18 U.S. Code § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

Source: 18 U.S. Code § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

Society of Environmental Journalists

Educate yourself on this brutality that took place is southeast Iowa and nobody raised an eyebrow. https://poisonedbymyneighborfromhell.wordpress.com/

 

 

Police Chief Brent Shipman under color of law violates civil court order citing my right to enjoy my own property. NOTE; staubs broken off at ground level obviously pushed away from fence line from Conlee property by Conlee in the middle of the night.


Attorney Steve Swan representing me was confident in my case against the City of Montrose. Expressing that this witness list in itself would be compelling to the court. Stating these witnesses are experts in their own right and completely unrelated to each other. They are actually more related to the City officials by blood and special friendship. Had he submitted any of the affidavits or question the witnesses on the stand in court no doubt this case against the City would have been a slam dunk. Swan lied to me, he never filed a complaint against the CIty of Montrose. Question: Did Steve Swan simply forget that he never actually filed a complaint on my behalf, and told me he did out of error. Or did Steve Swan conspire with Mark Conlee and the CIty of Montrose violating his oath and my Constitutional RIghts to equal protection of the law and Right to enjoy my own property. .
Two out of court settlement offers by the PLAINTIFF to me the DEFENDANT cause of action was LOSS OF ENJOYMENT TO HIS PROPERTY! UNBELIEVABLE PSYCHOPATHIC TRAIT.  This evidence proves Conlee admits to causing the nuisance drainage problem to my property. This evidence was suppressed from the court by my Attorney Steve Swan. QUESTION: was failing to submit this evidence a simple mistake by my Attorney Steve Swan or was Steve Swan conspiring to deprive my Constitutional RIghts to enjoy my own property and equal protection of the law.


This was done on behalf of one man who redeveloped his legally nonconforming property into illegally nonconforming property. The building permits issued are illegal. Applying chemicals to the property of another person is illegal. I repeatedly requested the City and County Attorney to file a complaint on my behalf. I was repeatedly denied my right to file a criminal complaint. The existing conflict of interest was just to extreme for any of these officials to follow the law. This is a conspiracy deprivation of rights under color of law. In order for him to legally plat it on the County map he had to acquire ownership of my property. He used chemical warfare to accomplish his agenda. This was intentional to cause me bodily harm or death, defined by law as attempted murder  Poisoned by my Neighbor from Hell is a partially compiled web site blog. There are many more criminal offenses committed against me that I have yet to post. Any public exposure is welcome. They know I have the evidence or I am sure a defamation of character complaint would have been filed against me. They have file many frivolous complaints on Mark Conlee’s behalf. I admit I did give him the finger. that is not a crime Mr, Short,

 
sincerely,
Melody Boatner

Attorney fails to file complaint, lies to client claiming he did. Client gets sued by illegal property redeveloper for frivolous complaint. Is it typical for a person to sue you and offer 2 out of court settlements? Judge dismisses case, Police chief assists in violating court ruling, contempt is a criminal law.

Official letter of intent to sue

I hired Steve Swan to sue the City of Montrose in July 2005. This is not typical for a neighbor to have to do, the building authority has the duty to address residents concerns regarding nuisance drainage issues caused by new property redevelopment. He sent this letter to Conlee that afternoon. He lied by continuing to claim he filed a complaint against the City of Montrose. He stated that we would sue both parties, the City is where the money is at. Based on the fact that the building permits are illegal, the redevelopment of the legally non conforming property is illegal I knew full well who the liable party was. So what does his failure to represent my best interests fall in the justice system. An investigation would be required to find that evidence. The evidence supports the least of his immoral, unethical behavior is legal malpractice. This could be due to his physical disabilities, This man is morbidly obese. For him to actually get to the courthouse to file a complaint on behalf of a client has to be extremely difficult for him. He had to set on four chairs in the courtroom. I filed a complaint but of course the sided with Swan, We agreed to barter services for this case, after which he sent me a bill for $4000.00. I never was billed after I filed the complaint. Is it not the his responsibility to present evidence and question witnesses? He never did that either. I believe the evidence supports his actions are within that of a co-conspirator.

 

Petition in Equity
Petition in Equity. Mark and Linda Conlee sue me for LOSS OF ENJOYMENT OF HIS PROPERTY. I was well within my legal rights to install a privacy curtain on my own property? There was nothing illegal about this. I am a law abiding citizen. I know the law before I take an action.

