REED FILES REQUEST COURT AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT INVESTIGATE TAMPERING AND OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE BY OFFICER HICKS AND CITY OF SPRINGFIELD LAW DEPARTMENT
6-15-13
BREAKING World News
Springfield (MO) A case that has over 380 motions in federal Court now is waiting for review by the United States Supreme Court. Government Attorneys for the City of Springfield Missouri have filed a last ditch effort to stop the motion submitted by Steven L. Reed. Reed says “If you care about 1st Amendment Rights, Right to Petition at all Career Centers nationwide and Wal-Marts, and 14th Amendment, 3rd, 4th, 5th 6th….If you believe the People have the right to effect governmental functioning, Freedom, Justice, Right to Due Process, Government Corruption must be stopped” then you need to read this motion and get involved it is your future and your Country --- not a government owned by the government then read the Motion filed by Petitioner Steven L. Reed.”
Petitioner Reed responds to 3rd City Attorney for Respondent Police Officer Hicks attempt to stop Writ of Certiorari in United States Supreme Court
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0q3d_XW
BREAKING STORY:
STATEMENT RELEASED----Steven L. Reed has sent up a request for the United States Supreme Court to review this case. Please take a look at the actual document at:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0q3d_XW
Petitioner Reed states that the extreme importance of the Free Speech and Constitutional issues is important enough that the “people are asked to send letters requesting the Court to take this case”….
Thanks Steven L. Reed
end
NOTICE
Notice to this Court and the public this request is for a review of the Interlocutory Appeal and that a final ruling has not been decided by the District Court or the Jury. The reversible errors including judicial errors must be reversed/remanded/corrected to allow for a fair jury trialand proper conclusion of case for Petitioner Reed. Reed has been denied basic due process by the lower court and the appeals courts which never wrote any rulings specific to the denial ofthe interlocutory appeals and whether the court of appeals, “has so far departed from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings, or sanctioned such a departure by a lower court, as to call for an exercise of this Court’s supervisory power” under Rule 10(a) of this Court’s rules.
…Whether the right to petition the government for redress of grievances, public access, freedom of speech, public access and political association are required for career centers which are formed in each state under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 set up by the United States Congress….
Dear Freedom and Constitutional Supporters:
Please send these sites to people you know.
If you want to help either:
- Send to media.
- Help find a lawyer.
- Give a grant of $100, $500, $1,000 to $5,000 --- to help take this case to the June 3, 2013 Trial by Jury.
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0q3d_X
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0q3d_X
Please join my Facebook at Steven L. Reed Springfield MO
Mailing Address is:
Steven L. reed
1441 S. Estate Ave
Springfield, MO 65804
THANKS!
10-15-12
Notice: Statement Released to the World Community
The case in currently in the 8th Circuit Appeals Court in St. Louis as an interlocutory appeal requesting review of fabrication of evidence. Real evidence is needed to show the Jury. It will be coming back down to the District Court where 290 Motions have been filed and it will be heading to a Jury Trial by the end of this year or the start of next year---Thanks Steven Reed---
End
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-new
MUST SEE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYKyMyPG1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZ3Pwt9wc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8o8ynjKnf
APPEAL 5-12-12
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fLJ4
Up to the Appeals Court---please see link---thanks!
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FnDU
STATEMENT ISSUED JANUARY 1, 2012
Petitioning is the “Rights of the Citizens” to effect governmental functioning, and it along with liberties is included in the 1st, 5th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 13th, 14th, 15th, and 26th amendments of the Constitution are in peril. The most paramount issue is the fact that our Constitution on the State and Federal level must be adhered to.
In February 2010, I was getting signatures at the Career Center in Springfield for two ballot issues. The property manager showed up and said no to petitioning claiming the sidewalk is private property, and I said “call the police” and a police officer showed up and stated if I did not leave he would arrest me. I read to the officer and several government employees the “CITY OF FLORISSANT. V. JEAN STUSSIE” case. The STUSSIE CASE is the exact same situation as in the instant case where Jean Stussie was Petitioning just as Steven Reed was and she was told to quit doing the action and taken to jail. In Conclusion Ms. Stussie’s conduct of collecting signatures for a petition to put an initiative on the ballot was a clear expression of the type of core political speech that our founding fathers intended to protect by ratifying the Bill of Rights. Because the License Center acts as a public agency and Bianco profits from the performance of a public service on its property, they are state actors for First Amendment purposes. Political expression must be granted the highest deference and protection by the courts. For the foregoing reasons, the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is granted and all charges against Ms. Stussie are ordered dropped.
