All Around Mobile Music Broadcasting Station AMBS.live - All Around Mobile Music Broadcasting Station All Around Mobile Music Broadcasting Station

Inspector General request for investigation of California State Attorney General Xavier Becerra.

Below is the complaint I have filed with the US Inspector General.

Xavier Becerra, the current Attorney General of the State of California, is on record as saying, “no one is above the law, not even the President of the United States.

I am writing the Inspector General in hopes that Attorney General Becerra will be investigated for his refusal to investigate ongoing felony’s being committed in San Diego.

Below is a citizen’s complaint that I have filed with Attorney General Becerra. It clearly outlines criminal activity with documentation by a convicted drug felon, John Williams. It provides a prima facie case documenting Mr. Williams felonious crime spree in San Diego.

During the filing of that complaint I became aware that someone altered the DOJ data base records to list me as a convicted felon. The change was reported sometime after I filed my complaint with Attorney General Becerra. I spent a year working with the Attorney General’s office to correct this record alteration. I was told by a member of the Attorney General’s Office that the La Mesa Police Department was responsible for the report.

Before I filed my complaint with the Attorney General, the San Diego Civil Grand Jury spent three years investigating my charges. They confirmed Mr. Williams’s crimes. The Civil Grand Jury waited three years for an explanation with no response from the La Mesa Police Department. It was at the suggestion of the San Diego Grand Jury that I filed my complaint with Attorney General’s Office.

California Department of Justice Policy governing citizen complaints against law enforcement administration of general policy states: Those complaints which do not meet the policy criteria will be responded to by the Public Inquiry Unit. This response will inform complainants of the appropriate local resources to be contacted for resolution of complaints and/or request clarifying information as needed.

In spite of direct contact with Attorney General Becerra, he refuses to follow the policy either by an explanation as to why: he will not investigate my complaint; he will not investigate the reported crimes or; he will not refer me to local resources.

I am asking the Inspector General to investigate Attorney General Becerra willful criminal misconduct and violation of my rights to equal justice in his refusal to investigate Mr. Williams, the falsified DOJ report and the La Mesa Police Department.

California Citizens’ complaint PIU #651016

The La Mesa Police Department has created an unconstitutional policy of unequal protection that can best be described as institutialized mob rule.

          The victims of this complaint are: the Federal Government, the State of California, the County of San Diego, The City of La Mesa, Terri McComas, Todd Brunetti, Robert Chaidez, Rich Riel and every person who has ever filed a complaint against any member of the La Mesa Police Department.

          This complaint is being presented to you because our justice system is built upon the United States Constitution. The La Mesa Police Department, for over ten years, has institutionalized an unwritten policy which will be referred to in this complaint as La Mesa Law. La Mesa Law at its heart is an excuse for the La Mesa Police Department to barter police favors and ignore the Constitution.

          This Complaint is against the La Mesa Police Department, current La Mesa Chief of Police Walt Vasquez, former La Mesa Police Chief Ed Aceves, former La Mesa Police Chief Alan Lanning, La Mesa Police Sgt. Brett Richards, La Mesa Police Officer Higgins Badge # 1232, La Mesa Police Officer Snow Badge # 1235, La Mesa Police Officer Salazar Badge # 1234, all the La Mesa Police Officers who have had citizen complaints filed against them and John Loy Williams.

          Referring to any member of the La Mesa Police Department as a police man is to demean the honor and professionalism of those who serve and protect as legitimate police officers. In this complain, the thugs who masquerade as police officers as well as the organization itself will be referred to as the La Mesa Mob.

The basis of the complaint is an institutionalized policy of privileges' for the rich and influential and violations of the constitutional rights for those who challenge the authority of the La Mesa Mob. Under this policy, the Constitution of the United States is subordinated to La Mesa Law.

La Mesa Law can best be explained by the three pillars that support this unconstitutional behavior of the La Mesa Mob. This three tiered policy provides: 1. citizens without influence and not perceived as trouble makers, get a standard brand of treatment that can be mistaken for good police procedures; 2. If you are a person of influence with the La Mesa Police Department you get unconstitutional preferential treatment; 3. If you are a perceived criminal or uncooperative you are subject to having your constitutional rights routinely violated by members of the La Mesa Mob.

This complaint will use four victims and three recipients’ of this policy to demonstrate how La Mesa Law works.   

The recipients of the special treatment that are used in this complaint are former La Mesa Mayor, Art Madrid, former La Mesa City Finance Department Employee, Trisha Turner and Johnie Loy Williams Jr. These individuals and others are regularly given preferential treatment when they came in contact with the La Mesa Mob.

The following victims are used to demonstrate the treatment you can expect from the La Mesa Mob if they think you are a criminal or uncooperative: Robert Chaidez; Todd Brunetti; Terry McComas and Rich Riel.

LA MESA LAW PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT

In an official La Mesa Mob Incident report a La Mesa Mob member reports La Mesa Mayor Art Madrid and La Mesa City Finance Department Employee Trisha Turner, were so drunk the Mayor was vomiting on the streets of La Mesa, while his Finance Director was passed out in the driver’s seat of the Mayors’ car. The Mob member, when he identified the drunk as the Mayor and the other drunk as a high ranking city employee, gave them both the special treatment reserved for those who have influence with the La Mesa Mob.  Neither one of them was given a sobriety test nor were they arrested. Instead they were driven home in a La Mesa squad car. Mayor Madrid upon arrival at his home was incapable of unlocking the front door. His Mob escort was kind enough too unlocked and opened the door for the Mayor. Mayor Madrid’s relationship with the La Mesa Mob is well document. La Mesa Law is good for those who have influence with the La Mesa Mob.

Not so well documented are people like Mr. Williams, a career criminal, who has stolen over $250,000 of California Tax Payer's funds and is allowed to continue his criminal activities because of his special relationship with the La Mesa Mob. Mr. Williams has committed crimes which have been reported to the La Mesa Mob. The La Mesa Mob, because of its three tiered system of law enforcement policy (La Mesa Law), refuses to investigate the well documented fact that Mr. Williams has a fraudulently obtained California driver’s license, has committed perjury to obtain a Contractor’s license and in numerous cases committed perjury to obtain services and benefits he would not otherwise be entitled to.   

WILLIAMS

          John Loy Williams, (aka Johnie Loy Williams Jr. (birth name), aka Johhnie Loy Williams, aka Johhnie Loy Williams Jr., aka John L. Williams, aka John L. Williams Jr., aka John Loy Williams, Jr., aka John Williams, aka Johnie Loy Williams, aka Johnie Williams, aka Johnnie Loy Williams, aka Johnnie Loy Williams Jr.) is a convicted drug felon who has also been convicted more than twelve times on various charges including possession of a controlled substance(meth), DUI, burglary and assault.

          Mr. Williams has influence with the La Mesa Mob that allows him to continue his crimes with no interference from them. This special treatment allows him to commit crimes with their knowledge and consent. This complaint will summarize some of the known crimes that have been committed by Mr. Williams.

          Chief Vasquez, Chief Aceves,  Chief Lanning, Sgt. Brett Richards, Officer Higgins, Officer Snow, Officer Salazar, all have personal knowledge of Mr. Williams illegal conduct. The La Mesa Mob has made a conscious decision to ignore Constitutional Law when by ignoring the law it means more money or influence will accrue to the Mob.

          Mr. Williams has been accorded special treatment by immunity from any investigation.  Mr. Williams, a drug made millionaire, has been accorded professional courtesy from the La Mesa Mob who choose to ignore his criminal enterprise because of the benefits of a relationship with Mr. Williams.

In San Diego Superior Court (Case No.  M103878) People v Johnnie Loy Williams, Mr. Williams, drug felon, perjured himself to obtain government services reserved for the indigent. He further perjured himself by claiming he had never been arrested for drugs or alcohol. Mr. Williams, as a direct result of the perjury was granted a public defender, special treatment reserved for first time offenders and a waiver of fees. As a result of this perjury, Mr. Williams, in this case alone has stolen government services and public funds with an estimated value of over $50,000 and was not punished as a repeat offender.

