Below are links to the documents I used for this week's story on the strange case of Robert Forest, who's suing former Fort Bragg police Lt. (and current Merced commander) Floyd Higdon in federal court for causing Forest's "malicious" and "wrongful" prosecution.
The incident the suit grew out of took place in November 2006 in downtown Fort Bragg.
**FBPD's report on Stanley Douglass, from after a witness called the cops to report that Robert Forest was pointing a gun at Douglass.
**FBPD's report on Robert Forest's account of the scuffle.
**The District Attorney's interview with witness Jacob Long (which was conducted after questions were raised about Higdon's conduct in the case).
**Prosecutor Tim Stoen on Robert Forest's previous weapons conviction.
**FBPD Sgt. Brandon Lee's e-mail to Chief Mark Puthuff saying that his report on the Forest/Douglass episode had been changed without his knowledge.
**Lee calls the changed report "garbage" and says he wouldn't testify to it in court. In the margins, he notes all the changes he said were made.
**DA Meredith Lintott's decision to dismiss the charges against Forest.
**Prosecutor Tim Stoen talks about how the problems at FBPD hurt his case against Forest.
**The federal suit filed by Robert Forest against Floyd Higdon, the Fort Bragg Police Department and the city of Fort Bragg for "malicious" prosecution.
you are the valiant one, tim, taking on the tough stories. bravo.
You produced all relevant legal documents so we can judge for ourselves who’s credible in Forest v Higdon in Federal Court. Good job digging out the elements of corruption, brick by brick–
*Lintott’s detailed explanation of why she dropped the case.
*Robert Forest’s declaration of why he acted in self-defense with a legal firearm.
*Robert Forest’s Civil Rights Complaint against Higdon/FB in US District Court.
Malicious prosecutions happen but the inner workings don’t usually come out. There’s plenty going on locally with asset seizures & lack of oversight colluding. With no instructions to deputies as to what’s legal medical marijuana and what’s not, it’s pot-luck, deputy discretion about out of compliance medical gardens. Under 9.31, law enforcement uses nuisance abatement orders (created out of the Sheriff’s Office) to gain access to private property without a warrant, deprive patients of a jury trial & the presumption of innocence & require no corroborating evidence.
Since the Supreme Court Kelly ruling, that will have to change. Kelly affirmed the rights of collectives and the ID card program because they both enable the purpose of SB420 to ‘enhance access through collective cooperative cultivation’ and they threw out the arbitrary 6 plant-8 oz limits because they restrict access.
Mendo County’s 25 plants per parcel nuisance ordinance is about to be tested as well, since it violates the rights of collectives & reduces constitutional rights of patients in violation of state law, where “enhancing access” is the standard.
A new patient collective status — “public nuisance” — applies to no other group of people and is the issue since it undermines access to medicine with enough restrictions to tie up a whale. Let me count the ways–there are 23–wherein qualified cannabis patients become 2d class ‘public nuisances’ with fewer constitutional rights than under criminal law.
Any law enforcement agency that fails to adjust its punitive policies & practices to a protective post-Kelly era will have no chance of prevailing in court.
Your viewers need to know advertising rates for the site, apart from the paper.
Is it by the year/month/week or by the ad — how does your system work?
I’d like to submit the Medical Cannabis Calendar as an ad, revised each month, from now to the June election. What would one week cost vs a permanent space?
pebbles