Nancy Wood on Facebook
2 years ago
06/08/2017, 05:08 AM
Imhoff has the best reputation in the country, but, It's too bad that Imhoff does not communicate with prospective clients via email, I don't have a phone, they did at least respond to my inquiry if only to say that communication has to be by phone. A security guard at Mom Supermarket, 5111 W. Edinger Ave, Santa Ana, Ca. had me arrested three times via citizen arrest for a misdemeanor charge of Aggravated Trespass, 602 (t) which requires prior convictions at the location, I have no convictions at all. The arresting officers chopped off the critera (2) and deemed the charge it a misdemeanor. When in fact it is invariably charged as a felony, because it can only be charged based on a prior con... more>>
Imhoff has the best reputation in the country, but, It's too bad that Imhoff does not communicate with prospective clients via email, I don't have a phone, they did at least respond to my inquiry if only to say that communication has to be by phone. A security guard at Mom Supermarket, 5111 W. Edinger Ave, Santa Ana, Ca. had me arrested three times via citizen arrest for a misdemeanor charge of Aggravated Trespass, 602 (t) which requires prior convictions at the location, I have no convictions at all. The arresting officers chopped off the critera (2) and deemed the charge it a misdemeanor. When in fact it is invariably charged as a felony, because it can only be charged based on a prior conviction, and since it is the 'stalker law' it means that when someone is convicted of stalking someone else with terrorist threats, when the perp is convicted of stalking, and making threats, and then returns to follow through on the threat he will be charged with a felony. In fact a citizen arrest can only be brought in California regarding a felony witnessed or experienced by the person making the Citizen Arrest, it has to be charged as a felony, mesdemeanor Citizen Arrests are not allowed, arresting someone at the behest of of a citizen in the absense of a felony is a malicious prosecution, criminally and civilly actionable, against both the arresting officers and the citizen. The arrests of April 23, and 30, were both misdemeanor 602 (t). The third charge was brought as 602.1 (a) but although the securty guard making the charge and authoring the Citizen Arrest,wanted it charged the police booked me and encarcerated me for four hours but changed it to (an Unlawful) detention and changed as 602.1 (a) but when I got to court to plead on the 602 (t) charges of April 23 and 30, 2017, the two 602 (t) charges had been "superceeded by the DA who had changed the date of the 602.1(a) charge to April 23, 2017, from May 21, 2017, so that the 602.1(a) preceded the first and second 602 (t) arrests and therefore upon a conviction would qualify as criteria for the 602 (t) prior conviction and therefore the 602 (t) would be a legitimade arrest and meet the criteria for charging the 602 (t)s as felony trespassing, instead of false arrest misdemeanors. In spite of the fact that 602.1 (a) is blocking the doorway of an abortion clinic during a protest. I was standing by myself in the parking lot of a grocery store on a shady median. I have never been in protest, I have never prevented anyone from entering anywhere. The purpose of the arrests is to sieve a crime into existence in the absence of a violation of law. The procedural errors are civil rights violations, the DA tried to dismiss it for a DNA swap, I said, 'no, don't do me any favors, if you think that you have witnesses and evidence of a charge that unlawful at every level, I want to go to a jury trial. I want the land holding company that owns the market parking lot, and the security company that they hired to show up to court with their evidence of a crime. The DA said, "You won't ever get a trial the judge will reduce to an infraction and convict you of that. And you will have a prior and be jailed for three years on felony trespass 602 (t) two counts." As far as I know reducing a misdemeanor to an infraction in order to avoid a jury trial is unlawful. Nine police officers affirmed three unlawful arrests, I was in jail for more than four hours each time, and the citizen making the arrest said that his evidence of a crime is a statement from a shopper that she doesn't like me, and a statement from a customer who said that he doesn't like the way I look. Neither are customers, the lady is an unlawful vender in front of the gocery store, and the man who does not like the way I look is a drunk from the park across the street. There is no proof of a crime, the security guard who made the citizen arrest said that he finds me to be intimidating. How is that possible, I'm a quiet nun, 'intimidating' is defined as being put in fear for ones safety, he is a big armed guard, how did I, a 65 year old nun resting in the shade, accomplish putting him in fear for his safety? He said that he has pictures and tape recordings of me panhandling. This also seems odd, since panhandling is termed 'accosting' in the Penal Code, I would have had to have asked someone for money. How did I do that just standing there by myself in the shade, people have handed me money, but not in response to a solicitation, Buddhist nuns traditionally accept alms, one of my portrait students paid me ten bucks for an earlier lesson, he and his mother handed me the ten bucks where I park my bike near the market cart rack. And we talked about his art lesson, I wear a vioce activated recorder all of the time, I have every conversation for the past ten years on tape, including the arrests, the tape recorder went through property, so, I also have the all night rave where each and every arresting officer who brought drugs into evidence via property that evening is using property as a pit stop to get as high as is humanly possible and talking up a storm about it. Buddhists always hand each other dollar bills, it's considered good Karma' when friends from the temple see me, they had me a dollar, it's not panhandling. Panhandling is more like asking people for spare change, The guard also said that once someone stopped to say hello to me while I was standing under the tree, and that person was in the lane where cars park, the guard said that his charge of obstructing commerce is based on that. I asked him if perhaps he is thinking of pedestrian in roadway; obstructing means preventing someone from entering the Market, or deliberately blocking cars, it has to be intentional, obstructing does not mean that a car had to sort of skirt someone standing near the curb, in order to get into a parking space. I think that the guard is either suffering from Kosakoff Syndrome; alcoholic wet brain, and has no idea of what is going on around him or maybe he is running lucritive rackets in the strip mall parking lot and just wants to get rid of potential witnesses. That seems possible, because kick-backs would explain why nine supposedly trained police officers would make three false arrests in a row, risking their badges, unless it was for cash kick-backs. This would be good case for a law firm because it's so clearly egregious abuse of due process. If only I had a phone.