"You have made me very desperate. You might not be glad that you did."
--- Nick Fury, "The Avengers"
My last posting was a considerable amount of time ago, and this is due to a number of factors. One reason is due to two large posts I'm still working on, and the fact that I haven't had the time to finish them. One of those posts may actually be obsolete after this one, as this post covers much of what is being discussed, though I'll have to take a look at it to be certain. Both my work and a few meetings with a post-conviction attorney are additional issues causing this lack of time.
This gap in posting has not gone without notice by those friendly to the Manweilers. The amount of views of my blog went up as the wedding day for Michelle Manweiler grew closer. In fact, the viewings were considerable during my gap in postings, likely to see if I'd make any comments before the wedding. This checking of my blog has not ceased even after the wedding, including an attempt to defeat the viewer tracking - an attempt that failed and easily spotted for what it was.
In addition, it seems my blog was the topic of conversation at the wedding, assuming of course that the information I was told on the date of the wedding was correct. Because the wedding itself was irrelevant to me, I never did bother to inquire from any of my other sources if the date was changed or not from November 10th. I have no reason to believe the date was changed, but I've been far too busy lately to concern myself with any additional information on Ms. Manweiler/Dickerman's wedding.
Assuming that my date of the wedding is correct, the reason I know that my blog was a topic of discussion at the wedding is the fact that on the 10th my blog was being specifically sought out by several individuals who never visited before, and these views of the blog were going on during the normal times that a wedding takes place. Several views also took place the night of the 10th. These new visitors have continued to view the blog even after November 10th, along with other regulars from such places as California, New York, Arlington, DC and St. Louis, Missouri.
For those attempting to see if I'd make any negative comments about the wedding before and immediately after the event, sorry to disappoint but the wedding of Michelle Manweiler to John Dickerman is absolutely meaningless to me. Did you people really believe I was going to rage about the fact she's getting married? The only thing that initially annoyed me about the wedding was the deliberate choice of the date, and that has been water under the bridge for some time. The only reason I even bothered to note when she was getting married, was so that I'd know when Ms. Manweiler would officially receive the name change to Mrs. Michelle Annette Dickerman. I don't feel that there is anything further to say on the subject of the wedding.
I'm sure most of the people viewing my blog automatically have the mindset that I'm a bad person simply on the word of Michelle Dickerman. There is a massive amount about this situation you know nothing about, and Ms. Manweiler is no saint regardless of how she publicly presents herself. If you think that I'm some horrible individual when you've never met me, that definitely tells me something about you. The simple fact is that no one outside of Michelle Manweiler/Dickerman and I know what the truth is of this situation.
Also the only other parties, besides myself and Ms. Manweiler obviously, who have inside knowledge of the ugly truth of what was really done behind the scenes of the 2006 legal farce, are as follows:
* My immediate family and friends
* Charlottesville law enforcement
* William Johnson, my former attorney
* Greg and Carole Manweiler
* Lawyers I've spoken with
If you aren't in this list, then your opinions on this case come from a position of ignorance on the subject. You won't receive accurate information from the Manweilers of course, who are going to be tight lipped as to their level of involvement with the actual corrupt actions taken during the 2006 issue. They will attempt instead to place the blame on the prosecution for what the Manweilers are actually responsible for, as I will bring up later.
The simple fact is that the Manweilers aren't going to be forthcoming about any wrongdoing on their own part. Do you really think these people would admit to doing anything bad? Of course not, they will simply paint me in the worst possible light by making up all sorts of stories. The Manweilers do this because they don't want anyone to look too closely into what was done on their say in 2006. Before you rush to believe the horror stories they come up with, use your head for a moment. It took months before Ms. Manweiler finally had the police get involved. If this situation was really what the Manweilers have made it out to be, why did they sit on their butts for months instead of immediately taking action?
Ms. Manweiler claimed that prior to going to the police, she was supposedly in fear for the safety of her family, roommates, coworkers, puppies and kittens, squirrels crossing the street, etc. Yet Ms. Manweiler waited for roughly seven months before actually doing anything. Does that sound normal to you? If things were really what the Manweilers have claimed, why would anyone in their right mind not take action immediately instead of waiting for months for it to be convenient? If I were in that position and had been worried about the safety of all these people, I wouldn't wait even a day to take action. No rational person would wait so long if they really believed the lives of those they cared about were in danger.
So either these people were never in danger as Ms. Manweiler tried to claim, or she did feel that they were in danger and allowed them to be at risk for months. If Ms. Manweiler thought that her own safety was at risk, why didn't she act sooner? Very convenient that she waited until after graduating before going to the police to have me arrested. I would think anyone with a shred of common sense could figure this out on their own.
If anyone is assuming they are hearing the full true story from the Manweiler family, I'm sorry but I'm going to have to say that you are an idiot. You can take offense to that all you want, but if you simply take everything they tell you at face value without question, I don't see any other way to put this. I've put more than enough evidence on this blog to call into question any story told by the Manweilers. Anyone who rushes to make judgements on me when they've never met me, especially without hearing both sides of the issue, simply isn't an intelligent individual - and you haven't heard my whole side of the issue. Despite all the posts on this blog, the reality is that this is just the tip of the iceberg. I could tell you things about Ms. Manweiler, and even some things about her parents, that would upset you. They aren't as nice as they pretend to be.
As I've said, none of the people on Ms. Manweiler's side know what the real story is. Despite all their interference in 2006, even Ms. Manweiler's parents don't know the full story of the things their daughter has done. I'm sure that they know she lied to the cops and tampered with evidence in 2006, but that is likely the extent of their knowledge. I'm sure they don't care that she did this either. After all, if the Manweilers don't feel you are of use to them or on their level, you're just cattle to them. Why would they feel bad about the harm done to me and my family by their daughter, when they don't view us as human beings. When my mother ran out of the courtroom in tears at the preliminary hearing, the Manweilers just gave her evil looks. They behave in this malicious and shallow manner, and then wonder why I've responded to them as I have.
To give you an idea of how clueless both Carole and Greg Manweiler are about their daughter's actions of the past - I bet they aren't aware that the visit from the William and Mary campus police in 2000 was due to their daughter claiming that I drove a car around the campus to follow her. They probably saw the mention on my blog, but other than that I guarantee they never knew of it before. Back in 2000 Ms. Manweiler made the first of her false accusations to the campus police at William and Mary. The officer told me, and other witnesses, that Ms. Manweiler claimed I drove a car around the campus and followed her with the vehicle (and that I was the sole occupant).