So I filed a federal lawsuit, that in a year has over 150 motions filed. I ask you to take a look at this very important case by going to: www.allvoices.com/users/StevenL.Reed or e-mail http://mailto:mrstevenlreed@yahoo.com
We are at a time when less and less people want to get involved and part of the reason people feel what is the use if government does what ever it wants. In the Interest of Justice and Democracy, Freedom and the Constitution” and the PUBLIC INTEREST please take a look at this case when you can.
Steven L. Reed
1441 S. Estate Ave
Springfield, MO 65804
417-888-6473
http://mailto:mrstevenlreed@yahoo.com
NEW MOTIONS FILED DECEMBER 27, 2011 Total Motions over 154
BREAKING ---
DECEMBER 15 MOTIONS put total to 135 in a year!
FROM:
BREAKING NEWS FREEDOM OF SPEECH ON THE LINE USE IT OR LOSE IT! If you have ever signed a petition and you believe in Freedom please read this! The picture above is Steven Reed Petitioning last year at the Library Center in Springfield, Missouri.
Springfield (Mo) Steven Reed of Springfield has announced that a federal case was filed back in December of last year. The Career Center Job Council of the Ozarks is supported and ran by the state and federal taxpayer’s money. The problem is the City of Springfield says they will not allow Petitioning or Freedom of Speech on the side walk at the entrance to the Career Center. The notices posted at the entrance quote city code saying no soliciting on Private Property.
Reed is asking citizens to: Please help spread to their family, friends, neighbors and local and national media. “The case concerns violations of the 1st and 14th Amendments to the United States and Missouri Constitutions and Reed says he will not stand by and watch city of Springfield walk all over the Constitution”. Over 120 Motions have been filed in District Court already as the case moves towards a jury trial. Steven Reed has announced that the latest motion notifies the Court that the City of Springfield is tangled up in obstruction of justice by allowing witness and evidence tampering.
To find out more and to see the complaint and MANY OF REED'S MOTIONS please Google: federalcasefreedomofspeech obstruction of justice Steven L. Reed
Or the Direct Link is:
THE COMPLAINT:
https://sites.google.com/site/federalcas
Please join his facebook page: Steven L. Reed Springfield
THANKS SO MUCH!
NEW NOV. 23, 2011
COMES NOW Pro Se Plaintiff Steven L. Reed, by and through counsel of record, and, pursuant to Rule 36, submits the following Requests for Admissions directed to Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks. Defendant shall have up to thirty days to respond to same. Defendant must admit or deny each numbered request. Failure to admit an item or fact that is true may result in Defendant paying the costs of Plaintiff proving said fact including his attorneys’ fees.
DEFINITIONS
For purposes of your responses to these Interrogatories, the following definitions shall apply:
A. Pro Se Plaintiff Steven L. Reed is referred to as Plaintiff Reed
- Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks is referred to as Defendant Hicks.
- anyone at the project site or any other tangible thing that you or any agent of yours has in its possession that is responsive to the requests submitted herein.
ADMISSIONS
1. Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks followed Plaintiff Reed to his car where Plaintiff Reed got the Stussie Legal Brief and Plaintiff said he was going to read it to the managers including Brian Cruse and Defendant. Defendant Hicks followed Reed to his car and said Plaintiff could not do that because “they said they do not want Plaintiff coming back again ever.”
ANSWER:
2. There were no postings against soliciting or petitioning posted at the Missouri Career Center and Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks quoted no ordinance or law to Plaintiff Reed and said nothing about any complaints except that of property manager Brian Cruse.
ANSWER
3. Training procedures require that when confronted with a possible “Constitutional Violation of Rights” Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks would contact a superior (sergeant, lieutenant), or prosecutor to ascertain the proper process under the law of how to proceed and Defendant Police Officer Thomas has no proof he did that at the Missouri Career Center.