At the time he made these statements under oath he was living in El Cajon, he had previous alcohol and drug related convictions, was an owner operator of his own contracting firm, owned classic cars free and clear, apartment buildings free and clear and had cash on hand of over $50,000. Mr. Williams had, and continues to have, a net worth in excess of $1,000,000. The La Mesa Mob has been informed in writing of these crimes.

La Mesa Mob Law caters to people with money and/or influence. Money collected for the application of La Mesa Mob Law can help the La Mesa Mob supplement its payroll either from a cash bonus to a mob member or by City Council budget approval.          

While on trial for DUI for the case cited above, Mr. Williams applied for and was granted a California driver’s license number N8250567 under the alias Johnie Loy Williams. In applying for the license, Mr. Williams did not list any of his other aliases, his prior convictions or the fact that he was currently being tried for a DUI in the above referenced case. Mr. Williams committed fraud in obtaining the California drivers license. As of the date of this complaint, Mr. Williams has in his possession an illegally obtained California driver’s license. The La Mesa Mob is aware of this crime and chooses to ignore it.   

On October 8th 2010, in Superior Court (Case No. EV17399) Williams v McComas, Defendant Williams using the alias John Williams, under oath in an application for a restraining order against Ms. McComas, told a judge, that he had contacted Ms. McComas‘s attorney Lisa Berg and informed her of the hearing. He further stated under oath that she (Lisa Berg) would not make an appearance at the hearing. Ms. Berg later testified in court neither she, nor her office received a call on that day from Defendant Williams about the hearing.  Defendant Williams perjured himself again when he claimed that Ms. McComas, on October 7th in the early evening pulled a hand gun on Defendant Williams. The La Mesa Mob is aware of this crime and chooses to ignore it.

Mr. Williams was arrested and charged with selling meth before he had lived with Ms. McComas. She never knew he was a convicted drug dealer. At the time she hired Riel to protect her from Mr. Williams she had no idea of his criminal past.  Mr. Williams knew that Ms. McComas kept hidden in her home ammunition and a hand gun. Mr. Williams while he lived with Ms. McComas was in violation of the law that prohibits felons from having guns.

On October 8th, 2010, Riel was in lawful possession of Ms. McComas's home on 7863 Highwood Ave, La Mesa, California. At approximately 4PM, Mr. Williams, while on probation for a DUI, with a fraudulently obtained driver's license, drove up to Highwood home. He was driving the same van that he had been arrested in for the DUI just months before.  Mr. Williams arrived at the home knowing that Ms. McComas was not at home with the intention of breaking into an unoccupied house. Mr. Williams brought tools with him that would facilitate breaking into a house. To make sure no one was home Mr. Williams rang the door bell.

Riel behind a locked specially keyed security door to which only Riel had the key, saw Mr. Williams at the door. He saw the tools that Mr. Williams had brought with him to break in. Riel ordered Mr. Williams off the property. Mr. Williams was clearly surprised to find the house was occupied.  Mr. Williams refused to leave and both Riel and Mr. Williams called the Police Department for the City of La Mesa.

La Mesa Mob Member Sgt. Sweeney, with henchmen Garcia, Willis, Cox, Hugging, Hildebrand, Chambers, and Hinton, arrived at the Highwood house. Riel, unaware of La Mesa Law cooperated fully with the police officers. Riel showed the officers the County Recorder “Certified Grant Deed” provided to him by the owner of the Highwood House showing that the only one on title to the house was McComas. Riel was requested by the Mob to allow them to come inside the Highwood house to confirm Riel was in lawful possession of the house. Riel agreed to the request and invited the Mob members inside the Highwood house while Mr. Williams was kept outside.   The Mob asked if Riel was in contact with the owner. Riel provided the Mob members with the two phone numbers he had for the Owner.

The Mob, unaware of Mr. Williams's relationship with other Mob members, made a determination that Riel was in lawful possession of Highwood. They told Mr. Williams he was not to return to the property without Mob permission. They were unaware of Mr. Williams's special status, so Riel was accorded what appeared to be standard police behavior, the first tier of La Mesa Law.

At about 8PM, in violation of his agreement with the La Mesa Mob, Mr. Williams returned alone and uninvited to the property. Riel again called the La Mesa Mob.  At least fifteen minutes later Sgt. Brett Richards, Higgins, Snow and Salazar from the La Mesa Mob arrived at the Highwood house.

Riel, a former private investigator, thinking he was dealing with police officers who understood and obeyed the United States Constitution, attempted to make a citizens’ arrest on Mr. Williams for trespass.  Sgt. Richards flatly refused to arrest Mr. Williams for any crimes including driving on an illegally obtained license. Sgt. Richards told Riel he “knew Williams.” It was at that moment Riel realized the Mr. Williams had a special relationship with Sgt. Richards that meant that Sgt. Richards could not and would not be impartial in his deliberations. It was at this moment that Riel began to suspect that La Mesa Police Officers were different from every other law enforcement professional he had ever dealt with. It was the first time in his countless contacts with the police that he felt that a police officer was not there to protect and serve.

La Mesa Law entitles Mr. Williams, like the Mayor, to that special treatment reserved for those who have influence with the La Mesa Mob. Sgt. Richards was in the employment of Mr. Williams and clearly understood who was paying for Sgt. Richards and his henchmen. Mr. Williams needed to get back into the Highland house to recover $40,000 in cash and his drugs which he had hidden in the house. Sgt. Richards was able to facilitate the recovery of Mr. Williams's cash and drugs by using La Mesa Law to ignore Riel's legal right to possession of the Highland home.

Sgt. Richards told Riel that he wanted to search the Highwood house. Riel asked Sgt. Richards if he had a search warrant. Sgt. Richards said he “did not need a search warrant to go into the Highwood House.”  Riel told Sgt. Richards, he was wrong, if he was going to come into the Highwood house legally he would need a search warrant to do it. Riel went inside the house and locked the door behind him.

Sgt. Richards asked Riel to come outside a second time. Riel, still not fully aware of the consequences of being under the jurisdiction of La Mesa Law, complied with the request.  Sgt. Richards asked Riel if he was in possession of a hand gun. Riel, unlike Mr. Williams was unaware that Ms. McComas had secreted a gun in the house Riel was occupying. Riel responded truthfully that he had no gun. Sgt. Richards went on to explain that California had a specific law that prohibits defending a home from invasion if there is the ability to leave without harm. Sgt. Richards said that he and his cohorts had other Mob business and would be leaving soon. If Williams should attempt to break in Riel must leave.

Riel was now fully cognizant that he was dealing with a thug in a uniform pretending to be a police officer. When Sgt. Richards asked Riel what he would do if Mr. Williams attempted to break in, Riel replied, "I'll arrest him and detain him for a real police officer."  Riel went back in to the house to prepare for the break in by Mr. Williams promised by Sgt. Richards. 

Sgt. Richards for a third time asked Riel to unlock the door and step outside to talk to him. While Riel was engaged in conversation with Sgt. Richards, La Mesa thugs Higgins, Snow and Salazar came up from behind Riel grabbing his arms, holding them behind him and then handcuffing him. Riel was taken from the porch of the Highwood house in handcuffs and placed in the back seat of a locked police cruiser still in handcuffs. While Riel was handcuffed and locked inside a single seat police cruiser confinement cell, Sgt. Richards and his henchmen without permission or legal authority conducted an illegal search of the Highwood house. Riel requested he be allowed to call his lawyer. Sgt. Richards refused to allow the call.

While Riel was incarcerated Mr. Williams waited as his employees inspected the house. In a police report of the gun incident, not provided to Riel, it references that in spite of a search by Sgt. Richards and his henchmen, no gun was found. Mr. Williams, the ex felon, after being given possession of the house went into the house while Riel was hand cuffed and found the gun for his employees. Clearly an ex felon in possession of a firearm did not bother the men of La Mesa Law. They confiscated the gun so Ms. McComas would not have it to protect herself from Mr. Williams.

At the end of the hour Riel was released from the cruiser, the handcuffs were removed and his house key was given to Mr. Williams. Sgt. Richards had taken Riel’s possession of the Highwood house and given it illegally to Mr. Williams. Sgt. Richards told Riel if he stayed on the property he had given to Mr. Williams, Mr. Williams would have Riel arrested for trespass. Riel, could not have an ex felon arrested for trespass under La Mesa Law, but should Mr. Williams request it Riel would have been arrested.
         