The campus police officer left the house after my mother informed him that this accusal from Ms. Manweiler was not possible, since I didn't have a license at the time let alone a vehicle. This lack of a license can be confirmed via DMV records. Carole and Greg Manweiler most likely have no clue that this incident happened like this, and probably wouldn't believe it no matter what. My family was present that day and recall the entire event. My mother and both of my sisters heard that officer say that Ms. Manweiler claimed I was following her in a vehicle in 2000 around the William and Mary campus, and they all remember that Officer Coleman couldn't leave fast enough upon hearing I didn't have a license to drive.
Ms. Manweiler herself won't deny that the W&M campus police made a visit to my house in 2000, though she will not admit to the real reason for that visit. This officer came to Hampton from Williamsburg with two other officers in tow, and had the handcuffs out and ready. He stated to me, my mother and sisters that he was there to take me into custody. Then he suddenly leaves the house without making an arrest after hearing I didn't have a drivers license. Not only do I have witnesses to this event, but if what I was saying wasn't true - well considering the event of the officer coming to arrest me that day is not in dispute by any party, if what I'm saying isn't true then why was no arrest made that day? Why would the officer come all that way with that much backup, only to leave for no reason? He had a reason for leaving - he couldn't arrest me after realizing the victim lied.
I'm sure you're asking why Ms. Manweiler wasn't arrested. Think about it - she's a student of William and Mary and her tuition helps pay the officer's salary. In addition, my understanding is that both her father and mother attended the college long ago as well, and I'm sure they donate to this day. Her brother was due to attend after he graduated high school. Do you think the college would want to lose that amount of income just to get a misdemeanor charge on Ms. Manweiler? Even friends of mine who attended William and Mary said they were not surprised by the actions of the W&M campus police - they all agree that in a dispute between a student and a non-student, the campus police will always side with and protect the student.
Same thing happened in 2006 - Michelle Manweiler is attending UVA, and Charlottesville law enforcement has a known reputation of over-protection of that income *ahem* I mean students. Ms. Manweiler's rich banker father also attended UVA as well. How interesting that two law enforcement agencies, known for favoring their local college students, just so happen to cover up for the daughter of a man who has money and attended both campuses. Even some of the lawyers I've brought this up to immediately assumed Mr. Manweiler had something to do with both instances. In fact, when a family member was speaking with a business owner he knew (the co-owner/VP specifically), in an attempt to help me gain employment right after jail, this individual actually stated that Mr. Manweiler had likely influenced the C'ville law enforcement in some way.
The only information this business owner had about the Manweilers was that Ms. Manweiler was a UVA law school student - he knew nothing more about her or her family. After hearing all the ridiculous and overboard things done to me by the legal system he makes an extremely good guess - "It sounds like she had a rich daddy who knew someone important at UVA and got them to pull some strings". Mr. Manweiler, being the CFO of a bank and a UVA alumni (and donator to the campus from my understanding), certainly fits that statement. Interesting how this business owner knew nothing of the Manweilers and still guessed correctly what had taken place. That's the Manweiler ideal of justice - making dirty deals under the table so that their own personal gestapo cracks someone over the head for making them angry. Al Capone would be proud of the Manweiler family.
The false accusation from 2000 is similar to one of the claims made by Ms. Manweiler in 2006. She claimed at the protective order hearings (and to police) that I went to her residence in Charlottesville and followed her with a vehicle around the city. This accusation is actually recorded in the paperwork in my possession from the protective order hearing. I have plenty of witnesses who can testify that I never left my home long enough to make the travel between Charlottesville and Hampton, and I have physical evidence proving I've never made the trip. As everyone who knew me at the time can attest, when I was not at work the bulk of my time was spent in my apartment playing video games.
The most important evidence is that months later, when Ms. Manweiler admitted in her Victim Impact Statement that she was glad I was arrested because she was fearful that I'd eventually find out where she lived and worked in Charlottesville. It appears Ms. Manweiler forgot about her previous lie to police. So someone explain to me how I was supposedly going to her residence and following her around the city, as she had originally claimed to law enforcement, when by her own admission I've never even known her location in Charlottesville? Little hard for me to have done any of this when, in her own words, I never even knew where she lived and worked. Not only that, but it's hard to claim I was even a threat to her when I never knew her location, and never tried to find it in the seven months it took her to go to police.
I didn't try because I didn't care. In 2006 this situation really wasn't important to me as others tried to make it out to be. I was simply attempting to get back at a bully, and was getting quite bored with it. So considering that in seven months I never even bothered to attempt to find her location, how was Ms. Manweiler even fearful that I'd learn it eventually, if I had never tried it all that time? It would have take me roughly a day to have located her residence if I actually tried, yet in seven months I never attempted it, by her own admission in court documents. Until the 2006 preliminary hearing, I hadn't even been in this woman's presence since 1999. Ms. Manweiler was in such danger wasn't she?
The simple fact is that anyone believing Ms. Manweiler's story is very foolish. Especially when I can prove she lied in court documents - using no less than her own words and writings. It surprises me that there are people clueless enough to believe her every word on this situation, especially when I can use her own words to prove she lied to law enforcement. I'm willing to bet this woman made claims to those of you who know her, that I could prove to be a lie with the documentation I have in my possession. As I've said, in many cases I can prove she's completely made something up. This entire situation was nothing more than a stupid argument that she built up to be far more than it was. There is a reason why the inmates in the cell block with me referred to her impact statement as the "Chicken Little Statement" after I passed it around the cell block for them to read. When I do show the statement to people, they have the same reaction as the inmates. A family friend who is a retired journalist even mocked her, stating that she couldn't believe a grown woman wrote a statement like that.
Ms. Manweiler/Dickerman exaggerates things and sometimes completely lies just to make herself look better. I'm not sure why she feels the need to hype things up to be more dramatic than they were, perhaps she's the type that is just needy for attention. As an example of how Ms. Manweiler lied and exaggerates in her VIS: Ms. Manweiler mentions how things occurred in a specific period of time, and I can prove these things never happened the way she claims because I still have copies of hand written notes she sent me in during that time period. What Ms. Manweiler says took place in her VIS of 2006 is greatly in excess of what she actually admits took place in her old hand written letters. There can't be any argument or denial of this fact by Ms. Manweiler because as I said - it's all in her own handwriting and it contradicts every bit of what she claims in her VIS.
So right there is immediate proof in her own hand showing that she was being dishonest with what she was telling the police and the courts. So those of you backing her up have no leg to stand on when I can show you right to your own face that this woman lied - and with it all in her own words and handwriting you have nothing to say against it. Anyone coming on this blog believing they know anything about the truth of this situation (or think you know what kind of person I am), it is essentially like me telling you what the inside of your house looks like when I've only seen a photo of the outside of the building.
