Murder Charges Dropped

I don't know anything about murder in Grove Park. I would however like to shine a little light on the incumbent Sheriff that has relieved him of my vote for re-election.

John Thrasher contributed to his campaign in 09/07. Now, this is not "continued support", this is first time support.  There was no contribution from John Thrasher in his initial run for office.

Members of the CTLAC are being run off, no let me take that back, they are being issued what I believe is called a "trespass warrant".  Here is the scenario and perhaps someone else can add in more of the story ; a law went through the legislature not too long ago that had to do with people petitioning, essentially making it harder if not impossible.  I believe there is a US Constitutional law that provides for protection of a citizens right to petition. Problem is it will now have to be taken to court to be struck down, just like what happened to HDA and the revokation of signatures.

Anyway, someone sees where the CTLAC are petitioning, they call the store, or the cops, or both and complain.  Now......the officers from what I understand "could" tell them to leave and then tell the person complaining they can go to GC and file a complaint. But noooooooooo they're going to the effort to issue "no trespass warrants (if I am right about what it's called).

This is how I personally absorb all this.  John Thrasher made a contribution and now our tax dollars are being spent to send the Coppers after the CTLAC.  I see too many speeders and aggressive drivers every single day, I have NO DOUBT these Officers have MORE IMPORTANT things they should be doing.

I don't know who I will vote for come election time, but it most certainly will not be Sheriff Beseler. 

 http://24.23.126.8/ Petition for choice in Nov. 7 Commissioners or 5.

Now, before anyone under a ficticious user name comes in here and says, ok he donated $500, big deal let me address what I believe support from a Lobbyist brings you. The money is just a sign of something else to me. When you have the support of a Lobbyist you have the support of everyone he/she knows, usually people with money, people within the Goverment.  All of the "favors" that can be done by all these connections gives a person/candidate/elected official a superior position from which to benefit in more ways then one.

I am no Mike Taylor fan at the moment but it would not surprise me to see, something happen before election time, something coming from somewhere or someone that will attempt to derail his campaign.

The money is inconsequential, it's what is behind the money and the network support of a Lobbyist that does the real damage.

The real power in decision making the voters can use is to follow the money.  Lobbyists don't contribute because they're pals.  You don't have to take my word for it, go to the Supervisor of Elections Website and search the financial records of the Candidates. 

www.clayelections.com

http://24.23.126.8/ Petition for choice in Nov. 7 Commissioners or 5.

Marsha,

About a month or so ago the Sheriff’s Office legal advisor issued a bulletin that said obtaining voter petition signatures on property open to the public like parking lots is a protected right. Most likely there was an incident that triggered the bulletin. The high courts have already ruled on this matter. If the property owner wants the party conducting the activity to cease and desist they have to obtain a court order. It’s a different story if folks obtaining signatures are inside a place of business stopping customers trying to conduct purchases.

I have dealt with similar situations, remember the African American male that use to stand on the street corners with religious signs waiving to traffic? One time he was in a local shopping center handing out religious material and a store owner wanted him kicked off the property. I politely said it’s not going to happen because your lease does not cover the parking lot and it’s a protected right. Campaign signs posted on public right of way are considered abandon because they are not on private property. If a vandal damages a sign or picks it up and carries it away it’s not considered vandalism or theft. It’s a touchy area and a lot of cops are not clear on some of these technical issues.

As for Thrasher I believe it is common practice for him to donate to incumbents.

Marsha;

I wish EVERYONE would take the time to 'let their fingers do the walking' through the list of contributors to every candidate.

I see what you are talking about with the Sheriff. I will say one thing though, at least it was only the $500.00. I'm not sure how much of this 'pressure' might be coming from someone else. 

Also, take a look at how much money is coming from Tallahassee addresses. You see the same address three and four times for the same candidate and it happens to be a PO Box.

Again, it's legal because each one is from a different business name but it sure looks funky to me. Why would all that Tallahassee money be interested in lil' ol' Clay County?

Maybe it's just the way I look at things, perhaps my belt is way too tight. That sure takes a big toll on you when that happens. If it wasn't for all that tax I'd have to pay I might try to get me something to bridge that 10.95 gap I'm trying take care of.

Mike Heemer http://24.23.126.8/ Petition for choice (5 or 7) in Nov.

Marsha,

I always enjoy your comments even when I don't necessarily agree with you.

I was surprised at your comment "under a  ficticious user name" Are you saying that those comments are less valid or correct? 

I do not have any intention of EVER using my real name for three reasons.  (1)My employer would not be happy (2) I started reading(but did not join) the MCS when Solo changed his screen name--his SAFETY was at issue,  that made me decide that anonimity was smarter. (3) I am very involved in a non-profit here in Clay. I would not want anything I stand for (or against) to affect them in any way.

