Dimora Improved Race Relations

1. ANTHONY THORNTON, CHERYL SCULLARK, KEVIN NIETART
   Body: South Euclid, Ohio’s Acting Chief Kevin Nietart, is one of many, whom has failed as head of law enforcement during this ongoing stalking and harassment from Anthony Thornton, Economic Development Manager of Cuyahoga County and his girlfriend Cheryl Scullark for over two years.
   Nietart has blatantly and outright refused to enforce the law, directed his subordinates to do likewise, given the green-light to Thornton and Scullark’s ongoing stress they’re causing and went as far as to write me a letter justifying why the stalking and harassment has, will and keep continuing. In a Civil Stalking Protection Order hearing held on April 7, 2006, Thornton and Scullark’s attorney, Fernando Mack, questioned me; didn’t the police [South Euclid] tell you to stop filing police reports? He has, without any qualms or reservations, SUPPORTS and allows this accosting, abusive and threatening behavior to continue which speaks volumes on his part. This archaic technique of intimidation used by Nietart is outrageous.
   Contrary to Nietart’s law and reasoning, the State of Ohio has enacted Anti-Stalking and Anti-Harassment laws. The statute is clear and unambiguous:
   � 2903.21. Aggravated menacing.
   (A) No person shall knowingly cause another to believe that the offender will cause serious physical harm to the person or property of the other person, the other person’s unborn, or a member of the other person’s immediate family.
   (B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of aggravated menacing. Except as otherwise provided in this division, aggravated menacing is a misdemeanor of the first degree. If the victim of the offense is an officer or employee of a public children services agency or a private child placing agency and the offense relates to the officer’s or employee’s performance or anticipated performance of official responsibilities or duties, aggravated menacing is a felony of the fifth degree or, if the offender previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to an offense of violence, the victim of that prior offense was an officer or employee of a public children services agency or private child placing agency, and that prior offense related to the officer’s or employee’s performance or anticipated performance of official responsibilities or duties, a felony of the fourth degree.
   (1) Whether the person has a history of violence toward the complainant or a history of other violent acts;
   (2) The mental health of the person;
   (3) Whether the person has a history of violating the orders of any court or governmental entity;
   (4) Whether the person is potentially a threat to any other person;
   � 2917.21. Telecommunications harassment.
   (A) No person shall knowingly make or cause to be made a telecommunication, or knowingly permit a telecommunication to be made from a telecommunications device under the person’s control, to another, if the caller does any of the following:
   (1) Fails to identify the caller to the recipient of the telecommunication and makes the telecommunication with purpose to harass or abuse any person at the premises to which the telecommunication is made, whether or not actual communication takes place between the caller and a recipient;
   (2) Describes, suggests, requests, or proposes that the caller, the recipient of the telecommunication, or any other person engage in sexual activity, and the recipient or another person at the premises to which the telecommunication is made has requested, in a previous telecommunication or in the immediate telecommunication, that the caller not make a telecommunication to the recipient or to the premises to which the telecommunication is made;
   (3) During the telecommunication, violates section 2903.21 of the Revised Code;
   (4) Knowingly states to the recipient of the telecommunication that the caller intends to cause damage to or destroy public or private property, and the recipient, any member of the recipient’s family, or any other person who resides at the premises to which the telecommunication is made owns, leases, resides, or works in, will at the time of the destruction or damaging be near or in, has the responsibility of protecting, or insures the property that will be destroyed or damaged;
   (5) Knowingly makes the telecommunication to the recipient of the telecommunication, to another person at the premises to which the telecommunication is made, or to those premises, and the recipient or another person at those premises previously has told the caller not to make a telecommunication to those premises or to any persons at those premises.
   (B) No person shall make or cause to be made a telecommunication, or permit a telecommunication to be made from a telecommunications device under the person’s control, with purpose to abuse, threaten, or harass another person.
   (C) (1) Whoever violates this section is guilty of telecommunications harassment.
