Category Archives: equal protection of the law

www.dictionary.com/browse/equal-protection-of-the-laws
equal protection of the laws. A phrase in the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution requiring that states guarantee the same rights, privileges, and protections to all citizens.

Iowa Code 729

29.5 VIOLATION OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS — PENALTY.

  1. A person, who acts alone, or who conspires with another person

or persons, to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate or interfere

with any citizen in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or

privilege secured to that person by the constitution or laws of the

state of Iowa or by the constitution or laws of the United States,

and assembles with one or more persons for the purpose of teaching or

being instructed in any technique or means capable of causing

property damage, bodily injury or death when the person or persons

intend to employ those techniques or means in furtherance of the

conspiracy, is on conviction, guilty of a class “D” felony.

A person intimidates or interferes with another person if the act

of the person results in any of the following:

a. Physical injury to the other person.

b. Physical damage to or destruction of the other person’s

property.

c. Communication in a manner, or action in a manner, intended

to result in either of the following:

(1) To place the other person in fear of physical contact which

will be injurious, insulting, or offensive, coupled with the apparent

ability to execute the act.

(2) To place the other person in fear of harm to the other

person’s property, or harm to the person or property of a third

person.

  1. This section does not make unlawful the teaching of any

technique in self-defense.

  1. This section does not make unlawful any activity of any of the

following officials or persons:

a. Law enforcement officials of this or any other

jurisdiction while engaged in the lawful performance of their

official duties.

b. Federal officials required to carry firearms while engaged

in the lawful performance of their official duties.

c. Members of the armed forces of the United States or the

national guard while engaged in the lawful performance of their

official duties.

d. Any conservation commission, law enforcement agency, or

any agency licensed to provide security services, or any hunting

club, gun club, shooting range, or other organization or entity whose

primary purpose is to teach the safe handling or use of firearms,

archery equipment, or other weapons or techniques employed in

connection with lawful sporting or other lawful activity.

via Iowa Code 729.

