Leaderboard 728 X 90

Tuesday, April 4, 2017

Missouri deputy admits she did not witness my wife push anyone, so that means Carol was arrested on the word of a nameless "ghost," who was not under oath


Carol Shuler
My wife, Carol, holds the distinction of probably being the only person in U.S. history to be arrested and imprisoned based on the word of . . . a ghost.

I'm not making this up. Follow us on a three-step path that shows what we mean:

(1) Carol is charged, per a Misdemeanor Information (MI) from Greene County, Missouri, Prosecuting Attorney Dan Patterson, with trespass. The MI states that particulars about the trespass charge are in a Probable Cause (PC) Statement from Deputy Debi Wade. The PC Statement, however, says not one word about trespass. That means the charge is based on . . . nothing -- and it must be dismissed, as a matter of law.

(2) Wade claims in her PC Statement that Carol "barreled into [her] head first," apparently supporting a count of assault on a law enforcement officer. Wade's claim has a couple of problems: (a) It didn't happen, as Carol has shown in her Motion to Dismiss; (b) Even Patterson seems to acknowledge that it didn't happen because he filed no charge against Carol based on the alleged Debi Wade incident. That count, essentially, already has been dismissed as a matter of law.

(3) The only remaining claim is that Carol "assaulted" Deputy Jeremy Lynn by pushing him after he had forced his way into our apartment during an unlawful eviction on Sept. 9, 2015. But Wade admits in her PC Statement that she did not witness this event. Specifically, Wade states: "I was not witness to that assault, however, I was advised that Carol first pushed the door from inside when Capt. Lynn attempted entry with the key, then got physical with him once inside the threshold and pushed him repeatedly.”

(Note: The PC Statement, MI, and Motion to Dismiss are embedded at the end of this post.)

If you believe that arresting and imprisoning someone is serious business -- and you agree with the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which holds that no seizure of a person shall happen without probable cause -- this should scare you death.

Consider what Wade is saying here: She did not witness Carol do anything wrong regarding Jeremy Lynn, but someone "advised" her that Carol pushed the officer. Well, who advised her on the subject? Was it another officer, a squirrel out on the lawn, a passing meter reader, a golden retriever taking a poop across the street?

You might think I'm being ridiculous, but get this -- the "adviser" has no name. We don't even know if he's human.

That's why I say Carol was arrested on the word of a ghost. Based on Wade's statement, the "adviser" might as well be from the spirit world. Whoever he is, and wherever he's from, he provides no probable cause to arrest my wife.

How many people -- with names and swearing under oath -- claim Carol Tovich Shuler did anything wrong regarding Officer Jeremy Lynn? Zero.

That means two things:

(1) All of the criminal charges against Carol are not based in probable cause and must be dismissed;

(2) Carol's arrest and imprisonment were based on zero probable cause, constituting a false arrest and false imprisonment -- and a Fourth Amendment violation -- that are about as blatant as they can come.

We are left with this glaring question: If someone on the scene witnessed Carol push Officer Lynn, and advised Debi Wade of such, why was that officer not chosen to submit the Probable Cause Statement? Why have Officer Wade make a statement under oath about events she admits she did not see?

With those questions hanging in the air, the credibility of the Greene County "justice apparatus" is emitting the smell of a rotting fish. In fact, it might not even smell that good.












18 comments:

Anonymous said...

I don't see how you can put a statement in an affidavit when you admit you didn't witness the event. Bizarre.

legalschnauzer said...

@10:26 --

For one thing, the event -- the alleged pushing of Jeremy Lynn -- didn't happen. He, and maybe someone else, was too busy banging Carol's head against the wall. Two, this isn't a serious PC Statement. It's just an excuse to arrest Carol on bogus charges and terrorize us.

Anonymous said...

Our taxpayer dollars at work.

Anonymous said...

This Missouri prosecutor must have rocks in his cranium. Who would seek an arrest warrant based on a PC Statement like this?

Anonymous said...

What a clown car they apparently have in Greene County, Missouri!

Anonymous said...

Congratulations, Mr. Schnauzer. How many couples both get arrested and beaten up by police? Sort of husband-wife jail tag team. That's certainly an accomplishment to be proud of.

Anonymous said...

Pretty weak attempt at humor, 11:17. Maybe cops will falsely arrest your ass someday, and we'll see how funny that is.

Anonymous said...

That Missouri sheriff needs to be investigated.

Anonymous said...

Many sheriff's offices in the U.S. are run like back woods hunting clubs. There is no professionalism about them. Hate to say it, but this doesn't surprise me. I've seen how they operate.

Anonymous said...

Jim Arnott is a dark and dirty guy who runs a dark and dirty department. That's well understood by most rational people in SW Missouri. The problem is this: The southern half of Missouri has become so right wing there hardly are any rational people left.

Anonymous said...

Please stop writing pleadings for your wife and get her a lawyer. She has been through enough.

legalschnauzer said...

@5:06 --

a. I'm not writing pleadings for my wife.

b. Your comment has nothing to do with the content of the post. Therefore, what is your point?

c. Do you want to pay for Carol's lawyer? They don't work for free; perhaps you've heard about that.

d. I agree that Carol has been through enough, and much of it has been caused by corrupt lawyers, who stole our money without doing the work they were hired to do. We are out at least $100,000 because of crooked lawyers (and that's a conservative estimate). She's not in a hurry to go down that path again. It will be her decision, not mine -- and certainly not yours, unless of course, you want to pay for it, and maybe reimburse us for all the money lawyers already have cost us.

