Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09 CLAIM(KERR) 01-35 09-17-01 ~ NO 9 AGENDA REPORT .,i!" 180-10 MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 17, 2001 ' TO' FROM' SUBJECT: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY ATTORNEY CLAIM OF NELSON A. KERR; CLAIM NO. 01-35 SUMMARY: The City Attorney is recommending that the City Council reject Claim No. 01-35, Nelson A. Kerr. RECOMMENDATION' After investigation and review by this office and by the City's Claims Administrators, it is recommended that the City Council reject the claim and direct the City Clerk to send notice thereof to the claimant and the claimant's attorneys. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact with this action. BACKGROUND: The claimant alleges $11,888.00 in damages due to the loss of certain items of personal property. The claimant has a dispute with the property owner at 140 A Street, Tustin. The Tustin Police were called in by both the property owners and by the claimant on various occasions. The claimant alleges that the property owners stole all of his computers, file boxes and boxes full of receipts. The claimant also alleges that the property owners removed the claimant's personal and business belongings, including 17 computers and monitors, hard drives full of data, boxes full of legal files for pending cases, evidence, court displays, years of legal research, witness statements, depositions, time slips, accounting information, etc. There is nothing in this claim to suggest any wrongdoing on the part of the City of Tustin, including the Tustin Police Department. It is recommended that the City Council reject this claim. ATTACHMENTS' Claim 41410\1 CITY OF TUSTIN CLAIM AGAINST THE CiTY OF 'f tJSTIN (For Damages to Persons or Personal Property) The law provides generally that a claim must be filed with the City Clerk of the City of ~Us"('i~':"~'i'ihi'n~"siX'(6_~ months after the incident or event occurred. Be sure your claim is against the City of Tustin, not another · public entity. Where space is insufficient, please use additional paper and identify information by paragraph number. Completed claims must be mailed or delivered to the City Clerk, City. of Tustin, 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, California 92780. · WHEN COMPLETING THIS FORM, PLEASE TYPE OR USE BLACK INK To the Honorable Mayor and City Council, City of Tustin, California' · The undersigned respectfully submits the following claim and information relative to damage to person and/or property: . 1. a. Name of Claimant: Nelson A. Kerr b. Address of Claimant' ............... . - Name,' telephone, and post office address to which claimant desires notices to be sent (if other than above): "... ........ o This claim is submitted against: a. The City of Tustin only. b. __ _ The following employee(s) of the City of Tustin only: c. Y,, X The City of Tustin and the following employee(s) of the City of Tustin only:' Tustin Police .Officer...B. rabeCk ........ Tustin Police Officer Celano ....... · Tustin Police Watch Commander Perry _ _'l'ustin_ Police Investigator Kilgore Occurrence or event from which the claim arises' a. Date' February 4, 2001 b. Time: Approx. 8'30 am c. Place (Exact and Specific Location): 140 South "A".Street, Tustin, CA 92780 d. How and under what circumstances did damage or injury occur? Specify the particular occurrence, event, act or omission you claim caused the paper' if necessary'_ See Attac..nment 4d ee What particular action by the citY, or its employees, caused the alleged damage or injury? See Attachment 4e , o Give a description of the injury, property damage or loss so far known at the time of this claim. there were no injuries, state "no injuries". See Attachment 5 , Give the name(.s).of the City employee(s) causing the damage or injury: Name and address of any other person injured' See. Attachment 6 None at this time , 10. Name and address of the owner of any damaged'property: ' Nelson A. Kerr, PO Box 98921Br.ea, CA 92822 :, Damages Claimed: a. Amount claimed as of this date' . __ See Attachment 9a b. Estimated amount of future costs: See Attachment 9b .. c. Total amount claimed' See Attachment 9c d~ Attach basis for compUtation °f~am°UntS-' claimed (include copies of ali bills, inV°ices, · estimates, etc.). Names and addresses of all witnesses, hospitals, doctors, etc. See Attachment 10 Claimant's Signature' Executed this WARNING' IT IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE TO FILE A FALS-E ~LAIM (Penal Code Section 72;. Insurance Code Section 556.0) ' ! have read!the matters and statements made in the above claim and ! know the same to be true of my own knowle;dge, except as to those matters stated to be upon information or belief and as to such matters i believe the .'same to be true. I certify under pe alty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. .. . . ....... A..ugust ...... 2001 . Date filed this .... day of ................. , 20. 2:CLAIM (1100) . Attachment 4d: On August 15, 2000, NELSON enters into a written Agreement with MASAOKA and HARCHOL for the move into 140 South "A" Street for 8-10 months. The outstanding balance due from MASAOKA and Harchol and owing at this time was $2 650, to be applied towards rent at 140 South "A" Street. Attached herewith as Exhil~itis a true copy of the signed Agreement, incorporated herein by reference. This copy of the Agreement had to be obtained directly from the Tustin City Attorney's office (Laura Underwood) on February 5, 2001 as MASAOKA and Harchol had later trespassed and stole the originals from NELSON between January 8, 2001, and February 4, 2001 Near the end of each month, NELSON prepares invoices for work completed for MASAOKA and HARCHOL. On December 27, 2000, NELSON has MASAOKA review, approve, and sign all current invoices to date as complete - Total is estimated at about $8,300.00 as MASAOKA had later stolen ali of NELSON's files and records. On January 8, 2001, NELSON lawfully began residing at 140 S. "A" Street in Tustin as a legal tenant, pursuant to the signed agreement of August 15, 2000 to enter into a lease to occupy the property and house for 8-10 months. The Landlords became HARCHOL and MASAOKA, with MASAOKA even helping NELSON with the move in. MASAOKA brings some additional furniture and a refrigerator to the house for NELSON to use. Along with several rolls of carpet to possibly be used to replace the existing carpet in the house. MASAOKA's uses his own name to personally activate all utilities (water, power and telephone) on or about January 10, 2001. And MASAOKA personally tells NELSON and Pastor Klm of activating all utilities for NELSON. , On January 27, 2001, MASAOKA and Harchol came by the Tustin house and requested NELSON to get other paying tenants 'for the house within 60 days or move out in 60 days. Attached herewith as Exhibit is a true Copy of the a letter written by MASAOKA but possibly signed by Harchol stating.that NELSON was obligated to recruit paralegal tenants. This accompanied a Notice to Vacate which was personally served on January 29, 2001 (see paragraph _. ), incorporated herein by reference. On January 29, 2001, MASAOKA bursts into the Tustin house at 10:45 pm, goes into NELSON's room, abruptly and hostily wakes up NELSON and serves a 30 day Notice to Quit, signed by HARCHOL, alon'g with a signed letter from HARCHOL asking for rent ($1,200) to be paid by February 7, 2001, all in clear violation of P_~C, {}602.5. All of this is contrary to the signed Agreement of August 15, 2000 (Exhibit ) and about $8,300.00 currently owing from MASAOKA and Harchol, and already applied towards the rent of the house per the written Agreement of August 15, 2000. On January 30, 2001, MASAOKA and Harchol began terminating telephone and w~tter .