By all means though, continue to backup someone who I can prove lied and manipulated the legal system to hurt someone who didn't deserve it, let alone commit the crime - it shows what kind of person you really are if you support what these people did. I guess if the Manweilers view you to be on their level, I shouldn't be surprised that you are exactly like them.
Anyone would be foolish to think that they will receive any information from Ms. Manweiler and her parent's except what they want you to hear. Do you really think she'd say, "Yeah I lied to get this guy a charge he didn't commit"? Do you think Mr. Manweiler would ever say, "I pulled strings to manipulate law enforcement into doing excessive things to this guy"? The Manweilers are going to say whatever they can to paint me in the worst light possible, while at the same time making themselves out to be victims and saints. They are neither.
Not saying I'm a saint or even really a victim either, but at least I'd never manipulate and lie not only to get someone more punishment than they deserve, but also have them denied a fair trial and convicted for something they didn't do - while at the same time claiming that this was justice. Punishment should fit the crime, and not only did the punishment go well in excess of what I was accused of doing, but I didn't even commit that crime in the first place. I also wasn't punished for what I was accused of doing, but was instead punished for WHO I was accused of doing it to - last I checked that wasn't the way things are supposed to be done in America. Ms. Manweiler isn't more important than any other American citizen out there, despite her belief to the contrary. She doesn't get to have more protection than anyone else just because daddy has money and connections.
Those of you siding with Ms. Manweiler, it means you side with doing things of this nature to people. There is no middle ground here - you can't back her up but at the same time claim it's not an affirmation of the corrupt things done at her request by the C'ville legal system. Ms. Manweiler knew I was being denied my right to a fair trial, she was told about it by the prosecution at the preliminary hearing. The prosecution even said it was being done because Ms. Manweiler and her parents wanted it to be done.
Don't try to claim that threatening to hurt me for exercising this right isn't a denial of that right, because that's bullshit and you know it. Think of the prosecutor's threat in a non-legal scenario: It would be like going to vote, but someone comes up to you and threatens to hit you in the head with a baseball bat if you vote instead of going home. Then they claim that's not a denial of that right because you could still go ahead and vote - just as long as you understand that you'll be beaten with the bat after you vote. That is still a denial of the right, and minus the baseball bat that is what the prosecution's threat involved. It was essentially that if I try to have a trial and defend myself against the charge, my right as an American citizen, they will try to hurt me for doing it. That is exactly the threat, and Ms. Manweiler denying it doesn't make it any less true - it just makes her a liar and a hypocrite.
So if you side with her, you are also saying that it was right for an American to be denied their right to a fair trial - you don't get to approve of her actions but then claim that's not intending to approve of someone being denied their right to a fair trial. If you believe that it's okay in this instance simply because you like Ms. Manweiler and don't like that I pissed her off, then you need to be shipped off to some place like Iran where you'll fit in with other people who have the same sick mentality.
The simple fact is this - I've never laid a hand on this woman nor am I some troublemaker who tries to hurt people. How many anti-social individuals like that would have a spotless record (obviously prior to the legal issue)? I literally had nothing on my record prior to this garbage in 2006, not even a parking ticket or moving violation - how many of you reading this can make the same claim? Even afterwards, my record only remains tarnished by the false charge from 2006. How many people in the United States do you think can claim they never even received a speeding ticket in their entire life? Can you or your kids make the same claim?
When I was arrested in Hampton over this issue, it was the first time I've ever even been pulled over by a cop. That is the fact of the situation - a spotless record before and after the legal farce of 2006. Only what was applied in 2006 shows on my record, nothing else happened before or since. That right there speaks volumes in the face of the Manweiler claims. No one who is the kind of person the Manweilers claim me to be, would able to say that they never got into trouble before or since. Those of you on the Manweiler's side need to start using some common sense here.
That glaring fact shows that what the C'ville law enforcement and the Manweilers did in 2006 was corrupt and evil. I was an individual with absolutely no criminal record, a DoD clearance, a promising career in engineering and who didn't even try to find out where the woman lived let alone ever come near her or raise a hand to her. That earns a felony (when the actual charge is supposed to be a misdemeanor in Virginia, they only bumped it up to a felony because Ms. Manweiler was a UVA student with a rich alumni father) and five years probation with a five year suspended sentence, and 20 years good behavior that even child molesters don't receive in Charlottesville or anywhere else. If you don't see something wrong with this picture, you are quite frankly either a warped individual or just stupid.
If Ms. Manweiler tries to claim that it wasn't her call, this is again another lie - one she's making to your face, keep that in mind. It's not just me saying that either - even the prosecution pins this on her. You'll notice in the email I posted long ago, where they were threatening me into the charge, that Platania makes a point of including Ms. Manweiler in the decision to do this. He does more than make the point in other emails I haven't posted. It's clear that these things were being done because the Manweilers were demanding it of the prosecution. On the tape recordings conducted by my mother and I when meeting with my former attorney in his office (and courtroom lobbies), he is also just as quick to put the blame on the Manweilers for what was being done.
Every time it was asked why something was being done to me - from the denial of bond that went against legal statutes, the felony charge that is supposed to be a misdemeanor in Virginia, the threat made to deny my right to trial and even the ridiculous terms of the plea agreement - my former attorney's response to all is "It's what the Manweilers wanted". So if Ms. Manweiler tries to pin the blame for the ridiculous and corrupt things done to me in 2006 on someone else, she has lied to you. Because my former attorney and the prosecution were her allies in 2006, and they all put the whole blame on the Manweilers for what was done to me. The simple fact is that Ms. Manweiler was aware of everything, including the denial of my right to due process, and it was only being done because this is what the Manweiler family wanted.
The only reason I received this charge is because I was bullied into it by the prosecution and even my own defense counsel. There was never a finding of guilt because I was threatened with harm by both the prosecution and my former attorney if I had attempted to exercise that right to a fair trial. The prosecution knew that Ms. Manweiler lied to them and they were at the risk of looking stupid after hyping this case up with the media. They decided to throw me under the bus instead of admitting their mistakes.
With no ability to prove my innocence at the time and my parents already hit with a $15,000 bill after hiring a lawyer who refused to do his job, I felt my only option was to give in to their gestapo tactics and hope I could clear my name and bring down the guilty parties later. Not to mention that I had no illusions about receiving a fair trial in a UVA town for being accused of threatening a UVA student. Even the correctional officers at the jail said that I needed to try for a change of venue because of Ms. Manweiler's UVA status. I was told by one correctional officer, "If you punch a University of Virginia student in the face in Charlottesville, you might as well have punched a cop". Inmates as well made similar statements. Last time I checked we lived in America - where you are supposed to be punished for what you did, not for where someone goes to college in town or because they have a rich father who went to the same college.
