Beverly Marks Crooked County Clerk rigs elections

Lawrence Smith DEFEATS Gerald B Hough Gilmer County Prosecutor in CIVIL ACTION!! Former Glenville City Councilman Dr Carl Armour and others in the audience of the courtroom like Dr William K Simmons stated HOUGH’s Performance in the Courtroom was POOR, in fact it SUCKED as BAD as SANJAYA singing URIAH HEAP HITS! It was the WORST YET!! A living NIGHTMARE PLAYED out on 27 February in a JUDGE FACEMIRE Courtroom!

By Free Bird Revenge of the Ghost Wolf Reporter for the Central West Virginia Secret Seven Coalition/Hurricane Rina McCoy – Cosmos Communicator/Editor Edison – CalPatty Press Editor

High Ranking SS officials met with Lawrence Smith  to get the play by play of his defeating Gerald B Hough Prosecuting Attorney for Gilmer County — in the civil law action before Judge Facemire earlier yesterday afternoon.

Here is the report on the court case according to a Free Press update:

Monday, February 27, 2012, the Gilmer County Circuit Judge Richard (Dick) Facemire dismissed with prejudice the lawsuit filed by the Gilmer County Prosecutor Gerry Hough on behalf of Gilmer County Commission, and Jean Butcher, the Gilmer County Clerk against Lawrence Smith from WV Record.

The WORST performance ever was when SANJAYA attempted to perform URIAH HEEP songs the worst rock band to ever come down the pike and they could not play live because they were always too drunk! THEY SUCKED performing live and HOUGH SUCKED in his performance Monday afternoon February 27th, in a JUDGE FACEMIRE court! (this work of art is copyright protected by Brian Chalmers) Brian was the SS art director from 06-09 and also from WMMS 100.7 FM -- As the man who drew the Buzzard since 1986!

The lawsuit was filed because Smith had requested information under FOIA.

Decision was made by the Judge after Gerry Hough and Lawrence Smith made their presentation to the court.

The decision by the Judge means that the lawsuit may not be re-filed, and as such, it operates as an adjudication on the merits.

Smith defeated Hough in the Gerald B Hough home court and the prosecuting attorney even made it a point to tell the judge that Smith had been friends with and knew the Supreme Commander of the SS.

Judge Richard A Facemire made no reply to the off the cuff, Hough comment of who it is Mr Smith knows, but must have been thinking to himself…

“Man oh man this Gerry Hough is an idiot as really to what purpose does making that statement have to do with this court case!”

***

Oh YEAH!! Lawrence Smith of the West Virginia Record won!

Tara Kennedy was wide awake and suddenly terrified, her breath coming so fast and hard she froze in disbelieve when the judge said, “I’m not doing this!” And the Crooked County Commissioner Brian Kennedy turned BEET RED, and was redder than his hair as he tried to get out of there, but we felt like saying …..”Thanks Brian, thanks for being such a complete asshole, because that is what you are doing here!" Tara Kennedy was looking right through me, almost as if wicked black darts were shooting from those dark and wicked eyes, while I waved hello, hello!

We Won!!!

Judge Facemire’s last words were ” I will not do this” and he dismissed with prejudice so it cannot come back to court. Yes, Gerry Hough was so insistent he said that Lawrence Smith was best friends with another person who called Gilmer county the Crooked County!

Facemire asked HOUGH what damages were done and that’s the best Gerry Hough could come up with.

After the POOR PERFORMANCE that turned County Commission Clerk Brian Kennedy BEET RED, Hough felt kinda of funny when he looked at himself in the mirror! Dude looks funny too! And since the Gerry Hough's performance as a civil litigator for Crooked County was as BAD as it gets lets play a BAD song by a bad rock bad that also gives a piss poor live PERFORMANCE! The worst Rock Group, in the history of Rock n Roll, here is Uriah Heap and LOOK AT YOURSELF!! Because you are sure looking like a DUMB BITCH to us Gerry Hough!

All three commissioners and Jean Butcher were there also! Cassandra Huff and Glenville Crazy Gary Collins were there as spy’s for the Elite. You should have been there too!It was great! Gilmer County Commission President Brian Kennedy walked downstairs and he was beet red from the collar of his shirt to the roots of his hair!

The Gilmer County ELITE couldn’t scramble out of there fast enough!

Of course the SS was busy shaking hands and giving hugs, and passing out doobies in the parking lot later — All happy citizens shook hands and gave hugs and kissed some babies too!

Tara was hanging behind Brian Kennedy her husband, and seemed, out of her mind on drugs or nerve pills or whatever else the elite DRUG CONNECT Lisa Stewart has samples of this week. As I walked by Tara she just stared through me like she was stoned out of her mind, right after she listened to the Beatles RUBBER SOUL, but it was me looking through her and seeing a phony and a fake married to a criminal who soon may face the situation of ; IT WILL ALL be found out at stake! …that is what mattered.

For once, no matter what the reason, Facemire served the people and not the politicians. Happy days!


Gilmer County Commission releases settlement of debacle by Beverly Marks for illegal recording of a Lien!

By Hurricane Rina McCoy – Cosmos Communicator Editor

Reporters for the Gilmer Free Press along with the West Virginia Record were present at the Gilmer County Commission meeting at 9am yesterday the 20th of January. Even the Glenville Democrap and Pathfinder of Bullshit was represented yesterday. Below you will find an actual court document pertaining to the settlement and payment to be made by the Gilmer County Commission, for the huge mistake of Beverly Marks, who as it turns out is not much far removed from a full on Crooked County white collar criminal that takes instruction from the Butcher and Butcher law office, to the detriment of Gilmer County and its citizens.

Gilmer County Commission Special Meeting Report – FRIDAY01.20.12

image

The Gilmer County Commission met in a special meeting on Friday, January 20, 2012 in an effort to conduct the following business:

Settlement of Lawsuit: Textron Financial Corp (Plaintiff) vs. New Horizon Home Sales, Inc., Gilmer Housing Partners, LLC, Summit Community Bank, (Defendants) and Summit Community Bank, Inc. and (Third-Party Plaintiff), vs. Office of the Clerk of the Gilmer Commission, and Jack D. Jones (Third Party Defendants.)
The following is the timeline of the meeting:
•  8:58 AM – Commissioners Kennedy, Hess, and Ramsey as well as County Clerk Jean Butcher enter the commission room for the meeting.

Tim Farmer, the County Administrator; Lawrence Smith from The WV Record,  Dendra Miller from Glenville Democrat, and Dave Ramezan from The Gilmer Free Press were already in the room.
•  9:00 AM – Commission President Brian Kennedy calls the meeting to order and asks everyone to pledge allegiance to the flag.

The Pledge starts and Gerry Hough, the Gilmer County Prosecutor enters the room.
•  9:01 AM – Gerry Hough asks the commissioners whether anyone from the news were present!
•  9:02 AM – Brian Kennedy calls for executive session for the Commissioners, Gerry Hough, and Jean Butcher.

Everyone else leaves the room.
•  9:04 AM – Executive session ends and everyone returns to the room.
•  9:05 AM – Brian Kennedy makes a motion to accept the settlement.

Motion Seconded and passes unanimously.
•  9:05 AM – Kennedy asks the commissioners for any comments and in the absence of it he makes a motion to adjourn the meeting.

Meeting is adjourned.
•  News reporters ask whether they can have a copy of the settlement and Jean Butcher makes copies of the settlement and provides it to the reporters.

According to the settlement it cost the Gilmer County taxpayers $40,000.00 for wrongdoing by the previous Gilmer County Clerk, Beverly Marks, and was suggested by prosecutor and approved for payment by the Commission.

Due to too much secrecy and the nature of this lawsuit, any additional costs are not known at this time.
Click to Read the Printable Copy of the Settlement

GFP – published 01.21.2012

The SON of a SON of A CROOK from Crooked County!

By Free Bird – RGW Reporter/Hurricane Rina McCoy – Cosmos Communicator

That little bitch ass funny little fuck adopted son of Beverly Marks got arrested early into the holiday season!

Beverly Marks the retired Gilmer County Commission Clerk that was arrested for election fraud — before retiring in 2011 — must have been teaching some crooked little tricks to that crooked little dick that hangs around with her name at the end of his, GREG LEE MARKS has some felony arrests to tell Beverly Marks (known as BM around the courthouse) about when she gets back!

