Update - PlagScans, Motions, Police Investigations, and Prepping for Things to Come

I wanted to post an update on two issues at the start of the holiday season, since things are usually very busy for me during this month.

University of Virginia and my blog as an apparent source

The first issue relates to the previous discovery of a UVA student using my blog as a reference, likely for some paper they were writing. When I first had a hit from PlagScan, a service for teachers to help with combating plagiarism, it was a visit to the main blog front page. Prior to any PlagScan hits I had received views from the University of Virginia that originally started with my Andrew Alston post. The individual then went through my blog in depth, focusing on my evidence of Michelle Manweiler's evidence tampering and the threat email from prosecutor Joseph Platania.

When I received that first PlagScan hit, I had no way of knowing whether they reference my blog just on the Andrew Alston case. With the first hit being a general hit to the front page of the blog, there was no way to know what exactly was being referenced. That has now changed when I recently received two additional hits from PlagScan yet again. It is now confirmed for me that my actual case was referenced in whatever work this UVA student turned in. The two hits pointed to a very specific post on this blog - the post titled "Recent Impact and Further Explanations on Evidence Against Michelle Dickerman (Manweiler)".

This post is one of the more important posts on this blog. In it I step-by-step break down how Michelle Annette Manweiler (now Michelle Annette Dickerman) committed a criminal act in 2006. I do this using the very evidence she provided to police herself in 2006. In that linked post above, I prove that Manweiler tampered with the evidence that the Charlottesville law enforcement based their entire case on. I additionally demonstrate that this tampering was done with the intent of misleading law enforcement as to what actually happened - thus showing that Manweiler had criminal intent with her actions.

The hit to just that post suggests that my case was discussed in a UVA student's school assignment. I looked through that post before writing this update, and there was only one extremely brief mention of Andrew Alston. There wasn't a detailed discussion on his case, I just said Andrew Alston was a previous example of favoritism. Thus there wasn't anything to quote on the Alston case, certainly not worthy of two consecutive hits from the PlagScan service.

Obviously the hit wasn't just because of the mere mention of Andrew Alston's name, as I have plenty of posts bringing up that case. In fact there aren't many posts on here that don't at least bring up his name. None of those other posts received PlagScan hits, but the Manweiler Evidence post received not one but two separate hits in this recent viewing. That suggests there were a few things quoted/cited from that post.

So it does indeed appear that my case from 2006 was discussed in a UVA school assignment. Doesn't necessarily make it a law school student's paper, but it is certainly interesting to at least have Michelle Manweiler's actions brought up at her beloved Alma mater of University of Virginia. I've said it before that Manweiler obviously wasn't thinking clearly if she believed she was ever going to walk away from her actions in 2006. You don't get to fake evidence, lie about events, push for special treatment, and inflict severe harm over something stupid - and then expect it to all to just disappear. If she wanted that, she should have thought twice about pushing it as far as she did. Instead of going away this issue is now escalating. Even to the point that her criminal act is apparently being discussed in a school assignment at her prized university.

One thing of note before jumping off this subject and on to the next - keep in mind that the PlagScan hit doesn't mean that any plagiarism took place. Citing something from my blog as a source would result in such a hit as well. Given the span of time between the very first PlagScan hit and the more recent hits, it is reasonable to assume that this involved two different assignments turned in on different dates. If this assumption is correct, obviously no plagiarism happened the first time if the student was still attending the school to push out a second assignment.


The Motion Update - Delays, Views, and Rudman at it again

For the second issue I'm going to discuss in this post, the district attorney's office still hasn't responded to the motion. Even with the murder trial against that twat Fields concluded, and the fact that my views certainly show I caught someone's attention, I can't say I'm expecting a response for the rest of December. They still have the sentencing phase for that trial to prepare for, and I'm sure the response to my motion is being deliberately delayed by the prosecution. So I figured making an update on this so early for the month isn't a problem.