~ervices for the Tustin house, in clear violation of CC, §789.3(a). MASAOKA has the :,Water meter completely removed from the street connection. On January 31, 2001, MASAOKA and Harchol removed all fuses and fuse holders from the electrical panel at the Tustin house to prevent NELSON from re-activating the electrical service, in clear violation of CC, §789.3(a). NELSON arrives at the Tustin house at approx. 6 pm and finds MASAOKA and Detectives inspecting NELSON's computer equipment in the front living, room. MASAOKA insists that he has personal knowledge and knows for a fact that all of NELSON's computers and computer parts are stolen. Attachment 4d (cent): Costa Mesa Det. Georke requests that NELSON produce some receipts to prove the legal p'urchase of the computers and computer parts. NELSON locates a white file box full of receipts and pulls out several receipts from GoodWill Computers in Santa Ana, CA. NELSON also pulls out several business cards from GoodWill,. and Det. Georke telephones GoodWill. Det. Georke returns and confirms that GoodWill does sell Macintosh computers such as those NELSON has in his possession. The Costa Mesa Police Detectives properly determine that none of NELSON's property was stolen. See Costa Mesa Police Report for January 31, 2001, attached herewith as Exhibit__~_ and incorporated herein by reference. MASAOKA and Harchol later stole all of NELSON's Computers, file boxes and boxes full of receipts on February 4, 2001, and never returned them. The Tustin Police are called by MASAOKA and Harchol to immediately perform a citizen's arrest on NELSON for alleged trespassing and for identity theft in the false allegation of NELSON using MASAOKA's name to activate utilities on or about January 10, 2001 without MASAOKA's permission, and without MASAOKA's knowledge. MASAOKA told Tustin Police Officer Mutziger and Officer that MASAOKA and NELSON had absolutely no prior or current working relationship, that NELSON had never worked on any construction planning or with the City of Tustin Planning Dept. (Binsack), and that NELSON moved into the Tustin house without MASAOKA and Harchol's permission, and without MASAOKA and Harchol's knowledge. And that MASAOKA and Harchol just..now discovered that NELSON had moved in and was occupying the house. When the. truth is that MASAOKA and Harchol authorized the move on August 15, 2000 (Exhibit ~) and MASAOKA and his wife again authorized the move on January 8, 2001. MASAOKA even-helped NELSON move into the Tustin house. And MASAOKA brought extra rolls of replacement carpet and a refrigerator for NELSON. to use, and came to work-with NELSON at the house and with Pastor Klm several times. During the entire time the Tustin Police were at the Tustin house, MASAOKA never claims or even suggests that NELSON is or might be an attorney. Or that NELS©N was MASAOKA's attorney!! Or that NELSON had stolen and forged MASAOKA's checks!! Later on that night, on January 31, 2001, NELSON and Pastor Klm went to the Tustin Police Station from 10:30 pm to 12:30 am, meeting with Watch Commander Sgt. Finney and Officer Mutziger, who listened to all of the facts and reviewed the evidence, and assured NELSON and Pastor Klm that NELSON was a legal tenant at 140 South "A" Street, Tustin, and that the Police will not and can not evi(~t NELSON or allow Landlords to remove any of NELSON's property. And that all of this is for the civil courts. ·truo copy of tho Repor~ #0~-637 is attachod herowith as Exhibit and incorporatod heroin by roforonco. Tho roport makes no montion of ~astor Kim and tho last sentance states that ~EkSO~ wanted this incidont documented fearin~ M^S^OK^ might fotura again to ha¥o ~ELSO~ arrestod, but makes no mention that Watch Gommandor Sgt. Finno¥ and ©ffi¢or Mutzigor assurod ~EkSO~ that tho Poli¢o will not and can not ~EI_SOS or allow Landlords to remove any of ~ELSO~'s proport¥. And that all of this is for tho civil courts. NELSON requested, and Watch Commander Sgt. Finney and Officer Mutziger agreed to make this known and available to all shifts of the Tustin Police Dept. That NELSON was a legal tenant at 140 South "A" Street, Tustin, and that the Tustin Police will not and can not evict NELSON or allow Landlords to remove any of NELSON's property. And that all of this is for the civil courts. 2 Attachment 4d (cont): NELSON discovers that all documents and records pertaining to any work done for MASAOKA and Harchol are now missing from NELSON's file boxes in the Tustin house, along with other documents and records belonging to NELSON, in clear violation of Civil Code, § 1861 a. On the early evening of February 3, 2001, ~ 7 pm, MASAOKA goes into the Tustin house while NELSON is away, and without NELSON's permission, Trespass in clear violation of PC, §602.5, and removes at least 2 more of NELSON's file boxes of documents and records in clear violation of PC, §499c. MASAOKA also deletes files from NELSON's Apple 540c laptop computer in clear violation PC, §502, and then rips out the telephone and computer cables which throws one of NELSON's three Apple Laser Printers to the floor and breaks NELSON's Apple 540c laptop computer, in clear violation of CC, §789(b)(3). And vandalism in clear violation of _PC, §594 Upon leaving the house, MASAOKA and Harchol change the lock on the front door and does not issue a new key to NELSON or even notify NELSON, in clear violation of P__C, §418 and CC, §789(b)(1). After a long afternoon and evening of work, NELSON comes home to the Tustin house at about 11 '15 pm and discovers the changed lock, the missing Apple Quadra 840av Tower Computer, and the damaged Apple 540c laptop computer adjacent to the Apple Quadra 840av Tower Computer. NELSON calls the Tustin Police and files a Police report with Tustin Police Officer McClements --11'30 pm, Report # ,. , attached herewith as Exhibit incorporated herein by reference. and NELSON takes Pictures of Tustin Police Officer McClements as she takes fingerprints off the Apple 540c laptop computer in the Computer Room, attached herewith as Exhibit and incorporated herein by reference'. NELSON produces a detailed, graphic floor plan of Tustin Police Officer McClements as she goes through the house, inspects the Apple 540c laptop computer and takes fingerprints in the Computer Room, and writes up her report in the living room while sitting in one of two office chairs in front of 3 work tables. Tustin Police Officer McClements recalls the office equipment and furniture in the Computer Room and the Living Room, attached herewith as Exhibit_ and incorporated herein by reference. On February 4, 2001 at 8:30 am, MASAOKA and Harchol accompany the Tustin Police to illegally escort NELSON off the property w/o his personal or business belongings under the direction of MASAOKA and Harchol. NELSON produces the 30-Day Notice that Harchol signed and MASAOKA served NELSON just 6 days earlier, and reminds the '.'Tustin Police officers of the January 31, 2001 incident and decision involving Sgt. Finney -~nd Officer Mutziger. The formal Tustin Police decision on January 31, 2001 was that NELSON is a legal tenant, that this is strictly a civil matter, and the Tustin Police would not remove NELSON from the Tustin house.. Tustin Police Officer Celano said