An honest police officer in a civil dispute for possession of a home between: a drug felon, who had just been convicted of a DUI, having an illegal obtained California drivers license, admitting  he had lived in the house with a gun; and a law abiding citizen in possession; would never have allowed that felon into the house. An honest police officer would have arrested the felon as soon as he knew he was in possession of a fraudulently obtained driver's license. Sgt. Richards is not an honest police officer, he like the rest of the Mob, is a thug who sells his office as a police officer to other criminals.

Riel believed in his constitutional rights to the quiet enjoyment of his home and to expect equal treatment from an officer sworn to "Protect and Defend the Constitution." Sgt. Richards holds La Mesa Law superior to the Constitution. Under La Mesa Law Sgt. Richards was correct he did not need a search warrant. Sgt. Richards is exempt from providing equal protection because La Mesa Law specifically provides for different kinds of protect. Riel believes that the outcome of this investigation will prove Sgt. Richards wrong and Riel was right. This investigation will send a message to the La Mesa Mob, La Mesa Law is not superior to the Constitution of the United States.

WILLIAMS CRIMINAL HISTORY

Riel was unaware of the extent of Mr. William's criminal background until after he met Sgt. Richards. All the following information about Mr. Williams was obtained from public records. Chief Vasquez, Chief Aceves, Chief Lanning, Sgt. Richards, and other members of the La Mesa Mob are aware of this history. The Mr. Williams that is refer to in this complaint has a birth date of January 22, 1962 and his social security number is 571-37-6780, he owns and resides at his debt free apartment complex in El Cajon. All of the court cases below reference Mr. Williams by last name, his social security number and birth date.  The following is a list of some, but not all of the convictions Mr. Williams have recorded against him.

Mr. Williams attended high school in Ridgecrest, California. His first recorded arrest and conviction was for Juvenile Battery in 1980.  There is no case number or public record available.

The following cases are in East Kern Municipal Court, District County of Kern, for the State of California.

3/9/81 Case # MC 3612 case name Johhnie Loy Williams Jr.
PC  459 burglary PC 17 felony
PC  459 burglary PC 17 felony
Charged felony
Convicted misdemeanor

3/25/81 Case #MT 3667 case name Johnie Loy Williams
cvc 23103 Reckless Driving
cvc  26311(a) Every motor vehicle shall be equipped with service brakes on all wheels,
Charged misdemeanor
Convicted misdemeanor

8/16/82 Case #MT-5105 case name John Loy Williams
4000(a) cvc Registration Required
12500(a) cvc Unlawful to Drive Unless Licensed
Charged misdemeanor
Convicted misdemeanor

8/31/83 Case #FC 0464 case name Johnie Loy Williams
PC 487.1 grand theft: property.
Charged felony
Convicted misdemeanor

1/15/85 Case #MC-5105 case name Johnnie Loy Williams Jr.
653(m) PC Harassment
653(m) PC Harassment
653(m) PC Harassment
653(m) PC Harassment
Charged misdemeanor
Convicted misdemeanor

11/20/85 Case # R000303 case name Johnnie Loy Williams
PC 594 (b) (2) vandalism
Charged misdemeanor
Convicted misdemeanor

12/23/85 Case #R 000373 case name Johnnie Loy Williams, Jr.
242 PC Battery
415.1 PC Challenging to fight
Charged misdemeanor
Convicted misdemeanor

2/10/86 Case #R000530 case name Johhnie Loy Williams
597(b) PC Animal Abuse
Charged misdemeanor
Convicted misdemeanor

12/29/86 Case # R001567 case name Johnie Loy Williams Jr.
CVC 23109(c)
Charged misdemeanor exhibition of speed
Convicted misdemeanor

2/9/87 Case #R001739 case name Johnie Loy Williams
 Handwritten on docket index card “853.6 to app.2/26/87 8:45AM”
PC 647 (f) disorderly conduct, under the influence
Charged misdemeanor
Convicted misdemeanor

5/21/87 Case # R002155 case name Johnnie Loy Williams
242 PC Battery
242 PC Battery
415.1 PC Challenging to fight
Charged misdemeanor
Convicted misdemeanor

8-21-87 Case #FR35006 case name Johnnie Loy Williams
11379 H&S sale of controlled substance
11378 H&S possession of controlled substance
Charged felony on first count; plea bargain dropped first count in exchange for an agreed to guilty on 2nd count.
Convicted felony

Below is the narrative from Kern County crime report R187-01889 detailing the sale of meth from Mr. Williams to undercover   Deputy C. Ericsson, dated 8-18-87.

On 8-17-87 at approximately 1900 hours Sr. Deputy FIVECOAT and I met with the suspect later identified as JOHNNIE WILLIAMS in the Thrifty Drug parking lot in the 100 block of No. China Lake Blvd. We walked up to a faded yellow Cadillac which had earlier been described to us as the vehicle the suspect would be in. We then made contact with JOHNNIE and a few minutes a subject later identified as BOB walked up to the vehicle. Sr. Deputy FIVECOAT and BOB struck up a conversation and advised us they were going into the drug store to purchase some beer. As they left I got in on the driver's side and JOHNNIE was sitting on the passenger side. I asked JOHNNIE if he had any product with him and he handed me a package of cigarettes, I looked inside and observed a plastic baggie containing a white substance. He told me that the product he had handed to me was at least sixty-five percent pure. I asked him how much he wanted for it and he told me he gets $100 for a sixteenth. I then put the cigarette package in my shirt pocket and handed JOHNNIE a $100 bill. Approximately five minutes later Sr. Deputy FIVECOAT and the WMA identified as BOB returned to the vehicle and we had some general discussion while we drank a beer.' A short time later FIVECOAT and I left the vehicle with the understanding that we would make contact with them at a later date. Shortly thereafter Sr. Deputy FIVECOAT and I made contact with fellow officers in the area and had some further discussion about the case. ... After completing these tasks we returned to the Bakersfield NTF office where I conducted a Valtox test on the substance. The test proved presumptive positive for the presence of methamphetamine. I then sealed the cigarette package which contained the suspected methamphetamine in a Kapak and put it inside a lab envelope, which was also sealed.

Mr. Williams hired Attorney Carl Osborne. Mr. Osborne traveled from his office on Wilshire Blvd., in Los Angeles to make appearances in Ridgecrest and Bakersfield. Mr. Osborne charged rates that would facilitate him maintaining an office in a downtown Los Angles high rise. Mr. Osborne settled this case in less than 90 days. In the plea bargain the State agreed to drop the first charge, dealing, if Mr. Williams pled guilty to a lesser charge of possession. 

This is verbatim from the Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings hearing on Probation Officer’s Report and Passing of Judgment, held in Superior Court of California in and for the county of Kern, Bakersfield, California December 15, 1987 case #35006

Page 3 lines 4-15
Carl Osborne Attorney for the Defendant

 …Mr. Williams (has)…. had very minimal contact with law enforcement before. He indicated in the probation officer’s report that he had an alcohol problem which he had gone though the Sheriff’s Program in Ridgecrest and the Sheriff’s Alcohol Rehabilitation Program in 1986 and he has followed continually that course so that he no longer feels he has an alcohol problem except that he still takes care of himself on a day to day basis because once you’re an alcoholic, you’re always one and he understands that.

Page 6 lines 12-15
Hon. Len McGillivray

It is a serious offense that he (Williams) engaged in. I do note that the defendant -- his record consists of one Juvenile battery. In 1981, petty theft.  In 1983, misdemeanor grand theft and that’s it.

Mr. Williams failed to disclose to the court his past convictions. He had learned from experience the weakness of our legal system. By exploiting the commonality of his name and perjury he had considerably lessened the time he would have to serve. The fact that he was committing perjury paled in comparison to the fact he was a convicted drug “user” instead of a convicted drug “dealer.” Perjuring himself got him 140 days in City jail instead of a well deserved longer sentence in a State Prison.