ANSWER
4. In question #20 of Defendant Hicks questions to Plaintiff Reed it states “Plaintiff was allowed, by Defendant Hicks, to enter the Missouri Career Center and read a decision of an associate circuit court judge…” Defendant Hicks thereby had control of Plaintiff Reed’s movement and actions thereby had him under arrest.
ANSWER
5. Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks and City Employees are told they can not sign petitions and that demand is followed by Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks and he has never signed a petition and thereby he really does not know what it feels like to be part of the process of putting issues on the ballot so people can vote on them.
ANSWER
6. Defendant Police officer Thomas Hicks is familiar with the United States and Missouri Constitutions especially with the rights spelled out concerning redress of grievances and the right to petition and thereby effect governmental functioning since he swore to uphold those principles when hired as a Springfield Police Officer.
ANSWER
7. Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks has been paid to be in or out of uniform for the private sector security.
ANSWER
8. Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks told/promised Plaintiff Reed that he would write an incident report since Reed insisted he wanted it in writing and Defendant Hicks said he would write a police report only if Reed did not leave he would be arrested.
ANSWER
9. Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks says his car video shuts off with the ignition. Yet Cruiser Videos are used to protect the public but most importantly to protect the police officers and one example would be if an officer is incapacitated the video may be the only witness to the crime.
ANSWER
10. Defendant Hicks in a small claims hearing when asked if he remembered talking with Plaintiff Reed said who could even forget that and laughed. Plaintiff Reed then asked him if it was proper thing to do in open court to make fun of someone under oath and Defendant Hicks said no.
ANSWER
11. Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks agrees that 1st Amendment Rights apply at a Government Sponsored Venue even if it is not Government Property.
ANSWER
12. Public Access is guaranteed under the United States and Missouri Constitutions.
ANSWER
13. To narrow the Public Access, so narrow to exclude, a place as reasonably Public as an unemployment/employment office would make future outcomes unknowable.
ANSWER
- Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks has never lied to a suspect he was investigating.
ANSWER
- Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks admitted in a small claims proceeding that Brian
Cruse had called the police a week earlier concerning petitioning at the License Bureau located a few doors down in the same shopping center.
ANSWER
16. Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks has received more training on the environment than constitutional rights issues.
ANSWER
- Defendant Hicks checked out the ordinance that was posted at the Missouri Career Center a
week later and the city ordinance see EXHIBIT #1 states it can not be used contrary to State or Federal Constitutions.
ANSWER
18. Defendant Hicks has admitted in pleadings in the instant case that the Missouri Career Center receives over 3 million dollars a year in tax payer monies and that requires allowing public access as allowed by United States and Missouri Constitutions.
ANSWER
19. Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks called a Superior in connection to the incident at the Missouri Career Center while on site (after leaving, or in some other time about an actual event), concerning a constitutional issue and Defendant Hicks has the name of that person.
ANSWER
20. Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks understands the views, ideas, and conversations are necessary for a healthy society to participate in progress and acceptance of public conscience and conflicts.
ANSWER
21. Defendant Hicks agrees with Brian Cruse that the sidewalk is owned by the owners of Glen
Isle Center.
ANSWER
22. Defendant Hicks had a legal duty of due diligence once Plaintiff Reed read the Stussie case to write a complete police report since a constitutional issue was involved therefore Defendant Hicks committed a breach of contract and duty in his official capacity.
ANSWER
23. Defendant Hicks has read the inter-office memo, ( included in the official complaint accepted from Plaintiff Reed by Court September 2, 2011), written by Lyndel Porterfield Assistant City Attorney to Gordon Loveland Police Chief concerning Public Access” and Free Speech and rules of conduct by officers.
ANSWER
24. Defendant Hicks agrees with an injunction allowing petitioning and voter registration at the Missouri Career Center in Springfield until this case is finished.
ANSWER
25. Defendant Hicks has heard about or read in the News-Leader about Plaintiff being arrested for handing out “Draft Claire” for Governor.
ANSWER
26. Defendant Hicks understands that many of Plaintiff Reed’s community efforts (from promoting rail passenger service, technology park, and others), from 1992 to present were mostly volunteer efforts Plaintiff Reed paid for.