To whom it may concern

To Whom it May Concern,

I am contacting you again as there has been no authority who has reviewed my evidence. I am forwarding a letter I sent yesterday to a party who is described as protecting the Constitutional Rights of all Americans. Please ignore the caps as I was angry and am just plain tired of begging those with the power to protect my Constitution RIghts guaranteed to all, to dismiss my pleas, begging for the opportunity for my voice to be heard, at the least an investigation.
I have a case in which started with defamation of my character when I complained about a well connected neighbor. He purchased to land adjoining mine from the Mayor. Began illegal redevelopment of the legally non conforming property, issued illegal building permits. Causing adverse effects to my property. When he discovered he could not get the illegal redevelopment recorded on the County plat map he decided to eliminate me and acquire my property. He began using toxic chemicals as weapons applying them to my property. This went on for 5 years. I could not get any equal protection of the law. The effects of the chemicals were brutal, acts of terrorism, after 5 years I knew full well I was dying from these chemicals. I had lived disabled from the chemicals on money borrow from friends. A County officer stopped to inform me that this neighbor had no intention of stopping, he had to have my property to get his redevelopment recorded. I had to make a choice, kill him dead and pray that my health be restored or sell my property and pay the debt I owed friends that amounted to over $10,000. I sold my home, business, and property for enough to repay my friends and cover my final expenses, see more of my story at, https://poisonedbymyneighborfromhell.com
THIS CASE IS COMPLEX AND UNPRECEDENTED, THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST IS UNPRECEDENTED, THE ONGOING USE OF BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS AGAINST A NEIGHBOR WITH NO INTERVENTION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT IS UNPRECEDENTED, THE CITY CLERK COMMITTING FRAUD, FABRICATION ORDINANCES, KNOWINGLY MAKING FALSE STATEMENTS AND DEMANDING PAYMENT ON A PAST DUE ACCOUNT BE DIRECTLY FROM THE POCKET OF THE ACCOUNT HOLDER IS UNPRECEDENTED, IT IS CRIMINAL. THE DEFAMATION OF MY CHARACTER BY THE BROTHER OF THIS NEIGHBOR A LEE COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER  KNOWINGLY FABRICATING EVIDENCE AND MAKING THESE FALSE STATEMENTS TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC, IN VIOLATION OF ETHICAL RULES AND WITH NO JURISDICTION ,AND A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, THIS LEE COUNTY OFFICER ACTING A BUILDING OFFICIAL FOR THE CITY IS UNPRECEDENTED. THE ATTORNEY I HIRED TO SUE THE CITY TOOK MY MONEY AND NEVER FILED A COMPLAINT. HE REASSURED ME SEVERAL TIMES THAT HE HAD, HE STATED THAT MY WITNESS LIST WAS COMPELLING AND NEVER ASK A SINGLE QUESTION OF ANY OF THEM WHEN I WAS THE DEFENDANT IF A CIVIL CASE FILED AGAINST ME BY THIS NEIGHBOR WHO WAS HELD ABOVE THE LAW IN EVERY ACTION THAT WAS IN VIOLATION OF MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS IS UNPRECEDENTED. THAT COURT DISMISSED HIS CASE EVEN THOUGH MY ATTORNEY SUPPRESSED ALL EVIDENCE THE PROVED MY CASE WITHOUT A DOUBT IS UNPRECEDENTED. THE NEIGHBOR IN VIOLATION OF THE COURT RULING IN THE CASE HE FILED AGAINST ME VIOLATED THAT ORDER BY ALTERING, DESTROYING THINGS ON MY PROPERTY, HE HAD THE CHIEF OF POLICE AS A WITNESS WHEN HE TOLD ME IN ADVANCE HE WAS GOING TO VIOLATE THE COURT ORDER IS UNPRECEDENTED. THE COUNTY ATTORNEY HAVING A CONFLICT OF INTEREST VIOLATED MY FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW, RIGHT TO ENJOY MY OWN PROPERTY AND HARASSED MY BY FILING FRIVOLOUS COMPLAINTS AGAINST ME THAT WERE SO RIDICULOUS I NEVER EVEN GOT INTO THE COURT ROOM, HE TOOK HEARSAY FOR EVIDENCE WHEN THERE WAS HARD COPY EVIDENCE THAT COULD NOT BE DENIED, STATING TO ME THAT HE WOULD DECIDE WHO GETS PROSECUTED IN LEE COUNTY, WHEN HIS DUTY IS TO PROSECUTE ALL CRIMINAL OFFENSES IN LEE COUNTY IS UNPRECEDENTED. THE FACT THAT I HAVE NEVER HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT MY EVIDENCE PROVING CONSPIRACY DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW, TERRORIST ACTS USING CHEMICAL WEAPONS WITH INTENT TO CAUSE SERIOUS INJURY TO ANY AUTHORITY IS UNPRECEDENTED. THESE ARE ALL VIOLATIONS OF MY FEDERAL UNALIENABLE RIGHTS, THE FBI IS THE AGENCY DELEGATED TO INVESTIGATE PUBLIC CORRUPTION CASES. THEY ARE THE FEDERAL AGENCY DELEGATED TO INVESTIGATE CONSPIRACY AGAINST RIGHTS, THEY ARE THE AGENCY DELEGATED TO INVESTIGATE DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW CASES, THEY CANNOT INVESTIGATE A CASE IN WHICH I HAVE NOT HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT THE EVIDENCE THAT PROVES WITHOUT A DOUBT IN THEIR OWN STATEMENTS THEY IMPLICATED THEMSELVES. THIS CASE MEETS THE STANDARDS OF A RICO CASE. I AM NOT GOING TO BE THE VICTIM OF A NARCISSISTIC PSYCHOPATH WHO DECIDED TO TAKE MY PROPERTY BECAUSE HE AND THOSE IN AUTHORITY TO OVERSEE VIOLATED THE WRITTEN LAW, THIS WAS A BRUTAL PHYSICAL ATTACK, ONLY THE FBI HAS THE AUTHORITY AND DUTY TO INVESTIGATE MY ALLEGATIONS.
XXXX I do not have the authority to investigate whether there is a money trail supporting bribes were paid, I can not imagine this many people committing serious criminal acts just because they can. The first police chief told me straight up he did not want to make this neighbor mad. Perhaps they all know what he is capable of and were afraid to cross him. They went over and above what any friend would do. He was intentionally killing me and not batting an eye about it. His only concern was acquiring my property. They may have all been scared to death of him, but I am not the sacrificial lamb. They have a duty to protect my rights from monster neighbors if need be. End of story. I am demanding the opportunity to submit the evidence I have to an FBI agent that specializes in criminal profiling and violations of Constitutional Rights. It was a month ago that one of the County board of supervisors actually sat down and reviewed some of the evidence I have. He recognized violation of my right to due process, He left here knowing full well my Constitutional Rights have been violated. Absolutely no doubt about it.I am the victim here. But  my right to free speech has been violated each time I had the floor at council meetings in regard to the illegal property redevelopment, well before the terrorist unleashed his wrath on me, The BOS stated when he left we need to get this into court, well I do not have the power and authority to do that  I hired an attorney and he threw me under the bus, he never even filed the complaint against the city that I hired him to file, all I needed was someone to present the evidence to the court because I am to shy to speak in public.  Attorney’s are not so incompetent as this one was without it being intentional. Being I have lost the ability to see (vision) due to the chemicals I only knew what he told me. I got my vision restored in 2012. I am still finding things that are incorrect when reading through this enormous stack of hard copy evidence I have. So I need to get this into court, how do you advise I do that, I know the FBI has the authority. So if they just plain don’t give a damn that a domestic terrorist is amongst the community. Are they forcing my hand to hurt one of these individuals to have my voice heard? I just need to know, because I will do what needs to be done to defend my Constitutional Rights. I have the right to defend my right when it is the DUTY of the government,   Until I have the opportunity to submit the evidence that I knew as well as was advised by Senator Grassley to do back in 2007 I regard this as an open case. I am willing to travel where ever I need to go to meet with an agent.
Melody Boatner.