 

 

6-5-2006 Conlee offer to settle out of court
6-5-2006 Conlee’s first out of court offer, had Boatner’s attorney Steve Swan submitted this evidence to the court the judge may have recognized it as admission to the nuisance drainage issue Conlee’s illegal redevelopment caused to Boatners property.
6-22-2006 2nd offer by Conlee admitting liability for drainage
6-22-2006 2nd offer by Conlee admitting liability for drainage. This was also suppress from the court by Boatner’s attorney Steve Swan Esq. This is no less than Conlee admitting he is responsible for the nuisance drainage problem his illegal redevelopment caused Boatner’s property. What is wrong with this guy, seriously?
5-24-2008
5-23-2008 Mark Conlee  in contempt of court, altered the railroad ties I have on my property to divert stormwater from Conlees new illegal property redevelopment, staubs holding railroad ties in place are broken off and bent over, plastic edging pull up & laying on top of the ground. Evidence Mark Conlee has no respect for the court, no respect for the law, no respect for his neighbor or the police chief Brent Shipman who he bullied into assisting him in violating the court ruling. This behavior indicates he has a severe personality disorder believing he is above the law and he has the right to control others. You can see on the left part of the retaining wall that is holding Mark Conlee’s fill dirt in position.

 

EFFECTS OF TOXIC CHEMICALS HAVING DIRECT CONTACT WITH MY SKIN

I am not a doctor, but this was more than an allergic reaction CLICK LINK BELOW

Source: EFFECTS OF TOXIC CHEMICALS HAVING DIRECT CONTACT WITH MY SKIN – Google Slides

Good old boy network from hell

Good old boy network from hell

Evidence that was withheld or suppressed by City officials and Lee County attorney that proves ethical and criminal offenses have been committed against me.Evidence that was withheld or suppressed by City officials and Lee County attorney that proves ethical and criminal offenses have been committed against me. Evidence that was withheld or suppressed by City officials and Lee County attorney that proves ethical and criminal offenses have been committed against me.

Suppressed and previously withheld from the civil case Conlee vs Boatner EQEQ

Witnesses on Boatner’s behalf

Witnesses on Boatner’s behalf

These individuals were intended to be witnesses in a case that should have been titled Boatner vs. City of Montrose, Ia, that is what Steve Swan was hired to do, that complaint was never filed. Steve Swan assured me that he filed the complaint against the city several times,it was he that advised me that we would sue both parties, the city and Mark Conlee. I was well aware that the liability was that of the city, Steve Swan was aware of that also. I met with him the first time so I could question his knowledge of the law pertaining to property redevelopment, legally nonconforming properties and the duty a city must provide for the residents. He was overpaid according to his own documented statements of evidence.  Steve Swan was intentionally negligent, no attorney could pass the bar showing the skills he showed throughout this untimely process. Lee County Attorney Michael Short sent a deputy to investigate a complaint made by Mark Conlee against me, claiming he was concerned  that there may be a conflict of interest. My witnesses were never interviewed by the City of Montrose Police Dept or Lee County Sheriff’s Dept. Mark Conlee make multiple false police reports against Boatner. Conlee was never concerned of being held accountable by the City of Montrose or Lee County Attorney Michael Short for his many criminal offenses including contempt of court. They fully participated in every action he requested, legal or illegal, nobody showed any concern for the law that they were violating by participating.

Documented evidence proves Lee County Attorney Michael Short advised Boatner that he would need and independent investigation. I am not certain what County Attorney Short meant by “an independent investigation”. Due to the fact that none of my witnesses were ever interviewed in what would be considered a typical investigation. I stated that I wanted an investigation I am still today  patiently waiting to hear from Lee County Attorney Short as the the results of his independent investigation.

My witnesses took the stand to testify on my behalf in a civil suit Mark Conlee filed against me. Conlee vs Boatner EQEQ 004043 cause of action, loss of enjoyment to his property. They were not question by Steve Swan. My first witness was a former tenant of the Conlee property, well aware of the existing berm and the fact that when it rained the berm held back the stormwater from my property causing the front yard of Conlee property to retain a small pond. Swan never asked him any questions. I asked him why he didn’t question that witness about the berm. Steve Swan advised me that the judge uses his own common sense. In the previous criminal cases against me I never had to speak a word as the evidence was undeniable. Had Steve Swan submitted the written affidavits and photo evidence that supported my allegations. Unfortunately Steve Swan was to incompetent to file a complaint against the liable party, the City of Montrose, question the witnesses who should have been viewed as experts in their field, notify me in a timely manner that a decision had been made.