ANSWER
27. Defendant Hicks promised Plaintiff Reed he would write an incident report that would detail the denial of constitutional rights.
ANSWER
28. Defendant Hicks is aware that under the law police car videos, 911 calls, and police reports are required to be kept forever.
ANSWER
29. Defendant Hicks believes that the Chief of Police Paul Williams job duties include making sure all police officers in Springfield Missouri are properly trained on the proper legal ways to handle constitutional rights issues when dealing with the public since policemen are officers of the law and are duty-bound to uphold its practices.
ANSWER
30. Defendant Hicks believes City Attorney Dan Wichmer is the person who is responsible for making sure the law is followed concerning “Public Access” and Constitutional Issues in dealings of Police with the Public at Large.
ANSWER
31. Defendant Hicks understands the “Controlling Law” is the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 created and controls the Missouri Career Center of Springfield, Missouri.
ANSWER
32. Defendant Hicks checked with the Missouri Commission on Human Rights which is now in the Missouri Career Center in Springfield about how to handle Public Access Issues.
ANSWER
33. Defendant Hicks understands 7 County Leaders, (CHIEF ELECTED OFFICIALS FROM Christian County, Dallas County Greene County, Polk County, Stone County, Taney County, Webster County, Note: Jim Viebrock serves as the Chairman at present), that help run the Missouri Career Center that represents over a have million Citizens.
ANSWER
33. Defendant Hicks believes it should be easy to locate the recording of the 911 call made concerning the request for him to go to the Missouri Career Center and should only take a day or so to get.
ANSWER
34. Defendant Hicks heard Judge Hass say in open court that his Small Claims Court can not hear Constitutional Issues.
ANSWER
35. Defendant Hicks has read the Federal and Missouri Constitutions, especially the Amendments to the Federal Constitution which are some of the primary basis for the lawsuit against him.
ANSWER
36. Defendant Hicks has read the 1st, 10th, 5th, 8th, 9th, 13th, 14, 15th and 26th Amendments to the Constitution that are the foundation of many of the charges against him.
ANSWER
37. Defendant Hicks is aware the City of Springfield lost a case in Greene County Court, (see EXHIBIT #2), since it was ruled that even though Wal-Mart is on private property Jean Stussie had the right to petition since it is the same as a Public Square because so many people go there and since the Missouri Career Center has many members of the community who have to go there to do unemployment checks and look for jobs it is clearly in the realm of a Public Square.
ANSWER
38. Defendant Hicks says in official pleadings to the Court that he does not remember what Plaintiff Reed read which was the Stussie V. Florissant order at the entrance to the Missouri Career Center and that shows deliberate indifference.
ANSWER
39. Defendant Hicks understands that Ms. Julie Gibson is the Director of the State Workforce Development which oversees and implements the Workforce Development Act of 1998 at the Missouri Career Center in Springfield, MO.
ANSWER
40. Defendant Hicks believes the Citizens right to petition for redress of grievances and effect governmental functioning is the most basis premise of Democracy.
ANSWER
41. Defendant Hicks believes the State of Missouri Attorney General website statement: “A crime committed against a person violates state law and thus is a crime against the state.”
ANSWER
42. Defendant Hicks agrees with the courts ruling in City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (1989): “The Court decided that a “failure to train” can be a basis for liability if the failure to train reflects the government’s “deliberate” or “conscious” choice. If a city showed deliberate indifference to the constitutional rights of those who come into contact with its ill-trained employees, it could be forced to pay money damages to those who get injured.
ANSWER
43. Defendant Hicks believes the statement that the Supreme Court has rejected the notion that a plaintiff must meet a heightened pleading standard to state a claim against a municipality for an unconstitutional custom or policy.
ANSWER
44. Defendant Hicks agrees Plaintiff Reed was placed on public display at the entrance to the Missouri Career Center as a criminal all the while Reed was under the threat of kidnapping and transport to jail if he did not stop/quit his protected “Freedom of Speech”, “Right to Petition.”
ANSWER
45. Defendant Hicks believes that the policy of the Police Department is to start an internal investigation which the department did when Plaintiff Reed was arrested for handing out “Draft Claire” leaflets and that in this case it appears the city showed a deliberate indifference in not wanting to investigate the incident at all.