that this is a different day and a different shift. And that Officer Celano would arrest NELSON and book NELSON in the OC Jail under a citizen's arrest requested by MASAOKA and Harchol. All of this is in clear violation of PC, §418 and C_C, §789(b)(1). Tustin Police Officer Celano is the lead Officer. Attachment 4e' Criminal activity (From Tustin Police's own docket) has occurred as follows' 2. TENANT LOCKOUT Penal Code Section 418 reads' "Every person using or procuring, encouraging or assisting another to use, any force or violence in entering upon or ...detaining .any lands or other possessions of another, except in the cases and in the manner allowed by law, is guilty of a misdemeanor." Very often, when [it] a tenant is behind in his/her rent, the landlord will jam or change the tenant's door lock in order to prevent the tenants further use of the dwelling until the rent is paid. This lockout procedure is considered a "use of force" and is therefore a misdemeanor prohibited by Pe. na! ..C. od.e. Section 418. An officer should tell the landlord to permit the tenant back into the dwelling and to proceed with an unlawful detainer suit instead. 3. SEIZURE OF TENANTS PROPERTY The seizure of a tenant's property without a court order is a misdemeanor prohibited by Penal Code Section 418, and entering the premises to seize the property may constitute trespass. 6. TRESPASS A landlord may not enter a tenant's residence without prior consent even if stipulated in the rental agreement. If the landlord enters a tenants apartment without prior consent, it is a violation of Penal Code Section 602.5, a misdemeanor. The Tustin Police had and continue to have a legal duty to uphold the law. Criminal activity has been committed by MASAOKA, Harchol (and REED). Several crimes have occurred. 2. TENANT LOCKOUT- PC, §418 3. SEIZURE OF TENANT'S PROPERTY- PC, §418 6. TRESPASS- PC, §602.5 Office Brabeck and Officer Still instruct NELSON: "to leave the property immediately and advised him MASAOKA desired prosecution ii of him for trespassing and would perform a citizen's arrest if he did not comply." : Office Brabeck and Officer Still go into the house with NELSON to watch NELSON finish getting dressed and packing up his 2 laptop computers. Office Brabeck prepares a written report and states that: "MASAOKA told KERR he would contact him via telephone and advise him when to return to pick up the remainder of his personal items." Attached herewith as Exhibit, is a true copy of Office Brabeck's report, incorporated herein by reference. Attachment 4e (cont): NELSON produces a detailed, graphic floor plan of Tustin Police Officer Brabeck and Officer Still as they go through the house, view the furniture and office equipment, and sound off the items in each room, attached herewith as Exhibit and incorporated herein by reference. Under direction of MASAOKA and Harchol, Tustin Police appear to be acting under PC, §602(r) for Trespassing and/or PC, §537, Obtaining Accommodations Without Paying. PC, §602(r) does not apply here because of written agreement and owners consent, along with 3 weeks of known and accepted residency. PC, §537 does not apply here because of advanced payment NELSON made to MASAOKA and Harchoi, pursuant to written agreement of August 15, 2000, a true copy attached herewith as Exhibit , incorporated herein by reference. NELSON and Pastor Klm go to the Tustin Police Station from 9:00 am to 10:00 am, met with Watch Commander Perry and Officer Celano, informing them of the evening of January 31, 2001, when Watch Commander Sgt. Finney and Officer Mutziger listened to all of the facts and reviewed the evidence, and assured NELSON and Pastor Klm that NELSON was a legal tenant at 140 South "A" Street, Tustin, and that the Police will not and can not evict NELSON or allow Landlords to remove any of NELSON's property. And that all of this is for the civil courts. And that NELSON requested, and Watch Commander Sgt. Finney and Officer Mutziger formally agreed to make all of this available to all. shifts of the Tustin Police Dept. That NELSON was a legal tenant at 140 South "A" Street, Tustin, and that the Police will not and can not evict NELSON or allow Landlords to remove any of NELSON's property. And that all of this is for the civil courts. Watch Commander Perry and OffiCer Celano insisted that NELSON was a squatter Without a written lease of any.kind. And that because NELSON had not been in the Tustin house for at least 30 days and could not produce a written lease, NELSON had to be removed. NELSON repeatedly informed Watch Commander Perry and Officer Celano that MASAOKA had made the credible threat of turning over all of NELSON's information, documents, and files to opposing counsel in pending legal cases. And that MASAOKA made the credible threat of tampering with, and damaging NELSON's computers and all the information on NELSON's computers. Watch Commander Perry and Officer Celano were very rude and simply ignored NELSON's pleas. ~ ~., INELSON repeatedly stated his fear of potential theft in progress of NELSON's property, . ~'and repeatedly requested assistance from the Tustin Police to go with NELSON to the Tustin house to retrieve certain valuable computers'and files. Watch Commander Perry and Officer Celano were very rude and simply ignored all of NELSON's pleas. Officer Celano stated that MASAOKA said that MASAOKA would video tape all of NELSON's property and that MASAOKA would telephone NELSON to pick up the remainder of his property. NELSON was asked to leave the Tustin Police station. The Tustin Police refused to assist NELSON in retrieving any of NELSON's property from the Tustin house or to go and keep the peace while NELSON retrieved his property from the house. Attachment 4e (cont)' NELSON went back to the Tustin Police Department about an hour later and repeated his pleas, his fear of potential theft in progress of NELSON's property, and repeatedly requested assistance from the Tustin Police to go with NELSON to the Tustin house to retrieve certain valuable computers and files. Officer Celano again stated that MASAOKA said that MASAOKA would video tape all of NELSON's property and that MASAOKA would telephone NELSON to pick up the remainder of his property. NELSON was again asked/told to leave the Tustin Police station. The Tustin Police refused to assist NELSON in retrieving any of his property from the Tustin house. NELSON calls Arther MASAOKA several times for access to NELSON's personal property and clothes. No response from MASAOKA!! On February 4, 2001, sometime after 8:30 am, MASAOKA and Harchol entered the property at 140 S. "A" Street, Tustin and removed NELSON's personal and business belongings. This includes 17 computers and monitors, Hard drives full of data, 40+ file boxes full of legal files for pending cases, evidence, court displays, years of legal research, witness statements, depositions, time slips, accounting information, all extremely confidential and highly privileged, in clear violation of CC, §789(b)(3). Attached herewith as Exhibit._____ is a detailed list of the property that was taken from NELSON, incorporated herein by reference. As the dollar value exceeds $400, this concerted act constitutes Grand Theft under PC, §487. In addition to Forcible Entry and Detainer under PC, §418. As the property that was stolen contained valuable, confidential information, the theft of' Trade secrets under PC, §499c and 502(c). Attachment 5 & 9a, 9b, 9c, & 9d:' See: Nelson's Stolen Property April 4, 2001 