|
WORK
ON THIS PAGE IS STILL IN PROGRESS
This
material was included in FBI
FOIPA #0993702-000, received
by me on 09/04/04. Through that process, it has been approved
for "publication," i.e., review by the public, in accordance
with the United States Freedom of Information/Privacy Acts (FOIPA)
Incidents
proceeding this request
FBI
HQ Request
outline
FBI
NH Response
details
Substantiating
evidence provided 08/12/03 by FBI
NH to FBI HQ
Note the following regarding these documents:
This
material was included in FBI
FOIPA #0993702-000, received
by me on 09/04/04. Through that process, it has been approved
for "publication," i.e., review by the public, in accordance
with the United States Freedom of Information/Privacy Acts (FOIPA)
Typed
codes entered on these documents by FBI refer to relating
exemption provisions of Title 5 of
the United States Code, Section 552 and Section 552a
(C)'
notations on the website
copies of these pages were made sometime between the
time the package was received by (C), on 09/04/04, and January 2005, and
include abbreviations and shorthand
Complainant's
Observations
- Additional information
submitted to U.S. Department of Justice well before FBI NH prepared
it's response to FBI HQ:
-
Character
investigation of complainant (C)
Note:
FBI NH has interspersed and confused investigation of a possible
trafficking situation with a character investigation of
complainant. Attempt will be made here to keep
observations separate
(C)'s
account of much of what is on Page 2
and Page
3 is detailed in Ford
Attachment to 09/10/03 FBI Submission: Complaint under TITLE18, U.S.C.,
SECTION 1512 Obstruction of Justice
Observations
relating to character investigation of complainant (C)
Observations
relating to investigation of a possible trafficking situation
regarding
"interviews" of possible trafficking victims
-
If these
interviews could not reasonably be determined to
have been conducted as part of the type of
investigation appropriate for what was requested
for investigation by (C) in her filing
with FBI on 05/09/03, what were the circumstances
of these interviews?
-
If these
interviews could not reasonably be determined to
have been conducted as part of the type of
investigation appropriate for what was requested
for investigation by (C) in her filing
with FBI on 05/09/03, what is the basis for FBI NH
using these interviews as part of its
investigation of this situation?
-
Is the interviewing
authority using statements
made or allegedly made by "alleged victim" in
assessment of the actual situation of the "alleged victim"?
-
Was " alleged
victim" alone when he
made or allegedly made statements being used by
interviewing or other authority in assessment of the
actual situation?
-
Has FBI NH
attempted to acquire any documentation of these
interviews? If so, what were the results?
-
Does this
documentation clearly record that these interviews were relating to investigation of
a possible
trafficking situation?
-
Could these
interviews be reasonably be determined to have been
conducted as part of the type of investigation
appropriate for a possible
trafficking situation?
accompaniment
-
If
_______ arrived and left with other people,
was the identification of those people
requested and verified?
-
Was
there any attempt made to determine if
_______'s accompaniment by other people was
being masked? Was anything unusual
noticed relating to a possible appearance of
_______ arriving and leaving alone?
-
How much
of a notice did any of these people have of
the interview?
-
How much
time did it take to arrange an interview with
the "alleged victim" or how long did
it take to locate him, in order to conduct the
interview?
-
Was it
difficult to learn where the "alleged
victim" was working?
-
Was any
attempt made to visit the "alleged
victim" at his alleged residence or
workplace without prior notice to him or to
others?
verification
of identity and residence
-
Was identity
of any of these people verified through proof of
identification?
-
What
forms of identification and proof of residence
were used?
-
Were the
types and identification numbers of these
proof documents recorded?
-
Were these
proof documents photographed or otherwise
copied?
-
Was the
authenticity of these
proof documents verified?
interviewing
and/or reporting authorities
FBI's
failure to follow-up with all possibly relevant law
enforcement entities
-
All material used by
FBI
NH as backup detail and direct statements to FBI were statements
and police incident reports of Town
of Stonington
Police (SPD)
- Town
of Waterford Police (WPD):
-
Although what
SPD faxed of 05/03/03 to 05/6/03(5/13/03)
SPD Incident #2003-05958
(notated copy) to FBI NH claims that SPD had requested from WPD a "welfare
check" on (C) on 05/06/03, based on what was told to
(C) by
Waterford police, that
"welfare check" was not actually requested
until 05/13/03 and possibly until
after the SPD document reporting that incident was
faxed by SPD to FBI NH at
16:22hrs 05/13/03
-
That
FBI NH may not have followed up with
Waterford Police, the police in the town in
which (C) resides, is indicated by other documentation
conspicuously missing:
-
Interview
documentation which backs-up FBI's claim that
WPD interviewed "alleged victim"
-
06/20/03
letter issued by WDP regarding the "unsubstantiated
allegation" against (C), which is the conclusion of 05/03/03
SPD Incident#2003-05958:
-
WPD
records relating to (C)
which would have made FBI aware of records and
information omitted from what SPD told FBI and
what SPD sent to FBI NH on 05/13/03:
-
No
records from WPD appear to have been
included in FBI's investigation of (C)'s
character nor of the "possible"
trafficking situation
-
Town
of Groton Police (GPD):
-
Failure
to conduct investigation through police of the town
in which the "alleged victim" was residing, at
the time of his alleged abduction
-
Despite that the
"alleged victim" was living in Mystic, Groton
at the time of the alleged abduction, nothing from GPD
is included in FBI NH's trafficking investigation
detail.
-
Following up with
police of the town in which the "alleged
victim" was residing, at the time of his alleged
abduction, should have revealed:
-
GPD's part in
the "investigation" that SPD claims to
have done of Dave's "possible situation"
-
That where the
"alleged victim" was living, at the time
of his "possible abduction" is next
door to Laura Joyner, whose name appears in two of
the four reports submitted by SPD to FBI NH
-
No records from
GPD appear to have been included in FBI's investigation
of the "possible" trafficking situation
-
discrepant police
reports used to justify failure to investigate report of possible slavery activity
-
On 08/12/03, despite discrepancies
in these incident reports, which should have been detected
though due diligence procedures, FBI NH forwarded these
reports to FBI HQ, in
response to FBI HQ 08/08/03 inquiry:
Backup detail omitted
from what was sent to FBI NH
assumption based on that
these were not included in FBI
FOIPA #0993702-000 , and, therefore, were omitted or possibly omitted
(See Deleted
pages)
-
documentation of
communication between FBI
NH and SPD that
resulted in SPD
faxing SPD incident
reports to FBI
NH
-
this is based on the
assumption that faxed SPD
incident reports were sent to
FBI
NH in response to
FBI
NH inquiry to
SPD
-
current status of related arrest
charges of the
incident reports FBI
NH sent to FBI HQ
on 5/13/03
-
09/08/02 SPD incident report
for "no
contact" orders they issued against (C) via Waterford
Police (WPD)
-
09/06/02 GPD trafficking inquest
-
WPD trafficking inquest, if
any
-
Pat
Ford refers to this in point 2
-
Waterford
Police response to request for 05/13/03 incident record
-
other
WPD documentation conspicuously missing from FBI investigation detail
-
documentation of contact with
other relevant authorities and law enforcement entities
-
Addendum - Appeals to Authorities
Click
to return to top of page
Key people involved,
or who should be involved, in this investigation
Significance
of these incidents
Some
of the later developments related to this filing or possibly
relating:
WORK
ON THIS PAGE IS STILL IN PROGRESS
|
