The Guy Felton Page

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On the issue of Free Speech vs "Decorum" as Defined by Washoe County Officials, Meeting Laws, Nevada State Law and the U.S. Constitution.

The Trials, Tribulations and Abuses directed by the Judicial and Political Systems Against Public Watchdogs in Washoe County, Nevada

"Government is not your friend" is the theme of a must-read book by Judge Andrew P. Napolitano. He is a senior judicial analyst with FOX News and a former New Jersey Superior Court Judge.

We don't have to look far to find examples of "government is not your friend". Those of us who live in Nevada are constantly abused by the state's culture of corruption. One set of examples:

During a Reno City Council meeting in early November of 1999, then-mayor Jeff Griffin called Lt. Col. Sam Dehne (USAF Ret.) "a smart ass". This is documented on video tape. No other elected official present at the time raised an eyebrow; Griffin's gutter language went unchallenged. In effect, Griffin (and his fellow councilmembers who did not protest his choice of words) established a precedent for the acceptability of strong language during council meetings.

Two weeks later, during the next council meeting, Griffin lied when he stated that a recent trip he had taken to England "was not a taxpayer-financed one". This is documented on video tape. Actually, his trip's costs had been paid for with room tax money collected by the Reno-Sparks Convention and Visitors Authority. Taxes are paid by taxpayers.

Griffin has a regular habit of lying. Once, when guesting on a radio talk show, he could not stop lying about public affairs. The show was audio taped and the tape was transcribed by a former executive secretary of Nevada's ethics commission.

Almost immediately following Griffin's lie about trip expenses, watchdog Guy Felton (publisher of www.NevadaCorruption.Info) went to the public podium as part of the meeting's agendized public comment period. With Griffin's most recent lie in mind ~ as well as other documented wrongdoings committed by Griffin ~ Felton referred to Griffin and his supportive fellow councilmembers as "corrupt bastards". (Note that the Federal Communications Commission does not rate "bastard" as a gutter term. The word means despicable person or a person born out of wedlock.)

This was about 20 seconds into his presentation. Griffin then disrupted the meeting and hypocritically criticized Felton for his use of strong language. "If you're going to curse at us, I'm going to have you removed from this meeting."

In context of Griffin's unchallenged use of "smart ass" just two weeks earlier, he violated the principle of the 14th Amendment having to do with equal treatment. He should not have disrupted the meeting by interrupting Felton's presentation, nor by violating Felton's right to free speech.

Consider this landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision known as Times v. Sullivan (1964):

[As Americans we have] a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.

In defense of his right to free speech and equal treatment under the 14th, Felton then displayed righteous indignation. He was subsequently arrested.

If Griffin had not hypocritically and illegally interrupted Felton's presentation, Felton would not have had to kick into protest mode to defend the Constitution! Felton would not have displayed righteous indignation. Events leading to his wrongful arrest would NOT have occurred!

Felton believes strongly that violations of the Constitution MUST be immediately challenged. On more than one occasion, Felton has sworn to serve and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. When Constitutional violations are challenged in court, they can take years and years to conclude because we have a warped legal system in American ~ NOT a justice system. Corrupt judges can prevent wronged parties from receiving fair treatment.

Griffin disrupted the meeting's normal flow of business; Felton did not. Once Griffin disrupted the meeting, Felton protested Griffin's illegal conduct, but the meeting was already in a state of disruption. As a former Marine and police officer, Felton responded appropriately to crimes against the Constitution!

And for this, Felton was wrongfully removed from the meeting and subsequently arrested. Note that wrongful removal from a public meeting in Nevada is a crime. Wrongful arrest should be treated as kidnapping, i.e., illegal abduction.

All charges against Felton were eventually dropped.

Felton, now 69 years of age, is a former Marine, police officer, classroom teacher, executive job search consultant, and newspaper columnist. He is listed in the 2000 edition of Who's Who in America. Felton is extremely proud that members of his family served with Washington at Valley Forge, and that at least one member of his family crossed the Delaware with Washington and fought during the battle of Trenton in 1776.

Felton filed a federal lawsuit based on the fact that his First Amendment right to free speech had been violated ~ and that his following actions were a justified protest against said violation.

Government of, by, and for the people can not exist when citizens are prevented by their hired help from criticizing their hired help.

After six and a half years of lawyers and judges playing background games, a three-judge panel of the corrupt 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a warped, not-for-publication memorandum against Felton. Felton was never ~ in those six and a half years ~ permitted even one minute before a jury!

Felton believes strongly that the corrupt, three-judge panel decided to protect fellow politicians, Griffin and Hicks, and wrote their memorandum accordingly, ignoring hard facts in Felton's favor.

Griffin must be a contender for recognition as the politician most often reported to Nevada's ethics commission for offenses against decent, American government. On one occasion, Griffin claimed to have sold one of his businesses so that a conflict of interest charge would appear to have no merit.