Could you please explain--are "real" bloggers comments better or more valid to you? 

I wasn't thinking about the bloggers that are here reguarly who have created names. I was thinking about a new member showing up, or one that is not new but has never commented before.  Sorry, I didn't review what I said and I was focused on the larger point which is what having a Lobbyist in your camp does for the candidate.

http://24.23.126.8/ Petition for choice in Nov. 7 Commissioners or 5.

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to be critical of the individual Officers. I believe they're doing what they're told to do. I also believe, and correct me if I am wrong that it is normally up to the discretion of the Officer on Scene whether or not a trespass warrant is issued under certain criteria.  I believe they're discretion when it comes to the CTLAC has been usurped.

You would know more then I do about the law, but I do know for a fact that this is happening, at Wal-Mart, at the Post Office to name just two. By fact I mean that I have spoken with a few members of the CTLAC, it didn't come from someone who heard it from someone telling someone else. It came from people out there trying to get petitions signed.

It's just another attempt to reduce the efforts of a grass roots organization to do what they believe in, which should concern anyone who believes they should have a voice in local goverment.

http://24.23.126.8/ Petition for choice in Nov. 7 Commissioners or 5.

Hey thanks for the clarification.  And I so get your "lobbyist focus"  It is scary to think of the power they can wield with dollars.

I also would know you are a women (WITHOUT your picture or name).  You say sorry--bet you even ask for directions when you are lost!!!!

I am going out to play in the dirt have a great day bloggers

Magnum,

Thank you for your information.

Marsha

I just talked to a deputy that shed a little more light on one of the incidents. It was the Orange Park Police Department, not the CCSO, that issued the warrant at the Orange Park Post Office. I will contact Chief Bovine and talk with him about why the matter was handled in such a way and hope you will do the same. Hopefully, all Clay County law enforcement has received enough education on the DMS memo referred to by Magnum. I am sure it is public record and available for review.

I hope that by now Green Cove Springs and Orange Park PD are fully aware of the law that protects CTLAC's right to petition. As a petition gatherer myself, I will keep on keeping on. The law is on our side.

Marsha, get over it.  You certainly have right to your own opinion, but people (lobbyist) give boo koo money to campaigns usually for a special interest.  It takes mega bucks to run a campaign and eventually one runs out of family and friends.  Just b/c J Thrasher is a well accomplished politican and lobbyist does not mean his career choice is a bad apple and does not mean R. Beseler is a bad apple.  This country would not even survive or be here without the power wielded by dollars, given or taken from others for a certain purpose. 

Yes, i see the cloud above that says, this will silence the voters, but i don't see how, b/c special interest groups are nothng more than a conglomeration of people united through money for a certain cause and there are thousands of these groups, i bet you could find a group that represents your feelings, but you'll get nowhere without the vote or the support of an elected offical, thus the system while flawed works both ways, and lobbyist are not always out to get you. 

No vote for Beseler, not a fan of Taylor, hmmmm. the only one left is user name Braveheart.   

Granted there should be limitations on such.  If the money is to be used to derail popular public interest or the rights of voters to petition thus making their voice heard.  Limitations on how much money while this may already be in place is adequate. 

It's the choice of the candidate to take money from lobbyists, but most (not all) but most candidates don't see their office without such money.

There are many more limitations that should be in place, but with or without, four elecion cycles later, lobbyists will still be a major funder of campaigns.

Foxx, I have to side with Marsha on this one. Mom raised us to believe you are judged by the company you keep. If Sheriff Beseler chooses to align himself with one as loathsome as John Thrasher then he loses my vote. Same thing for anyone associated with the ACLU. That organization claims it stands up for the first ammendment rights but frankly, if they consider NAMBLA worthy of support they lose all credibility in my world. I don't care how they couch their defense of these perverts, they deserve nothing less than tar and feathering. Actually, for NAMBLA members themselves, I would give them leprosy to watch them come apart at the seams if you catch my drift.

Lily's Lore "I don't ever want to be rescued And I don't ever want to be saved I got a feelin' that I'm gonna be alive forever Dancin' on the edge of a grave..." Jim Steinman

Ahh, Foxx my wily friend. How have you been? Haven't heard from you lately but when you do show up you make a grand entry.

I agree with some of what you say but isn't it fun to 'follow the money'. PACs are PACs and they all have an agenda. Some are good and some are bad. And that is where the voter has to make up their mind.

Is what a particular PAC espousing good or bad for the majority? When one has the power to inhibit the actions of another even though they are proceeding in accordance with established legal precedence then that is not good.

My feeling is that someone didn't get the second memo. The first one said play hardball with CTLAC. The second one cautioned them that they were tromping on the legal rights of the group so back off.

Foxx, if people are really out to get you, you are not being paranoid.