ANSWER
46. Defendant Hicks is aware that Plaintiff Reed started the City Audit Petition drive in 2000 and then Doug Burlison and Mark Jones and then the police and fireman joined in getting signatures to audit the city to find out why their money was not being put into their pension fund.
ANSWER
47. Defendant Hicks signed and helped get signatures on the state audit petition so an audit could be completed to find out why the city was not putting the proper funds into the police/fire pension accounts.
ANSWER
48. Defendant Hicks participated in the picketing of city hall over the police pension fund issue which was covered by all local media.
ANSWER
49. Defendant Hicks is aware that the Governor of each Sate is responsible to oversee the Career Centers in their state as per the Federal Workforce Act of 1998 and the Governors including Governor Jay Nixon must report what is and has occurred in the operations of the Career Centers to the Federal Labor Department.
ANSWER
50. Defendant Hicks believes that “suddenly Christ’s presence gave grace upon grace. Christ is know everywhere by the prints of the nails in His hands.”
ANSWER
51. Defendant Hicks believes the sidewalk in front of the Missouri Career Center is public property/thoroughfare.
ANSWER
52. Defendant Hicks had a senior official of the police department speak to him about his actions after the Missouri career Center incident.
ANSWER
53. Defendant Hicks drives his car home after work and maintenance records for the last week of January and the first week of February 2010 could help prove if he was or was not on duty.
ANSWER
54. Defendant Hicks was in the military.
ANSWER
55. There is a certain procedure before you drive your police car away from the command center.
ANSWER
56. Defendant Hicks curriculum and test taken during training had very little mention of Citizens Constitutional freedom of speech and public access issues.
ANSWER
Respectfully Submitted,
PRO SE PLAINTIFF STEVEN L. REED
1441 S. Estate Ave
Springfield, MO 65804
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Certificate of Service---I certify that on _____________ a true copy of the above was mailed, postage pre-paid or electronically to the last known mailing address of each party to this lawsuit.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________________________
Steven L. Reed, Plaintiff Pro Se
1441 South Estate Avenue
Springfield MO 65804
(417) 888-6473 mrstevenlreed@yahoo.com
Nancy K. Yendes, Assistant City Attorney for Springfield Missouri
840 Booneville Springfield, MO 65802
Attorney for Police Officer Thomas Hicks NYendes@springfieldmo.gov
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-new
1 of 1
BREAKING NEWS FREEDOM OF SPEECH ON THE LINE USE IT OR LOSE IT! If you have ever signed a petition and you believe in Freedom please read this! Below is Steven Reed Petitioning last year at the Library Center in Springfield, Missouri.
StevenL-Reed is based in Springfield, Missouri, United States of America,
and is a Stringer for Allvoices.
Report Credibility
-
- Share:
-
-
-
-
-
-
Credibility
-
Reach
-
READ MORE:
Constitution, Freedom, corruption, Missouri, Department of Justice, city of springfield, FREEDOMFIRSTAMENDMENT elections, wars foughtdemocracy
Advertisement
Advertisement
News Stories
-
Local writer Rick Reed to speak at luncheon
Courier & PressRetired Evansville police detective Rick Reed can't drive down city streets without remembering the gory details of crimes he investigated. While the scenes sometimes keep him from sleeping, they've given him the insight to write detailed mysteries...
More From Allvoices
Cartoons of The Day
Got a similar story?Add it to the network!
Or add related content to this report
News Stories | Blogs | Images | Videos | Comments
Most Viewed Reports
-
G-8 must drive for Syrian peace talks:Cameron
By: rooys | 17 hours ago
-
Supreme Court says no to Arizona's physical proof of citizenship ...
By: DavaCastillo | 12 hours ago
-
NSA leaker Edward Snowden reveals more in online chat
By: JoeKukura | 7 hours ago
-
Taliban Pakistan : TTP demands ‘protection money'
By: avtalat | 19 hours ago
-
Proxy war in Syria begins: US versus Russia
By: herbinchi | 17 hours ago
-
G8: Syria on the menu of the first day with an Obama-Putin meeting
By: rsa76 | 21 hours ago
-
Iraq, baghdad: 12 killed in 3 Bomb Blast
By: econo | 16 hours ago
-
British government and GCHQ spying at G-20 summit: Who is snooping on ...