WILLIAMS CURRENT CRIMINAL ACTIVITY

In July 1995, Mr. Williams, a self employed handy man with a felony conviction for drugs,  no apparent source of income, purchased a four unit apartment complex in El Cajon, at 550 Richfield Avenue in the name of John L Williams Jr. Document #: 1995-0293275. The purchase price was $145,000. Mr. Williams put $39,000 cash through escrow and began making mortgage payment on a new $116,000 loan. In spite of keeping one unit in the apartment complex vacant since his purchase, (the windows are boarded up but the unit still has gas, electricity and water), Mr. Williams paid off his loan in fifteen years. In fifteen years, with one unit vacate, and until 2006 a self employed handy man, Mr. Williams paid off his loan. The reconveyance deed from the mortgage company was recorded in 2010. In later court proceedings, under oath, Mr. Williams told the judge that he always keeps $40,000 in cash in his house because he distrusts banks. In the same case under oath his sister testified the "John always had $40,000 in cash anywhere he was staying." 

In Jan. 2006, Mr. Williams applied to the State of California Contractors State License Board for a  C20-Warm-Air Heating, Ventilating and Air-Conditioning License using the name, Johnie Loy Williams Jr. He perjured himself when he failed to disclose his felony and misdemeanor convictions or the many aliases he has employed in the past. His license was initially declined when a record search showed the felony drug conviction. He appealed the decision, claiming he forgot to list the conviction. He did not disclose any of his other convictions knowing that if disclosed them his license would be denied. The license was issued September of 2006. Once again, Mr. Williams by exploiting the commonality of his name and perjury had achieved his goals.

Below is the police report for San Diego Superior Court (Case No.  M103878) People v Johnnie Loy Williams for DUI on February 6th, 2010.

On February 6, 2010, at about 7:05 p.m., San Diego Police Officer James Zirpolo was patrolling the QUALCOMM Stadium parking lot in San Diego. Officer Zirpolons attention was drawn to a green Dodge caravan in the parking lot of QUALCOMM Stadium. The vehicle was moving without its headlights on; the driver of the vehicle was speaking on his cell phone while driving.

Officer Zirpolo stopped the driver, later identified as Defendant Jonnie Loy Williams. Officer Zirpolo called for backup. Officers Thornton and Velovich responded. Officer Velovich smelled a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage coming front the Defendant's breath. The officer noticed that Defendant's speech was slurred and his eyes were bloodshot and glassy. Defendant admitted that he had consumed three beers in the last two hours with the last beer consumed about a half hour ago.

Officer Velovich conducted a brief investigation. Defendant stated that he suffered from arthritis. Defendant's performance on the FSTs indicated physical impairment, difficulty balancing, trouble counting and trouble following directions. Officer Velovich subsequently arrested Defendant for driving under the influence of alcohol in violation of Vehicle Code section 23 152(a) and (b) and for driving without a valid license in violation of vehicle code section 12500(a). Defendant later submitted to a breath chemical test which measured Defendant's alcohol level at 12%.

This is the same Mr. Williams, who when he was 25, hired Carl Osborne, Wilshire Blvd. Attorney, to cut a deal for him on his Drug Dealing Charge.  Mr. Osborne speaking on behalf of his client said,” He (Mr. Williams) had an alcohol problem which he had gone though the Sheriff’s Program in Ridgecrest and the Sheriff’s Alcohol Rehabilitation Program in 1986 …. he(Mr. Williams) still takes care of himself on a day to day basis because once you’re an alcoholic, you’re always one and he understands that.”

On Feb. 13, a week later, Terry McComas, Mr. Williams ex girl friend filed in court for an Emergency Protective Order against Mr. Williams for abusive behavior. The order was served on him before he could get his $40,000 or the drugs secreted in the house.

Mr. Williams has had 3 abusive relationships with women. Every one of those women has filed restraining orders against him. All of them now have permanent restraining orders against him.

On Feb 25, Mr. Williams, formerly of La Mesa, now living in his free and clear apartment complex in El Cajon, claimed under oath, he was indigence. He made a Motion for representation by a public defender in his DUI case, which was granted. Mr. Williams, a self acknowledged alcoholic, convicted drug felon, convicted twice for alcohol abuse failed to disclose his former convictions. At the time he failed to disclose his past convictions, he failed to disclose that he had $40,000 in cash at the Highland house, over $50,000 on deposit in various banks, he owned a four unit apartment complex with no debt, a 2002 green Dodge Caravan, a 2001 Ford work truck and an Jamboree Sport class C motor home by Fleetwood all free and clear. Instead Mr. Williams was credible enough that the judge made a finding he was an indigent and living in Arizona. The Judge ordered the government to pay Mr. Williams legal defense costs and waived some of the fees. 

Mr. Williams stole over $50,000 in services he was not entitled to, avoided jail time, had fees and fines reduced or waived, simply by doing what he has done all his life, lie under oath.

On Aug. 2nd Mr. Williams was convicted of a misdemeanor DUI. All the time that Mr. Williams was instructed by the court not to drive, Mr. Williams drove with impunity. During this time Mr. Williams applies for and is granted a California Drivers license. He committed perjury when he failed to disclose his DUI and drug convictions, his aliases or his past criminal record.   

SGT. RICHARDS, $40,000, A FELON IN POSSESSION OF A FIREARM AND DRUGS

 On Sept. 24th, at the direction of her attorney Lisa Berg, Ms. McComas filed an incident report with the La Mesa Mob for violations of her restraining order against Mr. Williams. Ms McComas and her Attorney were unaware of La Mesa Mob Law or the influence that Mr. Williams has within the Mob.

Ms. McComas told me that a background check was done on her when she filed her Sept. incident report. She told me that she was questioned closely by Mob flunky Garcia about an alias she had failed to include in the September incident report. It was a married name she had not used in over ten years. Ms. McComas said Mob member Garcia made her feel bad about filing the violations of the restraining order. He gave her the impression that he felt it was Ms. McComas's fault that Mr. Williams had violated the court order. He said Mr. Williams' violations were minor.

The Mob lackey who took her complaint was rude and abusive. He inferred that it was a waste of his time to take the report. The Mob, using all the resources a modern police station can offer had done an extensive background check of Ms. McComas. She was a victim of La Mesa Law. During the charade of an independent investigation the Mob called Mr. Williams and asked him nicely not to bother Ms. McComas. Finding nothing against Ms. McComas, other than an unlisted alias, the mob had to content itself with refusing to turn over the violations to the District attorney's office for prosecution.

On September 29th Ms. McComas went before a Judge to get a permanent restraining order against Mr. Williams. Attorney Berg argued that Mr. Williams had repeatedly violated the restraining order.

Mr. Williams on the stand lied about the violations minimizing them and correctly pointing out the Mob had refused to refer it to the prosecuting attorney.  Mr. Williams drawing on his vast experience of manipulating our justice system convinced the Judge not to grant a permanent restraining order against him. When the Judge was asked why he ruled against Ms. McComas, he said, “Mr. Williams was the more credible of the two.” Mr. Williams’ history shows us that when Mr. Williams commits perjury he is very credible.

Mr. Williams knew that he now had the Judge on his side. Mr. Williams wanted revenge against McComas. But more importantly, he had to get back into the house to get his $40,000 and stash of drugs. Mr. Williams was methodical; he wanted to punish Ms. McComas for taking him to court. What better way to extract revenge, than to use the Judge who had originally issued the restraining order against him to do the same to her? He figured that the best time to maximize the hurt he could cause Ms. McComas would be on the long weekend of Columbus Day. If he was successful it would give him an extra day in the house before Ms. McComas could file any actions with the court.

On October 8th, Friday, the start of the Columbus Day weekend, late in the morning, Mr. Williams appeared before the same judge that found him so credible. Mr. Williams concocted a story about Ms. McComas threatening him with a gun the night before when he supposedly had dropped by the house in the early evening to ask about his personal belongs. It was easy for the Judge to believe him, especially when he failed to tell Ms. McComas's attorney about the special hearing so no one could dispute Mr. Williams's perjury.

Mr. Williams told the judge under oath that he had contacted Ms. McComas‘s attorney Lisa Berg and informed her of the hearing. He told the Judge that Lisa Berg would not be attending the hearing. Ms. Berg was later to testify in court under oath neither she, nor her office received a call from Mr. Williams about the hearing. Mr. Williams under oath when asked why Ms. Berg was not in court, said, “… Ms. Berg told him she could not attend the hearing for her client because of a conflict.”