Attachment 6: Tustin Police Officer Brabeck ~Tustin Police Officer Celano ¢/Tustin Police Watch Commander Perry Tustin Police Investigator Kilgore 6 Attachment 10' Miguel Hernandez Can & will identify Nelson's TV's, computers, furniture. Can & will testify to Nelson's legal tenany. Will testify to Masaoka's wrongs and threats (witness intimidation) Arturro Hererra Freddy M. (12 years old) Can & will testify to Nelson's legal tenany. Will testify to Masaoka's wrongs and threats (witness intimidation) Freddy M, (12 years old) Can & will identify Nelson's TV's, computers, furniture. Tustin Police Officer Brabeck Should be able to identify Nelson's TV's, computers, furniture. Tustin Police Officer McClements 'Should be able to identify Nelson's TV's, computers, furniture. Applicable Criminal Charges illegal Entry, Lockout, Vandalism and Theft of NELSON's Property in Tustin, CA. PC, {}602.5. PC, {}182. PC, §418. PC, {}182. PC, §502. PC, §182. PC, §594. PC, {}182. PC, §499c. PC, {}182. PC, §487 PC, §182.. PC, {}496. PC, {}182. PC, {}135. PC, §182. PC, {}617. PC, {}182. PC, {}32. PC, §153. PC, §148.5. PC, {}125. PC, {}118a. PC, {}182. Unauthorized Entry of Property-Masaoka, Harchol & Reed Criminal Conspiracy to the Unauthorized Entry of Property Forcible Entry and Detainer-Masaoka, Harchol & Reed Criminal Conspiracy to Forcible Entry and Detainer Unauthorized Access to Computers, Computer Systems and Computer Data (§502(c)(1-7))-Masaoka, Harchoi & Reed Criminal Conspiracy to Commit Unauthorized Access to Computers, Computer Data Vandalism-Masaoka, Harchol & Reed Criminal Conspiracy to Commit Vandalism Trade Secrets; Theft; Solicitation or Bribery to Acquire- Masaoka, Harchol & Reed Criminal Conspiracy to Commit Theft of Trade Secrets Grand Theft-Masaoka, Harchol & Reed Criminal Conspiracy to Commit Grand Theft Receiving Stolen Property-Reed, Teresita Ortal, Mary Ellen Stone Criminal Conspiracy to Receiving Stolen Property Destroying or Concealing Documentary Evidence- Masaoka, Harchoi, Reed, Teresita Ortal, Mary Ellen Stone Criminal Conspiracy to Destroying or Concealing. Documentary Evidence Injuring or Destroying Written Instruments Belonging to Another- Masaoka, Harchol, Reed, Teresita Ortal, Mary Ellen Stone Criminal Conspiracy'to Injuring or Destroying Written Instruments Accessories-Reed, Teresita Ortal, Mary Ellen Stone Compounding Crimes; Obstruction of Justice- Masaoka, Harchol, Reed, Teresita Ortal, Mary Ellen Stone False Report of Felony or Misdemeanor-Reed & Masaoka on Nelson Statement Not Known to be True-Masaoka, Harchol & Reed False Affidavits as to Affiant's Testimony-Masaoka & Reed Criminal Conspiracy to preparing False Affidavits- Masaoka & Reed PC, {}127. PC, §133. PC, §136. ;PC, {}182. ~C, §136.1. PC, §182. PC, §137. PC, §182. PC, {}138. PC, §182. Subornation of Perjury-Masaoka, Harchol & Reed Deceiving a Witness-Masaoka & Reed Intimidation of Witnesses and Victims-Masaoka, Reed, Teresita Ortal, Mary Ellen Stone ~ Criminal Conspiracy to Intimidation of Witnesses and Victims Preventing or Dissuading Witness or Victims from Testifying or Doing Other Acts-Reed, Teresita Ortal, Mary Ellen Stone Criminal Conspiracy to Preventing or Dissuading Witness or Victims Influencing or Inducing Testimony-Masaoka & Reed Criminal Conspiracy to Influencing or Inducing Testimony Taking or Offering to Take Bribes by Witness-Masaoka, Reed, Teresita Ortal, Mary Ellen Stone Criminal Conspiracy to Taking or Offering to Take Bribes Why was NELSON removed from the Tustin house when Officer Mutziger and Sgt. Finney assured NELSON that thie was all a civil matter? Why was NELSON removed from the Tustin house by Officer Brabeck and Sgt. Celano when Officer Mutziger and Sgt. Finney assu~ed NELSON several days earlier that this was ali a civil matter? Why was NELSON removed from the Tustin house under some Hotel/Motel 30 day laws? Why does Officer Brabeck's report fail to mention that the Tustin house was full of tables, desks, chairs, TV's, along with racks and racks full of file boxes? Why hasn't Det. Kilgore showed Officer McClements NELSON's drawings or the color pictures??? Why has Det. Kilgore refused to show Officer McClements NELSON's drawings or the color pictures??? Why hasn't Det, Kilgore interview crucial witnesses? Why has Det. Kilgore ignored crucial witnesses? Why hasn't Det..Kilgore gone to inspect and search the Tustin house when it was known that much of NELSON's property was still at the Tustin house? ,. Why did Det. Kilgore tell NELSON that the Costa Mesa Police Report made no mention of NELSON's boxes of receipts and the tables, desks, chairs, racks and racks full of file boxes at the Tustin house when the Costa Mesa Police Resport clearly stated all of this several times? Why has Det. Kilgore forwarded his report to the OC DA's office without obtaining vitally crucial evidence, and to show Officer McClements NELSON's drawings or the color pictures in order to get her most valuable testimony. IS THERE A POLICE COVER UP GOING ON HERE?????? Officer Brabeck and Officer need to be interviewed, showed the drawings i~nd pictures, and memories refreshed ASAP. -' .. .. Lies and Untruths by Masaoka, Harchoi, and Reed May 15, 2001 1. Masaoka and Harchol told Costa Mesa and Tustin Police that all of Nelson's computers and parts are stolen from Costa Mesa. When the truth is that Masaoka knows that Nelson bought these computers from GoodWill in Santa Ana. And none of them are stolen from Costa Mesa or anywhere else! la. Masaoka and Harchol told Costa Mesa Police that Masaoka called Electric Company to shut down electrical supply to house at 140 S. A Street, Tustin that day (1-31-01). When the truth is that Masaoka simply removed ali fuses and fuse holders from the electrical panel to prevent NELSON from re-activating the electrical service. So Costa Mesa Police had to hunt around in the dark when searching the house. 2. Masaoka and Harchol told Costa Mesa and Tustin Police that Nelson moved in without Masaoka and Harchol"s permission. When the truth is that Masaoka and his wife agreed to and authorized the move inwriting (August 15, 2000) and Masaoka said his wife again authorized the move-in on January 10, 2001, and Masaoka helped Nelson move in. Masaoka brought in some extra furniture and a refridgerator for Nelson to use. And Masaoka came to work with Nelson at the house and with Pastor Kim several times. 3. Masaoka and Harchol told Costa Mesa and Tustin Police that Nelson moved in without Masaoka and Harchol's knowledge. When the truth is that Masaoka and his wife agreed to and authorized the move inwriting (August 15, 2000) and Masaoka said his wife again authorized the move-in on January 10, 2001, and Masaoka helped Nelson move in. Masaoka brought in some extra furniture and a refridgerator for Nelson to use. And Masaoka came to work with Nelson at the house and with Pastor Kim several times. 4. Masaoka and Harchoi told 'Costa Mesa and Tustin Police that the house was scheduled to be demolished in 2-4-8 weeks, so Nelson can not stay at the house. When the truth is that the City of Tustin has not issued any demo permits and will not. And Masaoka has promised eminant demos for -2 years now. And there were discussions with Pastor Klm about a 6-8 month lease for Pastor Kim, because of the planned demo in about 6-8 months. 