Beverly can’t leave town without that little bitch wanting to rape, pillage and plunder! Just about all power elite parents have had this problem at one time or another! And boy did ole Greg Lee fuck up this time!

Greg Lee Marks is charged with TWO COUNTS of conspiracy involving forgery and two counts of uttering — so someone whipped him and kicked him and made him write bad checks!

Detailed Offender Information

Imprisonment Status:  Pre-Trial Felon

Full Name: Marks,  Greg  Lee
Height: 5′  10″
Weight: 150 lbs.
Birth Date: 5/3/1983
Gender: Male
Booking Date: 12/27/2011
Facility: Central Regional Jail
Imprisonment Status: Pre-Trial Felon

Back to Admissions Summary

Offender Court Order Information

Court Info Number Issuing Agency Location
11F-114,115,116,117 GILMER COUNTY – Bail Amount: $20,000.00

Deranged Offender : Pre-Trial Felon  Full Name: Greg Lee Marks, Crooked County Asshole of the month — Issuing Agency Location 11F-114,115,116,117 GILMER COUNTY – Bail Amount: $20,000.00 — but don’t worry mom stole plenty when she worked for the county she can afford it!

“THIS JUST IN from the GILMER FREE PRESS… the story behind the arrest of the SON of a SON of a CROOK from Crooked County!  Notice the booking dates for these partners in crime!”

“The charges stem from Marks’ involvement with two other Gilmer County residents – Amanda Lorain Smith and Alicia Wine – and a man from Braxton County in passing bad checks recently at Fred’s Exxon in Normantown!”

According to the criminal complaint filed in magistrate court by Deputy Benton Huffman, the Sheriff’s Office received a call from the owner of Fred’s Exxon December 06, 2011 about two checks he believed were forged.  One was written on November 30 and the other December 01.

Upon viewing video of those day’s transactions, Deputy Huffman identified one of the people as Smith.

Unable to identify the others involved, Deputy Huffman took a still shot to the home of Travis Hoover, the owner of the account where the checks were drawn.

After arriving at Hoover’s home in Sutton, Deputy Huffman was told by his grandmother, Marcellene Cogar, that he had been in Pennsylvania for the last two months.  However, she was able to identify the people in the picture as Hoover’s brother Joshua, Marks, Smith and Wine.

Later that day, Deputy Huffman says he interviewed Smith who admitted to being with Hoover, Wine and Marks at Fred’s.  However, she couldn’t recall the day they were there, and didn’t see any of them write a check.

According to the complaint, Deputy Huffman returned to Sutton a week later to interview Joshua Hoover at the Central Regional Jail.

It is unclear the reason Hoover was incarcerated.

In the course of the interview, Hoover admitted to signing his brother’s names to the checks.  Also, he not only admitted Wine, Smith and Marks were with him those days, but also Wine accompanied him to the counter when the checks were signed.

In an interview with her two days later, Wine admitted to being with Hoover at Fred’s on November 30 and December 01, 2011.

According to the complaint, Wine wrote the checks, and Hoover signed his brother’s name to them.

Wine also admitted that she, Smith and Hoover were together at Tomblin’s Service Station November 30 where Hoover both wrote and signed a check from this brother’s account.

Currently, Marks is free on $20,000 bail.

In West Virginia, the sentence for conspiracy to inflict injury to persons or property is 1 to 1o years in prison.

Marks is the son of Beverly Marks, the former Gilmer County Clerk.  Last year, Marks opted not to seek re-election after serving as clerk for over 20 years.

Imprisonment Status:  Pre-Trial Felon

Amanda Lorain Smith

Full Name: Smith,  Amanda  Lorain
Height: 5’  5”
Weight: 120 lbs.
Birth Date: 09.27.1985
Gender: Female
Booking Date: 12.13.2011
Facility: Central Regional Jail
Imprisonment Status: Pre-Trial Felon

Offender Court Order Information

Court Info Number Issuing Agency Location
11F-121 – 123, 11F 118 – 120 GILMER COUNTY – Bail Amount: $30,000.00
Imprisonment Status:  Pre-Trial Felon

Alicia Nichole Wine

Full Name: Wine, Alicia Nichole
Height: 5′ 4″
Weight: 115 lbs.
Birth Date: 01.06.1983
Gender: Female
Booking Date: 12.14.2011
Facility: Central Regional Jail
Imprisonment Status: Pre-Trial Felon

Offender Court Order Information

Court Info Number Issuing Agency Location
11F-? GILMER COUNTY – Bail Amount: $40,000.00
Imprisonment Status:  Pre-Trial Felon

Joshua Allen Hoover

Full Name: Hoover,  Joshua  Allen
Height: 6’  1”
Weight: 205 lbs.
Birth Date: 08.29.1989
Gender: Male
Booking Date: 12.07.2011
Facility: Central Regional Jail
Imprisonment Status: Pre-Trial Felon

Offender Court Order Information

Court Info Number Issuing Agency Location
11F-134-135/141 GILMER COUNTY – Bail Amount: $15,000.00
11F-136/138/142 GILMER COUNTY – Bail Amount: $15,000.00
11F-137/139/143 GILMER COUNTY – Bail Amount: $15,000.00
11F-132-133/140 GILMER COUNTY – Bail Amount: $15,000.00
11-F-14 GILMER COUNTY – Bail Amount: $20,000.00
GFP – published 12.29.2011

Gilmer FREE PRESS Publishes Anatomy of a CRIME in a Gilmer County Hell Hole!

G-LtE™: Anatomy of a GILMER COUNTY CRIME – A HELLHOLE

image

In this first document there is clear evidence that the THREE WOOD COUNTY bank accounts totaling over $125,000 recognized in the first accounting with one cd account worth $14,000 dollars were all cashed out by the executrix Rosa Belle Gainer against the express wishes of Albert J Woofter.  As, soon as ALBERT J WOOFTER was dead with the unsigned Power of Attorney paper work on the night stand as they were taking his lifeless body away, Gainer liquidated all the accounts and put it into one bank account where R TERRY BUTCHER her employer had control of the day to day actions. The amount deposited was $73, 352.50.

SO, we have a paper trail that proves that $125,000 was cashed out of three accounts, and only $73,352.50 was deposited in the bank in Glenville where R Terry Butcher is on the board. Another conflict of interest.

image
Evidence shows that there were three accounts with an excess of $125K and GAINER put it all in one account that the “Benny” only got seven thousand from after Gainer and the B& B Law firm pilfered the estate.

There was no accounting from 1994 until 31 Dec 2006 against WV LAW.  The Butcher and Butcher law firm broke the law and a call was placed to office of VANCE GOLDEN a commissioner in Wood County as to WHY he allowed Timothy B Butcher and R Terry Butcher to break the law and steal money from the estate.

For five years, lawyer after lawyer sent letters to Gainer and Butcher requesting their client have an accounting entitled by law, but the B& B law firm would not take calls and did not respond.

While doing the final accounting Tim Butcher paid himself as much as $10,480 per day, and those documents will be provided in a further publication and some of it has been published in the past, so a Google search may turn up some evidence.

Butcher wanted to make sure that when the account was settled the law firm had already used up the money that was in the bank account which was a situation certainly against the wishes of Albert J Woofter.

Margaret Kreiner, an attorney in Ohio wrote letter after letter stating that they were not adhering to the wishes of the deceased according to the will.  But, the Butchers obviously had Judge FACEMIRE and a few other WV Judges in their pocket, so why should they worry. Kreiner for two years wrote to Gainer asking that Butcher be fired as per wishes of Ruth Woofter and the Guardian. All these letters were ignored by Rosa Belle.

The second document is only shown to establish that according to their own paper work at the Butcher and Butcher law firm, the fact is and was that Rosa Bell Gainer IS NOT A RELATIVE – THEREFORE SHOULD NOT HAVE RECEIVED A PENNY IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS FROM THE MISSING 1/6th.

Beverly Marks, the Gilmer County Clerk, distributed money to people RUTH WOOFTER had not seen or heard from in over 30 years and many like JACK GAINER the son of Rosa Belle Gainer and Rosa Belle herself were not even related, but money was sent to them anyway.