With no one to represent Ms. McComas, Mr. Williams was free to create a story about fearing for his life and the need to be protected against Ms. McComas. Mr. Williams asked the judge for a restraining order against Ms. McComas. He claimed that he feared for his life, she had threatened him with a gun just the night before. The Judge with no opposing arguments, unaware that Williams was a convicted felon who had lived in house for over ten years with a hand gun, and already predisposed to believe Mr. Williams, granted the restraining order. The Judge admonished Mr. Williams that it had no effect until it was served and not to serve the papers himself. The Judge in granting the restraining order never envisioned how Mr. Williams was going to use the Order to punish Ms. McComas

Mr. Williams was on a roll, by lying he had the method to get back into the house and get his money and drugs. Using the restraining order was the perfect revenge for Mr. Williams; he did to her what she did to him. Now all that remained was to get her served so he could take possession of the house.  At the end of the day Mr. Williams had his restraining order and he knew exactly how he was going to serve it.

Mr. Williams original plan was to take the restraining order with him to Ms. McComas home, break in while she was at work and wait for her to come home. When she got home he would abuse her until the Mob arrived. When the Mob arrived he would give them the restraining order. They would server her and escort her out of the house. She would be out on the street while he enjoyed the comfort of her home. At his leisure he could remove his drugs, money and personal property while Ms. McComas would be homeless.

Ms. McComas was afraid of Mr. Williams. She was afraid that she would come home from work and find Mr. Williams in her home.  To protect herself from Mr. Williams she arranged for Riel to move in as a security guard for her home. Riel was given a key to the house. Riel was given a room for his exclusive use and space to store his personal belongings and food.  Riel moved in with computer equipment, other personal items and security devises. Riel installed a security camera over the garage. Riel came to the Highwood home every day and left after briefing McComas about what happened and what to do if Mr. Williams attempted to break in.

On October 7th, the day that Mr. Williams claimed he was threaten by Ms. McComas she returned home about 6:30PM. Riel reviewed the security measures that he had suggested to Ms. McComas. Riel checked the security camera recordings, confirmed they were on and recording. He then left the house after 8PM. Before he left he made sure she understood she was to call the police and than him if Mr. Williams showed up at her house.  

On October 7th, during the time Riel was with Ms. McComas, and until 11PM, Mr. Williams was attending a first offender alcohol program that was mandated by his DUI conviction. The class let out at 11PM. Mr. Williams was never at the Highland house that night and no confrontation between him and Ms. McComas occurred.

On the afternoon of October 8th, Mr. Williams with his well thought out plan for revenge drove up to the Highwood house in his green van (the same one he got arrested in for his DUI conviction earlier in the year) at about 4:00PM. Mr. Williams got out of his car, with tools to facilitate the break into the house. Just to make sure the house was empty, he rang the door bell as he was getting ready to break in.

At this moment his well thought out plan hit a road bump, the house was occupied by a stranger.   Riel opened the inner door and looked out at him through a newly installed locked security screen door. This was the first time that Riel had any contact with Mr. Williams. Until that moment Riel only knew Mr. Williams by what he had been told by Ms. McComas. He was aware that Mr. Williams was a felon but not aware of all the crimes that Mr. Williams had committed in his career. Williams was surprised that the house was occupied. Riel asked Mr. Williams who he was. Mr. Williams identified himself as John Williams’ owner of the house. Riel told him that Ms. McComas was the owner of Highwood and for Mr. Williams to get off the property.

Mr. Williams assessed the situation and did what his training as a convicted drug felon, admitted alcoholic with a lifelong propensity for violence and perjury, currently on probation for a DUI does when he is caught breaking into a house, he called the La Mesa Mob. The following are excerpts of the only reports of this encounter disclosed by La Mesa Mob.

The incident report that was provided to Riel is quoted below. Close examination of this report indicates that the La Mesa Mob has whited out sections that appear on the original report. This information was withheld with no explanation as to the reason. Riel believes that some of the whited out sections refer to the gun in the house.

 

INCIDENT NUMBER:0LM0047128
8065  16:27:52   INCIDENT NUMER:0LM0047128
8065  16:28:03  Williams says he just arrived home and a strange male is inside the house.
8065  16:28:03   Riel is telling Williams to leave (the rest is whited out)
8065  16:28:52   UKN Race Williams says he can’t provide any descript because he can’t see through the door
8065  16:30:31   Williams says he currently resides there with his GF Terry 619 277 8858  
8065  16:30:56    Her car isn’t there – she drives a 98 corvette
8159  16:31:37    Male outside (the rest is whited out)
8213  16:32:20    Rich Riel is a friend of owner of house – Teri McComas -  He was advised to watch the house in case (the rest is whited out)
8065  16:30:56    Williams says things haven’t been good between himself and GF but he still lives there
8213  16: 32:37   John Williams tried to get inside   
8159  16:33:11    104 at 7869 Highwood   
8159  16:33:37    whited out 
8159  16:33:58    Related Incident number: 0LM0047129
8159  16:35:09    whited out 
8159  16:35:22    whited out 
8159  16:38:26    whited out 
8159  16:56:21    All parties adv . .  Williams may call back at 1900 hrs to get a PTP when he returns to the resd  -  Ofcr Garcia
8159  16:56:21     Closed dispo  : advised
  
INCIDENT NUMBER:0LM0047128
8199  21:11:42   CASE NUMER = 10-0000573 (LM) SAFE KEEPING // SNOW
8214  19:53:09  INCIDENT NUMBER: 0LM0047150
8214  18:53:09  … RP NEEDS TO PICK UP BELONGINGS AT LOCATION …. PREVIOUS 
                           CALL OF 415 EARLIER TONIGHT …. RP 10-4 TO WAIT IN FRONT OF
                          HIS RESD….
8214  19:11:51  OTHER ½ ON 9/11 NOW …. RP IS THERE NOW TRYING TO PICK UP
                          BELONGINGS
8214  19:12:10   whited out 
                      whited out 
8214  19:13:17   RICH IS 10-4 TO STAY INSIDE THE HOUSE ….MAKING CB TO ORIGINAL
                           RP TO HAVE HIM WAIT OUTSIDE
8214  19:14:32   ORGINAL RP IS 10-4 TO WAIT OUTSIDE AND TRY TO NOT GAIN ACCESS
                           TO HOUSE
8199 19:16:44    whited out 
8199 19:19:00   whited out 
                    --HE HAS INSTRUCTIONS TO KEEP DOORS/WINDOWS LOCKED –
                   AND TO CB IF JOHN ATTEMPTS TO BREAK IN OR SHOWS A WEAPON
                   whited out                                                                  SITTING ON THE PORCH         
                   WHISTELING TO HIMSELF
8199 19:28:19 RP IS NOW CALLING AGAIN   FOR ETA --- ADV UNITS BEING ISPATCHED          
                   NOW
8217 20:31:38 ONE DETAINED
8199 21:09:48 20S/C4 FOR UNITS
8199 21:12:16 whited out 
8199 22:07:24 CLOSED DISPO : REPORT TAKEN

Logic tells us: if the La Mesa Mob investigation of Ms. McComas was so thorough it uncovered an alias that she had not used in 10 years; than it is logical to conclude that all of the aliases of Williams and his criminal history were known to the Mob. The Mob was aware of the fact that Williams was a felon with a recent DUI in possession of a fraudulently obtained license.

Ms McComas was unaware of the special treatment reserved for people like Mr. Williams. She suffered the indignity of a phony police officer defending an ex felon on parole for a DUI by telling her she was wasting his valuable policing time.

Ms. McComas lost possession of her home because Riel failed to stop Sgt. Richards from throwing him out of the house that night. Riel followed the law, Riel answered truthfully to every question put to him by the police. Mr. Williams lied. Sgt. Richards knew of Mr. Williams's criminal background, his DUI and why Williams needed to get into the Highland house. Sgt. Richards's blatant disregard of the law caused Ms. McComas to be homeless for three weeks while Mr. Williams was given illegal possession of her home.

