2015 17:36:49 GMT -5
Neither of the two you suggest are correct. LW is a suspect of alleged criminal acts. She wrote that. Thank you Greg. Apparently I left off the "LW" part.
|
|
hberry
Senior Member
Posts: 743
|
Post by hberry on May 11, 2015 17:39:47 GMT -5
Sorry, you are quite right Greg & H'berry. There is a wide difference in meaning and implication between 'a suspect of criminal acts' and 'suspect of alleged criminal acts ' You are saying that the acts themselves are alleged to be criminal rather than the person is alleged to have committed criminal acts. I see.
|
|
hberry
Senior Member
Posts: 743
|
Post by hberry on May 11, 2015 18:00:57 GMT -5
You are saying that the acts themselves are alleged to be criminal rather than the person is alleged to have committed criminal acts. I see. Hmm no. A building is destroyed by a fire started with petrol. A person is seen fleeing. A criminal act has been committed. There may be a suspect. In this instance I am not aware of there being proof that rape has been committed. I will leave correct legal jargon to the legal folks. However, Wikipedia says: SUSPECT In the law enforcement jargon, a suspect is a known person accused or suspected of committing a crime. Police and reporters in the United States often incorrectly use the word suspect when referring to the perpetrator of the offense (perp in dated US slang). The perpetrator is the robber, assailant, counterfeiter, etc.—the person who actually committed the crime. The distinction between suspect and perpetrator recognizes that the suspect is not known to have committed the offense, while the perpetrator—who may not yet have been suspected of the crime, and is thus not necessarily a suspect—is the one who actually did. The suspect may be a different person from the perpetrator, or there may have been no actual crime, which would mean there is no perpetrator.[1] I think the above, if Wikipedia is correct (and it might not be), would mean a 'suspect' is accused but not proven (as in 'alleged'). I know newspaper reporters attach alleged to everything just to be safe. Or because they don't know the rules....as I don't! I will be interested in what the legal experts on this board have to say on this (the Sgt likely being more 'in the know' than I am for sure.) Edited to add: I think you are saying that there might not be a crime therefore he shouldn't be called a suspect, but I hope someone 'in the know' can help us out here. I'd like to know the rules for sure myself.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 11, 2015 18:44:24 GMT -5
Rat, maybe you should remember the thread you are on. I happened to spend a fair amount of time on the phone with the victim of this case, very concerned about the victim. For you to make a joke about being depressed on a thread about someone being raped is just sick in my mind. Remember this is a public thread!!! This is a public forum? That message should be at the top of every page. This thread is not about someone being raped. It is about an emeil sent by LW containing something which is pretty well confirmed as being false. It is nice of you to spend time on the phone with the victim assuming she wants to talk. However, getting all bent out of shape because someone mentions depression, in any context, in a thread that is discussion an email sent by LW seems to be just a bit off the mark. LW was a worker - does that mean that people should refrain from talking about or joking about workers? mangochango, @wally, maryhig, and marie might all be suffering from an upper respiratory infection but do you think making a joke about someone unrelated having a raspy voice is a problem? Would it also be classified as a " very nasty thing"? I believe it is quite clear that there is a substantial part that you do not know about. My reaction to this is mainly one of disbelief. I actually did not think you would. Just for the record - I exchanged PMs with mangochango and did not get the impression that my comment would have offended her. I could, of course, be in error. And, in the event that I am in error and she mistook my saying in jest that I was depressed over the comment made by another poster as a "very nasty thing" I have absolutely no problem in saying I am very sorry and hope, when rereading the post, she could see that it was made in jest. Wow - as it turns out apologizing for things you say is quite painless.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 11, 2015 18:50:12 GMT -5
Neither of the two you suggest are correct. LW is a suspect of alleged criminal acts. The state of Colorado and the laws of the state determine what happens. Without an arrest, issuing a warrant is problematic. If it was a federal court it would be different.