5. Masaoka and Harchol told Costa Mesa and Tustin Police that Nelson was not involved in any way with the planning and construction of the new house. When the truth is that Nelson has done extensive work architects David Nissen and Tom Lowrey, and with the City of Tustin Planning Dept. (Felix Garcia, Karen Peterson, Elizabeth Binsack, Patti Adams, Justina Willkom, and all others at the Tustin City Planning Dept.) regarding the future housing project at 140 South "A" Street, Tustin, and the Tustin City attorhey ~{Judy Barnwell, Jason Resnick and Laura Underwood) regarding the numerous health 'and building code violations at 140 S. "A" Street, Tustin. 6. Masaoka and Harchol told Costa Mesa and Tustin Police that Nelson was not involved in any way with the City of Tustin Planning Department. When the truth is that Nelson has done extensive work archetcts David Nissen and Tom Lowrey, and with the City of Tustin Planning Dept. (Felix Garcia, Karen Peterson, Elizabeth Binsack, Patti Adams, Justina Willkom, and all others at the Tustin City Planning Dept.) regarding the future housing project at 140 South "A" Street, Tustin, and the Tustin City attorney (Judy Barnwell, Jason Resnick and Laura Underwood) regarding the numerous health, environmental and building code violations at 140 S. "A" Street, Tustin. 7. Masaoka and Harchol told Costa Mesa and Tustin Police that Nelson was not involved in any way with the City of Tustin's City Attorney (Judy Barnwell, Jason Resnick) regarding the numerous health and building code violations at 140 S. "A" Street, Tustin. When the truth is that Nelson has done extensive work with architects David Nissen and Tom Lowrey, and with the City of Tustin Planning Dept. (Felix Garcia, Karen Peterson, Elizabeth Binsack, Patti Adams, Justina Willkom, and all others at the Tustin City Planning Dept.) regarding the future housing project at 140 South "A" Street, Tustin, and the Tustin City attorney (Judy Barnweli, Jason Resnick and Laura Underwood) regarding the numerous health and building code violations at 140 S. "A" Street, Tustin. 8. Masaoka and Harchol told Costa Mesa and Tustin Police that Nelson was never at Masaoka and Harchol's house in Fountain Valley for meetings with Architects Nitzen and Lowrey. When the. truth is that Nelson has been to the house in Fountain Valley for several meetings with with Architects Nitzen and Lowrey, and Nelson prepared meeting minutes, printed them up and signed by all attending. 9. Masaoka told Costa Mesa and Tustin Police that Masaoka had never been to Nelson's shared residence in Costa Mesa. When the truth is that Masaoka has been to Nelson's shared residence in Costa Mesa several times, and once to pick up Nelson's motor cycle, with Nelson. 10. Masaoka told Costa Mesa and Tustin Police that Masaoka never re-keyed the locks and gave Nelson a key. And that Nelson illegally re-keyed the locks himself. When the truth is that Masaoka personally re-coded the locks himself and gave Nelson 2 keys to the front and back doors. Pastor Kim was there at the house that day. 11. Masaoka told Costa Mesa and..Tustin Police that Nelson made his own keys to the house without any permission or knowledge of Masaoka and Harchoi. When the truth is that Masaoka personally re-coded the locks and gave Nelson 2 keys to the front and back doors. Pastor Klm was there that day. 12. Masaoka told Costa Mesa-and Tustin Police that Masaoka never turned on any of the. utilities at the house. When the truth is that Masaoka himself, probably from his own cell phone, activated all utilities in his own name for Nelson. 13. Masaoka told Costa Mesa and Tustin Police that Nelson turned on the utilities, fraudulently using Masaoka's name and identity, commiting identity/credit theft. 14. Masaoka and Harchol. told Costa Mesa and Tustin Police that Masaoka and Harchol was never at the property/house working with Nelson at any time. 15. Masaoka and Harchol told Costa Mesa and Tustin Police that Nelson has never performed any legal work for Masaoka and Harchol. '"'~,~ 6. Masaoka told Costa Mesa and Tustin Police that Masaoka was the owner of the ;/h ouse. This' is not true as Amy Harchol is the sole owner of the house as Masaoka has 'had to distance himself from the house to avoide adversarial law suits. 17. Masaoka told 'Officer Celano that Masaoka was going to video tape all of Nelson's property. Where is Celano's rOporl and where is the video tape?? 18. On February 5, 2001, Police officer Breskin telephones Masaoka. Masaoka states that Masaoka gave all of Nelson's property to Nelson's friend and personal attorney, John Reed, known to Masaoka as pending Defendants in Kerr v. Reed, OCSC Case #801882, in clear violation of PC, §418' and 602.5. Masaoka was fully knowledgeable that Reed was a Defendant in Nelson's fraud and legal malpractice lawsuit in addition to the fact that Masaoka served legal process by mail and in person numerous times to Reed for Nelson's pending legal case. 19.. Masaoka knov,,~gly lied to the Tustin Police when h~ said he had/has a good faith belief that Reed was Nelson Kerr's attorney. 20. On February 6, 2001, 7:30 am, Nelson follows up with Detectives Bryant and Kilgore, who telephone Masaoka. Masaoka states that attorney John Reed showed Masaoka some papers to prove John Reed was Nelson's personal attorney. And that Masaoka had/has a good faith belief that Reed was Nelson Kerr's personal attorney. Simply not true in that Masaoka was fully knowledgeable that Reed was a Defendant in Nelson's fraud and legal malpractice lawsuit in addition to the fact that Masaoka served legal process by mail and in person numerous times to Reed for Nelson's pending legal case. January 29, 2001 Harchol's Letter w/30 Day Notice to Quit 21. Harchol wrote in her letter that the sole condition for Nelson moving into the house was Nelson's success in getting Pastor Kim and two paralegals to move in first. Simply not true. What happen to all of Nelson's work on the house, with the City of Tustin, Masaoka v. Rickman, etc.? Valued at over $6,000!! 22. Harchol wrote in her letter that Pastor Kim had contacted her and said he declined the rental offer. This is not true as Pastor Kim has never spoken or even contacted Harchol at any time. Nor had Paster'Kim declined the rental offer to anybody except for after the time Nelson was evicted on February 4, 2001, and Pastor Kim decided that Masaoka was a dishonest, evil man. 23. Harchol wrote in her letter that Pastor Kim failed to meet Masaoka on three requested dinner/evening meetings to lease the rooms. When the truth is tht it was Masaoka who failed and even refused to meet and speak with Pastor Kim. 24. Harchol wrote in her letter that Nelson failed to obtain any credit application, rental application, oral interview, and rental contract from Harchol. When the truth is that neither Harchol or Masaoka gave any applications or forms to Nelson to fill out until just a few days before eviction. And never mentioned any of this or gave any forms to Nelson to fill out for the 4 - 6 months before the January 8, 2001 move in, or during the first 3 weeks after Nelson moved into the house. 