   Not upholding Ohio’s laws means that he sanctions these actions. Furthermore, this corroborates Cleveland Municipal Courts Probation Officer Alice Cox-Wynn’s dishonesty, threats and statements.
   read

2. TO READ ALL PRESS RELEASES GO TO http://WWW.MYSPACE.COM/134801324
   Cleveland Municipal Court Assistant Prosecutor Marlene Ridenour is the first of many to endorse and support a Summons for a Probable Cause Determination-Criminal Damaging on or about 3-15-05. This means SUSPECT, with no proof or evidence, just hearsay. I was never arrested about this matter. NO MIRANDA-NO RIGHTS-UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Moreover, I was never read my rights at arraignment, or at any pre-trials (read into the four volume transcript). I was NEVER READ MY RIGHTS-UNCONSTITUTIONAL. NO RIGHTS, NO CASE!
   According to Ridenour, she knew Cheryl Scullark (Cleveland) was the problem from reading her lengthy statement.
   Anthony Thornton (Cuyahoga County’s Economic Development Manager), Mrs. Scullark’s boyfriend told her to call the police (based on her testimony) and go to the prosecutors office (she did it) to have charges filed on me. First, Scullark went alone with telephone harassment (although she admitted in her statement she was calling my house harassing me) then added a brick.
   Ridenour met, spoke with me and saw what I looked like. Scullark could not successfully have me prosecuted without Thornton.
   After meeting with Ridenour, a week later, Thornton and Scullark falsified two more police reports. They went to the prosecutor’s office together with more statements. Thus came about the criminal damaging.
   Ridenour knew this was a lie when she signed the summons. Scullark signed the complaint that I was 5’5, 150 lbs. I’m nowhere remotely close. Thornton signed on to be a witness.
   In Scullark’s first and subsequent police reports with Thornton, there was no documentation of damage done to her steel door, nor did she mention it in her 911 call. In fact, there were no pictures taken by the police, or any follow-up photos about her steel door at any time.
   Scullark took pictures some time after going to the Prosecutors office on or about 2-16-05 (according to her testimony). These photos were not time-dated and stamped. No one can verify when these pictures were taken, especially when the police did not document any damage done to her steel door at the times they had come to her home.
   Ridenour knew that Scullark had a surveillance camera. No photos from there either to corroborate any allegations. No other witnesses, just her and her boyfriend.
   Ridenour being a prosecutor knows the law. Aiding in perjury is a crime.
   Ridenour is just as innocent until proven guilty as Scullark, Thornton, Cleveland Municipal Court Probation Officer Alice Cox-Wynn and South Euclid’s Police Chief Kevin Nietart.

3. TO READ ALL PRESS RELEASE GO TO http://WWW.MYSPACE.COM/134801324
   Cleveland Municipal Court Ass. Prosecutor Aric Kinast (whom litigated this case) stated; “we think Margaret Walsh is an excellent attorney and that this is– these allegations are ridiculous, but we are certainly not stipulating.” Let Margaret Walsh represent Cheryl Scullark, Anthony Thornton, Cleveland Municipal Courts Prosecutors Marlene Ridenour, Tiffany Young, Arik Kinast, Victor Perez, Anthony Jordan and herself and not present any evidence.
   Legal Aid Society Lawyer Margaret Walsh is inefficient and negligent. She was appointed my lawyer in Cleveland Municipal Court for a Criminal Damaging Case tried on or about July 14, 2005. This case involved Anthony Thornton, Cuyahoga County Economic Development Manager and his girlfriend Cheryl Scullark. Walsh did not care if I had been read my rights. If she did my rights that are constitutionally mandatory would not have been violated by her. I was not Miranda (read into the four volume transcripts). This case went before the Eighth Appellate Court and was affirmed, although (in my attorney’s brief) as an error in trial, he clearly made a prima facie case about Walsh’s inefficiency.
   I was unable to communicate with Walsh. On, Wednesday, June 8, 2005, my only consultation with her, I sat down to discuss my case and she told me that I was silly before I could explain the whole case to her. She prejudged me before I could even provide evidence to her.