The GILMER COUNTY SHERIFF METZ not only ignored our documented complaint, but threatened to have me arrested if I were to investigate, “Any more of his people”

When an entire town and county is involved in this kind of crime that was protected by the local state police and Governor Manchin, now a US Senator, really how does one proceed?  Should we follow their lead and take the law into our own hands?

YOU DECIDE!

image

image

As to Item 7 BENEFICIARIES (SEE INSTRUCTIONS PAGE 13

The listed “Benny’s is for the AJ WOOFTER ESTATE and HAD NOTHING to do with the missing 1/6 of surface property that is on the Calhoun/Gilmer County line West of Glenville on highway 5.

It was clearly established by their own paper work from the Butcher & Butcher law firm that ROSA BELLE GAINER now known as Gainer – Cunningham was NOT a relative yet it was GAINER that received CASH for the missing 1/6th and NOT the immediate family, that had been supporting Ruth Woofter and giving her a home to live in, plus paying for medical care and all taxes.

JACK GAINER, Rosa Belle Gainers son also received cash from the sale of the missing 6th and if Rosa Belle is not a relative, then her son is not either.

THE Missing 6th was not controlled by the estate and the guardian for Ruth Woofter lives in OHIO, and so did RUTH WOOFTER and NO DISTRIBUTION of her funds should have been made from the state of WV. Gilmer County was only supposed to approve the sale so she could use the money for medical help.

Tim Butcher and Beverly Marks both committed a crime with a witness present that will testify, when they disobeyed a court order to sell the property for much needed medical care and PULLED THE TITLE from the land books.

Sheriff Metz never had any intention of doing the right thing, instead attempted to cover the matter up with threats.

WHO MADE UP THE LIST OF PEOPLE TO RECEIVE MONEY FROM THE MISSING 1/6th hidden and pulled from the land books? Beverly Marks? If so, she should be immediately arrested, and the Sheriff should be removed from office.

THIS IS A CRIME not only ignored by the SHERIFF as if, the matter did not exist but also ignored by the WV STATE POLICE TOO because the final decision maker, the chief counsel from the State Police is from Glenville and directly tied to IKE MORRIS!

These documents are all evidence of a cover up and Gainer and the Butcher and Butcher law firm STOLE money from honest citizens from out of state and did it with the help of Beverly Marks the County Commission Clerk and the GILMER COUNTY COMMISSION ORDERED IS HEREBY ORDERED TO PAY THE MONEY or be held accountable for being accessories to a crime and civil action with penalties.

Timothy B Butcher had no legal right to interfere with that title, but it also was needed in a WV SUPREME COURT CASE and the result was the complaint NO 178- 2011 filed against Justice Jean Davis who certainly has no explanation as to why only 5/6 of the property in dispute was moved forward from circuit court against the rules of legal procedure.

By this proof alone the family that was supposed to receive funds feels they have enough evidence to have MARKS arrested, but when the matter was brought before the state police they refused to press charges, so the matter went before the counsel for the State Police, Virginia Lanham, and now we have discovered her father was a personal attorney for IKE MORRIS Clearly there is corruption in Gilmer County and the clearly the State Police have acted in an irrational and illegal matter.

In fact the state police tried to press charges federal charges against me for making the complaint.

“When LAW ENFORCEMENT becomes a political entity like the WV State Police then AMERICA can no longer be AMERICA and this seems to be the situation for the state of West Virginia!”

Bill Grottendiecks daughter is Virginia Lanham who was the chief counsel for the state police when I filed my complaint with Major Ingold.

Bill Grottendiecks was IKE MORRIS’ number one attorney for over 20 years.

Lanham was the one that decided if my complaint over the missing 1/6th was accepted.

Major Ingold and Lanham more or less ignored the evidence on the recommendation by Lanham, but by the virtue content of the letter he wrote in response, all of the facts are wrong — so by that evidence alone, their execution of the action, would on the surface appear malicious and in bad faith. But, that’s how they do things when it pertains to Gilmer County West Virginia, the POSTER CHILD for West Virginia’s legal hell!

So the title opinion, and back taxes has not been accepted as a complaint or even acknowledged, officially, by ANY agency in West Virginia, and Ohio law enforcement, and everyone else thinks that is pretty weird, but now that I know LANHAM the chief counsel for the State Police is Bill Grottendiecks daughter, it all makes a lot of sense.

Unfortunately the real criminal in this situation is the lawyer LANHAM from Glenville that represented the State Police  as chief counsel and some Gilmer County public officials and of course the County Commission Clerk Beverly Marks.

image

Marks was written a letter in July asking her to comply on the sudden reappearance of the missing 1/6th:

July 12

Beverly,

I spoke with Judge Spicers office today regarding the 1/6th of surface property in Dekalb owned by Audrey Ruth Woofter my aunt, a piece of property I paid taxes on myself, since my mother has broken her hip and didn’t work. Ruth never worked or held a job and had no income.
I explained to the judge’s office that I had a witness that was present when you called Tim Butcher and asked him what to do. The witness said, that Butcher told you to not do anything with the court order from Spicer.

I am talking to an officer of the court by cell phone as I am writing this to you. Spicer is an old family legal name around here and the judge is retiring at the end of the month. We asked him to take action before he leaves office

You ignored the judge’s court order and my aunt did not get the medical treatment she needed because you shelved the court order on order from Butcher who was city attorney and had nothing to do with this case.

Since you shelved the court order and took no action, my aunt could not get the medical treatment she needed for she needed the money from the sale and she died in Ohio.

The judge’s secretary asked me to file charges in WV and I laughed until I nearly cried, for we tried that and got no response from Metz which they actually did not believe. It was an uncomfortable moment, but I assured them it was true.

I will be back in touch with the judge’s office tomorrow and will be talking to the judge after he is fully briefed to ask him what sort of action should be taken. He was not happy you ignored the order and Audrey Ruth Woofter died on Xmas day.

Also, you took it upon yourself to distribute the funds from the sale after the death to heirs Ruth had not seen in over 30 years or so much as sent her a Xmas card. I reviewed the will and this was not the wishes of Albert J Woofter.

Further, matters were clearly stated in the will.

I explained to all concerned of your connection with Timothy B Butcher who pilfered the estate, and we have a serious issue with that. We have a witness that stated you always conferred with Butcher as, “What to do!?“

What you did was not legal, and we have evidence of you having committed similar acts in the past.

If for some reason any of these facts are incorrect, and/or you dispute the testimony of an eye witness, then I suggest you cooperate fully with authorities. You may want to speak with an attorney, at this time.

I have the list of heirs along with the title opinion that was also absent from the courthouse records when requested. We will ask you how you came by that list, and also why you did not go by the wishes of the Albert J Woofter will which specifically stated that all assets were to go to Ramona Bingman.

Rosa Belle Gainer was not a relative to Audrey Ruth Woofter, but yet we noticed she received money illegally from your transaction. So did her son.

How did she get on your list of heirs? Where did you get the list did you just make it up, who helped you with this alleged criminal action?

Ramona Bingman was the registered legal guardian, and had been for years. This was proven to Butcher ten times over, and it is matter of record here at the courthouse, and clearly it was established as fact today.

You decided to, “Make up your own rules” down there in Glenville, and really isn’t that how you always do it!
And this is a PUBLIC NOTICE TO BEVERLY MARKS PROVIDED BY AN AMERICAN FREE PRESS

Beverly Marks, YOU are to contact me immediately in regard to the MISSING 1/6th which you had no right to sell. You were given an order to sell that property while RUTH WOOFTER was alive and you hid the title instead which is criminal. While waiting for the money from the sale for medical care, RUTH DIED ON CHRISTMAS DAY, and as far as I am concerned you are implicated in a wrongful death and so is everyone that helped you who includes Tim Butcher and Sheriff Metz who attempted to cover up the matter and refused to investigate the allegations.

I spent 15 hours on the paperwork dating back to 1994 recently. I spoke at length with my attorney, who was hired for that purpose of reviewing all the documents, and then he attempted to speak with the Butcher&Butcher Law firm on our behalf, but rarely got any response at all. And then,  when he sent proof of the affidavit that proved who the legal guardian was Dianna L Butcher LIED and said they never received the document, but being of above average intelligence sent the document signed return receipt requested, signed and dated by Dianna L Butcher which proves that she lied to our attorney and got caught.

