AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Free Dating

An e-mail to the SC Attorney General

posted 7/30/2008 3:44:54 AM |
0 kudosgive kudos what's this?
    report abuse
  Pornosaurus

To the Honorable Henry McMaster:

On the 20th of March 2008, I, Donald J. Hurlbert, was charged with both, “obstructing Roadway” and “Public Intoxication,” placed under arrest wrongfully, and imprisoned falsely within the City of North Charleston, SC. I have since contacted the City’s Legal Dept., attempted to have used Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), and made arrangements for a pre-trial conference. Whoever shall have prosecuted me for the aforementioned, alleged violations will have been more stubborn than I was, apparently.

Officer G. Kramer, of the City of North Charleston Police Dept., is guilty of two misdemeanors, as per the “South Carolina Code of Laws, sections 16-9-10, Perjury and subornation of perjury [both, subsections (A)(2) and (B)(2)], and 56-7-10, Use of uniform traffic ticket; vesting of jurisdiction; forms; utilization of electronic devices.” Section 56-7-10 states, “There will be a uniform traffic ticket [Form S-438] used by all law enforcement officers in arrests for traffic offenses…” Section 16-9-10, subsection (A) (2) states, “It is unlawful for a person to willfully give false, misleading, or incomplete information on a… form [e.g., a uniform traffic ticket] required by the laws of this State.” Officer Kramer writes in the violation section on one Form S-438, “obstructing Roadway,” and on the other Form, “Public Intoxication.” The video record from the police vehicle, which is now in the North Charleston Police Dept.’s evidence log, depicts me walking along the outer edge of a roadway, then onto the grassy area by the side of the road before Officer Kramer stops the police vehicle in the fourth lane of Rivers Ave. [A copy of a copy is available on youtube.com for quick reference (Police video: some people should not…)] Please note that walking in the road is not a crime, as per SC Code of Laws, section 56-5-3160 [subsection (c)]. However, Officer Kramer attests in the incident report’s narrative to the following: “I, OFFICER G. KRAMER #274 OBSERVED A WHITE MALE WALKING AGAINST THE FLOW OF VEHICLE TRAFFIC IN THE SECOND LANE OF RIVERS AVE. I STOPPED MY PATROL VEHICLE IN THE THIRD LANE OF RIVERS AVE EASTBOUND AND ASKED THE SUBJECT TO STEP OUT OF THE ROADWAY AND ON TO THE GRASSY AREA IN FRONT OF 8333 RIVERS AVE. THE SUBJECT… REFUSED THIS OFFICERS COMMAND TO LEAVE THE ROADWAY AND HAD TO BE ESCORTED FROM THE ROAD. WHILE ESCORTING HURLBERT A STRONG ODOR OF ALCOHOL COULD BE SMELLED EMITTING FROM HURLBERT PERSON…” The Officer is clearly making up a story that never happens to fit the obstructing roadway charge, because the municipal ordinance in question (17-133) states in part that, “No person shall knowingly and intentionally engage in conduct which impedes, or is likely to impede, pedestrian or vehicular traffic along any public street, sidewalk, or roadway…” This charge offends me personally, as this ordinance pertains generally to protesting behavior. The Officer is clearly making up a story that never happens to fit the public intoxication charge, because he never smells alcohol emitting from me while escorting me from the road; he never escorts me from the road. Please note that in light of the evidence, the prosecution has no case against me. Although reasoning suggests strongly that the Officer makes up these stories to give false and misleading information on the Forms, etc…, I offer an alternative explanation to give Officer Kramer the benefit of doubt. Perhaps he believes in his mind that the incident happens like he says, even though the video does not lie. If this is indeed the case, then on the morning of 20th March the Officer has a psychotic episode, now ought to surrender his weapon, and seek psychiatric help.

Section 16-9-10, subsection (B)(2) states, “A person who violates the provisions of subsection (A)(2) is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be imprisoned not more than six months or fined not less than one hundred dollars, or both.” Section 16-9-50, Disposition of fines states, “The one moiety of the fines imposed by this article shall be for the State…” Thank you...

Copy & paste to friend: (Click inside box; Ctrl + C to copy; Ctrl + V to paste)

   read more blogs!

Blogs by Pornosaurus:
Third Motion (Moonlighting)
Notice of Appeal
Did I Ever Tell Ya'll About the Best Damn Head?
Vote 'Em All Out!
Here's what I think (on god):
Someone gave me a free female condom!
Porn and Law: Drinking and Blogging Again
Ike my ass!
For Fannie and Freddie
You'll wouldn't believe me...
This is disturbing:
Is it just me?
An e-mail to the SC Attorney General
Maybe this one's for the poor bastard who made front page news here
Movements and Rhythms
I'm about to get fucked;but first, get your chance.
Sorry to beat a dead horse, but this is really happening
Can anyone think of anything else?
Ass-ended
Is this police perjury?
"Memorial Day" (2006)
Wow, I own a business in downtown Charleston
I've found my spanking emoticon!
"There'll Be No Drinkin' In North Charleston"
"Crazy Waters" In C


Comments:

post a comment!

redbronze

Jul 30 @ 9:47AM  
looks like your crossing the street there is not much video there... perhaps a ticket for jaywalking but that is about it...
Wordsofwit

Jul 30 @ 10:34AM  
This sort of thing requires corroboration as it is a he said/she said situation and the cop wins without anything to support it.
The Officer is clearly making up a story
Please note that in light of the evidence, the prosecution has no case against me
No, its not clear at all to anyone but you. I see no proof or supporting evidence. Did they give a a breathalyzer? What does the cops dash cam show? Did a citizen call the police on their cell phone complaining?

Secondly, such a complaint needs to be filed by an attorney, perhaps legal aid, or at least persuasively written with the advise of counsel. This isn't.

Many attorneys will provide a free consultation and, if you haven't already done so, run it by one and listen to what they have to say. I anticipate that it won't be what you want to hear.

To me, and I am just some person like somebody on the jury, I just see a rant with opinions, and unsupported allegations that result in a mountain being made out of mole hill.

The thing that really reverberates to me is how you are putting forth such a massive effort into this as if you are being falsely accused of murder or armed robbery.. It is just a citation like a traffic ticket that doesn't go on your driving record. It is like Don Quixote and the windmill

The other thing to realize is that everybody involved in this (if it is a judicial and not a jury trial) gets paid for it but you. I do hope that you do not plan on taking off from work to attend to this.

Get over it and move on with life. It is more trouble than it is worth to proceed further if the AG office does not respond favorably.
redbronze

Jul 30 @ 11:04AM  
link to his video
Pornosaurus

Jul 30 @ 6:13PM  
Thanks. The police do not attempt to conduct field sobriety tests and breathalyzers for public intoxication here. A cop saying the she smells alcohol on someone is good enough for a conviction. The video is from the cop's dash cam. No one called to complain about me. The AG's Office says I need to take it up with the soliciter.

It doesn't go against my driving record. I have a criminal record because of this, which will come up when I want to fly, apply for a job, etc... Most people have no fucking clue that public intox. is a permanent criminal charge. It will be a jury trial, unfortunately for the jury.

sugarnspice005

Jul 30 @ 7:05PM  
If you want the judge to really take this serious...have a lawyer or legal service draw up the paperwork. They can cite codes, ordinances, law, and case properly to where the judge can research facts for him/her self.

Otherwise....all it boils down to is hearsay.

free dating | mission statement | testimonials | safety warning | report abuse | safe list | privacy | legal | 2257 | advertise | link to us

© Copyright 2000-2014 Online Singles, LLC.
OS-WEB01
An e-mail to the SC Attorney General