However, Griffin had not cashed out and the business was still operating on his capital; he maintained a very real financial interest in the business. Reasonable persons would agree that this goes against conventional wisdom regarding the sale of a business.

Politicians who lie ~ or withhold information ~ about matters pertaining to the character of government are corrupt.

The 9th Circuit's memorandum ruling indicates that Felton committed slander on the day of his arrest. However, Felton has no recollection of slander being proved; he certainly had no day in court to disprove this charge. Those judges who issued said memorandum distorted truth ~ and thereby invalidated the rationale of their position ~ by arrogantly and falsely declaring, not proving, that Felton was guilty of slander.

The not-for-publication memorandum treats Felton's protest against crimes against the Constitution as if said protest exists in a vacuum ~ having no connection to the genesis of said protest. Such genesis more than justifying ~ even mandating ~ the protest by a person having sworn to serve and defend the Constitution.

Further, the memorandum makes no mention that the federal district judge handling Felton's case in Reno, Larry R. Hicks, was not impartial toward Griffin and should have recused himself. Shortly before being appointed to the federal bench, Hicks was a partner in a Reno law firm that contributed at least $1,000 to Griffin's re-election war chest! Records prove this to be the case. Giving money to someone indicates an affinity for that someone.

Hicks abused his significant judicial powers to protect his friend, Jeff Griffin. Judges of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals abused their significant powers in protecting Griffin and Hicks.

The not-for-publication memorandum is an insult against truth and justice. It protects Hicks and Griffin and others while shafting Felton and the integrity of the system!

Note especially that the not-for-publication memorandum ignores these facts: (1) Griffin had set the standard for strong language during Reno council meetings, and (2) Felton's protest actions were triggered by Griffin's hypocritical denial of Felton's justified right to also employ strong language.

Questions: Is it the position of the 9th Circuit judges that Griffin was justly empowered to use strong language although Felton was not? Does the 9th Circuit approve of a double standard? Is it the position of hired-help 9th Circuit judges that hired help persons such as Griffin possess some non-legislated empowerment to curse at their employers, while those employers can not curse at their hired help?

The not-for-publication memorandum fails ~ with willful intent to deceive, in Felton's view ~ to deal honestly with the cause-effect sequence of happenings leading to Felton's wrongful removal from the meeting and subsequent arrest.

The not-for-publication memorandum improperly treats as a given the notion that Felton committed slander on the day of his arrest. The charge of slander was not proved in a situation where Felton had any personal opportunity to defend himself against this charge; he would have no difficulty doing so. Much documentation exists proving that Griffin committed many acts of corruption. Other councilmembers did not challenge Griffin's corrupt actions and thereby became equally guilty.

Does the not-for-publication memorandum's inappropriate employment of an unproved and false charge of slander not amount to libel? Obstruction of justice? Fraud? Conspiracy to defraud? Malicious abuse of judicial powers? A cover-up?

Persons interested in reading the 9th Circuit's memorandum are asked to visit:

www.NevadaCorruption.Info

~ Guy Felton

An Honest newspaper would print this rebuttal to your attacks on Felton.

MEMO
Sam Dehne, Lt Col, USAF (ret)

Mr Hamilton, 7/10/06
An Honest newspaper would print these poignant
rebuttals to your cowardly attacks against Guy Felton.
Heck, even try to add your own rebuttals to them...
assuming you could conjure any truthful ones up.
w/cc's

Fred Hamilton
abuses the power of the press
as publisher of the Reno Gazette-Journal

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hamilton is asked to answer the following questions raised by Guy Felton:

1) Why do you refuse to meet with me on a television talk show to discuss the character and agenda of your "newspaper"?

2) Have you read Constitutional Chaos by Judge Andrew P. Napolitano? Do you agree with him that "Government is not your friend"?

3) Do you agree that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is transparently corrupt and that it willfully protects persons having sufficient political juice?

4) Do you agree that we do not have a justice system in the United States, but rather a warped legal system?

5) Regarding your article about me published on June 29, 2006, do you see this as responsible, objective reporting ~ or as a piece intended to paint me as a demented loser in the eyes of the public?

6) In your view can a democracy be healthy without a well-informed electorate?

7) Do you see it as part of your job to keep Reno/Washoe/Nevada citizens and voters from being well-informed?

8) Do you agree that your publication works against the principle of government of, by, and for the people ~ and, instead, works for government of, by, and for powerful special interests?

9) Do you agree that a few persons in Nevada wield undue influence over our elected decision-makers?

10) Do you see it as part of your job to support those persons who wield undue influence over Nevada's decision-makers ~ and to work against those persons such as myself who attempt to challenge corruption in government?

11) Does your publication sometimes intentionally employ propaganda techniques to warp public thinking for the benefit of powerful special interests?