By: eileenkersey | 19 hours ago
-
ESA's Herschel space telescope switched off after 4 years
By: arkar | 7 hours ago
-
Combat reported in Aleppo, 60 casualties reported
By: rooys | 10 hours ago
Most Commented Reports
-
By: mhatter99 | 23 hours ago
-
Europe will ‘pay the price' for arming Syrian rebels warns President ...
By: NinaRai | 9 hours ago
-
Former NFL star Chad Johnson released from prison in Florida
By: Deepizzaguy | 8 hours ago
-
British government and GCHQ spying at G-20 summit: Who is snooping on ...
By: eileenkersey | 19 hours ago
-
Supreme Court says no to Arizona's physical proof of citizenship ...
By: DavaCastillo | 12 hours ago
-
Turkish authorities in the fight against the protesters can attract an ...
By: UsmanMunir | 12 hours ago
-
Iran's president-elect urges U.S. to 'look to the future'
By: alijaan0786 | 8 hours ago
-
Proxy war in Syria begins: US versus Russia
By: herbinchi | 17 hours ago
-
Iran political step after a successful election.
By: TaufanTasch | 6 hours ago
-
Turkish labor unions strike, hold rallies in support of protesters
By: sana95 | 14 hours ago
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/12829713-urgent-call-to-action-please-spread-via-all-means
FOR THE EIGHT CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
STEVEN L. REED, )
)
APPELLANT, )
v. )
) Appeal Court Case No. 12-2717
)
JOB COUNCIL OF THE OZARKS, et al )
)
APPELLEE, )
APPELLANT USA WHISTLE BLOWER STEVEN L REED STATES NOTIFIES THE COURT FOR THE RECORD APPELLEE POLICE OFFICER THOMAS HICKS AND CITY ATTORNEY SHOW DILIBERATE INDIFFERENCE CONCERNING THE ENFORCEMENT OF STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS CONCERNING THE MISSOURI CAREER CENTER AND WORKERS SHOULD BE PAID PER THE LAW
COMES NOW, Appellant Steven L. Reed PRAYS the Appeals Court consider the facts
that the City of Springfield Attorney denies and is hostile towards public access, petitioning,
public association, and the latest deliberate indifference is denial of rights of the citizens’
concerns the denial of wages. City Attorney Nancy K. Yendes wrote a contract for the
remodeling Missouri Career Center on Sunshine Avenue in Springfield Missouri and left out the
State of Missouri requirements that prevailing wages be paid on such a government project. The
State of Missouri has agreed to pay some of the wage difference between what was paid and
prevailing wages.
The State of Missouri Labor Department and the Federal Department of Labor have been aware
of the situation of the money owed to the workers for almost three months.
The City of Springfield Attorney handling the instant case signed the agreement to allow
for the remodeling but left out the prevailing wage requirements. It appears a cover up and
denial of payment to over 100 workers is underway, (several hundred thousand dollars are due
workers.) Appellee Police Officer Thomas Hicks is responsible to enforce state law and not have
a City Attorney violate the law whether it be Appellant Reed’s rights to petition, public access,
or the right to effect government functioning, or the rights of workers to receive proper wages
under the law.
Appellant Reed also points out that Warren Davis Properties may have not paid
prevailing wages back in 2001 when the Missouri Career Center moved into the remodeled
location art the Glen Isle Center.
COMES NOW, Appellant Steven L. Reed PRAYS the Appeals Court consider
the ongoing deliberate indifference of Appellee Police Officer Thomas Hicks and City
Attorney Nancy K. Yendes and the Court is asked to order the workers be paid according
to state and federal laws.
Certificate of Service---I certify that on _____________ a true copy of the above was mailed, postage pre-paid or electronically to the last known mailing address of each party to this lawsuit.