|
|
|
Post by matisse on May 11, 2015 19:52:58 GMT -5
Neither of the two you suggest are correct. LW is a suspect of alleged criminal acts. The state of Colorado and the laws of the state determine what happens. Without an arrest, issuing a warrant is problematic. If it was a federal court it would be different. That LW announced by mass email that the investigation was "closed for lack of evidence" when, in fact, it remains open is also problematic. He has essentially interfered with an ongoing investigation by law enforcement. This is a good reason for the sheriff in CO to issue a strong statement that the investigation remains open, that information continues to come in, and that it is not too late for someone with knowledge of the alleged situation to contact his office.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 11, 2015 20:20:54 GMT -5
The state of Colorado and the laws of the state determine what happens. Without an arrest, issuing a warrant is problematic. If it was a federal court it would be different. Thanks Rational! So Sgt Heap is unable to insist that LW come for an interview? But if he had sufficient grounds /evidence he could arrest him/would have arrested him? Is that how it is? Perhaps it is more complicated with state and federal systems you have there? If the complaint had been made to a federal police officer? Catch up here: www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/out-of-state-arrest-warrants.html
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on May 11, 2015 21:59:36 GMT -5
Wow - as it turns out apologizing for things you say is quite painless. Quite right. Things like "I don't know", "I was mistaken", "I'm sorry" or "You're right" are only as difficult as you make them.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 11, 2015 22:04:11 GMT -5
Wow - as it turns out apologizing for things you say is quite painless. Quite right. Things like "I don't know", "I was mistaken", "I'm sorry" or "You're right" are only as difficult as you make them. I am looking forward to a time when it would actually be appropriate for me to use one of those phrases!
|
|
|
Post by matisse on May 12, 2015 3:49:43 GMT -5
Each of the states in the US has its own criminal code regarding "Obstruction of Justice". Here is an excerpt from the code for the State of Colorado where the investigation (that LW declared closed) is taking place: ======== Colorado Crimes – Obstruction of Justice -18-8-102
18-8-102. Obstructing government operations.
(1) A person commits obstructing government operations if he intentionally obstructs, impairs, or hinders the performance of a governmental function by a public servant, by using or threatening to use violence, force, or physical interference or obstacle.
(2) It shall be an affirmative defense that:
(a) The obstruction, impairment, or hindrance was of unlawful action by a public servant; or (b) The obstruction, impairment, or hindrance was of the making of an arrest; or (c) The obstruction, impairment, or hindrance of a governmental function was by lawful activities in connection with a labor dispute with the government.
(3) Obstructing government operations is a class 3 misdemeanor.......
.........Other actions which can bring about the charge of obstruction of justice charge include:
• Interference of an investigation • Picketing and using a megaphone in front of the courts without a permit • Falsifying, hiding or destroying evidence and lying while participating in an investigation • Lying to law enforcement during questioning • Giving a false statement • Resisting Arrest • Falsifying, hiding or destroying documents • Paying someone else to give false evidence or testimony • Attempting to influence a jury or witness before or during trial • Assaulting or threatening a person for operating in a police investigation • Obstructing court orders
In fact, any action that interferes or hinders the daily operations of any of the three branches of government can bring about an obstruction of justice charge.
In order to be charged, law enforcement must believe or have strong evidence that you influenced or attempted to influence a proceeding or an investigation in some manner.
After a person has been charged with a crime such as obstruction of justice, it is important that they are informed of their legal rights and options.
The best way people can become informed throughout the legal process is by retaining the services of a knowledgeable Denver, Colorado criminal defense attorney who can continually protect the client’s best interests. By working closely with the right attorney, people may be able to avoid conviction for obstruction of justice and not have to deal with the life-altering consequences that are associated with most obstruction of justice convictions.======== Link
|
|
|
Post by matisse on May 12, 2015 4:11:29 GMT -5
I have not been aware of Police 'micro managing' with 'to whom it may concern' letters in our country. But maybe they do? It would be interesting for someone with knowledge of US law to post! It seems an unusual letter and step taken. But I have no experience or knowledge of US & it's laws and law enforcement procedures. I have provided excerpts of the Colorado code regarding "Obstruction of Justice" in a separate post. The TWIMC letter Heap wrote that has been published here on TMB is one way for him to get the word out among the F&W (and potential informants) that LW made false statements in his mass email about the status of the investigation and that the investigation remains open. I see the letter from Heap as an effort to dismantle an obstruction to the open investigation that LW put in place with his email.