“But, that’s how you always do it in Gilmer County!”

You need to call your attorney for we are going to be filing criminal charges against you and or bringing civil action in US District Court for compensation and also for punitive damages, unless of course Gilmer County wants to settle this suit. But, we know how they are from years of experience, extremely dishonest just like you Beverly Marks.

It clearly states in earlier paper work that Rosa Belle Gainer Cunningham is not a relative, yet you gave her the money from the sale of the property!

You got a court order to sell the property in 2005—but you did not sell it! You pulled the title from the land books like a common thief and you did it on order of Tim Butcher who had nothing to do with that property. What you did is a crime Beverly Marks and you are going to pay for it with as much jail time as we can possibly get you in an honest court, which certainly could never be a Gilmer County Court.

R Bingman was the legal guardian, and all the papers are in order. But YOU BLOCKED the sale until after RUTH DIED when it was her money, but then you abused your position as clerk and gave the money for the property that was not yours to some friends of yours. I would love to discuss this matter with you ASAP – so call me, everyone has my number. I want to see you face to face about this concern as soon as it can be arranged.

Sincerely
Dan Bingman
(Signature on file)

RETURN RECEIPT REQUEST IS in reference to text below:

During the entire time the Butchers were in control of the AJ WOOFTER estate they pulled every dirty trick in the book and just sat back in their big leather chairs and weathered out the storm protected by Judge Facemire and the Elites, and kept saying they had no documentation that R Bingman was the legal guardian of RUTH WOOFTER and her primary care giver and her niece that supported her, and provided her with food clothing and shelter for as long as I can remember.

An attorney from Cleveland and licensed to practice in New York is also a federal attorney and could no longer take the stalling tactics of the Butchers, so for an hourly rate which was rather costly provided all the paper work AGAIN that the Butchers needed to prove who the legal guardian was.

image
This receipt is signed by Diana L Butcher, but then the estate was held up for almost an entire year after the date on the signed receipt because the Butcher and Butcher law firm said they never received the documents which everyone knew was a complete and total lie. The last day Butcher had control he took more than ten thousand dollars out of the cash account which was three thousand more than the actual beneficiary got and that is just plain a crime. Butcher took 38,000 dollars from the estate in FEE’s he never earned in the last 90 days.

Another attorney by the name of Roger Curry had to be hired at a cost of $10,000 dollars because Butcher refused to cooperate with the out of state attorney, as he did with the four previous attorneys hired.

Rosa Belle Gainer – Cunningham got more than the 3% allowed by law for being an executrix and in some states could have been jailed for being an employee of Butcher and Butcher while being the executrix also, and then just taking more than the 3% allowed. This is a clear conflict and we believe by proven documents that Gainer committed embezzlement and fraud along with Butcher and Butcher and they should be arrested.

All documents are on file at the office of Vance Golden or at my home office, if any person wants verification of facts, I will do all I can to see they get the documents for review.

image
Why are public officials in Glenville allowed to break the law?

Who believes that R Terry Butcher and Timothy Butcher should be placed under citizen’s arrest, and then immediately and escorted to jail for stealing money from an elderly mentally challenged person as Ruth Woofter.

Audrey Ruth Woofter was my aunt, and myself and my entire family loved her. I can remember her from the early days in WV since I was three years old. The actions in Gilmer County killed her as far as my family is concerned, but please review the facts and draw your own conclusion, and then let’s put these people in jail where they belong.

~~  by Daniel Bingman ~~

The first thing that brings a huge RED FLAG is the fact that Charles V Renner just allowed his secretary to make a transaction and a highly illegal one if I read this correctly.

That is not allowed.

For those from Wood County know Mr Renner never made it out of the hospital, and died right around the time of the document published in this article.

My Uncle was one of the Wood County Commissioners that signed off on the estate.

Anybody that is anybody from Glenville knows that the Butchers made their living by stealing from estates, and if heaven were to release some secrets, this sort of illegal procedure got by the right people time and time again in Gilmer County.

People in the know are aware that some of the money from this estate was supposedly donated to GSC, but it obviously was not theirs to donate.

I vote for immediate arrest, and I think it is time Sheriff Metz resigned. This is just one too many times he has been involved in criminal activity.

By Gilmer County Schools Coalition member on 12.20.2011

÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷

All estates B & B have been involved with should be identified and there should be a comprehensive investigation to determine if there was a history of estate pilfering. Also, this GFP posting should be reported to Rachael Cipoletti (rfcipoletti@wvodc.org ) at the Bar’s Office of Disciplinary Counsel(ODC)to observe how it deals with a complaint against lawyers. There probably would be a response that there is insufficient evidence, the statute of limitations has passed, misconduct did not rise to a level to merit discipline etc. Why have G. Hough and Metz failed to investigate the alleged crime? Does a citizen have to file charges before they are authorized to act or are they afraid to take on the Butcher’s? We need answers because this report relates to corruption in the County, and there is little wonder why citizens are afraid to take stands when there is evidence that the rich and powerful receive preferential treatment.

By Ralph P. Ayles on 12.20.2011

From the entry: ‘G-LtE™: Anatomy of a GILMER COUNTY CRIME – A HELLHOLE‘.

÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷

This article needs to be published in the Braxton paper. I have went through the same thing in Sutton court. Facemire should also be prosecuted if he did wrong in this. I had an attorney in Sutton that was dishonest, knew the other side ,went against me{my own attorney}because he did not want to go against other attorneys. This attorney has also practiced with Butchers.If you are honest in Braxton County court your in trouble. They go for the nasty, dishonest, thieves and liars. What a shame!!

By Anonymous on 12.20.2011

From the entry: ‘G-LtE™: Anatomy of a GILMER COUNTY CRIME – A HELLHOLE‘.

÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷

Once all the research is complete using the documents from Mr. Armontrout, all the criminal activities by the Butcher & Butcher’s as well as Beverly Mark’s office will be revealed for the feds to see. Innocent people have had enough of this group of crooks. Their time is coming.

By WatchDog on 12.20.2011

From the entry: ‘G-LtE™: Anatomy of a GILMER COUNTY CRIME – A HELLHOLE‘.

÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷

To Ralph,

In reference to: his GFP posting should be reported to Rachael Cipoletti (rfcipoletti@wvodc.org ) at the Bar’s Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) to observe how it deals with a complaint against lawyers…

Cipoletti proved herself to be as corrupt or more corrupt than the worst of the worst in Charleston by not accepting evidence against Gerald B Hough that proved criminal intent and no due diligence used. YOU are CORRECT she would have just made up an excuse and the best article written about such matters was written by our own PHD Carl Armour yesterday. It was right on point with the problems, please review that article.

Carl covered all the pertinent area’s that proves that attorneys in West Virginia are above the law and the stick together to make it all happen.

By Gilmer County Schools Coalition member on 12.20.2011

From the entry: ‘G-LtE™: Anatomy of a GILMER COUNTY CRIME – A HELLHOLE‘.

÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷

WV SUPREME COURT JUSTICE DAVIS IS ALL HOPPED UP ON GOOFENTHAUL AND A COMPLAINT WAS FILED WITH THE JUDICIAL INVESTIGATION COMMISSION!

By Hurricane Rina McCoy — Cosmos Communicator Editor

Chief Justice Robin Jean Davis of WV arrogant, and ethical gremlin and a certified moron?

Unfortunately for West Virginians, Robin Jean Davis became a justice on the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals in 1996 and remains on the bench as of this writing. Justice Davis’ so-called lawyer husband, Scott Segal is a plaintiff’s lawyer (ambulance chaser) who focuses on mega-lawsuits against deep-pocket corporations, many of which appear to be frivolous to the nth degree.
Since her ascension to the West Virginia Supreme Court, Justice Davis has helped in making West Virginia almost heaven for trial lawyers – including of course her hubby Scott.
Robin and Scott were severely criticized in regards to a case in which the West Virginia Supreme Court ruled that plaintiffs who claimed possible exposure to toxic substances (asbestos, etc.) could collect large sums from corporate defendants for lifetime medical testing. Hey Scotty — would you support free lifetime colonoscopy testing for victims of judicial misfits like your wife Robin, and ambulance chasers like yourself?
 