Come on, bud, if you care so much, step up to the plate and put your cash where your mouth is.

Anonymous said...

Aboard the Eliza Battle Admiral Tyron was introducing two distinguished guest; Roger Shuler and Alexander Mackintosh.The Admiral continued by saying that in appreciation of the assistance the Eliza Battle has received from the Schnauzer,Alexander is going to show Shuler how to make the most lethal weapon to catch a "Mon", the"Black Dog." Alexander gave a list of the materials he would need to the crew and informed them to meet in the galley at 0800 the next day. The next day Alexander begins; Who has the #1 blind-eye hook with a 3 inch shank? Mary Mac said she could not find that item but she did locate Young Jessica who considers herself a #1 and she must be blind to hook up with Big Luther and she carries a 3 inch shank for protection. Sheldon added that a #1 blind-eyed hooker with a 3 inch shank is a lethal weapon in his opinion. Alexander replied yes she is and we must disguise her. Alexander asked who had the green mohair for the Dog's head. Sheldon replied that a Angora Goat could not be found but the "Old Goat" Luv Guv sweats profoundly when he thinks of Beka naked and the sweat makes the brass frames of his eye glasses tarnish, turning his hair green. He also has a comb_over which makes him have "mohair" Alexander Replied excellent and now we need to cover her body.Who has the yellow canary feathers? Dr Foreman said that a yellow canary could not be found but during Mike's trial, witness Canary would not answer Hart's questions, making him a yellow-bellied coward. I have some of his belly button lint. Alexander said Outstanding ! Now we need to make this beauty look as innocent as an Angel. Who has the red turkey feathers for the wings. Bob Yancey replied that a turkey could not be found but during Mike's trial, Baxley was strutting around the courtroom saying Gobbledygook Gobbledygook which reminded him of a turkey. I have some of the fake Red Roses Baxley brought Nannie Dee.
Alexander presented the "Black Dog to Shuler and informed him that his task would be as easy as catching fish in a barrel. Shuler produced a bottle of "Black Dog Scotch Whiskey" and proposed a toast.
Meanwhile on the Victoria ,Jr Riley was studying the activity on the Eliza Battle through his spy glass. He saw the Black Dog Alexander had made and shouted "Shazam! I got to have some of that."Riley Sr took the spy glass and when he looked, he saw Shuler holding his glass and it appeared Shuler was directing his toast to Riley. Riley Sr looked at Jr and said "Your mama should have served you "Southern Maid " no burn bacon.
Back on the Eliza Battle The Stranger in the Shadows and the Admiral were discussing the war. The Stranger said now that Mike has received the Trial Transcript , we will know the direction of the battle within 30 days. The US Senate will prove that the #2 man of the FBI caused the erasure of Baker's phone records during Mcgregor's Trial and the National Intelligence Adviser directed the monitoring of Shuler's phone and computer.

Anonymous said...

A few questions for @5:16 --

1. Why do you care whether Carol Shuler has a lawyer or not? What is it to you?

2. I've read your comments closely, and you clearly don't give a hoot about Carol's well-being. At every turn, you've tried to blame her injuries on her:

a. She fell on her own.

b. She has fragile bones because of a thyroid condition, and that's the reason her arm broke.

c. She said something that caused cops to think it was OK to rough her up.

d. The law says landlord had no lawful grounds to evict, and cops had no lawful grounds to be on the property. But you consistently argue the law doesn't matter.

Again, you don't care about Carol's well-being. So why the con game about hiring a lawyer?

Anonymous said...

"We are out at least $100,000 because of crooked lawyers"

Roger, I've seen pictures of you and Carol. I doubt you've ever had $100,000 in your life, let alone paid it to anybody.

legalschnauzer said...

We lived in a house for 25 years that sold for right at $200,000. It would have sold for more than that if it hadn't been stolen from us via wrongful foreclosure.

You could look that up in public records, but why don't you just stay stupid -- your pictures suggest you are, in fact, more dense than a stump. Seems to be your comfort zone.

Why don't you send us a photo, so we can all make fun of it. Better yet, don't; it might dissolve computer screens.

Anonymous said...

> We lived in a house for 25 years that sold for right at $200,000.

You mean the *lender* sold it for $200,000, because you stopped paying your mortgage. Then, after subtracting the mortgage debt, real estate commission, closing costs, unpaid property taxes, your lender's legal fees - what was left? I'm guessing zero?

> your pictures suggest you are, in fact, more dense than a stump.

What pictures are you talking about? Are you high?

> Why don't you send us a photo, so we can all make fun of it. Better yet, don't; it might dissolve computer screens.

Wow, good one. You're really "on" this morning.

legalschnauzer said...

We paid 25 years on a house that proved to be worth more than $200,000. We not only paid for it, we made a wise investment. Those are the facts, and you can't change them.

Your original, smart-ass comment blew up in your face, so you tried to change the subject to lender, closing costs, etc. Typical tactic for a con man/loser.