|
|
|
Post by matisse on May 12, 2015 4:58:24 GMT -5
You have your own interesting version of it all Matisse. Thanks but I was interested in answers to the questions. By someone who knows CO or US Law. Not important but just interesting. As I've said I doubt a member of our police would write such a letter. My post addresses one of your questions and provides links to CO legal code that you can read for yourself. I am a US citizen and am familiar with how the State and Federal court systems work. I could have provided to you any of the information that Rational has provided so far. It is interesting to me that TMB is being used as a resource by an arm of the law. It makes a lot of sense if you stop for even a moment to think about it.
|
|
|
Post by matisse on May 12, 2015 5:07:48 GMT -5
Sorry I'm not able to follow Matisse but am happy for you to list my questions and then answers you have found for them. I appreciate the time you have put into this. No problem. Your question about the investigator's letter provided a convenient opportunity for me to post what was already on my mind. I expect others will appreciate my thoughts on the subject....no surprise, really that you "can not". Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 12, 2015 8:10:27 GMT -5
You have your own interesting version of it all Matisse. She posted the Colorado state statutes to answer the question(s) you had asked. I doubt that the Colorado state legislature slanted it's laws to meet the 'version' matisse was presenting. Not liking the answers to your questions is not grounds for rejecting their veracity. What was posted was about as complete a set of answers that could be provided.I don't think there are many posting here who have passed the bar in Colorado. But the statutes posted explain why an investigator would publish a letter containing false information by a person involved in an active investigation. It is not a set of difficult points. It also appears that LW could be setting himself up for additional charges by publishing information that could impede the investigation. Not important? Sending out false information regarding a case where a person has been accused of rape? What sort of an act would you consider important?You really don't believe there would be a response if the accused in an active rape case sent out a mass communication stating that the case was closed? Suppose the email stated that the investigating officer had stepped down? Why wouldn't there be a response to publication of facts related to the case that are known to be untrue?
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 12, 2015 8:13:00 GMT -5
I could have provided to you any of the information that Rational has provided so far. But could you have done the cut and paste of a URL as well?
|
|
|
Post by matisse on May 12, 2015 8:29:18 GMT -5
I could have provided to you any of the information that Rational has provided so far. But could you have done the cut and paste of a URL as well? The efficiency and elegance of your work is breathtaking to behold.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 12, 2015 8:57:55 GMT -5
But could you have done the cut and paste of a URL as well? The efficiency and elegance of your work is breathtaking to behold. Why do I feel like I should be putting on rubber boots to get through this?
|
|
|
Post by mangochango on May 22, 2015 6:59:17 GMT -5
If any of you have any doubts as to the authenticity of the investigator Joel Heap's letter you can save yourself some trouble and contact him and ask him yourself.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on May 22, 2015 19:29:13 GMT -5
The efficiency and elegance of your work is breathtaking to behold. Why do I feel like I should be putting on rubber boots to get through this? why am I groping for my inhaler?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 23, 2015 16:24:25 GMT -5
Sorry I'm not able to follow Matisse but am happy for you to list my questions and then answers you have found for them. I appreciate the time you have put into this. That is strange! "not able to follow Matisse?"
After she posted this? Colorado Crimes – Obstruction of Justice -18-8-102
18-8-102. Obstructing government operations.
I wonder what your problem is that you aren't you able to read? No need to feel bad about that! Many people, through no fault of their own, can't read.
One cause is dyslexia. One of my sons has that problem.
|
|
truevine
New Member
Looking for answers....
Posts: 31
|
Post by truevine on May 7, 2016 21:45:01 GMT -5
I haven't heard any recent news about Leslie.....anyone know what has happened to him?
|
|