The only reason I have not tried to overturn the conviction and prosecute Ms. Manweiler is due to the fact that it will likely cost me well over $10,000 or more to remove the charge - and I can't take any legal action against any party until the charge has been removed. I've been unemployed for years due to the charges and am only just now rebuilding my life, so obviously resolving this in the legal arena is not going to happen overnight. This is the only reason Ms. Manweiler hasn't received any legal actions against her, criminal charges or otherwise.
Think about this before you assume I'm full of shit on my claims on this blog - the Charlottesville law enforcement, including Detective Rudman who originally investigated this case, have made numerous visits to this blog over the years of it's existence. They have done nothing other than observe the blog a few times. I have provided evidence showing they were negligent and that they potentially committed criminal actions to cover up for their negligence. That's quite a serious thing. If there wasn't any truth to my claims on this blog, then why have they never attempted any actions against me all these years? It's because they know I caught them in the act.
Attempting any further legal action against me would get all my evidence out in the public, because it will get media attention like it did before, especially within Charlottesville. Reporters will be looking through my blog and seeing what was done to me and the evidence I have. If the law enforcement keeps quiet, only people happening across my blog would hear what they did. Now you might ask, "If it's true, why haven't they tried to fix it either?" Law enforcement isn't always as honorable as people think, especially those who sit behind a desk and worry more about their career than about right and wrong. They try to avoid responsibility for their mistakes just like any government entity.
The CPD isn't worried about right or wrong, they're more concerned about covering their own asses. It is the same with Warner Chapman and Joe Platania from the prosecution. This is a big reason why our legal system is screwed up - it's run by people who care more about their careers than about who gets hurt or whether they got it right. Why admit to their mistakes and risk punishment, when they are in a position to easily cover it up and throw someone else to the wolves. Warner Chapman would send an innocent man to death row than ever admit he made a mistake. So long as law enforcement can get away with it, they will crush someone under a boot before ever taking responsibility for negligence.
Think about the penalties the C'ville law enforcement stand to face if they admit they screwed up. They confined someone for months in jail on a false charge, cost this person a career and large amounts of money, inflicted severe emotional damage on that person and their family, and made this stupid disagreement out to be some major thing in the news media (thus smearing that person's reputation). In some cases they even lied to media sources. As an example of this lying to the media: even though I was arrested in Hampton, they hauled me down to Charlottesville the night of my arrest and the next day they told the media I was arrested in Charlottesville, knowing full well that they were lying.
Now think about all those damages and their admission that it was all done on fake evidence. Not to mention it's evidence exhibiting blatant tampering that would take either negligence or incompetence to miss for the five months this went on in the legal system. Add to that the fact that they have no excuse for only accepting evidence handed to them by Ms. Manweiler, without verifying this evidence from an independent source - as if Photoshop doesn't exist in the real world. To say they would be in big trouble would be an understatement. Careers would be lost for good, and that's the least of some of their worries.
Detective Rudman would lose his job immediately, that much is certain. Likely both prosecutors as well. The city and police department would be liable for major damages in court if they admit they made a mistake. Since my evidence shows extreme negligence/incompetence, and an attempt by law enforcement members to cover up these failures with violations of civil rights, there is enough to justify a criminal investigation of the CPD by a Federal authority. Some could end up with Federal charges against them. They don't stand to gain much by admitting on their own that they screwed up.
The C'ville law enforcement would have to be forced to admit their screw up either through seeing that the media was involved or through legal action. C'ville law enforcement isn't smart enough to take my offer of limiting civil action against the party that corrects the damage on their own - they would only consider my offer if they were confronted by the entire issue coming out in the media. Of course they could be forced into admission through legal action after I have the charge thrown out in court, but then if I have to spend the resources to fix this in court myself there will be no deal to let anyone limit the damages to themselves nor any acceptance of a settlement. The deal would be that the lawyer would have to take everyone possible to court for maximum damages without accepting deals or settlements - in exchange I would simply sign over all monetary gains to the lawyer who puts a boot up the rear end of all parties in civil court. I don't care about money, I want my life back and I want justice against those who did this. If the parties involved won't fix it on their own, they better pray that I don't manage to do it myself, because I won't hold back just as they did not hold back.
But that's an issue for the future, not now, so I'm getting off point. The point is, none of you viewing my blog due to being an acquaintance of Ms. Manweiler know what actually went on. Basing your opinion of me and this case on the word of Michelle Manweiler/Dickerman is an opinion based in ignorance. There is more that went on here than the Manweilers are telling you, and Ms. Manweiler is no angel no matter how much she pretends otherwise. I get it that she can make herself look such a nice person. It's an act she does around people whose opinions she cares about - or when she wants something from you.
Think about some of the false pastors who act so holy and good in public while tricking followers out of their money, and you'll get an idea of what Ms. Manweiler is really like. If she needs you for some reason or views you on her level, she can act like the nicest person in the world. But deep down this is a horrible person and that side is the only side she's ever shown to me. I'm actually quite glad that Ms. Manweiler didn't care about what I thought of her to show me that fake side she shows the rest of you, because it let me know who the real Michelle Manweiler is underneath. In a way, I know her better than you people do because I've seen the real person and not a mask.
Ms. Manweiler did everything in her power to make this private war between us what it is, and made just as many mistakes as I made. You can't have a situation this screwed up without mistakes on both sides. Yet I'm the only one who will admit to screwing up and making mistakes - you won't hear that admission from Ms. Manweiler, because she's too much of a narcissist to admit she ever did anything wrong in her life. Ms. Manweiler took it too far however when she pulled this stunt in 2006. She didn't cross the line at having me arrest, even though I knew she wasn't being truthful with the cops. I wasn't even mad at her when I was arrested, just scared and upset about what was coming. Ms. Manweiler crossed the line the day the prosecution (on her behalf) threatened me out of my right to a fair trial, and into accepting a felony I can prove I didn't commit. A felony Ms. Manweiler knows I didn't commit.
Once I became a felon for a crime Ms. Manweiler knew I never committed, something that only occurred because of the pressure she and her parent's applied to the prosecution, she crossed a line she really, really shouldn't have. There is no "getting over" something of that magnitude either, especially when I know I never committed the crime. Saying I should get over it would be liked telling a raped woman that she needs to "get over it". If you tell me that you'd just forget about something that destroyed your life for something you know you didn't do, especially when it was done through corrupt and vicious means, then I'm going to call you a liar. If you have children, don't you dare claim that you would just "get over it" if they were in my shoes. My mother and family have not gotten over it, and they still worry every day that this charge will throw a wrench into my life once again.