25. Harchol wrote in her letter that Nelson never received approval from her to rent and move in at all. When the truth is that it was agreed to in writing on August 15, °2000. '~,~d Masaoka assisted Nelson with the move-in, and even brought in some extra furniture find, a refrigerator for Nelson to use. 26. Harchol wrote in her letter that Masaoka has told Nelson and Pastor Kim that Masaoka does not own the property and that Harchol was the exclusive person making the decisions regarding rental and construction matters. Yet Masaoka tells the Tustin Police that Masaoka owns the home, and Masaoka collects the money from the Herrera's. 27. Harchol wrote in her letter that Nelson has not submitted any rental money and that Nelson now owes $600 + $600 ($1,200). Nelson has a balance owing from Masaoka and Harchol of over $6,000.00 from Masaoka and Harchol that is/was being applied towards rent per the August 15, 2000 written agreement. -.February 8, 2001 Half Hour Telephone Call to Fountain Valley Self Storage 28. Masaoka tells Bob Kellogg that Nelson's motorcycle is stolen, and that Nelson has fileded off the VIN. 29. Masaoka tells Bob Kellogg that Nelson's Cadillac is stolen, and that Nelson has · filed off the VIN. 30. Masaoka tells Bob Kellogg that Nelson's computers are stolen, and that Nelson has filed off the serial numbers. 31. Masaoka tells Bob Kellogg that Nelson has been robbing a bunch of attorneys. 32. Masaoka tells Bob Kellogg that Nelson has been robbing a bunch of people, taking them for all he can get. 33. Masaoka tells Bob Kellogg that Nelson has a Warrent out for his arrest. And to call the Police if Nelson comes around. -.February 21, 2001 Masaoka's conversations with Detective Kilgore 34. Masaoka now tells Det. Kilgore that. Masaoka had looked through some of Nelson's files and found some documents that led him to believe that atty. John Reed was Nelson's personal attorney. And that rather than leave Nelson's property in the street, Masaoka thought it would be safer and more responsible to deliver Nelson's property to Nelson's personal atty John Reed for safe keeping. Simply not true in that Masaoka was fully knowledgeable that Reed was a Defendant in Nelson's fraud and legal malpractice lawsuit in addition to the fact that Masaoka served legal process by mail and in person numerous times to Reed for Nelson's pending legal case. .. And as Nelson had telephoned Masaoka numerous times on Sunday morning afternoon and Sunday evening on February 4, 2001, along with Monday morning and Monday afternoon on February 5, 2001, Masaoka knew that Nelson was prepared to come and pick up some of his most important items (Computers, confidential file boxes and clothes). If John Reed is not Masaoka's attorney, and not Nelson's personal attorney, why did Masaoka give Nelson's property to atty John Reed? And why would atty John Reed retain Nelson's property pending a Landlord/Tenant dispute? What role is John Reed playing here??? What legal right does he have for retaining Nelson's property???? Why wouldn't Police Officer Still get Nelson's property??? 35. Masaoka now tells Det. Kiigore that Nelson's Cadillac is stolen. !36. Masaoka now tells Det. Kilgore that Nelson has child pornography at the house on '140 S. "A" Street. Yet nothing shows up when Kilgore retrieves Nelson's property, with Reed saying that this is all of Nelson's property. 37. Masaoka now tells Det. Kilgore that Nelson has stolen property from Kinko's (Scanner, Computer Parts, etc.). Yet when Reed produces all of Nelson's property, nothing stolen from Kinko's is discovered. The Costa mesa Police were out to the house on January 31, 2001, looking for stolen property. They found that nothing was stolen, if Nelson did have any stolen property at the house, Nelson would have quickly taken the property (Libra Books~ ry ..) away from the house fearing further searches. So the books had to be planted by Masaoka/Reed, prior to or on February 4, 2001 Or after February 4, 2001 as it took 25 days for the stolen Library books to reach the Tustin Police. 38. Masaoka tells Det. Kiigore that Nelson had no right to be at the house on 140 S. "A" Street, but now tells Det. Kilgore that Masaoka brought in a full size refridgerator. What would the working refridgerator be for if not for Nelson? 39. Masaoka tells Det. Kilgore that Masaoka has never, ever performed any service of process for Nelson in any of Nelson's cases. Not true as Masaoka personally served Reed's office, with personal service on Teresita Ortai herself on _____, 2000 in Kerr v. Reed. A quick interview with Teresita Ortai should prove Masoaka wrong. In addition to numerous mailings of service on Reed by Masaoka for Nelson. A quick interview with attorney George Dunlop will prove Masoaka wrong as Masaoka showed up in OC Court with NELSON and attorney George Dunlop to testify to his personal service by mail in Fabtron v. Kerr, sometime in May/June, 2000, Dept. C22, Judge Chaffy. 40. Masaoka tells Det. Kilgore that Nelson had represented himself as an attorney. Not true as Nelson has always insisted he is not an attorney and that there must be an attorney on board for Nelson to do any work. Nelson met with Masaoka's attorney, Elva Wallace, to present recent research and to obtain approval to provide further research and suport for certain several Leagal Malpractice cases Masaoka has with Elva Wallace as his attorney. (Eiva Wallace at 1717 S. State College Blvd. in Anaheim (714) 634-0766). And attorney William Roseberry, III for several additional cases (17491 Irvine Bivd in Tustin (714) 838-1773), in which Masaoka and Roseberry approved and authorized Nelson to do all of the research and support, and the legal writing for several of Masaoka's new cases that Elva wallace is not handling. 41. Masaoka tells Det. Kilgore that Masaoka met with Nelson at Nelson's office in Whittier. Not true as Nelson has no office or clients in Whittier. Nelson has always met Masaoka at Kinko's, OC Law Library or State Building, Self Storage in.Fountain Valley, Elva Wallace's office or William RoSeberry's office. 42. Masaoka tells Det. Kilg°re that Masaoka never served Nelson with a 30-Day Notice to Vacate on January 29, 2001. -or.- Masaoka tells Det. Kilgore that the 30-Day Notice to Vacate that Nelson produced for the Tustin Police was forged in that Masaoka's was hand written. 43. Masaoka tells Detective Kilgore that there was no furniture at the house on February 4, 2001. This is not true as Nelson's sofa, 5 Banquet Tables, Chairs, Lots of HD Shelving, Bed Matresses, Ironing Board and Steam Iron, witnessed by Nelson, Pastor Kim, Nancy Wood, Officer McClements at midnight on February 3, 2001 along with. a !~icture, Officer Celano and at least I or 2 other Officers on the"morning of February 4, ~001, Frddy Herrerra, Miguel Herrerra. 44. Masaoka tells Det. Kilgore that Masaoka never signed a non-disclosure Agreement · with Nelson (June 30, 2000), and that Nelson forged Masaoka's signature. Need to obtain all of Masaoka's court documents to use as signature exemplars. 45. Masaoka tells Det. Kilgore that Masaoka and Harchol never signed an Agreement to Rent (August 15, 2000), and that Nelson forged Masaoka's and Harchol's signature. Need to obtain all of Masaoka's court documents to use as exemplars. Along with numerous Harchol documents and records. Nelson now believes that Masaoka signed Harchol's signature on the Agreement to Rent. 46. Masaoka tells _ ~t. Kilgore that Nelson never collect,.., on any of the judgments that Nelson was supposed to collect (and was already paid for in full??). The truth is there was only one judgment to collect on (Rozansky), in addition to 7-9 other critical cases Masaoka had pending (Rozinblit Amended Appeal w/motions), Rickman case with pending Motion for Summary Judgment, $500 per day criminal penalty from City of Tustin, City planning urgency to prepare and submit plans. 47. Masaoka tells Det. Kiigore that Masaoka paid Nelson over $2,000/$2,800 for work never completed. Not true as Nelson performed and invoiced for only work completed · 1 . . 