During that time she had to depend on the charity of others for a place to sleep and bath. At times she was forced to sleep in her car. Ms. McComas got back into her home after three weeks of living on the street, her computer, as was Riel’s, had been rendered inoperable. The home was trashed. The security camera was trashed and the recordings were destroyed. Ms. McComas also found recently issued hundred dollar currency wrappers indicating a substantial amount of money had been in the house left behind by Mr. Williams. It was his way of taunting Ms. McComas.  Williams got his $40,000, his drugs, his possessions and a reasonable man would conclude that Sgt. Richards got a payoff.

Ms. McComas is so traumatized by this experience she has lost all faith in the legal system. She is afraid to assert her rights against the La Mesa Mob because her experience with them shows a bias toward Mr. Williams.

On October 21st, Ms. McComas appeared in court to testify as to what happened. Mr. Williams, with his drugs, money and possession of her home never showed up in court. The Judge granted a motion for a restraining order for fifteen years against Mr. Williams.

In November, Mr. Williams violated the Restraining Order so many time she was again instructed by her attorney to file another police report with the La Mesa Mob. Ms. Berg, like Ms. McComas, was operating under the assumption that La Mesa had a real Police Department.

 The Mob is always consistent in the application of La Mesa Law. They were on Mr. Williams's payroll and not surprisingly, refused to turn over the results of the investigation to the District Attorney Office for prosecution.  

          Mr. Williams is so sure of his special status with the La Mesa Mob, in the report 10-06441 dated 11-14-10 by Mob member D. Cox ID 1201, Mr. Williams hangs up on Cox after inviting him to, "... come out and arrest him."    

          It is clear that Cox didn't understand Mr. William's special relationship with Chief Lanning and Sgt. Richards. Cox was operating under Tier one of La Mesa Law; he did not know that Mr. Williams was a deserving of Tier 2 treatment. Mr. Williams knew that his friend Sgt. Richards or Chief Lanning would make sure no one from the La Mesa Mob would arrest him. Cox knows of Mr. Williams's criminal background and in spite of the taunt and the insult as have other members of the Mob, refused to "... come out and arrest him." Cox knows Mr. Williams is in good with the Chief so the insults and the taunts must be endured if he is to be promoted within the Mob.

          Mr. Williams has become so adept at working the system he now uses it as a club to punish defenseless women.  He lies to a judge so he can continue to harass Ms. McComas. He used our court system to get his revenge for her getting a restraining order against him. He has bribed Sgt. Richards, Chief Lanning and other members of the La Mesa Police Mob, to steal her house.  This is the ugliest truth about La Mesa Law, it perverts justice so much that Mr. Williams can inflict pain and suffering and disguise it as the law.

Ms. McComas understandably has no faith in the law. She told the truth in court and she spent three weeks homeless. She drives to court, knowing that Mr. Williams can’t legally drive. Mr. Williams appears in court knowing Ms. McComas knows he can’t legally drive, there is a warrant out for Mr. Williams arrest and she can't do anything about it.
LA MESA LAW

          The key to understand La Mesa Law is the Citizen Complaint Process. The premise of the La Mesa Mob is La Mesa Law is superior to the United States Constitution and the State of California.  When California passed a law requiring all California Police Departments to have a Citizen Complaint Process, all the law abiding police departments made a good faith effort to implement the process. The exception was the La Mesa Mob.

          Over ten years ago, Chief Lanning decided that he would adapt the process to further expand La Mesa Law to the rank and file of his department. Chief Lanning and his henchmen devised a one page information sheet out lining the process. It was the tier one approach to La Mesa Law," a standard brand of treatment that can be mistaken for good police procedures." On its face the document gives the appearance of compliance with the law.

As the Chief of the La Mesa Mob, Alan Lanning rose through the ranks by enforcing La Mesa Law not only for his henchmen but City Council. The City Council was aware of La Mesa Law and the benefits to be derived from the policy. The Chief knew that the City Council tacitly agreed with his Mob rule. Because of the approval of City Council the Chief answered to no one.

As a Police Chief who answered to no one, Lanning ran his Mob like a benevolent dictator. He surrounded himself by thugs that share his vested interest in perpetuating the La Mesa Law. Under the rule of Lanning, a police officer who wants to follow the constitution is penalized because his arrests are measured against other officers who don’t need a search warrant or probable cause. Police officers know that their conduct is not measured by what is right, but by what Lanning allowed.

All the thugs in the Department know about La Mesa Law because of the bogus complaint system that is in place to enforce the policy. The one page Citizen Complaint Procedures states, ” As a citizen you have the right to initiate a complaint if you feel that a police officer or other employee of the La Mesa Police Department has treated you improperly. All complaints will be investigated thoroughly and as promptly as possible. In the event the investigation discloses misconduct, appropriate administrative action will be taken. The employee has the right to receive a copy of any formal complaint. COMPLAINT PROCEDURE 1. The complainant discusses the nature of the complaint with a supervisor. 2. If a citizen Complaint is desired, the supervisor will take a recorded statement from the complainant. 3. Citizen Complaints are required to be in writing 4. Citizen Complaints are assigned to a supervisor for investigation and upon completion are submitted to the Chief of Police for review.  5. The complainant and the employee are notified of the disposition of the investigation. 6. Citizen Complaints are maintained in file for a minimum of five years.”

          This complaint will use the known experience of four individuals who have filed a total of five complaints over the past ten years. Each one of the complainants followed the instructions for filing a citizen's complaint. After they filed their complaint each complainant waited 90 days. During that period there was no follow up contact by anyone from the La Mesa Mob. At the end of the 90 days each one received a form letter which said:" The La Mesa Police Department has completed the investigation of the complaint you made with the department on, …. I wish to assure you that your complaint was thoroughly investigated. I personally make the final decision in all matters of this nature. Please be advised that allegations made in the complaint have been deemed “Unfounded.”  …. It is my policy to not discuss any details of the investigation…." signed by the Chief and the case is closed.

          The only investigation conducted was by Chief Lanning and his henchmen were to determine which of his Mob to reward for generating the complaint. Each Mob member identified in the complaint got a copy of the complaint and was aware of the predetermined form letter the Chief would send out. Everyone in the Mob knew the Chief would cover for any of his Mob members who used La Mesa Law instead of following the Constitution. The Mob members because of the perversion of the complaint process knew that La Mesa Law was king in La Mesa.

          The complaint process is an integral part of the three tiered policy known as La Mesa Law. The investigation is conducted by Mob members who are aware of La Mesa Law. These same Mob members get their promotions based on following La Mesa Law. Lanning will not promote anyone who is not a team player. A team player understands that when a citizen complaint is filed The Chief will protect the policy and the thugs who up hold the policy. Any deviation from the policy by a real police officer will not change the policy; it will only hinder his promotion. Chief Aceves and Chief Vasquez have been promoted because they, like Lanning, supported and followed the three tiered policy of La Mesa Law.

ROBERT CHAIDEZ VICTIM OF LA MESA LAW

                Robert Chaidez like Mr. Williams has had a history of criminal convictions including drugs.  Mr. Chaidez unlike Mr. Williams was unaware of La Mesa Law. Mr. Chaidez is serving time for various drug charges some of which are the result of his encounter with the La Mesa Mob. Mr. Chaidez is the first of the four complainants; his complaint establishes the earliest public record documentation of La Mesa Law.

          On April 2nd, 2004 Robert Chaidez claims Mob member Sgt. Brett Richards, henchman Mark Becker and Miseal Cerda violated his constitutional rights by an illegal stop and seizure. He filed his complaint from prison.

          In his citizen complaint he alleged he was stopped on the street illegally, dragged to a police car in handcuffs, taken to the La Mesa Police Station, searched, his personal possessions taken from him and he was transported to San Diego Central Jail. While in the custody of La Mesa Police Sgt. Brett Richards, money in the amount of over $8,500 was taken from Chaidez’s wallet. Chaidez claims La Mesa Police Sgt. Brett Richards and La Mesa Police Officer Mark Becker took his money and kept it. In addition to the theft by Sgt. Richards, Robert Chaidez claims that La Mesa Police Officer Mark Becker and La Mesa Police Officer Miseal Cerda planted narcotics on Chaidez

          On May 9th, 2006, Chief Alan Lanning writes,” The La Mesa Police Department has completed the investigation of the complaint you made with the department on February 2, 2005,… I wish to assure you that your complaint was thoroughly investigated. I personally make the final decision in all matters of this nature. Please be advised that allegations made in the complaint have been deemed “Unfounded.”  …. It is my policy to not discuss any details of the investigation…." Chaidez never received a copy of the purported investigation, all he received was the letter assuring him an investigation was done and the officers cleared of all wrong doing.