   On Friday, July 8, 2005, I left a message with Walsh. I did not get a response from her until Monday, July 11, 2005, at 11:06 a.m. She left a message with my answering service in which she said, “… there’s nothing to talk about, we’re set for trial. I don’t have any news because the prosecutor and I rarely talk about cases until the day of, so I will see you in court on July 14th, this Thursday, 9 o’clock or 10, 9 o’clock or 10 o’clock, whenever it was set for bench trial. Come at 9 o’clock and we’ll have a bench trial, bye.”
   As a result, I left her a message on Monday, July 11, 2005, and another message on Tuesday, July 12, 2005. She left a message on Tuesday, July 12, 2005 at 4:17 p.m. stating, “Hi, Ms. Townsend, I got your message and I called you back the other day. I was off on Friday. You called me last week, I called you back. I’m calling you now. I know you said call after 5. What is so imperative? Leave me a message, 698-3222, 698-3222. We’re still scheduled for trial. You still have to come to court. Come to court. You’re scheduled for trial, that’s not changing. Leave me a message. What’s so imperative? Bye.”
   Walsh failed to communicate with me regarding a bench or jury trial. Subsequently, I was not given the opportunity to select a bench or jury trial. She took it upon herself to decide that I was having a bench trial. I didn’t sign a waiver form be it yellow or white. She violated my rights by waiving without my knowledge or consent. I did not want a bench trial. I did not know that we were having a bench trial until I received the message from my attorney on Monday, July, 14, 2005, as stated above. At any time before trial, my counsel did not state or gave me an opportunity to review any of the city’s evidence.
   Not having my best interest in mind, she refused and failed to disclose any of my evidence to discredit the witnesses.
   After trial, Walsh told me that I would have a lot of fines to pay, do not call the complainant’s home and change my phone number. I then asked her was she going to be with me at sentencing, she said no and then walked away. I retained other representation.
   There was a new trial motion filed on my behalf, outlining Walsh’s conduct. The Court suggested that we call her as a witness to dispute the allegations. The burden was on the City. They refused to call her either since I taped her messages and attached them as an exhibit to the motion. She did not volunteer a rebuttal, defense or explanation. She just sat there. My retained attorney made a prima facie case.
   The city has opened the door for me to continuously be stalked and harassed by their witnesses. Walsh put the wedge in.

4. TO READ ALL PRESS RELEASES: Google
   Anthony Thornton, Cleveland; Cheryl Scullark, Cuyahoga; Tiffany Young, Cleveland;
   or GO TO http://WWW.MYSPACE.COM/134801324
   “Game, I’ll show you a game. I’ve got a girlfriend in Columbus for 5 years and I’ve been with Cheryl for 17 years”, Thornton said on Feb. 14, 2005. I replied, “17 years! You need to marry her.” He chuckled, “Marry her? What do I want to marry her for? I’m already married and besides she’ll do anything that I tell her to do. You don’t understand; she’s lonely. Her ex-husband mistreated her, dogged her out, used her, and abused her. See, I can come in and out of her house as much as I please. And, I’m going to get her to put you in jail. And when I get off the phone with you I’m going back over there and she’s going to let me in. Game, I’ll show you how the game is played!”
   Anthony Thornton, Cuyahoga County Economic Development Manager, Cheryl Scullark (Cleveland), his girlfriend, and his wife, thought that this was hilarious as I testified to this at a Civil Stalking Protection (CPO) hearing on Apr 7, 2006. Their attorney, Fernando Mack, didn’t crack a smile.
   Scullark gallivanted to the county’s “Unjustice Center” on Feb 16, 2005 with a smorgasbord of allegations asserting all kinds of stuff without any proof or evidence, to teach me a lesson.