12) Again, regarding your June 29 article about me, why does it not include any mention that Larry Hicks, the Reno federal judge assigned to my lawsuit, gave a significant amount of money to the re-election campaign of Jeff Griffin not long before Hicks was appointed to the federal bench ~ and never disclosed this obvious conflict?

13) Is it your position that judges who are friends of any defendants coming before them can credibly claim to be impartial?

14) Why did your article not attempt to report the genesis of my conduct on November 23, 1999?

15) Why did your article not report that defendant Griffin called Lt. Col. Sam Dehne a "smart ass" during the previous council meeting (documented on video tape) and that (1) no other elected official present raised any objection or expressed any concern about Griffin's gutter language, and (2) the genesis of my arrest on November 23, 1999, was Griffin disrupting the meeting by interrupting my public comment to hypocritically order me not to use strong language?

16) Do you, Mr. Hamilton, believe in a double standard where servants are permitted to use strong language, but their employers are not?

17) Do you, Mr. Hamilton, agree that American citizens are not only empowered, but also obligated, to challenge violations of the United States Constitution when they experience same?

18) When Griffin interrupted me and ordered me to not use strong language ~ as he himself had done during the previous meeting ~ what constitutional amendments were violated?

19) Was slander ever proved against me in a situation where I had the opportunity to defend myself?

20) Why did the Court of Appeals' "ruling" treat me as guilty of slander when this was never established in a trial situation?

21) What did I have in mind when I referred to Griffin and his henchmen as "corrupt bastards"?

22) Are there not documented instances of Griffin lying about public affairs?

23) Did Griffin not lie about a trip he had taken to England just before I went to the public podium on November 23, 1999?

24) Did Griffin not lie to the so-called ethics commission when he told them he had sold one of his businesses (in order to attempt countering a charge of conflict of interest) when he had not actually cashed out of the business and still had a very-real financial interest in the company?

25) On at least one occasion, did Griffin not ignore a directive from the ethics commission regarding his being told to not participate in consideration of airport matters?

26) On at least one occasion, did Griffin not arrogantly and angrily refuse to explain how city tax money had been used?

27) Is it not true that Griffin was primarily responsible for friends of his being appointed to the airport board of trustees ~ and that almost immediately following their appointments, they approved a major airport contract for one of Griffin's businesses?

28) Did Griffin not participate in the deliberation of a wrongful death lawsuit decision without demanding a thorough investigation into the loss of key evidence in that case? (Reference John Paiva Junior being killed in his own home by Reno police officers.)

29) Who is willing to swear that I caused "spit" to fly over the podium and onto the council table during the council meeting of November 23, 1999? Is this notion not a ridiculous fabrication of your reporter, Susan Voyles?

30) Are you not aware that I hold Susan Voyles in low regard based upon her warped reporting over a number of years and that I have previously asked her to submit questions to me in writing ~ with the understanding that I would respond in writing (so that she would hesitate to distort my answers)?

31) Are you aware that Patricia Lynch learned of the Ninth's ruling in my case before I did and that it was not sensible for Voyles to ask my reaction to something I had not had an opportunity to read and evaluate? (Lynch announced said ruling, actually a not-for-publication memorandum, during the council meeting of June 28, this year.)

32) As documented on video tape, Patricia Lynch once accused me of threatening her life. This slanderous charge was investigated by police detectives and found to be without substance. Did your publication report this incident? If not, why not?

33) Patricia Lynch lied when she told a Reno News & Review reporter that I had once brought pornographic materials to a Reno council meeting. Actually, it was another concerned citizen who offered comment to the effect that the council should take steps to make it more difficult for under-age persons to obtain pornographic materials. Mr. Hamilton, why did your publication not report Lynch's false charge against me?

34) Why does your publication give only token attention to wrongful actions committed by elected officials such as Jeff Griffin and Patricia Lynch?

35) Why does your publication attempt to protect public officials from accountability for their stupid or corrupt actions?

36) The Los Angeles Times has recently run articles exposing corrupt judges in Nevada. Has your publication given any attention to this concern? If not, why not?

37) Why do you think it took six and a half years for my wrongful arrest case to reach the warped memorandum point?

38) Do you comprehend that your warped, unbalanced article about me has exposed your publication to a multimillion-dollar defamation lawsuit?

39) Why have you ignored my repeated requests for space in your publication to rebut your article which defames me?

40) Mr. Hamilton, are you not a despicable insult against any notion of honest journalism?

41) Do you agree that you are most definitely NOT a defender of truth, justice, and the American vision?

42) Are you willing to take a lie-detector test regarding any answers you might offer to the foregoing questions?

Return to Nevada Corruption

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sam Dehne, The Encyclopedia of Reno Govt (weblink)

--
e-mail courtesy of:
Sam Dehne, editor, The Reno Citizen Magazine (775) 825-1398
Lt Col, USAF (Ret)
(click to read) http://www.renocitizen.com