          TODD BRUNETTI VICTIM OF LA MESA LAW

          On May 3rd, 2009 Todd Brunetti at approximately 4:30AM was in his home with his girl friend and their 11 month old child. At that time La Mesa Police Officers Jacob Wisler, Herschel Massey, Dan Herrin and William Wilson arrived at Brunetti’s home in response to a 911 call from Brunetti’s girl friend Lisa Than, complaining that Brunetti had pushed her, was loud and shouting. Lisa Than in her call to the La Mesa Police never intended to have him arrested.  La Mesa Police Officer Massey spoke with Brunetti. Todd Brunetti denied having any physical contact with Than. He said that Than had slapped him. Without a witness to corroborate the confrontation and Than declining to press charges, Massey determined there was probable cause to place Brunetti under arrest.
         
When Massey decided to arrest Brunetti, Brunetti was holding his 11 month old child in his arms. Officer Massey informed Brunetti he was under arrest and to release the child to Than. Brunetti under the impression he was dealing with police officers who would follow the law, continued to hold the child while asking the officers to leave. Subsequently without provocation La Mesa thug Jacob Wisler, drew his La Mesa Mob issued X26 Taser, while Brunetti was being distracted by Officer Massy, Wisler assaulted Brunetti with the X26. Brunetti paralyzed by pain, the protective instinct of a parent and the physical reaction to a muscle cramping electrical charge of 5,000 volts was unable to release the child. Holding a child he could not release the La Mesa thugs repeatedly tasered and assaulted him while he lay helplessly incapacitated by the tasering. Wisler claims in his report he only tasered Brunetti 3-4 times for an approximate duration of 5 seconds each. Subsequent investigation shows that Wisler tasered Brunetti 9-10 times, for as long as 11 seconds. Not only did Brunetti get tasered, while he was incapacitated he was beat up by elbow strikes to his head and sprayed in the face with Oleoresin Spray.

La Mesa Law tolerates and encourages police brutality.  The thugs who beat up and tasered Brunetti must have been a little embarrassed about their actions they lied about, among other things, the number and duration of the Taser attack on their official report. The thugs were unaware that the Taser itself generates a report of its use.

Brunetti filed a complaint with the La Mesa Police Department. He, like everyone else who files a complaint, received a letter from Chief Lanning assuring him an investigation was done and the results were the police officers did nothing wrong. He, like everyone else, never received a copy of the purported investigation, just a letter from Chief Lanning exonerating the officers. The thugs involved got a copy of the complaint and already knew that they would be exonerated and promoted because of the complaint.

TERRY McCOMAS AND RICH RIEL VICTIMS OF LA MESA LAW

On October 13th, Riel and McComas each separately filed a Citizen’s Complaint with the La Mesa Mob concerning the actions that occurred on October 8th.  They followed the procedures as outlined above. It took three hours to file the complaint. The thug, who took the complaint, spoke to each of the complainants separately. Both complainants filed a verbal recorded deposition and a written complaint. Both complainants’ were led to believe two investigations would be conducted and the results of the investigation would be available to the complainants’.

Riel felt the Mob member he interacted with was rude and inconsiderate. The officer made a number of references to Ms. McComas as Riel's girlfriend. Riel corrects the officer, stating he was married and he had a minimal amount of contact with Ms. McComas prior to his meeting with Sgt. Richards.   The tone of his investigation was that this was a waste of his valuable policing time.

During the alleged investigation no one called Ms. McComas. Riel called twice to ascertain the progress of the investigation and was told the results would be available after the Chief reviewed them. No one from the La Mesa Police Department contacted either Riel or McComas to elaborate on their written and/or recorded statements.

On November 17th, Riel received a letter to his mailing address on Harjoan from Chief Lanning. The salutation was, Dear Ms. McComas. The two paragraph letter said, “The La Mesa Police Department has completed the investigation of the complaint you made with the Department on October 12, 2010.  I wish to assure you that your complaint was thoroughly investigated. I personally review all matters of alleged misconduct. Please be advised that the allegations made in the complaint have been deemed “Unfounded” in Part and “Exonerated” in part.       
It is not my policy to discuss any details of the investigation due to provisions of California law….”

It is clear from the fact the salutation was wrong and the fact the wording of the letter was identical to what MsComas received, that Chief Lanning had not spent a lot of time reviewing the “investigation.” Riel called Chief Lanning on November 29th to clarify what the letter meant and why McComas’s name was on a letter with Riel’s address. The Chief said he would have to get back to Riel later as he did not remember the letter or the circumstances.  It was clear to Riel from his conversation with the Chief; Lanning had no idea about what happened. The letter was drafted for his signature and he presumably signed it.

On November 30th, Riel received a 2nd letter from Chief Lanning which said, “Following our telephone conversation on November 29th I reviewed the investigation of your complaint.  The investigation was conducted by a police lieutenant and your complaints were summarized as being unlawfully removed from what you characterized as your home at 7863 Highwood Avenue, being unlawfully detained for 45 minutes, the house being turned over to another party, and officers unlawfully searching the house. These were collectively identified as Allegation #2 in the complaint investigation. No misconduct on the part of the officers was found with respect to this allegation and the ' disposition for this allegation was ''Exonerated.'' Other issues raised in the complaint  were identified as Allegation #1 and the disposition for that allegation was “Unfounded.''

In summary, the two allegations identified in this complaint investigation, in which you were one of the complainants, were ''Unfounded'' in part and ''Exonerated'' in part, as were related in my letter of November 17th.  With regard to your specific issues, the disposition in that allegation was determined to be “Exonerated.'' A copy of your statement for the complaint investigation is enclosed.

On December 5th, Riel wrote back to the chief: “ Thank you for your quick response to my conversation with you on November 29th.  In your letter to me dated November 30th you wrote the following:

 … your complaints were summarized as being unlawfully removed from what you characterized as your home at 7863 Highwood Avenue, being unlawfully detained for 45 minutes, the house being turned over to another party, and officers unlawfully searching the house. These were collectively identified as Allegation #2 in the complaint investigation… the ' disposition for this allegation was ''Exonerated.''  Other issues raised in the complaint were identified as Allegation #1 and the disposition for that allegation was “Unfounded.''

Based on your last letter I now know what the allegations and disposition was for allegation # 2, what is still unclear to me is what allegation #1 was. Please identify what allegation #1 was, I already know that based on your investigation it was “unfounded.”

In our telephone conversation on the 29th I told you that I had just received a copy of the only police report about my arrest or detainment on October 8th .  I asked you about the statement in the report:

WILLIAMS had an interim California driver's license with an address of 7863 Highwood Ave.

You said that you did know what an interim California driver’s license was, but you would find out for me.

Please identify the two police officer’s by name and badge # that came to my house at 4PM in response to my first 911 call. I was told that they would file a report, does such report exist?

Thank you for your attention to my issues,”

On December 20th, Riel received from Chief Lanning the following,”
On December 17 I received your letter of December 5. You asked that I identify what Allegation #1 was.  Since Allegation #1 related only to the complaint of the second party in this matter, l cannot provide you with any information about the substance of the allegation.

In your letter you related that the report of this incident stated in part ''Williams had an interim California driver's license with an address of 7863 Highwood Ave.” Referring to an earlier telephone conversation we had, you went on to write ''You said that you did know what an interim California driver's license was, but you would find out for me.” I don't recall what additional information you are seeking but in the context of the report I believe the officers were describing the information available to them that linked Mr. Williams to the Highwood Avenue address.

The Department has two related incident reports from your first contact with officers on October 8, 2010, the first at 4:27 PM, #0LMO047128, and the second at 4:29 PM, #0LM0047129. Information from the officers assigned is included in the incident reports.”