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________________________________
Steven L. Reed, Plaintiff Pro Se
1441 South Estate Avenue
Springfield MO 65804
(417) 888-6473 mrstevenlreed@yahoo.com
Nancy K. Yendes, Assistant City Attorney for Springfield Missouri
840 Booneville Springfield, MO 65802
Attorney for Police Officer Thomas Hicks NYendes@springfieldmo.gov
Clerk of the Court-Michael E. Gans
Thomas F. Eagleton Courthouse
Room 24.329
111 South 10th Street
St. Louis, MO 63102 FAX Number 314-244-2780
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
Honorable Senator Patrick Leahy
Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Patrick Leahy
437 Russell Senate Building
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Honorable Senator Patrick Leahy:
I am writing about deliberate indifference and denial of due process in court by a Springfield Missouri attorney and police officer concerning the denial of petitioning, the right to have public discourse including petitioning government for redress of grievances, and citizen’s rights to effect governmental functioning at the entrances to local workforce offices in Missouri.
A Federal Civil Rights Action was filed in December of 2010 by Steven L. Reed. An Interlocutory Appeal was filed recently because the Defendant Police Officer Thomas Hicks and City Attorney have supplied false and possible fabricated evidence. Exhibit #1 is a motion that the 8th Circuit refused to file and thereby I was denied Due Process by the Appeals Court.
Appellant Steven L. Reed understands congressional investigations are “to be related to, and in furtherance of, a legitimate task of the Congress.” Appellant Reed believes having proper public/equal access concerning government civil rights violations can or could influence future legislation in that area.
This situation also, seems to also fall under corruption and for that reason I am mailing to the Chief of the Department of Justice U.S. Attorney David M. Ketchmark to take a look at.
Congress and the Judicial System were created by the Constitution. This letter concerns the fact that access to justice means equal access. Appellant Steven L. Reed has asked the Appeals Court review questionable evidence submitted, or the lack of by Appellant Police Officer Thomas Hicks.
“To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper” and this has been consis¬tently interpreted as encompassing the power to investigate.” …U.S. Const. art. I, § 8.
“That power is broad. It encompasses inquiries concerning the administration of existing laws as well as proposed or possibly needed statutes. It includes surveys of defects in our social, economic or political system for the purpose of enabling the Congress to remedy them.” Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 187 (1957).
The legal system and the American Courts are central to protecting civil rights, social order, and conflict resolutions. American politics helps decide who gets what and how they get it making it imperative that citizens have the right to effect governmental functioning. A crucial question for American Democracy is, Who gets to take advantage of this powerful system for allocating resources and values in society? A major component of American politics is the principle of equality before the law which means all citizens should be treated equally before by the law, and all citizens should have equal access to the law.
As this letter is typed a story has been published, (Exhibit #2), that shows the City of Springfield government officials are not only deliberate indifferent towards Steven L. Reed rights, but the City has become hostile towards petitions and the citizens’ rights to effect government by peaceful means. The City of Springfield snuck in Charter Changes on a August primary election when most Springfield voters are not used to voting on City municipal issues. The charter change was increasing the amount of signatures needed from 2,500 to over 7,000 on initiative petitions making it almost impossible for Citizens to place issues on the ballot.
The success of a free democratic government is measured by the allowing of freedom of expression. Freedom of expression produces information about government, limits corruption, protects minorities, and helps maintain a vigorous defense of government and helps preserve social order, stable government, and protection of civility, decency, and reputation.
A person who can successfully claim he or she has rights that must be respected by government is a citizen of that government. A person who is under the authority of a certain government but cannot claim rights is merely a subject, bound by the laws without any power to challenge or change them.
To have a true Democracy we must have a rule of law for all Citizen’s not supplied only for the elite in business, the military, the media, and education but for all and if it is not the social fabric may be in peril.
I look forward to a response and thank you for your service.