Shortly thereafter, Scotty became involved in a lawsuit seeking such medical monitoring on behalf of healthy smokers. Justice Davis dismissed any suggestion that she should have recused (withdrew) herself from the case by noting, “There’s not a personal-injury case that comes before this court that at some point, some time, couldn’t affect my family.”
Now, this is one arrogant simpleton! Apparently, this nitwit is incapable of comprehending the meaning of the term “conflict of interest.” Where does she get off thinking she has a right to judge cases that involve her husband? Since she’s married to this ambulance chaser, we must presume that she shares in any booty (fees) that he collects via court approved extortion of deep pocket defendants.
 
The Segal Law Firm
This firm was formed on Nov. 6, 1996, when Robin, one of its founders was elected to the Supreme Court.
 
This celebrated ambulance chasing firm has the chutzpah to claim it was formed “to serve the needs of the working men and women of West Virginia.” This is pure bunk. It was formed to take advantage of Robin’s new position of influence, and to enrich Scotty (Robin gets half as a wife) and the other attorneys while they troll for alleged victims in pursuit of ripping-off deep pocket corporations.
On his website, Scotty has the chutzpah to spin the following hyperbolic (BS): “Few catastrophic injuries are the result of fate. Law, engineering, science and medicine are the tools which we stop the irresponsible.” Hey Scotty Baby, what tools would you personally recommend to prevent Judicial Misfits such as your wife Robin from inflicting on the good citizens of West Virginia? Would an industrial strength inversed chastity belt receive your stamp of approval Scotty?
Chief Justice Robin Jean Davis’ Total Lack of Ethics
It is obvious to this writer that Robin lacks the intellect to appreciate what a “conflict of interest” really is. For this ninny to assert that there isn’t even the “appearance” of a “conflict of interest” when she sits in judgment of cases involving her husband’s financial interests is an unmitigated falsehood and she knows it.
This is akin to believing that there would have been no conflict of interest had the late President of Uganda, Idi Amin been employed to give an honest critique on the rather novel dining habits of Jeffrey Dahmer.

 Complaint Filed with WV Judicial Investigation Commission

Judicial Disciplinary Counsel

Compo No. 178-2011

City Center East, Suite 1200 A
4700 MacCorkle Ave. S.E.
Charleston, West Virginia 25304

BEFORE THE
JUDICIAL INVESTIGATION COMMISSION
OF WEST VIRGINIA

COMPLAINT CONCERNING A JUSTICE, CIRCUIT JUDGE, FAMILY LAW MASTER, MAGISTRATE, MENTAL HYGIENE COMMISSIONER, JUVENILE REFEREE, SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OR SPECIAL MASTER NAME AND ADDRESS OF JUDICIAL OFFICER:

Justice Robin Jean Davis who served as CHIEF JUSTICE in September of 2007
(in care of Address is above)
NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

CHIEF JUSTICE Robin Jean Davis brought forth FALSE FACTS that were NOT in the COURT RECORD in her majority opinion filed: October 26, 2007 – My first complaint is that DAVIS only recognized 5/6th of the property. WHY is that 6/6 makes the total property in dispute not 5/6 and that has got many and educated attorney wondering why someone with her authority would even think of signing a document with FALSE FACTS -The l/6th in question has been deemed the missing” l/6th and if you google the “Missing l/6th” you will find many articles on the unlawful acts committed regarding property that my family owned NOT MY UNCLE ROGER RAFFERTY!! (Continued)
YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS:

Daniel B Bingman 130 Hollywood Ave, Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio 44221

TELEPHONE NO. (330) 926-9116
This attached Affidavit must be signed by you before a Notary Public as a part of this complaint. Please mail complaint to the address shown at the top of this page.
Page Two Nature of Complaint Continued

The first question asked by myself and consulting attorneys is didn’t Justice Davis read the court record? She can only go by the court record and she obviously did not bother to read it which makes her extremely irresponsible and certainly NOT WORTHY of serving as a Justice of the Supreme Court.

image
In her majority opinion DAVIS has me moving old used rusted farm equipment that sat on our farm since 1980 when the court record clearly shows that I NEVER MOVED it or even ever touched the equipment. The equipment was moved by Danny Nub Marks of Bull River Rd in Calhoun County, a state witness in my case who was recently arrested for a DUI at three times the legal limit while in possession of loaded weapons in the car. Shirley Ball another state witness in my case also committed perjury and may be under arrest soon for making false police reports showing once and for all her unsavory and dishonest character. Google Shirley Ball, Millstone Inn and you will come up with several newspaper articles on the matter. Marks did not have permission to move all of the equipment just the brush hog which Gerald Ball who was my former employer was going to fix . If there is no record in the court record why did Davis represent the opinion to the other justices voting on the case. A fact hidden was the fact that Gerald Ball knew me well, and I was employed by him by my god given name Dan Bingman and I have the check stubs to prove it. Gerry offered me help, since our whole shift had just been laid off and I was on unemployment from his company Telecon. I had just signed a contract with CUMULUS BROADCASTING at the time of my arrest and was trying to report to my new radio show when I was arrested on felony charges that were proved to be false.

It is an interesting fact the misdemeanor I was convicted of, I was never charged with against my constitutional rights. If I had been charged with the misdemeanor I was convicted of, it would have been time barred, and Gerald B Hough would not have had a case, and that is why he had Marilyn Matheny LIE ON THE STAND about the value of the 24 year old used rusted farm equipment, so he could charge me with a felony.

Ohio authorities that have looked into the illegal extradition and my case, and have reviewed all the facts, have expressed a concern that Matheny has not been arrested and sent to prison once the evidence that F JOHN OSHOWAY SUPPRESSED was discovered and the evidence brought before the West Virginia state police. When MAJOR INGOLD refused to bring charges a complaint was filed with the US ATTORNEY and the matter was accepted and sent to the special litigations unit.

If there is no record in the court record of me touching or moving the equipment why did Davis represent the opinion to the other justices voting on the case that I moved the equipment from an adjacent 100 acre property not part of the circuit court case, not only mentioned, but definitely not true. That equipment was never on that 100 acres, which was never in the court record so where did she get that information. The 100 acres mentioned was never part of the case at all. It was suggested that DAVIS got that information from Robert Goldberg and his brief to the WVSC. Goldberg said I moved the equipment when I never touched it, so how can these facts be presented when they were not in the court record.
PAGE THREE Nature of Complaint against JUSTICE DAVIS continued.

Do I have to be the one to tell you all that you can only use testimony from the court record in deliberations, not untrue hearsay brought forward by a very irresponsible pompous Asst attorney general like Goldberg? You would think with all that law school DAVIS could comprehend the basics.

In the court record Roanna Rafferty testified to the fact that she owned the l/6th that has been hereby deemed the missing l/6th and I have to ask why that is not in the opinion. I am submitting as evidence testimony from the court record that former Chief Justice Davis obviously did not even bother to read. Included as evidence is testimony from a Roanna Rafferty who HOUGH made the jury believe was a VICTIM. Rafferty was NOT A VICTIM and Hough paid her to lie on the stand. In fact Gerry Hough brought Rafferty all the way from Florida when in actuality she had nothing what so ever to do with the case. I am also submitting as evidence a TITLE OPINION that proves Rafferty had no interest in any of the properties before the court and when Gerald B Hough convinced the jury she was a victim, truly the whole court case was tainted from that point on and should be dismissed. Hough DID NOT use due diligence as evidence fully proves, or do y’all even go by evidence down there at the Supreme court, for by the actions of Justice Davis it appears that you do not. When I recently filed a complaint against Hough all of this evidence was completely ignored. Can you explain why an office that represents the Supreme Court completely ignored this evidence and unlawfully did not accept this evidence or even acknowledge its existence against my constitutional rights? My constitutional rights were violated severely by my own defense counsel when he never informed me of my statute of limitations on a misdemeanor. Oshoway had to know, or he really is an incompetent attorney that has had over 25 complaints filed against him with the office of the ODC and he has not had one reprimand and no judgments against him. I plan on contacting every person that filed a complaint against him and discuss those issues for publication of my latest book; GILMER COUNTY-The POSTER CHILD for West Virginia’s legal hell!