          The complaint process is an integral part of La Mesa Law. The investigation is conducted by thugs who are aware of the policy. These same thugs get their promotions based on the rule of Lanning. Lanning will not promote anyone who is not a team player. A team player understands that when a citizen complaint is filed The Chief will protect the policy and the Mob members who up hold the policy. Any deviation from the policy by a police officer will not change the policy; it will only hinder his promotion. Chief Aceves has been promoted because he, like Lanning, supports La Mesa Law.

         A reasonable man would assume a competent investigation of the Riel-McComas investigation would disclose the fact that Williams is a felon, and he used a fraudulently obtained driver's license for identification.  A competent police investigator would wonder why Sgt. Richards would act as the complaint stated. What exists in the La Mob is not competency it is dishonesty.  From police officer to chief everyone covers for everyone else.

          All the information that was submitted in the above complaint is public record and is easily available to any competent, honest police officer investigating Mr. Williams. Sgt. Richards stated to Riel on October 8th he knew Williams. Sgt. Richards was aware of the fact Mr. Williams was a convicted felon in possession of an unlawfully obtained drivers license. Sgt. Richards knew he had a pay day coming if Mr. Williams retrieved his $40,000 and drugs from the Highwood house.

          Sgt. Richards was paid off by Williams to get into the house so Williams could retrieve his $40,000. Sgt. Richards knew Williams to be a drug made millionaire, with a falsely obtained interim California Drivers license.  Sgt. Williams, like all the members of the La Mesa Mob, respect the brilliant manipulation of the legal system that Williams has accomplished. Williams, like the La Mesa Mob, have no respect for the Justice System of America.

          Sgt. Richards's career with the La Mesa Mob has made him very familiar with La Mesa Law. His promotions in spite of the complaints filed against him convinced Sgt. Richards he could do anything on the street he wanted. He knew that anything he did on patrol would and was covered up by Chief Lanning.  He knew that any citizen complaints would be handled by fellow thugs who had a stake in continuing the illegal policy. He was correct in his assumption that his career would be unaffected by any complaints about his illegal actions.

          The real criminal in the La Mesa Mob is Chief Lanning. Whatever his reasons, the facts demonstrate his department confers special favors on select individuals. He encouraged his officers to treat certain people above the law. Lanning, his successors and henchmen use La Mesa Law as a license to steal. In La Mesa everything is for sale. His henchmen knew the Chief would protect them from any actions that would never be tolerated in an honest and competent Police Department. Chief Lanning by his actions and the actions of his successors demonstrate that until an outside agency acts, La Mesa Law has a higher authority than the United States Constitution and is the Law in La Mesa. 

TEN YEARS AFTER CHAIDEZ

          In early April of this year a new Chief succeeded Chief Aceves. Chief Aceves was promoted from within the Mob. Chief Aceves was a clone of Lanning, the Godfather of the La Mesa Mob. The new Chief, Walt Vasquez, was hired without any known connection to the Mob. On April 20th, just over 90 day ago Riel filed another Citizens Complaint with the Mob. The same facts that are presented in this complaint were presented to Chief Vasquez.
         
Riel filed his complaint and like every complainant who had filed before him, waited 90 days for someone from the Mob to contact him. During that period there was no follow up contact by anyone from the La Mesa Mob. At the end of the 90 days, Riel, like each complainant before him, received a form letter which said:" The La Mesa Police Department has completed the investigation of the complaint you made with the department on, …. I wish to assure you that your complaint was thoroughly investigated. I personally make the final decision in all matters of this nature. Please be advised that allegations made in the complaint have been deemed “Unfounded.”  …. It is my policy to not discuss any details of the investigation…." signed by the Chief and the case is closed. A copy of the Chaidez form letter and the Riel form letter are included as part of this complaint.  The Consistency of the paper work and the failure to investigate, confirms the continued existence and health of La Mesa Law.

          Chief Vasquez, all the former chiefs, the La Mesa Mob and Mr. Williams are all criminals, the only difference between Mr. Williams and his fellow criminals is Mr. Williams has been convicted a number of times. The lesson to be learned here is if you want to be a criminal and avoid prosecution become a member of the La Mesa Mob.

          Three years ago Riel filed a complaint with the San Diego County Grand Jury. In the complaint he presented the same facts that are presented here. The Grand Jury has confirmed that Williams has stolen over $50,000 in government services. But Riel's complaint was filed not against Mr. Williams it was against the La Mesa Mob. Mr. Williams continued freedom from arrest raises the more disturbing question as to why a legitimate Police Department would ignore Mr. Williams's crimes.

          The Grand Jury has asked for an explanation and to date has not got an adequate response that would justify a final report. The La Mesa Mob is arrogant; they have ignored requests from the Grand Jury and are stalling hoping the Grand Jury will drop its investigation. A civil grand jury does not have subpoena powers and the La Mesa Mob knows it. The Mob has become so insulated against the consequences of breaking the law they believe themselves to be invulnerable to outside agency's investigations. Chief Vasquez is carrying on the tradition of Mob protection for protecting Mr. Williams and his criminal activities. Chief Vasquez has the honor of being the latest in a string of three to protect Mr. Williams.  
         
MISAPPROPRIATION OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS

For over ten years the La Mesa Mob has embezzled millions of taxpayers' dollars under the pretext of following the law. The men and women named in this complaint all have one common defect; they have put themselves above the law. They have in a calculated manner subverted the law from what they swore to uphold to what is today called La Mesa Law. There is no oversight or audit to protect Federal, State and local funds.  These unsupervised thugs have access to millions of dollars of taxpayer money.

It is a fact that Mob has no real citizen's complaint process. It is a fact the Mob is ignoring requests for an answer to Riel's charges made by the San Diego Grand Jury. These facts beg the question of who is policing the thugs who have control over all the money coming into the department from the Federal Government, the State of California, San Diego County and the City of La Mesa?

If the Mob does not investigate citizen complaints, it follows they will not investigate wrong doing internally. The problem with La Mesa Law is it only works in La Mesa. Mob members have a vest interest in protecting each other from outside investigations. An outside investigation of the Mob, especially if Mr. Williams, long time favorite of the Mob is in jail, would probably encourage some of the less guilty to come forward and confirm what is charged in this complaint. 

In the La Mesa Mob everyone answers to the Chief. Chief Vasquez has been told by Riel in a phone conversation, about Mr. Williams and Mr. Williams bribe to Sgt. Richards.  A principled Police Chief with an honest internal affairs department would have opened an investigation as soon as that complaint came in. Someone other than the Chief would have called Riel to determine that facts as known to Riel. Chief Vasquez in his arrogance has made the decision that Riel's complaint is not worth his staff time so instead of an investigation he sends a form letter.

The La Mesa Mob runs a limousine service for elected officials. They steal from criminals, they routinely violate the constitutional rights of citizens, it is a logical conclusion that they are misappropriating funds from government agencies. Chief Vasquez refuses to investigate Mr. Williams numerous crimes, refuses to answer questions from the San Diego Grand Jury. The only logical reason for these actions is he is covering up the fact that he and the rest of the thugs have perverted our justice system to this despicable thing called La Mesa Law.

REQUESTS

          By this written document I am requesting you, in your capacity as Attorney General of California; to initiate an investigation to do the following:

Confirm the facts presented in this complaint that John Williams committed perjury which resulted in thief of government services worth over $50,000 and that money plus penalties be recovered. That his driving license is investigated to confirm his perjury to obtain said license and that license is confiscated. That his contractor's license be investigated to confirm his perjury to obtain said license and revoke the license.

Investigate former Chief Alan Lanning, Chief Ed Aceves, current Chief Walt Vasquez, Sgt. Richards and all the La Mesa thugs who have had citizen complaints filed against them, for their involvement in a covert policy to violate the constitutional rights of Citizens to their right to enjoy the equal protection of the law.

Perform an audit on the Mob to determine how much money has been diverted from Department funds for illegitimate uses.

Conduct a fair, independent and impartial investigation of the Riel, McComas, Brunetti, Chaidez and all other citizen complaints filed with the La Mesa Police Department and make those findings available to the complainants.

Respectfully submitted,

Rich Riel