It definitely can cause trouble again, because I'm still putting things off that I need to do for my job simply because I know the result - it will be denied and my job will be at risk. I will eventually have to travel overseas for my job as well, and some countries bar felons from travel to their country - that will be a problem as well. What am I supposed to do if I'm put on a contract by my company, and the country I have to go to says I can't enter due to the charge? What do you think my company will do? So there is no "getting over it" so long as my rights are stripped, my employment is at risk and my record is tarnished - especially since it was all done on a lie. If I can't have peace in my life because of her underhanded actions, than Ms. Manweiler won't ever have peace either.
I know that causing problems with my employment was the point of Ms. Manweiler taking this too far, though I'm sure that just being evil had a lot to do with it as well. In the past I was always told things Ms. Manweiler was saying behind my back. One of those comments was that she would always tell people that I'd never amount to anything. I proved her wrong, and she's too much of a narcissist to allow that to pass. My mother and other family members believe that not only did the Manweilers do this out of viciousness, but believe that Ms. Manweiler wanted to do as much harm as possible because she was proved wrong. In Ms. Manweiler's screwed up head, derailing my life by manipulation of the legal system strokes her ego and "proves" her right about me - even if she had to lie to cause it. Despite her very good attempt however, I still proved her wrong - and actually ended up in a much better job than before. That could still end of course due to the charge.
Ms. Manweiler pushed me too far, and now she's answering for it little by little. It wasn't just one thing that pushed me either, it was a combination of the events of 2006. It wasn't even the fact that she had me arrested with false claims, it was everything else that followed. From grossly corrupt officials smearing me, vicious attacks from a reporter, denials of basic civil rights such as the right to trial and even being threatened when trying to fire my incompetent attorney, verbal abuse from the same attorney towards both me and my family, sitting in jail for five months against legal statutes while those who were accused of worse received bond, having to resign from my position at a job I enjoyed, receiving not only a felony but ridiculously excessive penalties that even child molesters don't receive, and all the years spent in hopelessness at being unable to repair the damage - all of this marked me for life. I will never walk away from this until I get my name cleared and get justice against those responsible. That is all there is to it and it isn't going to change no matter what that sick woman and her corrupt father try.
I already know that for most of you, attempting to point out the real Michelle Manweiler/Dickerman will be like arguing with a brick wall, especially those close to the Manweilers. I've never tried to hide the fact that those within the Manweiler circle providing direct aid to me are small in number. Most of those on her side are so foolish that this woman could be convicted in court and sent to jail, and you'd still never admit that she's a bad person. For those who know Ms. Manweiler through her relationship with John Dickerman, I have every confidence that one day you'll see that I was right about this woman.
If this marriage ever ends in divorce (roughly half of them do after all), I've no doubt you'll see the proof that this woman isn't the sweet innocent thing she passes herself off as. Don't mistake this statement for wishing for it to happen, while I do want only the worst for Ms. Manweiler in her life, the statement on divorce is merely a statement of an unfortunate fact of marriage today and nothing more. I know right now that those of you who know her through Mr. Dickerman think she's the greatest thing to ever happen to him. But I'm confident that if it does ever go sour, Ms. Manweiler will show you who she really is deep down. If you're a relative or friend of Mr. Dickerman, if I were in your shoes I'd hope that day never happens - because if the marriage goes downhill it won't be a pretty sight for John Dickerman. Look at the outrageous penalties I received in 2006 and you'll see a glimpse of the future should the relationship ever come to divorce court. I guarantee she'll do everything in her power to harm him in court. I'm sure that you won't listen until it happens, so by all means ignore the warning.
As for work taking up my time, a recent development may eat up more time depending on the work load. I'm being shifted to another contract with a higher priority due to a heavy need by the USCG for an experienced designer's services for a year. This will involve a different ship class, and while I will miss not currently working on the WMSL class, this is an opportunity for me to preform more of the engineering side of my job than I have been doing on the current WMSL project. It may or may not eat up more time, we'll have to see. However, I'm still going to make time for working on my legal issue.
After taking time to step back and evaluate my position, I've come to the conclusion that I likely need to take a very drastic move to clear my name. I'm still intending on working with the post-conviction attorney I was working with previously, as she was quite willing to help me and knew of a few ways of getting the felony thrown out. However, this is going to be expensive and is thus not feasible for the short-term. There is no time limit however to take these measures she found, so it will be used as a last resort.
In the mean time I will prep for the drastic step I'll have to take to get this matter resolved and clear my record. While I'm preparing, I'll take some measures to restore my rights that were stripped from me with this charge, which is why I've been meeting with a separate post-conviction attorney in the area. It will be cheaper to restore my rights than it will be to clear the charge for the time being, and I can still challenge the felony even with the restoration of rights.
These rights include some deeply important ones to me, such as the right to vote and the right to own a firearm. I also want the 20 years good behavior garbage removed. I've talked to a number of post-conviction attorneys over the years about the removal of the good behavior (I've spoken with many because I wanted to see whether they would say the same things about certain issues, or to see if some knew things the others didn't), and every single one has said it will be easy to get it knocked down to time served.
When I go into the details of the case and the fact that I had zero criminal record, I already get an astonished reaction from every attorney (both post-conviction, standard criminal attorney and even attorneys not involved in criminal law) over what was done to me during the proceedings. But when I bring up the 20 years good behavior, that's when I get the biggest reactions. I've never spoken with an attorney that didn't say that this amount of punishment was insane. Considering every attorney without fail has expressed shock at those penalties and stated that there was no excuse for that, that should tell you even more about Ms. Manweiler. She is a lawyer, and thus she knows that it went too far just as all these other attorneys do. The assistant prosecutor Mr. Platania even stated in court that Ms. Manweiler had seen the plea deal and was in full agreement with all the terms - this was recorded by a reporter who was present and I still have the article to this day.
Every post-conviction attorney I've spoken with said it wouldn't be a problem getting the 20 years good behavior dropped to time served. Every single one has stated that any Judge would be just as shocked as them. It would essentially take an extremely corrupt Judge to allow that amount of good behavior time to stand. I was told that with my lack of a criminal history prior to and after the events of 2006, in addition to my employment in engineering, that no Judge would see 20 years of good behavior as acceptable.
As I said, this specific attorney is different from the one I talked to before who agreed to help me, and I only sought out information related to the good behavior time. However, I believe that I do not need to have the good behavior time removed in order to restore my rights that were taken from me. I've already done the research and do not need an attorney to ask for these rights back, at least not for most of it. I did seek some attorney help and advice on the restoration of my rights, just nothing detailed yet since it was an informal talk outside the office.
