09/18/03 SPD incident

Find out what’s going on and DO something about it ! ! !

TOP
09/18/03 SPD incident
SPD incident issued as a result of 09/17/03 letter to Erskine and a call from Heively
Last revised 12/09/05

Significance
Key people involved in incident
Events leading up to this incident
Incident detail
Related documents
Later developments of this incident

WORK ON THIS PAGE IS STILL IN PROGRESS

Significance

open display of possible evidence:

see Laws and Related Acts page

Key people involved in incident

SPD Jerry Desmond
Peter Dibble
SPD David Erskine
Bob Heively
Deanna Rushlow
"sleazy punk gang"
SPD Darin Stewart
and by authority
- Board of Selectmen, Town of Stonington

Events leading up to this incident

06/09/02 told by FBI that FBI will not investigate on advise of SPD
08/29/03 told decision regarding Waterford 08/13/03 work proposal is based on advise of SPD and discussions with FBI
09/05/03 complaint to US DOJ/FBI New Haven: conspiracy against rights, conspired threat to livelihood, and gang activity
- 09/10/03 FBI Submission: Complaint under TITLE18, U.S.C., SECTION 1512 Obstruction of Justice
09/10/03 obstruction of justice complaint submitted to US DOJ/FBI
09/10/03 restraining order requested from CT US District Attorney
- 09/10/03 Request for Issuance of Restraining Order under TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 1514
  - Attachment to 09/10/03 CT US DA Submission: Request for Issuance of Restraining Order under TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 1514
09/16/03 series of incidents begin with gunshot near the end of my street
09/17/03 Ltr to SPD Chief Erskine
- 09/17/03 Ltr to SPD Chief Erskine, Subject: Unsubstantiated Information Resulting in Obstruction of Justice and Threat to Livelihood
09/19/03 09/17/03 Ltr to SPD Chief Erskine published in local online newspaper
- www.stoningtonct.com/mariannelabrecqueletter.html, by the Stonington Intelligencer, a local online newspaper: www.stoningtonct.com
  - publication of 09/18/03 - Stonington CAN'T plead IGNORANCE!
09/19/03 began sending formal request for investigation to local law enforcement entities
09/24/03 RIF to Coast Guard Intelligence (CGIS), in conjunction with other jurisdictions
09/26/03 additional information submitted through FBI online hotline
10/01/03 (related development) smoking ban in Connecticut - 1st stage
10/03/03 learn of publication of 09/17/03 Ltr to SPD, local rampant pedophilia and probable ties
10/10/03 Request to FBI Headquarters, Washington, DC, for case numbers and action

Incident detail

10/14/03 Heively makes another call to Stonington Police
- Although Heively's name is included in the report heading, dated 09/18/03, it lists a call from Heively on 10/14/03 as seq#3, with seq#2, being Erskine's receipt of the letter I sent to him on 09/17/03. No seq#1 is recorded
- This time, Heively poses as someone who "has not had contact with [me] in years"
  - Comments relating to this are included in 10/15/05 - crazy > integrity - Pt 2 (written 02/17/04)
According to SPD records, as the basis of Heively's complaint against me, Heively points to:
1. 09/10/03 CT US District Attorney
  - Request for Issuance of Restraining Order under TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 1514
  - Attachment to 09/10/03 CT US DA Submission: Request for Issuance of Restraining Order under TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 1514
  - which is pursuant to
    - 09/10/03 Complaint to US DOJ/FBI
      - FBI Submission: Complaint under TITLE18, U.S.C., SECTION 1512 Obstruction of Justice
      - which is pursuant to
        