I have documented more misconduct involving corrupt officials in Gilmer County than can even be believed at this point. I find it shocking that attorneys in West Virginia can break the law and have the unlawful acts sanctioned by the circuit courts and the West Virginia Supreme Courts and even the ODC.

I can now prove this nauseating discovery via court record and court documents, along with testimony, and affidavit. In her opinion Justice Davis states “That on his property near his home Roger Rafferty had ..“ IT WAS NOT HIS HOME we had an equal 3/6th shares in the property and this matter was hidden by the jury when the title was actually pulled from the land books. Even more truthfully, it was my home, since I had been living there for more than a year and Ramona Bingman was in control of 3/6th. She also testified to that effect in the court record. It appears to any reasonable person that Justice Davis did not take the time to even read the court record and the result was my entire life and career has been destroyed for her wrongdoing. Davis proved herself to be completely inept.

We were just billed at this address for back taxes for property Chief Justice Davis said in her Majority Opinion that we did not own. That is a serious situation and when brought to the attention of the
Page four Nature of Complaint against JUSTICE DAVIS continued.

Gilmer County Sheriff he threatened to have me, “Picked Up” if I were to investigate any more of, “His people!“

The threatening phone call by Metz was recorded for possible future law action, but all WV law enforcement authorities refused to look into the matter even when the sheriff Metz stated in front of witnesses that just as soon as he see’s Dan Bingman he is going to knock him out. I recently discussed this matter with the regional head of the FBI in my state. Metz is a black belt in Karate which made the matter a deadly threat, but being threatened by attorneys or public officials is widely known as common place now in Gilmer County and supported by the West Virginia ODC and Supreme Court.

Please find the billing for the back taxes included as evidence. The evidence of title opinion and back tax billings should reset the two year statute on the complaint according to a phone meeting with SKIP GARTEN in 2010, since all evidence being presented in this complaint is NEW EVIDENCE that has been discovered since the court case. Also find a CD which was a recording made at Lemon Equipment 18 months before the trial in which the appraiser for Lemon Equipment, John Lemon actually gives the total value of the old used rusted 24 year old farm equipment as $390.00 – Matheny LIED about the value to a grand jury in March of 2003 and told Gilmer County authorities that the equipment had a value of $2498.00 which got me indicted on a GRAND LARCENY charge that turned out to be false. If the JIC is going to condone these types of actions and endorse the misconduct of then Chief Justice Davis, well then the people of West Virginia need to be informed of a possible very corrupt situation in their state.

But what I really want some attention brought to is the matter of the statement in the majority opinion where Davis says I was sent to PRISON for a misdemeanor charge which greatly has affected my 30 year broadcast career since this information is widely available on the internet. Since when are people sent to prison for misdemeanors and why would Davis mention that in official documents.

Davis has brought great harm to myself by not taking facts from the court record and would be advised to read the dissenting opinion authored by Justice Albright and endorsed by Justice Starcher who see the situation the same as i do.
December 7th 2011

image

Two other justice did not agree with DAVIS when the final decision was made after languishing in the West Virginia Supreme Court all of 2006 and most of 2007.
654 S.E.2d 611

No. 33299 _     State of West Virginia v. Daniel B. Bingman
Albright, Justice, dissenting:

I respectfully dissent from the opinion of the majority of this Court. Indeed, as the majority recognizes, this Court’s decision in State v. Boyd, 209 W.Va. 90, 543 S.E.2d 647 (2000), specifically governs this case. However, in my judgment, Boyd is unabashedly wrong. Prior to Boyd, this Court had declared explicitly as follows:

Where, in a criminal prosecution, a conviction for assault and battery is had under an indictment charging the defendant with the commission of a felony, under Code, 61-2-9, which indictment was not returned within one year after the offense charged in the indictment was committed, the conviction is barred under Code, 61-11-9, and is void. . . .

Syl. Pt. 6, in part, State v. King, 140 W.Va. 362, 84 S.E.2d 313 (1954) (emphasis supplied). The King precept remained steadfast and was applied in State v. Leonard, 209 W.Va. 98, 543 S.E.2d 655 (2000), a decision filed by this Court on the same day Boyd was filed. In Leonard, this Court stated: “Our decision in King joined an overwhelming majority of courts that hold a defendant cannot be convicted of a lesser offense upon a prosecution for a greater crime commenced after the statute has run on the lesser offense.” 209 W.Va. at 101, 543 S.E.2d at 658.

Despite the King assertion that a conviction is void under the identified circumstances, the Boyd decision created an exception which permitted a conviction to stand where the defendant requested an instruction on the lesser-included offense. Specifically, syllabus point three of Boyd provides as follows: “When a defendant is not indicted within one year of the date on which an offense is committed but requests the circuit court to instruct the jury on a time-barred lesser included offense, the defendant by that act waives the statute of limitations defense contained in W.Va.Code § 61-11-9.” (Emphasis supplied). The Boyd Court reasoned that “[t]o hold otherwise would allow defendants to sandbag trial judges by requesting and approving an instruction they know or should know would result in automatic reversal if given.” 209 W.Va. at 94, 543 S.E.2d at 651.

There is merit to that argument regarding legal sandbagging to the extent that the decision to request consideration of a lesser included offense could have been utilized as a trial tactic, with a defendant essentially hedging his bets by seeking the benefit of conviction of a lesser included offense rather than a felony, with the secondary plan to attack the conviction on a statute of limitations claim should the jury take the bait. In that situation, as recognized by Boyd, a defendant would essentially be petitioning for consideration of the lesser included offense and thereafter seeking reversal based upon his own invitation. Therein lies the problem identified in Boyd. The failing in Boyd is not in its identification of the issue but rather in its resolution.

The underlying inconsistency between introducing the possibility of conviction on a lesser included offense and thereafter professing the illegality of the conviction under the statute of limitations has been recognized by a myriad of courts dealing with this situation. In People v. Nunez, 745 N.E.2d 639 (Ill. App. 2001), for instance, the court observed that “asking the trial court to consider a lesser included offense might generally be considered a trial tactic[.]” 745 N.E.2d at 646. However, “when that tactic includes a decision to waive the statute of limitations, the record should reflect that the defendant consulted with defense counsel about the decision to waive the statute of limitations and agreed to the waiver.” Id.

[W]hen the statute of limitations has expired on that lesser included offense, the trial court may find defendant guilty of that lesser included offense only when the decision to submit the lesser included offense to the trial judge for consideration and thereby waive the statute of limitations is a product of the defendant’s informed consent. The right to waive the statute of limitations is the defendant’s right.

Id. (emphasis supplied).

This same principle was acknowledged in People v. Brocksmith, 604 N.E.2d 1059 (Ill. App. 1992). “While the proffering of jury instructions might generally be considered a trial tactic, when that decision includes a decision whether to waive a statute of limitation, the defendant must be consulted.” 604 N.E.2d at 1066. The Brocksmith court specified that “[t]he right to waive the statute belongs to the defendant and should not be assumed from the action of counsel in this situation.” Id. (emphasis supplied). An additional element in Brocksmith was the recognition that the act of waiving the protections of the statute of limitations “cannot be considered a sound trial tactic when defense counsel admittedly did not know that the period had expired. He cannot make a reasoned decision without knowing the facts. Nor can the defendant be deemed to have made a knowing waiver of the period.” Id. The Brocksmith court concluded its analysis with the assertion that “under these facts, defendant was denied his constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel.” Id.