One of the rights I want restored is the right to own a firearm, not only for protection but I will admit that it will be a giant middle finger to the Manweilers and the prosecution. Although the prosecution freely admitted that I never threatened anyone with a firearm and never broke any laws related to a firearm, the claim was made that I needed to be a felon in order to never own a gun again. It was actually merely an excuse, because the fact is that there was another option that allowed me to sign over my 2nd amendment rights in exchange for a misdemeanor - an option that as I understand it would have been more effective. Because it turns out that a felony does not permanently bar you from owning a gun contrary to popular belief. A felon can get the right back.
The common misconception among the general public is that once you receive a felony, you can never own a gun again for the rest of your life. This is completely and utterly false. A pardon is the first thing that immediately comes to mind that will restore that right to you. However, there is another option and you don't have to even be pardoned. That's right - a felon who has not been pardoned can still receive the right to own a firearm again. It simply involves requesting the right back from the appropriate authority after some conditions are met.
At first I thought this involved asking the Federal government. This was actually incorrect. If I had received a Federal felony, I would have to go that route, but all I received was a state level felony in Virginia. So I do not have to ask a Federal authority to restore the right, which makes it considerably more easy and assured. If successful, the right to own a firearm will be permanently restored not only in Virginia, but in any state. In addition, the restoration of the right can be requested repeatedly even if it is denied at first. After a set amount of time, I can simply petition again to get the right back. I can keep trying until it finally happens.
I've already been informed that I will most likely get the right restored on the first request, and that I have a considerable amount going for me. A few of the reasons why:
1. I received only one felony. Multiple felonies on your record will make it extremely difficult, if not impossible. Because it is only one charge, it isn't difficult getting the right restored. This is why it's so ironic that the Manweilers had me threatened with multiple felonies just to plead guilty to the one felony count - it would have been extremely difficult getting the right restored with the multiple counts, if not impossible. Giving me one felony actually made it much easier.
2. It is the lowest level of felony you can get. Many people who receive two previous misdemeanor convictions for the same offense (example - DUI) have the third automatically become a class six felony, the same class I have.
3. I had zero criminal record (not even parking tickets) prior to the charge, and have had zero record since. I even had a Department of Defense security clearance at the time I was going through this legal farce in 2006. I've talked to a number of legal professionals (from lawyers, Judges, police officers, probation officers, etc) who look at what took place in 2006 as an act of insanity by the parties involved. So would the individual reviewing my request to restore my 2nd amendment rights. This charge was supposed to be a misdemeanor even if I had been guilty of it. A retired Federal Judge from another state (the son of the elderly woman attending the hearings with my mother) did the research and flat out stated that this was not supposed to be a felony whatsoever. He said the only reason it was being done as a felony was because the Manweilers knew someone that could put influence on the Charlottesville law enforcement.
4. No acts of violence occurred, no firearms laws were ever broken. I never even knew of Ms. Manweiler's location in a city three hours away from me, by her own admission.
5. My previous employment in engineering, and especially my return to that career, puts me in a much different light versus still being unemployed.
In turn, I have a far greater chance of getting the right restored than your typical felon - and I've known felons with worse problems who eventually got the right back. That's how I knew where to look - by talking to the people who went through the steps to get their own rights back. So if Ms. Manweiler/Dickerman and Mr. Platania actually thought that giving me a felony permanently kept me from ever legally owning a firearm again, they aren't very bright lawyers. It would be pretty bad for Ms. Manweiler if someone in engineering knew something about law that even a lawyer didn't know. Even when going through the entire process in 2006, I knew I could eventually get the right restored one day despite Platania's claim. I'm not going to go into details on how the process is done. If Ms. Manweiler doesn't know, she can do her own research like I did - assuming she hasn't done so already.
I'm not worried about mentioning this for Ms. Manweiler to see. It is my understanding that neither Ms. Manweiler/Dickerman or the prosecution would be informed of the fact that I was petitioning to have rights restored or having the good behavior time removed. It would be one thing if it was parole or probation, but removal of good behavior time is not considered important and thus no attempt is made to alert the claimed victim or the prosecution.
In fact the decision to have me removed from probation early was an immediate decision of the probation officer, and no input was given to the prosecution or Ms. Manweiler. The prosecution never even received notice of this because their job ends after the conviction occurs. Ms. Manweiler may or may not have received notice by the legal system that I was off probation, but the point is that even if she received notice, it was only after I was removed from probation. In the case of restoration of rights, it isn't up to Ms. Manweiler or the prosecution and isn't considered their business. So Ms. Manweiler is not given any opportunity for input. I certainly will not mention on here or any other source at what time I will actually be doing these things. I will only bring it up once everything has actually gone through - when it would already be too late to change it.
Since I can keep asking for the rights to be returned after each waiting period finishes, I only have to get lucky once while Ms. Manweiler has to be lucky every single time, and the longer it goes on the more likely it'll succeed. That's not the best of positions for Ms. Manweiler. However, Ms. Manweiler should not hope for these rights to be withheld from me any longer, as it isn't helping her in the least.
The level of harm done to me has only escalated what in reality was nothing more than a childish disagreement. This situation is now far, far beyond that and will not go away for Ms. Manweiler so long as it doesn't go away for me. I was actually getting tired of the disagreement when Ms. Manweiler finally took action, thus she merely ended up fanning the flames of a dying argument - a habit of her's it seems. Had the legal issues of 2006 never occurred, Ms. Manweiler wouldn't be hearing a single thing from me now. All these years she could have been living in Arlington never having to concern herself about butting heads with me ever again. I had a good career, and by now could have had a house, a wife and even kids. Would Ms. Manweiler really be stupid enough to believe I'd still care about our past scuffles after that?
Unfortunately the legal fiasco did occur, all based on Ms. Manweiler's fairy tale account of the situation. Even so, with a misdemeanor, even one caused by a lie, I'd have an incentive to just let it go since I could easily move on with my life without any complications. In my current situation now, with a brand new career and living in a completely new area, I could have just left the past behind me and started fresh.
This is all I wanted during that five months of hell. My life has never been free of issues unfortunately, but it took losing what I had that made me appreciate what I gained in that one year prior to my arrest. In that year I was happy in my life for the first time and actually looked forward to the future. I only fought with Ms. Manweiler due to an old acquaintance joking around about some of the false stories made up by Ms. Manweiler in the past. My only intention was to run my mouth and blow off all the anger I still had towards her. Deep down I had hoped some how Ms. Manweiler and I would bury the hatchet so that we both could move on with our lives. However, I wasn't dumb enough to assume a narcissistic like her would do anything good, so the major intention was just to blow off steam.