NO ADVERSE IMPACT FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT AND THE COURTS

My initial complaint was in regard to this issue. To end up being poisoned by chemicals illegally applied to my property because the City and County officials had a conflict of interest with this illegally nonconforming owner/builder/redeveloper who was issued illegal building permits is unprecedented. It was the chemicals that nearly cost me my life. I could control the stormwater within my rights to defend my property. This man was angry that the officials could not control what I did legally on my own property. I could not control the chemicals, the fact that this man was allowed to do this knowing it was causing me physical harm and the officials dismissing the act as he had the right. That makes this a Federal Constitutional Rights case. The perps are the CIty and County officials who had the duty to protect my Right to enjoy my own property and my Right to Equal Protection of the Law.

via No adverse impact floodplain management and the courts

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.

Code of Ethics | icma.org

Code of Ethics

Adopted in 1924, the ICMA Code of Ethics defined the principles that today serve as the foundation for the local government management profession and set the standard for excellence. Leadership in a management structure committed to equity, transparency, integrity, stewardship of public resources, political neutrality, and respect for the rights and responsibility of elected officials and residents strengthens democratic local governance.

ICMA members pledge to uphold these principles in their conduct and decisions in order to merit the trust of the public, elected officials, and staff they serve. As a condition of membership, ICMA members agree to submit to a peer-to-peer review under established enforcement procedures should there be an allegation of unethical conduct.  Members who are working for a local government in any capacity are required to follow all 12 Tenets of the Code. Members who are students, elected officials, fully retired, working for a state or federal agency, or in the private sector are required to follow Tenets 1 and 3.

ICMA’s Code of Ethics, most recently amended by the membership in April 2015 to reflect changes in the profession, includes Guidelines to assist members in applying the principles outlined in the Code. The Guidelines were adopted by the ICMA Executive Board in 1972 and most recently revised in June 2015.

The mission of ICMA is to create excellence in local governance by developing and fostering professional local government management worldwide. To further this mission, certain principles, as enforced by the Rules of Procedure, shall govern the conduct of every member of ICMA, who shall:

Tenet 1

Be dedicated to the concepts of effective and democratic local government by responsible elected officials and believe that professional general management is essential to the achievement of this objective.

Tenet 2

Affirm the dignity and worth of the services rendered by government and maintain a constructive, creative, and practical attitude toward local government affairs and a deep sense of social responsibility as a trusted public servant

Tenet 3

Be dedicated to the highest ideals of honor and integrity in all public and personal relationships in order that the member may merit the respect and confidence of the elected officials, of other officials and employees, and of the public.

Tenet 4

Recognize that the chief function of local government at all times is to serve the best interests of all people.

Tenet 5

Submit policy proposals to elected officials; provide them with facts and advice on matters of policy as a basis for making decisions and setting community goals; and uphold and implement local government policies adopted by elected officials.

Tenet 6

Recognize that elected representatives of the people are entitled to the credit for the establishment of local government policies; responsibility for policy execution rests with the members.

Tenet 7

Refrain from all political activities which undermine public confidence in professional administrators.  Refrain from participation in the election of the members of the employing legislative body.

Tenet 8

Make it a duty continually to improve the member’s professional ability and to develop the competence of associates in the use of management techniques.

Tenet 9

Keep the community informed on local government affairs; encourage communication between the citizens and all local government officers; emphasize friendly and courteous service to the public; and seek to improve the quality and image of public service.

Tenet 10

Resist any encroachment on professional responsibilities, believing the member should be free to carry out official policies without interference, and handle each problem without discrimination on the basis of principle and justice.

Tenet 11

Handle all matters of personnel on the basis of merit so that fairness and impartiality govern a member’s decisions, pertaining to appointments, pay adjustments, promotions, and discipline.

Tenet 12

Public office is a public trust. A member shall not leverage his or her position for personal gain or benefit