5-13-2005 Letter from Lee County Extension Agent including Professional Opinion on Nuisance Drainage Issue

Due to the fact that after multiple requests from Boatner for the building administrator Mark Holland to come to the location and address her concerns, he refused.  A witness was prepared to testify that she asked Holland if he was going to go to the location and address Boatner’s concerns. He replied that he had no intention of going to Boatner’s to address her concerns.  Knowing that the expert on this situation would be the local FEMA director Steve Cirinna. Knowing that a conflict of interest exists due to the fact the he is the husband of the city clerk Celeste Cirinna his opinion was not an option. Through a referral from the internet source Boatner contacted Lee County Extension Agent Robert Dodds for an opinion regarding the nuisance drainage issue. Mr. Dodds did come to the location as a professional courtesy.  Mr Dodds noticed some discrepancies that I had not, I only noticed that the building permit was not signed by the builder as required by State of Iowa law. The following letter was written to me advising me of his opinion to some questions I had asked him. A copy was also sent to Mayor Dinwiddie along with a copy of the State drainage laws. This letter was never discussed privately with Boatner or at a public council meeting. This letter was not submitted as ongoing business to the next elected administration of Mayor Tony Sciumbato . This expert’s opinion was ignored in this case, yet there are numerous instances unrelated to Conlee-Boatner nuisance drainage issue in which public record shows Mr. Dodds opinion was requested and respected. At this point any reasonable person would recognize a conspiracy to deprive me of my Federal Constitutional Right to Equal Protection of the Law and my Right to Enjoy my own Property at the least of the issues in this case.
5-13-2005 Bob Dodds letter to Mayor Dinwiddie
5-13-2005 Lee County, Ia extension agent Bob Dodds letter answering questions Boatner has asked, identifying errors or violations of drainage laws to Boatner and  Mayor Dinwiddie. He included a copy of the Iowa storm water management regulations.

3-18-2005 Boatner informal notice of drainage problem to Mark Conlee

Boatner also left copies of this letter on Mayor Dinwiddie and building official Holland’s door. NOTE THE WORD DITCH IS WHAT I REFERRED TO AS WHAT WE NEEDED


3-10-2005 Foreseeable adverse effects to Boatner property have occurred crawlspace and back yard.


This is the damage to my foundation due to the illegal removal of the existing berm by Mark Conlee. I requested multiple times for the building official to come to the location and address my concerns. Conlee’s will claim that the damage was caused by storm water runoff coming from the street. However it has already been established that Boatner hand dug the ditches bordering her property upon purchase in 1995. Prior to repairing all damage caused by the lack of maintenance by the city of many years. This photo is from the basement of  Boatner’s home. Shot toward the right front corner, The front of the house facing 5th St is dry, easy to distinguish by the light color. The left side of this photo is the side of the home that faces Conlee’s property. Easy to distinguish this soil is saturated by storm water caused by illegal removal of existing berm by Mark Conlee along with the regrading of his entire lot due to him changing the frontage ¹ of his new home to be toward the alley. He regraded the entire lot downward to drain onto Boatner’s property.