During the initial legal problems, all I wanted was a chance to just walk away with my future intact so that I could go back to the life I had. Ms. Manweiler and her parents couldn't have that however, and they made the single dumbest decision of their lives. Now with a felony, the past keeps hounding me and causing trouble for me at every turn. Ms. Manweiler lacks even a shred of common sense if she believed this was going to do anything other than make a minor dispute into a much worse situation. This isn't going to ever go away for her and her parents until this gets fixed. This just went too far, and I'm not going to continue living my life with all the problems this felony continues to cause. Especially since its effects constantly get thrown in my face.
My loss of the right to vote comes up every time there is anything involving elections. Missing the 2008 and 2012 elections bothered me, and it is a frustrating experience to not have that right. Especially since I've done far more in my career to benefit the public interest than Ms. Manweiler, not to mention that I didn't even commit the felony that took the right away in the first place.
I'm sure someone as ignorant and arrogant as Ms. Manweiler thinks it's great that I've been denied the right to vote based on differing beliefs, and I'm willing to bet her husband feels the same way. If so, it shows how truly ignorant they are if they believe a denial of that right is a good thing just because that person has different beliefs. If a person is that intolerant of differing beliefs, then in my opinion they wouldn't be that far off from people like Pol Pot and Hitler. Just because you don't have a desire to kill someone like they did, doesn't mean you don't share the same ignorant mindset as them.
The denial of the right to own a gun however has caused me far more of an issue in day-to-day life than the denial of voting rights, in that it has led to several awkward moments. At least in the case of the right to vote, I can always brush aside any inquiries by saying it's something I don't like to discuss. That at least is understandable by many. It is a little harder to brush it aside when you are at a person's house and they ask you to take a look at their newly purchased firearm, especially when they know you have firearm knowledge.
In a situation like that, it takes some quick thinking to find a way to avoid them bringing out the firearm without raising suspicion of being a felon. I've had a number of coworkers and friends inquire about going shooting at the range some time with me, and every time I've had to find creative ways of dodging the subject without raising suspicion. I've even had to turn down potential relationships and dates when I found out the woman was into shooting sports or hunting.
This as you can imagine only drills home the damage caused by the felony, and increases the amount of anger towards the Manweilers every time it comes up. In addition, every time I lock my door when coming home I have to think about the fact that if someone kicks the door in, I have to depend only on my size and any available weapon to defend myself or defend any loved one with me.
In addition, I've wanted to get back into backpacking, especially in the back-country of Shenandoah National Park. While it is currently legal to carry a firearm in national parks, I can't do so until I get the right restored. Even then it would have to be open carry since I wouldn't be able to get a concealed carry permit, and open carry makes you very unpopular. Out in the back-country there are no police and no phones. Dealing with an armed nut in the woods is bad enough. Against a bear? Without a firearm you are a two-legged lunch. Forget what they say about bear spray - if it has intentions on eating you, you'll likely only piss it off.
A state trooper family friend mentioned to my step-father that he wouldn't even consider stepping foot inside any state or national park without a weapon, and thinks anyone not bringing protection is gambling with their life. So obviously this is something that will constantly be on my mind while hiking. So this is just one of many reasons why I'm fully committed to obtaining the restoration of this right.
The right shouldn't have been taken from me in the first place, and when we get down to it, it shows just how warped the people are who think like Ms. Manweiler. No crime was ever committed with any firearm, by the prosecutions own admission in court. They even admitted I never threatened Ms. Manweiler or her family with a gun. Ms. Manweiler tried to lie on her victim impact statement by claiming this situation involved a "loaded gun". It involved no such thing, again by the prosecution's own admission. If Ms. Manweiler still has any copies of the emails, original copies and not her highly modified ones she turned over to police, she'll see that no where in print did I ever say anything about a "loaded gun" as she had stated in the VIS. Even my former attorney admits on tape that "not only was there never a loaded gun involved, but he never had the intentions of harming Ms. Manweiler, her mother, father or brother, he was a singularly focused young man" (singularly focused on playing computer games as he says previous to the comment).
The simple fact is that this falsely stated motivation for harm was done simply because they didn't like that I owned firearms, and not because I had done anything wrong with one. It specifically involved the fact that I owned a very non-PC firearm. My response is "tough shit", because we don't decide things in this country based on what Ms. Manweiler's personal tastes are. My probation officer said it best when I told him of Platania's comment of doing this to me so I can never own a gun again - "That's not for him to decide, that's for the Constitution and the Virginia General Assembly to decide what you should be able to own".
Ms. Manweiler is the perfect example of the idiots these days who make decisions based on feeling rather than informed opinion. Ms. Manweiler doesn't have a single clue about firearms or their laws. She's no different than other members of that crowd, who either get their information on guns from TV shows, movies or idiot reporters who get their information from those same sources. You don't have a right to an opinion on a subject that you are completely ignorant on. Far as Ms. Manweiler's concerned, people should only be allowed to live their lives by her edict and she is all too willing to hurt innocent people simply because they don't conform to her ignorant opinions - opinions based on fear rather than facts.
What truly would show Ms. Manweiler's lack of common sense is if she not only really believed a felony not only prevented me from ever obtaining a firearm, but if she really thought it wouldn't have the potential to make the situation worse. There is a quote from Shakespeare's "Henry the VIII" that perfectly illustrates a concept Ms. Manweiler should have kept in mind back in 2006:
"Heat not a furnace for your foe so hot
That it do singe yourself"
What this means is that you shouldn't try to do so much harm to an opponent, that it ends up coming back to you in some way - usually at the hands of the same opponent you heaped everything upon. When you cause so much harm to a person, they can't help but desire revenge for what you did to them.
It wasn't the arrest or even the lies of Ms. Manweiler that pushed me too far, in fact I wasn't even angry with her when I was arrested. It was everything that was piled on me to try to cause me maximum harm, that has now given Ms. Manweiler an enemy who has no problem being in her face for the rest of her life. It wasn't enough for the Manweilers to just give me some jail time and a misdemeanor, and leave it at that - especially when she knew she lied to get that in the first place. The Manweilers made sure to pile it on, and that was a really bad idea. What were some of these things, that when added up, really pushed things too far?
* It was being forced to strip naked at the jail in a public area in front of lots of people, tossed a green gown and made to sleep on a cement slab in the suicide watch cell without any justification for it. It wasn't normal procedure as I didn't see it being done to anyone else like it had been done to me. It was done this way because a high up friend of the Manweilers told the law enforcement to cause as much harm as possible.