Mike Heemer http://24.23.126.8/ Petition for choice (5 or 7) in Nov.

Here is a link to the press release from the Sheriff's Office:

http://www.claysheriff.com/05_01_00news.asp?NewsID=240

Here a link to the case. It has been NOLLE PROSSED (dropped) on May 14, 2008:

http://clerk.co.clay.fl.us/asp/cr_charges.asp?gin=157087

Now hold on there you two.  While you are much wiser than i, i support the free flow of money into politicial hands for certain causes, not all causes.  I don't support the actions of others that lily described, but i do support the ability that led up to those actions to do so.  Darn, i sound more like a liberal everyday, i think i'm going to go to therapy, no wait it's the professors at college, it's their fault, sorry mr. platt.    

Chapter 810 of the state statutes addresses the issuance of trespass warnings for open land, structures and conveyances.  The statute states impart, “As used in this section, the term "person authorized" means any owner or lessee, or his or her agent, or any law enforcement officer whose department has received written authorization from the owner or lessee, or his or her agent, to communicate an order to depart the property in the case of a threat to public safety or welfare.”

Oh, i've been fine finder.

Foxx;

Let me give you an example of what I'm talking about when I speak of following the money.

There is a limit of $500 donation from a company. Now what does that mean? Let's pick one that I found in one list of donors to a candidate.

There is an Inc., and 4 LLCs all listing the same address. Now my feeble mind says that this is one entity and should be limited to $500. It is NOT. For election donations they are all separate entities and each can (and did) donate $500.

I'm going to state this right up front. In this particular instance I do not see some sinister plot. It just happens to be the example I chose to use because it is so easy to see. Nothing more, nothing less.

Now let's look at a place like Tallahassee where you have literally dozens of entities just like this. Each can (and does) donate $500 to any given candidate. All perfectly legal.

Who decides which candidate gets the money and how much is the point. If you dig deep enough you keep seeing the same names.

Do a little research. Follow the money.

Mike Heemer http://24.23.126.8/ Petition for choice (5 or 7) in Nov.

I understand that there is a limit as to how much a person or company can donate to a particular candidate.  $500 is an amount that can be spent very quickly in a campaign.  If a whole bunch of $500 donations come into the coffers and aren't spent during that campaign, what is the legal method of liquidating the extra funds?  If a campaign is Not For Profit, isn't it illegal to keep the extra cash?

Walt;

Here is a link that will answer that question.

http://election.dos.state.fl.us/publications/pdf/CandCampTreasHand.pdf

Everything you ever wanted to know (and more) about campaign finance. Starts on Page 46 - Disposing of Surplus funds.

I was bored one night and needed something to read. I know, I have got to get a life.

Angela;

Did I do good?

Mike Heemer http://24.23.126.8/ Petition for choice (5 or 7) in Nov.

You have so impressed me with your public records skills. You get a A+ and a welcome to the world of public records. Your constitutional right as a citizen of Florida to have access to your government. Public Records Rule.

You did good.  That link answered my question.  When I get an acute case of insomnia, I'll sit down and read the entire publication.

Walt;

It's kind of like reading the old 4790. Put it under your pillow and let it seep in by osmosis.

Angela;

I'd feel bad taking an A+. I stumbled on it by accident one night when I was looking for something else and it took me 10 minutes of stumbling to find it again.

Mike Heemer http://24.23.126.8/ Petition for choice (5 or 7) in Nov.

I thought maybe you were reviewing the handbook for candidates. We could sure use a fine gentleman like yourself to register.

This information can be found in the FSS 106.141 but is a much longer version. That's for nights when you really can't sleep at all.

The handbook makes it much easier for everyone to understand. For that you deserve an A+. Job Well Done.

I have heard that the case had some problems coming from CCSO, maybe Magnum or Pioneer have some info. Did any information come across the DMS in a memo form?

209north,

Information pertaining to the case disposition can be found in the criminal courts section of the Clerk of the Court. The state attorney has to file a disposition notice citing the reasons the case will not be prosecuted. I am just a little fish in the ocean so I am not one of the privileged to the party line.

Here is a link to the TU's report of the case that was presented in the blog. The Sheriff's Office covering up misconduct, obstruction of justice, perjury, and a few other comments I've heard coming from the Sheriff's Office in some articles written by Jim Schoettler lately.

Statements in the article:

"Beseler said Mills made a mistake by creating the new report, changing it from information only to robbery. He said it was done only to match the details of the crime with the properly coded offense in which reports are submitted to state and federal agencies for tabulation. Beseler said no one will be punished."

"Sheppard, in a letter to Skinner, accused the Sheriff's Office of covering up misconduct that he said prosecutors should have done more to investigate. Skinner declined to comment on whether any police actions in the case are now being investigated. Beseler denies any cover-up occurred."

http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/052108/met_281106550.shtml