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Pre-Construction work on new house (Architects, City Inspection, Planning) (Binsack, Peterson, Garcia, City attorneys); City Attorney v. Harchol/Masaoka-Eminent Criminal Prosecution - Threat of $500 per day per .violation - criminal penalties' - Criminal Prosecution now in process against Harchol/Masaoka See City Attorney Laura Underwood @ (714) 564-2609 Masaoka v. Rickman (Motions, Responses, Amended Complaint, Discovery, Opposition to MSJ); Masaoka v. Rosinblit (Amended Appeal, Applications, Motions and new Exhibits); Masaoka v. Hipchen; Masaoka v. Greenbaum; Masaoka v. Langford; Masaoka v. Smith; Masaoka v. 20th CentuCy Masaoka v. Chaco Ail of these cases had eminent, pending deadlines and court appearances taking priority over Rozansky collection per Masa.oka. Masaoka decided priorities. Attorney Roseberry and Nelson had only so much time each week to work on Masaoka's cases. Nelson's personal work on .the Masaoka v. Rickman case, from July, 2000 thru March, 2001 consists of the following: Compile documentary evide.nce, time line, binders Work with City of Tustin and City Attorney Work on house at 140 S. "A" Street~ Tustin. Legal Research on vicarious liability, fraud, probate, etc. Motion to Disqualify Opposing Counsel, & reply, & court hearing, & parking. Amended Complaint & Motion to Amend ~ Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment Discovery Responses Discovery Requests Personal Service and Court Filing Motion to Strike Costs Declaration reg. Work on Masaoka v. Rickman Nelson's additional work for atty Roseberry on other projects to help compensate for Roseberry's Masaoka work. 70+ Hours of Work by Nelson on Rickman case!!! Nelson's personal work on the Masaoka v. Rickman case, from July, 2000 thru March, 2001 consists of the following' Compile documentary evidence, time line, binders Work with City of Tustin and City Attorney Work on house at 140 S. "A" Street, Tustin. Legal Research on vicarious liability, fraud, probate, etc. Motion to Disqualify Opposing Counsel, & reply, & court hearing, & parking. Amended Complaint & Motion to Amend Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment Discovery Responses Discovery Requests Personal Service and Court Filing Motion to Strike Costs Declaration reg. Work on Masaoka v. Rickman Nelson's additional work for atty Roseberry on other projects to help compensate for Roseberry's Masaoka work. 70+ Hours of Work by Nelson on Rickman case!!! -3,500.00 Coordination with City of Tustin & City Attorneys - Resolve $500 per day Per violation criminal penalties from August, 2000 through February, 2001 SupervisiOn of architects, pre-planning, preliminary drawings, pre-construction of New House at 140 S. "A" Street, Tustin, CA -2,400.00 Masaoka v. Roseinblit- Amended Appeal, Motions -2,50O.OO Masaoka v. Rozansky- Collection, Debtor/Judgment exams -$100.00 Masaoka v. Greenbaum - Fraud, Legal Malpractice Masaoka v. Langford- Fraud, Legal Malpractice -1,000.00 Masaoka v. Smith - Fraud, Legal Malpractice Total Estimate of Work Invoiced .. Paid (Continental Currency??) less Continental CUrrency not paid Masaoka actually.paid, out of pocket -$9,5'00.00 -$2,000.00 $1,35P.00 -$650.00 48. Masaoka has'not paid Nelson as Masaoka's checks ~ave bounced, still owing to Continental Currency. So Masaoka is not out of pocket more' than $600 or so. Of which Nelson has solid, detailed records and copies of the checks, of which Masaoka and Reed have stolen for the very purpose of making Nelson unable to provide proof and evidence. 49. Masaoka tells Det. Kilgore that Masaoka never bounced any checks on Nelson. The truth is that every check Masaoka has ever written to NELSON has bounced. There is a pending action in OC Small Claims court, Continental Currency v. Masaoka, Case No. 00SC007352, for a bounced check for ~$1,350. On March 16, 2001, Det. Kilgore tells. Nelson that Masaoka (Reed??) claims that the child pornography was on Nelson's computers. Which comPuters? As nothing Det. Kilgore obtained from Reed/Masaoka constitutes a working computer, which of Nelson's computers is the child pornography on? And who saw the pornography and where? So Nelson's computers where taken for suspected theft and child pornography? And none of Nelson's computers were found to be stolen? If the claim is now that the child pornography was on Nelson's computers, why go through Nelson's files? As no child pornographY has ever been found, was all of this just a smoke screen to get/steal Nelson's computers and files?? And hold everything for 25 days?? Computers 2 6 4 12 8' 12 2 1 Nelson's Stolen Property April 4, 2001 Apple Macintosh Quadra 840 AV Tower Computers w/1.44 mb Floppy Drives, 2x CD Drives, 96/96/9~76/76 mb RAM, 2 MB VRAM, ($300 each, $1,500 Total) Radius 100 mhz Accelerator Cards ($15 each $30 Total) Radius Video Cards - Short Cards ($25 each, '$150 Total) Apple Macintosh Quadra 605 Desktop Computers, 36 mb RAM., w/FPU Processors ($90 each, $360 Total) Apple Macintosh iisi Desktop Computers, 17 mb RAM. ($35 each, $420 Total) Apple Iisi PDS/NuBus Adapter Card, Right Angie ($10 each, $80 Total) Apple High Resolution Video Cards - Long Cards ($10 each, $120 Total) Daystar 50 mhz Accelerator PDS Adapter Card ($15 each, $30 Total) Apple Macintosh Classic II ($30) (Ail Beige in Color) 4 1 12 5 8 10 10 16 6 6 Zoom 56k Modems, White, w/Data Cables and Power Supplies ($50 each, $200 Total) Paper-Port .OptiCal Scanner w/Power Supply ($65) Apple 14" Color Display Monitors (All Beige) ' ($20 each, $240 Total) Apple 15" Muitiscan Color Display Monitors w/cables(All Beige) ($25 each, $125 Total) Shod Apple Monitor Cables, 3' DB15 to DB15 ($5 each, $80 Total) Long Apple Monitor Cables, 6' DB15 to DB15 ($5 each, $100 Total) Apple Laser Printers ($40 each, $120 Total) Epson Stylus 700 Color Printer, White, w/CD Software ($200) Apple Keyboards ($5 each, $50 Total) Apple Mouse (Soap Bar style) ($5 each, $80 Total) Black Mouse Pads ($2 each, $12 Total) Blue Mouse Pads ($2 each, $12..Iotal) Under-Monitor Power Center ($5 each, $15 Total) 1 6 11 4 7 12 10 12 12 14 4 4 2 14 Seagate, SCSI, 6.5 gig Hard Drive- Stand Alone Case ('~?) ($250) Quantum, SCSI, 4.1 gig Hard Drives' ($80 each, $480 T'o'tal) Quantum, SCSI, 2.1 gig Hard Drives ($60 each, $660 Total) Quantum, SCSI, 1 gig Hard' Drives ($20 each, $80 Total) Quantum, SCSi, 650-900 Hard Drives ($20 each, $140 Total) Quantum, SCSI, 250-500 Hard Drives ($10 each, $120 Total) Quantum, SCSI, 120-160 Hard Drives ($5 each, $50 Total) Quantum, SCSi, 40-80 Hard Drives Apple/Sony CD ROM Drives, SCSI, 2x (150) ($10 each, $120 Total) ~~;D Caddies ($2 each, $28 Total) . '~ pplo/Sony CD ROM Drives, SCSI, 4x (300) ($20 each, $80 Total) Apple/Sony CD ROM Drives, SCSI, 4-6x, Stand Alone ($20 each $80 Total) Hitachi CD ROM Drives, SCSI, 12x, Stand Alone ($80 each, $16t~ Total) Apple/Sony 1.4 mb Floppy Drives ($5 each, $70 Total) 2 14 5 2 12 1 Linksys 8 port Ethernet Hub, Blue ($60' each, $120 Total) 12' 10', 6', 3' Cat 5 Cables w/connectors (~ 14 Total - $70) Farallon RJ45 AAUI Adapter ($40 each., $200 Total) Farallon RJ45- RJ11 Ethernet/^ppletalk Adapters w/Power Supplies ($40 oach, $80 lotal) Farallon dual RJ11 Appletalk Connector Boxes ($10 each, $120 Total) Computer UPS (Battery Back Up) - Beige ($45) 8 4 1 8-10 Power Strips Inland Pro 8 Stereo Computer Speaker Sets-White (8 Speakers Total x $5 = $20) Black, JVC, Over-The-Ear, Adjustable Headphones ($25) Brand New File Boxes Computer/Stereo Cables Apple Quadra parts, brackets Apple PowerBook Parts Power Cables Power Strips (4) Floppy Disks, CD's (400+, 32+) Apple, 1 10v PowerBook 540 Power Supply- Grey ($80) Apple RJ45 AAUI Adapter for 540 Power Book ($35) SCSI PowerBook Adapter, "L" Shape. ($30) General Electronics 1 1 1 1 1 Panasonic 2.4 gig hz Cordless Telephone ($140) Sanyo 26 "Color TV w/RCA Remote ($300) RCA VCR 4 Head, HQ, Stereo w/Remote ($85) Goldstar 13" Color TV wNCR w/RCA Remote .