¹Conlee committed perjury in civil court Conlee vs Boatner Eqeq 

This photo shows the soil saturated and the foundation washed out, this is the side of the house that faces Conlee’s property. According to witnesses Tonya Adkins and Stuart Westermeyer both former owners testified that the property never received storm water runoff from the Conlee property. When there was a heavy rainfall because of the berm the front yard of the Conlee property became a pond,the berm held all the water from running onto Boatner’s property. Witnesses were prepared to testify to all this and I have written affidavits stating this as true. Attorney Steve Swan failed to submit affidavits and to question witnesses on my behalf in a civil suit Conlee filed against me for loss of enjoyment to his property. Yes that is a tell tale sign of narcissistic personality disorder. I will post all the court records as the events happened.

I contacted Mayor Dinwiddie, building official Mark Holland and every other council member on this day. I requested each of them come to the location and see with their own eyes the flooding of my property caused by Mark Conlee’s illegal property redevelopment. Only one of the council members had the professional courtesy to answer my request, Cathy Roberts Farnsworth saw the adverse effects my property was having. Building official Mark Holland had the duty to act as the authority. he is the only authorized authority to represent the State building codes for the City of Montrose, Ia. He had been on notice since fall 2004 and had not preformed his duty on my behalf. That is to untimely to consider he is not conspiring with Mark Holland to violate my Federal Right to enjoy and equal protection of the law under color of law.

Here you can see it standing it the level spot that we had the pool set up. This yard has never held water in the past. I may have more knowledge than most about these issues but building administrator Holland has a manual that states the standard procedure required for redeveloping non conforming properties, his lack of concern was not due to ignorance, it was due to conspiracy intent to deprive me of my rights under color of law. Witnesses will testify that he questioned them about site layout when they were issued a building permit for their new home. He refused to answer my concerns and continued to issue Mark Conlee two more building permits. It is noted on public record that Holland did drive by, that will be posted by the date of the meeting.

Conflicts of Interest in Land Use Decision-Making – eXtension

Conflicts of Interest in Land Use Decision-Making

Elected and appointed officials involved in land-use decision making must not be tainted with prejudice regarding on matters that come before them. Such prejudice exists when the individual finds herself with a conflict of interest. A conflict of interest arises when a public servant is in the position of deciding between public duty and private interests. The three most common conflict of interest situations are (1) when the member is in a position to gain financially from the decision being rendered, (2) when the member is a relative of an interested party, or (3) the member is near, or next to, the property at issue.

The most obvious example of a financial conflict is when a land-use decision-maker has an ownership interest in the property that is the subject of the requested action. A review of court cases from around the country reveals numerous other possible conflict situations:

  • The decision-maker is in a business relationship with the applicant.
  • The decision-maker is employed by a company that stands to gain from approval of the development proposal.
  • The decision-maker owns property near the property in question.
  • The member owns a business that would directly compete with the applicant’s business.

The tangle of familial relationships that can potentially give rise to conflict of interest questions is equally broad:

  • The decision-maker’s spouse is the Realtor working with the landowner.
  • The decision-maker’s close relative lives near the property in question.
  • The member’s nephew is an attorney with the firm representing the applicant.

 

A decision-maker who questions whether he has a conflict of interest should ask for advice from the attorney representing his city or county. If a conflict of interest does in fact exist, the decision-maker must disqualify himself from the case. If a conflict of interest does not exist, it is the decision-maker’s duty to participate and vote, even if the situation may be uncomfortable because it involves a friend or associate.

Many communities, boards or commissions have adopted bylaws or policies that govern conflict, and some state codes require specific action to be taken where conflict of interest may exist. Care should be taken to follow any applicable standards in effect locally. While the advice to confer with legal counsel is always sound, some communities require that potential conflict of interest issues be declared and discussed at an open meeting and a vote taken to determine if an actionable conflict is present. Again, local practice should be followed when applicable. In addition, many local and national planning organizations provide models and standards for resolving conflict of interest issues.

Gary D. Taylor, Iowa State University