        09/05/03 complaint to US DOJ/FBI New Haven: conspiracy against rights, conspired threat to livelihood, and gang activity
        
        which is followed by
        
        09/05/03 rock thrown at my car, as I'm driving
        
        approx 6 hrs after faxing "conspiracy against rights" package to FBI New Haven
        
        rock thrown at car, report to police
        
        and which is pursuant to 08/23/03 Work Proposal
2. publication of 09/17/03 Ltr to SPD Chief Erskine
  - 09/18/03 - Stonington CAN'T plead IGNORANCE!
  - www.stoningtonct.com/mariannelabrecqueletter.html, by the Stonington Intelligencer, a local online newspaper: www.stoningtonct.com
SPD issues incident report
- 09/18/03 SPD#2003-14136
- details of incident report
  - uses, as the initiating date, the date after receipt of 09/17/03 Ltr to SPD Chief Erskine
  - records Heively's call on 10/14/03, pointing to this publication
  - references previous incident resulting from Heively's call to SPD on 08/26/02
    - "[LeBrecque]... is known to have serious psychiatric problems, and has been transported by this Department to L&M for an evaluation in the past."
  - additional comments on this report
    - 10/15/05 - crazy > integrity - Pt 2 (written 02/17/04)
  - Rushlow's "professional opinion"
    - "None of Ms. LeBrecques's accusations have been substantiated; in addition, she is known to have serious psychiatric problems, and has been transported by this Department to L&M for an evaluation in the past."
      - 08/26/02 L&M refused to do psychological evaluation of me, although they detained me, under guard, for 7 hours and later billed $512
        
        I did not authorize release of information relating to this
      - Regarding the statement that I have “serious mental problems”
        
        Regarding the statement that there is a restraining order against me
      - under Regarding the statements being made that findings negate the possibility of this situation
        
        letter dtd 9/17/03 to Stonington Police Chief David Erskine states
        
        There is also reason to believe that representatives of your department are continuing to relay that a proper investigation has been conducted in the human trafficking of David _________ that resulted in findings that he is not a victim of human trafficking. However, the “investigation” that was conducted in September 2002 was that for a “missing person ” versus a possible human trafficking situation, even though Stonington Police were well aware of the situation I was describing. Evidence of that is in Stonington Police Emergency Examination Request I02-12498, issued by Lt. Stewart on 8/26/02. Admittedly, over the course of efforts I’ve been making for over the last year, it’s become evident that no law enforcement agency that would be involved in investigating David _________’s situation has an appropriate protocol in place for interviewing a possible victim of human trafficking. This includes the FBI.
        [continued in 09/18/03 - Stonington CAN'T plead IGNORANCE!, under Regarding the statements being made that findings negate the possibility of this situation]
      - letter
        
        began with
        
        It has again been brought to my attention that representatives of your department are continuing to relay unsubstantiated statements about me regarding “serious mental problems” and a restraining order against me to other law enforcement officials and other authorities. Please be advised that the result of this activity is hindering, delaying, preventing or dissuading persons from arresting or seeking the arrest of persons in connection with Federal offenses and hindering, delaying, preventing or dissuading persons from causing a criminal prosecution to be sought or instituted. These activities are also resulting in injury to me in the free exercise or enjoyment of rights or privileges secured to me by the Constitution or laws of the United States, and may be seen as being conducted because I have so exercised the rights or privileges secured to me by the Constitution or laws of the United States. There is also reason to believe that representatives of your department are continuing to relay that a proper investigation has been conducted in connection with Federal offenses that resulted in findings that negate the possibility that Federal offenses relating to the situation involved here are being nor have been committed. Please be advised that the result of this activity, also, is hindering, delaying, preventing or dissuading persons from arresting or seeking the arrest of persons in connection with Federal offenses and hindering, delaying, preventing or dissuading persons from causing a criminal prosecution to be sought or instituted.
        
        ended with
        
        The request that I am making of you is also to reduce the number of barriers to resolving this situation. In addition to having representatives of your department cease making the statements listed here, it would be appreciated if efforts were made by your department to reverse the effect of statements they have already made. I would also like to ask establishments that have prohibited me from entering, because of the fictitious restraining order that Tania Tyler claims to have, to contact your department to verify that none exists.
        
        For future reference, please be advised that I exercise my right to represent myself, rather than using an attorney to do so, in legal matters relating to this situation.