($140) Motorola 5" Portable, AC/DC, B/W TV w/AC Adapter, Brand New!! ($35) VHS Tapes- All Movies ($21 x 10 = $210) Mission Impossibl-e 1 Planet of the Apes 007-Goldfinger 007-WorldNot Enough 007-Golden Eye In The Line of Fire Pelican Brief Few Good Men Water World Civil Action American Beauty Perfect Storm Lost In Space Arlington Road Sphere Batman 1 Quiz Show Star Trek IV Apollo 13 Mask of Zorro Entrapment Office Stuff 30+ File Boxes- Legal, Cases, Client, Financials, Legal Forms, Lexis Books-Codes 6' .. Black, Deep, Stackable, HD Cardboard File Box. System, New!l( $8 each, $48 Total) 2-Kerr v. Reed-General Case 1-Kerr v. Reed-Motion For New Trial 1-Mary Ellen Stone/Debbie Silva 25 ., 2 50O White, Store-All Std., White File Boxes, Brand New!! ($25) 'Kerr v. CLSS/ALSS Kerr v. Moa Kerr v. Conser Kerr v. Sparks ilbtron v. Kerr ey v. Reed Adams v. Reed Daily Logs/Call Reports 3/1998 to'present Receipts, 1998-2001 Competitive Concepts v. CCl/Lanplex, Background, Velo-Bound ($24) White, 22:33:: Binders, Competitive Concepts v. CCl/Lan)plex, Volumes 1-12 ($40) White, Binders, Riley v. Reed, Volumes 1-8 ($30 Boxes full of 2" & 3" White Binders, Brand New!! (14 x $5 - $70) 3' x4' Court Display Boards w/Pictures, Brochures, Advertisements, Articles, Cont. Lic. - Competitive Concepts, Lanplex, MAI, CLS (6 x $30 -- $180) Business Cards- Nelson A. Kerr General Furniture 3 1 72"x 32", Wood Grained Top, Fold-Up Banquet Tables ($10 each, $50 Total) 7' Tall x 6' Wide by 32" Deep HD Structural Shelf Unit, Steel ($100) 7' Tall x 6' Wide by 32" Deep MD Structural Shelf Unit, Steel ($75) Misc Shelving Units, 3'- 6' Tall ($20 each, $100 Total) Low Profile, Wood Grained on Particle Wood Sofa-Type End Tables (2 x $20 = $40) Black, 5" Tall, 3' Wide, 4 drawer, HD File Cabinet ($145) Roll Around Bread-Rack Type, 3-Shelf Racks, 4' Tall (approx 24"d x 36"w) ($60 each, $240 Total) Roll ArOund Bread-Rack Type, 6-Shelf Racks, 6' Tall (approx 16"d x 36"w) ($40 each, $80 Total) Deluxe Office Chair, High Back-, Leather Like, Arm Supports (Staples-SKU464529 - $180) Std Office-Type Chairs ($40 each, $120 Total) . 5' Sofa, Light Brown, Leather Like ($75) Black, Aviation-Type Clock, 12" x 12" ($12) 2 Black "Computer Case", Roil-Around, Computer/File luggage like, -24" tall, + Extending Handle, Multiple Compartments ($30. each, $60 Total) Contents of both Black "Computer Case"' 20 Avery Binder Dividers 1-10 ($4 each, .$80 Total) 20 Avery Binder Dividers 1-25 ($5 each, $.100 Total) 20 Avery Binder Dividers 25-50 ($5 each, $100 Total) 20 Avery 2" Self-Adhesive.J'ndex Tabs ($4 each, $80 Total) Black, Nylon CarrY Cases Gray, Canvas-Type, Camera Back, Pack ($60) 24"x 24" Green Paper Cutter (Big Blade!!) ($70) 8 1 2 2 2 3O 100 1 14 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 Std. Staplers ( 8 x $6 = $48) HD Large Throat, 20-100 Stapler ($35) Staple Removers Black, Rolodex, HD, 50 page Capacity 3-Hole Punch ($50 each, $100 Total) Sharp/Canon 110v Calculators-Desk Top Accordian Folders ($2 each, $60 Total) Brown, Clasp-Type Large Envelopes ($10) Box Std Envelopes Eldon Smoked Letter Trays-Stackable ($2 each, $28 Total) . Boll Around HD Car Battery Charger, Black w/Red Lettering, Charge meter/Gauge ($45) ~lack Plastic Box 1/2" Ratchet/Socket Set, approx. 40 pieces- American & Metric sizes Steam Irons, 1 w/Teflon coated heating surface ($20) Full Size Ironing Table & Cover Hoover Vacuum Cleaner- Green Upright w/Hose & Crevice Tool ($80) White, Medium Size Panasonic Microwave Oven ($45) Wood Grain, Large, Toshiba Microwave Oven ($75) GE Toaster Oven ($35) Mr. Coffee 6', Blue, Plastic Mattress, about 8" thick ($20) Sheets Green Sleeping Bag-Coleman ($20) Red Sleeping Bag ($30) Pillows ($10) Aluminum Beach Sand Chairs-Sitting outside on Front Porch (3.x $6 - $18) Wicker Bench - Front Porch Black Frame Bicycle-1 speed- in Back Yard ($40) Clothes 9 4 1 1 4 Dockers Long Pants - Blue, Black, Green, Beige (all 38-42" x 32") (9 x $10 = $90) White, Long Sleeve Dress Shirts (4 x $7 = $28) Docker, Blue Stripped Shirt Blue Swirley Shirt Colored Golf Shirts (4 x $4 = $16) 8 Pr Socks-White (8 x $i = $8) 2 Pr Socks-Black (2 x $1 = $2) 2 Pr Socks-Beige w/emblems (2 x $2 = $24) 2 Pr Black Leather Dress Shoes (2 x $1 = $24) 3 3 2 3 2O Nordstrom's Garment Bags, Black w/Clear Business Card Pocket on Upper Left Side- Wool Suits, I Black, 2 Grey w/pin stripes (3 x $35 = $105) Dark Blue Wool Sport Coats (2 x $12 = $24) Hanger Racks w/Ties (-30) (30 x $2 = $60) Clothes Hangers Red, "Rollo"(?) Down-Filled Ski Jacket ($160) Plaid, Wool, Mountain Man Jacket ($12) Black, Compact Umbrella Lot Schick, Aluminum, Deluxe Flex Razor Kits (4) Toothbrush (2) Tooth Paste Floss Gadgets Q-Tips-Big Bag Rubbing Alcohol (4) Mouth Wash (2) Baby Powder "Babe" Soap (9 Bars) Bath Towels (4) Wash Cloth (2) Toilet Paper (12 Roll Package) ($40) Personal Lot 2 Fuji DL-400 Zoom Camera, 35 mm, & Grey "Falcon" Bag w/Velcro, Film ($300+) B, cox (~70) Pictures of Nelson's Corvettes (Red '99, Red '71 and Gray '85), ffices, Boats, Girlfriend, Pictures & Negatives- Nelson & Girlfriend, Corvettes, Bibles, 1 Black Leather from ~ 1964, I Brown Leather from ~ 1974 Tools 1 2 -4 2 1 3/8" B/D Variable Speed Drill Hammers Screwdrivers, assorted Orange 25' Extention Cords Shod Step Ladder ($30) From Miguel Hernandez Stand Alone Hard Drive w/Cable Mac OS 8.1 CD Mac Norton Utilities CD Other Misc Mac CD's Spare Set of Keys to Nelson's Cadillac Page Totals- Page I $ 6,972.00 Page 2 $ 1,517.00 Page 3 $ 2,428.00 Page4 $ · 971.00 Page 5 $ 0.00 Grand Total $11,888.00 Gra'nd Total I I ,888.00 Plus value of Files, Documents, Re.cords, !Computer Programs, CompUter F~les, Time to Research, Install, Maintain Computers and Computer Files (Potential of $3,000+) Recovered Property on 3-1-2001 Iisi w/4-4 meg chips Quadra 605 $20 + $15 = $35 each X 10 $40 + $50 = $90 each x 2 $350.00 $180.00 14" Color Monitors 15" Color Monitors $20 each x 8 $25 each x 4 Apple Keyboard Apple Mouse (Soap Bar style) $160.00 $1oo.o0 Apple/Sony CD ROM Drives, SCSi, 2x (150) $5 each x 4 $20.00 $5 each x 14 $70.00 Apple/Sony CD ROM Drives, scsi, 4x (300) $10 each x 4 $40.00 Apple/Sony 1.4 mb Floppy Drives Misc Hard Drives, SCSi, 40 - 500 $10 each x 4 $40.00 $5 each x 5 $25.00 Seagate 6.5 gig Hard Drive $5 each x 27 $135.00 $250 each $250.00 Power Center $5 each $ 5.00 File Boxes, Print Outs, Transcripts, Binders, Copies Minimum - $400.00 Total Value $1,770.00 In looking at the Apple Quadra 840 AV in the color pictures, with the Video cards,.the Accelerator card, the expanded RAM and VRAM memory, a 2.1 and a 4.1 gig SCSI Hard Drive set up, the current value of this machine would be at least $400. The value of the software that was on this machine in the color pictures would be valued at a minimum of another $400. And the Apple Ouadra 840 AV in the color pictures does look complete and fully functional. The Apple Quadra 840 AV inspected at the Tustin Police Department was missing everything (Power Supply, Power cables, SCSI Cables, SCSI CD ROM Drive, 1.4 mb Floppy Drive & Ribbon Cable, RAM & VRAM Chips, Speaker Box) and was not a functional computer by any stretch of the imagination.