Sincerely,
Steven L. Reed
Copies to:
Chairman of the House Committee on the Judiciary Honorable Lamar Smith
2138 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
Department of Justice U.S. Attorney David M. Ketchmark
Hammons Tower, Suite 500
901 St. Louis
Springfield, MO 65806-2511
United States Senator Claire McCaskill
Hart Senate Office Building
Suite 506
Washington D.C. 20510
United States Senator Roy Blunt
260 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington D.C. 20510
Nancy K. Yendes, Assistant City Attorney for Springfield Missouri
840 Booneville Springfield, MO 65802
Attorney for Police Officer Thomas Hicks NYendes@springfieldmo.gov
Clerk of the Court-Michael E. Gans
Thomas F. Eagleton Courthouse
Room 24.329
111 South 10th Street
St. Louis, MO 63102 FAX Number 314-244-2780
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHERN DIVISION
STEVEN L. REED, )
)
Plaintiff )
v. )
) Case No. 10-3492-CV-S-RED
JOB COUNCIL OF THE OZARKS, et al, )
SPRINGFIELD MISSOURI POLICE )
OFFICER THOMAS HICKS, )
)
Defendants. )
PLAINTIFF STEVEN L REED (WHISTLEBLOWER), REQUEST COURT ISSUE INJUNTION REQUIRING EMPLOYEES OF MISSOURI CAREER CENTER BE PAID MONIES OWED BECAUSE OF STATE LAW CONCERNING PREVAILING WAGE ON PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS
COMES NOW, Plaintiff Steven L. Reed DURING DISCOVERY IN THE
INSTANT CASE UNCOVERED CORRUPTION that needs to be resolved
concerning willful violation and intentional disregard of state law and statutes by
the city legal staff of Springfield , Missouri..
Plaintiff Steven L. Reed request the Court issue an injunction under Federal
Rule 65. Injunctions and Restraining Orders that will require the payment of wages
due to all 100 or more workers who renovated the new location of the Missouri
Career Center which cost over two million dollars.
The renovation of the Missouri Career Center was completed in July of this
year and over 100-200 workers have not been paid the difference of what they were
paid to what they were supposed to be paid under state law and the amount may
exceed a million dollars. The contract was wrote up by Defendant Police Officer
Thomas Hicks City Attorney Nancy K. Yendes who is assigned to work on legal
issues and contracts for the Missouri Career Center and City Attorney Dan Wichmer
and did not include the “prevailing wage clause” in the contract.
There is a pattern established of deliberate indifference shown by these
since the City of Springfield has a record of not requiring paying prevailing wages
to workers which probably included not paying prevailing wages to renovate the
Missouri Career Center which was remodeled by Warren Davis Properties in 2000-
2001 at the Glen Isle Center.
The City of Springfield does have a record of deliberate indifference. The
ruling of (DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, STATE OF MISSOURI, APPELLANT,
v. FRIENDS OF THE ZOO OF SPRINGFIELD, MISSOURI INC., et al.,
Respondents. No. SC 82858 Sup. Ct. MO En Banc. Mar. 6, 2001), said II.
[1.] Prevailing wages shall be paid to workers “employed by or on behalf of any
public body” engaged in the construction of public works. Section 290.230.1……
That legal ruling against the City of Springfield by the Missouri Supreme Court
shows a pattern of the City of Springfield Mo has of evading or trying to evade
paying prevailing wages to workers.
With deliberate indifference towards: public access for citizens including
petitioning, the right to have public discourse including petitioning government for
redresses, and citizen’s rights to effect governmental functioning at the outside
entrances of local workforce offices, disregard for civil and constitutional rights it
is clear Attorneys Yendes and Wichmer also have a deliberate indifference about
allowing employee wages required by state law.
In conclusion the Missouri Career Center renovation at the new East
Sunshine location was completed by July 4 and we are now past Thanksgiving
and these workers have not been paid money owed them under state law.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Steven L. Reed request the Court issue an
injunction requiring the payment of state prevailing wages owed to the workers who
renovated the new location of the Missouri Career Center located at 2900 East
Sunshine Springfield, MO immediately.
Certificate of Service---I certify that on ____________________copy of the above was mailed, postage pre-paid or electronically to the last known mailing address of each party to this lawsuit.
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________________________________
Steven L. Reed, Plaintiff Pro Se
1441 South Estate Avenue
Springfield MO 65804 (417) 888-6473 mrstevenlreed@yahoo.com
Nancy K. Yendes, Assistant City Attorney for Springfield Missouri
840 Booneville Springfield, MO 65802
Attorney for Police Officer Thomas Hicks NYendes@springfieldmo.gov
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0q3d_XW6c5LcURDc19kTkw4V3c/edit?usp=sharing