In Cowan v. Superior Court, 926 P.2d 438 (Cal. 1996), the California court generated a comprehensive discussion of the intricacies inherent in this issue. The court initiated its analysis by examining the critical difference between waiver and forfeiture. “Over the years, cases have used the word loosely to describe two related, but distinct, concepts: (1) losing a right by failing to assert it, more precisely called forfeiture; and (2) intentionally relinquishing a known right. ‘[T]he terms “waiver” and “forfeiture” have long been used interchangeably.‘” 926 P.2d at 440. In the instance of the loss of the right to assert the statute of limitations, the correct principle was held to be waiver, rather than forfeiture. (See footnote 1)

To remove oneself from the protection of the statute of limitations, one must intentionally relinquish a known right. In Cowan, the court observed that the prosecutor was “concerned that if petitioner pleads guilty, he can later challenge the conviction in a habeas corpus petition and assert the statute of limitations.” 926 P.2d 443. The court replied that such “concern is understandable,” but that its “holding should obviate that concern. A person who waives the statute of limitations, as petitioner seeks to do here, may not later attack the conviction on the basis of that statute of limitations.” Id. The crucial issue is how the statute of limitations is waived. In that vein, the Cowan court proposed as follows:

To avoid the problem that arose in this case, we remind trial courts and prosecutors that whenever a defendant seeks to plead guilty to, or a court considers whether to instruct the jury on, a lesser offense, they should determine whether there may be a problem with the statute of limitations regarding that offense. If so, the court should elicit a waiver of the statute as a condition of the guilty plea or giving the instruction. This should be an easy process. The record need merely reflect in some fashion that the defendant is aware that the offense is, or might be, time-barred, and the defendant has waived the statute of limitations.

Id. at 443-44. Quite simply, “[t]he court need merely inform the defendant in some fashion that the charge is, or may be, time-barred, and elicit a simple waiver of the bar.” Id. at 441.

In a concurrence in Cowan, Justice Baxter further elucidated the discussion by agreeing with the majority’s “conclusion that a defendant ought to be able to waive the statute of limitations and, with the prosecutor’s consent, plead guilty to a time-barred lesser offense where the waiver is knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, is made for the defendant’s benefit and after consultation with counsel,” subject to the limitations of the majority opinion, and where the waiver does not handicap the defense of contravene a public policy. Id. at 444, Baxter, J., concurring.

In another concurrence, Justice Chin observed that “[t]o allow defendants to lose the protection of the limitation accidentally could mean that persons could languish in prison under judgments that could not have occurred had they merely thought of the statute of limitations in time.” Id. at 445, Chin, J., concurring (emphasis supplied).

In addition to being fair, requiring an express waiver of the statute of limitations makes practical sense. Unlike a forfeiture rule, which would imply a waiver on a silent record, requiring an express waiver would ensure a fully developed record. When a defendant seeks to plead guilty to, or have the court instruct on, a time-barred offense, the court, with the assistance of the prosecutor, should take a simple waiver. That way the record is protected. A defendant who expressly waives the statute of limitations cannot later claim he did not know of it. The forfeiture rule would leave the record undeveloped. Whenever the defendant was represented, i.e., most of the time, the defendant could later claim he did not receive effective assistance of counsel, a claim which would be plausible most of the time, meritorious much of the time, and difficult to disprove all the time.

Id. The concurrence recognized the very likely potential for an ineffective assistance of counsel claim and the ability, if not responsibility, of a court to avoid that probable result by straightforward action during the early stages of the proceedings.

If a represented defendant pleads guilty to a time barred offense and thereby forfeits the statute of limitations, but later claims counsel was ineffective, on what basis could a court deny relief? Suppose the defendant requests and receives an instruction of a time barred lesser offense and is convicted of the lesser offense. Later he files a petition for writ of habeas corpus, claiming his attorney never discussed the statute of limitations with him, and if he had known the lesser offense was time-barred, he would never have agreed to requesting the instruction. When the record is silent, the claim would be credible. It would have to be litigated and would often be found meritorious. On the other hand, a simple waiver on the record would settle the matter.

Id. at 445-46. The concurrence explained that “a forfeiture rule would lead inevitably to the development of an entirely new jurisprudence. . . . A new subspecialty of ineffective assistance of counsel claims would arise. That development would be neither desirable nor necessary. The simple expedient of taking a waiver will avoid the problem. A silent record aids no one.” Id. at 446.

An identical conclusion was reached in State v. Kerby, 156 P.3d 704 (N.M. 2007), wherein the New Mexico court held: “Based on our review of the various approaches, we hereby adopt the waiver approach and hold that the statute of limitations is a substantive right that may only be waived by a defendant after consultation with counsel, and only if the waiver is knowing, intelligent, and voluntary.” 156 P.3d at 709. The Kerby court rejected the forfeiture approach not only because the protection should not be unintentionally lost but also because the forfeiture rule is “an exercise in futility.” People v. Williams, 981 P.2d 42, 45 (Cal. 1999). As the Williams court explained:

Defendants would usually gain indirectly by claiming ineffective assistance of counsel what a forfeiture rule would prevent them from gaining directly. A forfeiture rule would merely add a step to the litigation. Only those who admitted their guilt right away and did not request an attorney could never gain relief.
Id.

The Kerby court reasoned that “if we adopted the forfeiture rule in the instant case, Defendant would have a compelling ineffective assistance of counsel claim because he would not have been convicted but for his attorney’s failure to raise the statute of limitations defense.” 156 P.3d at 710.

In jurisdictions with a forfeiture rule, in numerous cases involving similar facts, courts have granted post-conviction relief outright on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel or have remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the issue. Thus, if we adopted the forfeiture rule, we would expend judicial (and executive) resources addressing Defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim and ultimately delay the inevitable vacating of Defendant’s convictions.

Id. (Citations omitted.) The attorney for the defendant in Kerby admitted that he failed to consult with the defendant about the statute of limitations because he did not recognize the issue. The court found that the defendant “did not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waive this defense after consulting with his counsel” and vacated the defendant’s convictions. Id.

The United States Supreme Court addressed this issue in Spaziano v. Florida, 468 U.S. 447 (1984), and held that a defendant in a capital case may be required to waive the statute of limitations as a condition to having the trial court instruct the jury on a lesser included offense. The Court grappled with the issue of whether a defendant is entitled to the benefit of both a lesser included offense instruction and the defense of an expired period of limitations. The Court explained:

If the jury is not to be tricked into thinking that there is a range of offenses for which the defendant may be held accountable, then the question is whether Beck [v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625 (1980)] requires that a lesser included offense instruction be given, with the defendant being forced to waive the expired statute of limitations on those offenses, or whether the defendant should be given a choice between having the benefit of the lesser included offense instruction or asserting the statute of limitations on the lesser included offenses. We think the better option is that the defendant be given the choice.

Id. at 456. “In this case, petitioner was given a choice whether to waive the statute of limitations on the lesser offenses included in capital murder. He knowingly chose not to do so.” Id. at 457. The trial court has explicitly detailed the statute of limitations issue directly to the petitioner, asking if he understood the ramifications of his decision, as follows:

THE COURT: Do you understand that while the statute of limitations has run on the Court submitting to the jury lesser included verdicts representing the charges of second-degree murder and third-degree murder, manslaughter, that you who has the benefit of the statute of limitations can waive that benefit and, of course _ and then have the Court submit the case to the jury on the first-degree, second-degree, third-degree and manslaughter.

If you don’t waive the statute of limitations, then the Court would submit to the jury only on the one charge, the main charge, which is murder in the first degree, and the sentencing alternatives are as [defense counsel] stated them. Do you understand that?

MR. SPAZIANO: Yes, your Honor.
Id. at 457 n. 6. The Supreme Court found that, under those circumstances where the defendant understood the consequences of his actions and refused to waive the statute of limitations, the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offenses.

The Boyd declaration, and consequently the conclusion of the majority herein, is contrary to the reasoned methodology employed by courts addressing this critical criminal right. Boyd dictates that the very act of seeking the lesser included instruction is a forfeiture of the rights afforded to a defendant under the applicable statute of limitations. End of inquiry. This restricted view fails to acknowledge that the protections afforded by the statute of limitations in this instance should not be deemed to have been abandoned in the absence of a knowing, voluntary, and intelligent waiver. Moreover, the ramifications of the application of the narrow Boyd rule conflict with the basic concepts of judicial economy. As recognized by several cases above, the potential for ineffective assistance of counsel claims is overwhelming where the Boyd rule is applied. Without the informed consent of the defendant, counsel’s decision either for or against waiver could ultimately result in a claim of legal malpractice. The predictions of the Williams court, examined above, would then come to fruition, and the forfeiture approach would properly be viewed as “an exercise in futility” which simply and unnecessarily “add[s] a step to the litigation.” 981 P.2d at 45. Whether viewed from the broad perspective of the fundamental rights of a criminal defendant or the more narrow determination of effective judicial management, the rule adopted by Boyd is defective. I therefore respectfully dissent from the application of the Boyd rule in this case, and I would reverse the Appellant’s conviction.