   Scullark reported that she was receiving numerous calls, her door was damaged with a brick, they hid her boyfriend’s vehicle in HER garage after SHE received a death threat: “Bitch, you’re dead”- then his tires were flattened, he’s been her boyfriend for two years, more calls intercepted by her mother including, “Tell your daughter she’s a paranoid bitch.”
   Scullark testified at a Criminal Damaging case on July 14, 2005, that she knew nothing about me prior to Feb 14, 2005, and she and Thornton have been friends since high school. First she didn’t hear anything; it was brought to her attention by her mother that heard me, because she doesn’t have a doorbell and HE HAD TO PUT HIS CLOTHES ON when they heard me yelling in the yard. She claimed that I banged on her door so loudly that it literally shook the house, and her door damaged was estimated over $500. She claimed that she saw me with a stone, a brick or something; Thornton was standing beside her when the police came, and she even handed the phone to the officers at the scene due to the phone ringing so much.
   Thornton testified that he didn’t see me with anything, he left and the police called him back, he and Scullark never mentioned the door, went back into the house and left it like that.
   Thornton left Scullark hanging at sentencing proceedings on Aug 4, 2005. She testified that she “SUSPECTED” that I was doing things, is 50 years old, “old enough to be her mother”. She went on with how her elderly, deathly ill mother was the first to see me and that the doctor’s don’t know how long she will live and stated, “I have never ever entered any type of conspiracy”, and didn’t know that you need three calls to get a trace put on your phone. “I only got two calls.” (South Euclid requests that you get three calls, which is in my police report, Cleveland only one call). She understood how the system works now, denied calling my home, check her phone records and if she is having a problem, she was going to let the law handle it.
   Furthering, she said that Thornton used to come over to her house 4-5 times a week until I came along, how he is afraid to come over to her house since his vehicle has been damaged, and she can’t help the way he feels about her. Although, she doesn’t have a beef with me; I should be angry with Thornton, not her and wants to be left alone. And, that as of his birthday, July 31, I drove by her house to see if he was over there. No pictures of this either from her surveillance camera. Nevertheless, she wanted me to go to jail.
   Frustrated, Judge Zone asked Scullark why she wanted me to go to jail. Her reply, “It’ll teach her not to bother me and Anthony”.
   She later called Probation Officer Alice Cox-Wynn as soon as she could with more harassment.
   I testified at the CPO, that Scullark called Wynn complaining so much; Wynn told me that she told Scullark to stop calling with idle complaints or she’ll file harassment charges on her. I explained that Thornton influenced Scullark to call, and Wynn is a third party to the harassment with her threats which made all of them in contempt.
   Thornton, Scullark and his wife didn’t think this was funny. None of them laughed. Judge Eileen T. Gallagher and Attorney Mack looked at the defendants, astonished.
   Recanting her previous testimony and statements, Scullark testified at the CPO, she made a mistake on her first police, Thornton has been her boyfriend for three years, but they’re friends now. Recanting more, she said that they had eaten dinner, were watching some movies and heard me bang on the door with a brick.
   After hearing Wynn lie and say she never complained, hearing my testimony, Scullark admitted (unbeknownst to Wynn) Thornton told her to call the police on me and she even called the Probation Officer complaining about harassing calls. Lying more, she said that she never called my house, maybe her relatives did, I called her and said “Bitch leave my man alone” and I even pretended to be his legal wife. She’s the only one in the courtroom cursing. She said that she didn’t know exactly where I lived and she’s never been by my house. Then she said that by the time she put the surveillance camera up everything stopped.
   Anthony Thornton is the same man whom took the stand at the CPO in front of Scullark and his wife and testified that Scullark is not his girlfriend, never been his girlfriend and referred to her as a “THING he had DONE in his past that he isn’t proud of”. Later, he admitted he left Scullark’s home that evening, went back over there and she let him in.
   Nonetheless, I have Scullark on video in front of my house in a dark gray/silver van, Ohio License plate DES7736, pointing out exactly where I live to another person.
   Scullark’s words and actions are over a man that can’t stay off my phone, away from, or sending people to, where I live.

Comments are closed.