* It was being denied bond and thus having to resign from my job, while those accused of worse walked out on bail. I had enough time off saved up that if I had been released by the time of the last bail hearing, I'd have kept my job. Then it was the intentional delaying of the sentencing to keep me in jail months longer than necessary (all the Manweiler family's idea, via the email from the prosecutor I posted before). My former boss even kept telling my mother that he could get me back in if I could be released soon, since I had resigned instead of being fired. But due to being delayed and kept in jail for so long, there wasn't a position open anymore when that release finally came.
* It was having my family hire a lawyer for an insane amount of money out of desperation, only to have that lawyer not only refuse to do his job, but verbally abuse me and family members while doing it. There was no doubt he was doing this because of Ms. Manweiler being a fellow attorney, but I personally believe her father could have paid off my former counsel to throw the case. There is enough on the tape recordings to suggest something else was going on behind the scenes.
* It was being threatened out of my right to a fair trial that I'm supposed to be guaranteed under law to have - not only to cover up for Ms. Manweiler's actions, but to avoid inconveniencing an overseas trip she had planned after graduating from UVA. God forbid I get a fair trial and interrupt Ms. Manweiler's trip to Venice.
* It was being threatened out of even firing my incompetent lawyer when the prosecution got wind of it. They knew if this went to trial it would reveal what they did, or sink them into deeper trouble to try covering it up more. It was not only desperation by the prosecution, but also a Federal crime - one my lawyer admits to occurring on tape.
* It was having a false felony charge forced down my throat, especially when there were better and much fairer options available - and especially considering all parties knew I didn't even commit it let alone deserve it.
* It was receiving outrageous penalties that still shock lawyers today - even pedophiles don't get some of the penalties I received, hell even a rich UVA student who stabbed a firefighter to death didn't get as much jail time assigned to him for voluntary manslaughter as I did for written threats. That guy received three years in a white collar prison, while I received five years suspended sentence - meaning the potential to spend more time behind bars than a man who KILLED SOMEONE. Clearly saying mean things over the internet to a rich UVA student is so much worse than stabbing someone more than a dozen times and ending their life. Go look it up, the guy who did it was named Andrew Austin (I believe that's the correct spelling).
* It was spending years struggling to rebuild my life, including daily pain and injury from having to work a physically demanding job (the job I had when first getting out of prison) with a muscular disorder. I caused a great deal of physical pain to myself because of my condition just trying to keep from losing that job, because I feared there wouldn't be another - only to lose that job despite all the harm I did to myself.
That's just a sample of everything done to me, not the full list. Do you people even question why I, my family and my friends hate this woman and her parents? Ms. Manweiler and her parents did more than just cross a line, and I'm not just letting them walk away from all that. Especially not when I have a false felony charge rubbed in my face every single day. Ms. Manweiler and her parents can claim they had nothing to do with it, but the prosecutors tell a very different story - the prosecution's version says it was the Manweilers pushing for all these things to happen. So to those siding with the Manweiler family - this is what you are supporting. As I said, you don't get to back up the Manweilers and yet claim it's not intended to agree with the extent of what was done.
If you side with the Manweilers, it means you also think it's acceptable for corrupt things to be done to someone against the laws and Constitution of the United States. It means you believe people should be punished not for what they have done, but for who they did it to. It means you believe that those with money and influence should get special treatment by the legal system. It means that you think it's acceptable for someone to get punishments not given to child molesters and rapists, for simply saying means things to a rich UVA student. It means you give a nod to all the evil things done in the Manweiler name. If you stand by this woman when it comes to this case, then you agree with every excessive and corrupt thing done in her name, and that makes you just as sick as her and those aiding her in 2006. Thinking that you can just remaining neutral isn't going to cut it either, and it certainly doesn't make you a better person. As Desmond Tutu once said, "If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor". However, when it comes to most on the Manweiler's side of the fence, I'm just talking to a brick wall aren't I?
Eventually I will challenge the felony, and this is very important because I've been shown that I can't live my life in peace with it on my record in any form. I once brought up that there was a recent incident that further pushed me to taking action against the false charge. I'm not going into details here, only to say that a person I was involved with did a background check on me, and they have stated that they do not want anything further to do with me. This wasn't a pleasant thing to have happen.
If you're thinking that I'm angry at Ms. Manweiler after that incident, that's an understatement. This situation is not going away for Ms. Manweiler until it goes away for me, and there isn't a damn thing she can do to hurt me that will change that - Ms. Manweiler should check her track record on how well that's been working out for her. As I said before, Ms. Manweiler crossed a line she shouldn't have. It was a huge mistake. In the past this was a minor dispute that would have resolved itself. As I explained before, had the legal events of 2006 never took place I could have had a very promising career, a house of my own and even a wife and kids. I wouldn't have given a damn about this woman or her crappy attitude at that point. Very stupid decision on her part, because she took something minor and gave me a damn good reason to hold a grudge for life.
Even with the legal issues of 2006 - receiving misdemeanors, even for crimes I didn't commit, would have still given me the chance of being able to walk away. With this move to another area and a new place of work, I could have just decided to forget about what was done to me in the past had I just received misdemeanors. But with this felony? As you can see, there isn't a option for me to just walk away because it just keeps causing trouble for me. It will constantly be a problem for the rest of my life as long as it remains on my record. That will not stand any longer and I don't care what it takes. No matter what I'm going to get justice for what was done to me.
One day this situation will be brought into the open, and not only will Ms. Manweiler and her entire family look bad for their own actions, but all the underhanded things done in their name by law enforcement will smear their reputations as well. When everything done to me in 2006 is laid out, it stinks of absolute corruption and special treatment of the Manweilers. That will stick right with the Manweiler family. I'm confident that karma will give Ms. Manweiler and her parents a massive wake-up call one day, and they will deserve every inch of it. They should also get the same amount of mercy that they shown me - absolutely none.
I think I've let this post go on quite long enough. I do want to make the mention that I went ahead and closed the "leaks" on my facebook page. Those individuals that I even remotely suspect could be passing info, especially if they have never talked with me, will only be able to view things that I make public and nothing else. I never posted anything I cared about Ms. Manweiler finding out, but I prefer being able to selectively choose what information she can access.
The two I've been working on will likely have to be revised based on this new writing. How many posts I produce is dependent on the amount of time I have. This doesn't mean that I'm any less engaged in this situation or any less dedicated to getting justice. If those monitoring my page believed I was giving up simply because I didn't post in awhile, you were quite off the mark. My resolve to clear my name and receive justice has only increased, it is just my desire to post has waned. When it comes to this blog, my writing about events that hurt and make me extremely angry isn't exactly a form of recreation, so don't expect anything in the volume of postings I've previously done.