I am authorized to state that Justice Starcher joins in this dissenting opinion.

———————————————————————

Footnote: 1
See Potesta v. U.S. Fidelity & Guar. Co., 202 W.Va. 308, 315, 504 S.E.2d 135, 142 (1998) (identifying components of establishment of waiver, including demonstrating that party has intentionally relinquished known right.); Hoffman v. Wheeling Sav. & Loan Assn., 133 W.Va. 694, 713, 57 S.E.2d 725, 735 (1950) (“ ‘A waiver of legal rights will not be implied except upon clear and unmistakable proof of an intention to waive such rights.‘ ” (Citation omitted)). Hoffman also instructs that “[t]he burden of proof to establish waiver is on the party claiming the benefit of such waiver, and is never presumed.” (Citation omitted); see also Dye v. Pennsylvania Cas. Co., 128 W.Va. 112, 118, 35 S.E.2d 865, 868 (1945).

GFP – 12.07.2011
Opinions | Commentary | G-LtE™ | G-Comm™(4) CommentsPermalink

~~~ Readers’ Comments ~~~

Several different Gilmer County public officials, but especially Gerry Hough committed crimes,to cover up the facts of this case and all should be held accountable, and here it is all in black and white.

By Conservative Citizen  on  12.07.2011

Don’t expect the WV State Bar to do anything with a complaint against a lawyer unless there has been wide press coverage to make it impossible to sweep the issue under the rug. The Bar protects its own like any group empowered to self-regulate. A lawyer can plunder an estate, lie, cheat, steal, over-bill for work, bill for work which was not done or was unnecessary, and nothing will be done about it by the Bar. Not all WV lawyers are dishonest, but we have too many who will do anything to line their pockets. If we want to move WV ahead with its legal system we should adopt what was done in Iowa, Kentucky, and Connecticut(http://www.Halt.org) with their lawyer discipline systems. I bet that without too much effort we could cite examples of how lawyers close to home have ripped off helpless citizens.

By Hap Foster, Wood County  on  12.07.2011

To HAP:

When comments such as yours are submitted, and is shared with the many readers of the GFP the whole system WORKS.

And if we want to EXPOSE a GOOD EXAMPLE of: A lawyer can plunder an estate, lie, cheat, steal, over-bill for work, bill for work which was not done or was unnecessary, and nothing will be done about it by the Bar…

We have to look no further than the Butcher and Butcher law firm and the AJ WOOFTER ESTATE & Rosa Belle Gainer Cunningham their dishonest employee that was CAUGHT back dating checks to give the appearance of compliance.

We can prove wrongdoing six ways to Sunday and when we delivered box after box with hundreds documents to Bill Martins office….it was burned down shortly thereafter.

I remember that day well because it was hundreds of pages of documents and I bought Bills secretary Lisa flowers and really went all out for all the hard work they did.

I have been talking to reporters trying to get National Press. What I was told about the WV JIC was…

“If you think the office of disciplinary counsel is corrupt, you haven’t seen anything yet; the Judicial Investigation Commission is the most corrupt agency down there in Charleston!“

I believe that man will prove to be 100% correct.

By TO HAP  on  12.07.2011

They’re all spies down in Crooked County down by the Crooked River!

By Hurricane Rina McCoy-Central WV SS/Editor Edison – Cal Patty Press Editor with music and color

I awake to find no peace of mind

When the dead body of FRED HILL they did find

I said, how do you live as a fugitive like a member of the SS

Down here where I cannot see so clear,

But that Casey Smith certainly seems queer

You ask what do I know

The State Police just say…

“Hey JOE!” Where ya goin with that gun

Show me the right way to go.

I just don’t know, but the VILLE is an EVIL THRILL!

The elite think evil is fun so they gotta run…

And the spies came out of the water down by the Crooked River

You’re feeling so bad ’cause you know that they killed yet another

Just like the other

That’s why the spies hide in every corner

With the SS man a chief mourner   …at the memorial

But you can’t touch them no way their big dogs say

Or you will be eaten straight away

‘Cause they’re all spies

For in the tallest mountains the Ghost Wolf is still free

They’re all spies down in Crooked County down by the Crooked River

They’re all spies

I awake to see that no one is free but blood still drips from thee

Black cats and midnight tales bring Crystal Metz all too close to the unsolved murder of Fred Hill given the fact she was there and became annoyed by Fred when he pinched her ass and some said she vowed revenge right then and there. Then, just after the midnight hour a short time later Fred disappeared directly into the Crooked River behind the bar where he was drinking with a co-worker that night.

Because we are all spies
We’re all fugitives from the elite
Look at the way we give

And look at the way they live
Down here, some cannot sleep from fear, No!

But no fear they say is the SS way
I said, which way do I turn when I learn that everything is corrupt

We can not go belly up when they’re all spies
Oh, I forget everything but I remember a lot, because I am all spy

Those Crooks come down from the Hill down by the Crooked River

The Spies came all the way from the sea
But you’re feeling so bad cause ya know you ain’t free
Though spies hide out in every corner
But you can’t touch them, no, you can only see
The Dark Woods of Crooked County holds secrets

Cause they’re all spies

“The DARK WOODS of CROOKED COUNTY HOLDS SECRETS”

FRED IS DEAD ...just like the CalPatty Press said, a long time ago!

Here is something to think about GILMER COUNTY!

By Freebird/RGW Reporter for the Central WV SS and the Concerned Citizens Free Press

SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT GILMER COUNTY!

There are only 88 students registered at 200 High Street GSC.  No out of state person is eligible to vote other than their state absentee if they live off campus.  They must be domiciled in the dorm.  Remember how they kept saying how great the registration was from the college.  Bull,  so I am questioning 470 registered voters reported by the clerks office.  Did we miss those people on the census?  No!  Are all of them of the age to vote even if we did?  No.  Something is wrong.  The number of registered voters exceeds even the broadest definition of possible voters eligible by 470 votes.(counting any and all residents) 

SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT GILMER COUNTY.

Earl Ray Tomblin Democrat 696 51.79%
Bill Maloney Republican 534 39.73%
Bob Henry Baber Mountain 107 7.96%
Marla Dee Ingels Independent 5 0.37%
Harry V. Bertram American Third Position 2 0.15%
Write Ins 0 0.00%
Unofficial Results Total Votes: 1,344
Registered Voters Gilmer County Population Statistics
3145 Democrat
930 Republican 8693 2010 census Gilmer County
                         121 Independent -1746 fci glmer inmates Can’t vote
10 Libertarian -152 fci camp inmates Can’t vote
8 Mountain -1721 2009 students GSC Low # vote
473 No Party -945 Total County schools enrollment (very few eligible)
4687 Total Registered 4129 Gilmer Regular Residents remaining After adjusting out FCI and Students
4687 Registered Voters Total
558
Adjusted out total census remaining residents
               558 Are they students?
Per  SOS 88 Students @ GSC  -88

Registered at 200 High Street, Living on Campus                 470

Can we believe that 470 high school seniors who were 18 before the election were registered as eligible to vote ?   A very high number for possible eligible at the high school would be generous at 8 (one or less is more likely).   We have not been provided the number of Democrat and Republican Ballots voted by Party and non-party registration data for a very long time.  Why is this?  This bit of public information is very relevant to candidates, their supporters and the voters in general.  It is foolish to believe that every non student resident of Gilmer County that would have been missed during the census would be a registered voter.  The registered voter is usually quick to respond to census questionnaires.  Who are these 470 and how do they vote?  Did they have missed this many adults during the census amd is it even possible that they would all be registered voters? It is not very likely and something to think about..  It is hard to believe  that in a County so dedicated to its political beliefs there are 473 voters of no party affiliation.  473 versus 470, maybe just a coincidence but it seems a reasonable question. Certainly these invisible people and their ballots represent votes. The numbers are disturbing and statistics in Gilmer County do not change significantly year to year.