As I said, I'm sure Platania has been deliberately withholding comment. While he has been handling a big trial, Platania has assistant prosecutors who could comment on my motion instead. It also doesn't require any effort or time, since no further comment is needed beyond "We don't have any issues with the request". There really isn't any excuse to not have had this small motion resolved already.

The only excuse to even contest it is if the evidence in that sealed file would impact their office in a negative way. However, the clerk has stated it's just my PSI. I have no reason to doubt her, especially since I wouldn't be surprised if a clerk is legally allowed to view the contents of a sealed file. I'm also sure that Platania isn't stupid enough to walk into a trap by calling for a hearing on such a minor motion.

That means the only reason for Platania's office to not have responded by now is to just be his typical pompous and obstinate self. I'm sure he isn't happy about me calling out his actions in the motion. Like Manweiler, he was delusional enough to think all of this was going to go away for him. They are both discovering that this will never happen. The stunt they pulled in 2006 isn't going to go away for anyone until my name gets cleared and someone takes responsibility for the damages to my life.

If Platania believes he's actually accomplishing anything by delaying the response, the reality is that it is irrelevant. If I understand correctly, Platania has a time limit to comment before the Judge's decision stands. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but I find it really hard to believe that a respondent can delay a decision indefinitely this way. The legal system may move at a snail's pace generally, but to be able to stave off a judge's decision forever by withholding comment sounds massively broken to me. Which is why I doubt it works that way. I believe he has no more than 90 days to comment, and he's definitely blown through much of that.

I'm also currently operating on the belief that the clerk's statement on the contents is true. So a delay on receiving those documents doesn't affect me. There isn't any point for me to delay anything for items that aren't what I had hoped for. Since I'm going forward regardless of the status of the motion, Platania isn't going to delay the inevitable for long. What delay he is getting isn't due to his actions.

The only thing that has held me back for the moment is work, and I'm not expecting that to delay me that much longer. Indeed my FOIA requests are likely going to be mailed out this month, and that is just a prelude to my visit with Internal Affairs. One way or another this is getting resolved and someone is going to answer for what was done to me. I'm not going to ever let this drop, and I have no problem going as far as necessary to get justice.

As I said, I'm sure Platania is pissed off by the motion (there's worse coming their way before this gets finished). It certainly explains the views I'm receiving. One view that caught my eye proves that Rudman is attempting to investigate me again, most assuredly on the orders of Platania. The first sign came from a bank worker on the Capital One ISP searching for Detective Rudman. Given that I actually have an account with that bank, it did raise an eyebrow. That alone wasn't enough to convince me it had anything to do with me. It took what happened later to prove it does indeed have something to do with me. And it's definitely made me a bit angry. Well angrier than I already am with this case.

As I said this individual working at Capital One searched for Rudman. Their google search brought them to the specific post I did on the officer that is simply titled "Detective Nicholas Rudman". It didn't raise my suspicions at first that something was up, as I often get people searching for Rudman coming across that post (it's in the most popular list for a reason). I only took notice due to having an account with that bank, but I dismissed it as coincidence. But when I received a notification from Linkedin that someone working at Capital One bank was searching for me days later on social media - well that makes it not so easy to dismiss anymore.


I've already checked the Rudman post and my name isn't mentioned anywhere, and this individual never looked at any other posts besides that one. The four page views shown is either an issue with the tracker, or a sign that the individual refreshed or reopened the tab more than once, because they only viewed the one post listed. They never even went to the main page. I've also avoided using my full name on this blog, usually only going so far as to only put my first name down if at all. I'm sure if someone poured through the posts they could piece it together, but that's not what this individual did.

So someone working for Capital One was looking up Detective Rudman during a time I'm receiving increased views after the end of the C'ville murder trial. Days later I receive notice that someone working at Capital One was searching for my name, and clearly for someone with my name in my area of residence for me to actually show up in the results. My name is a rather common one, so someone had to be using very specific search terms to have my profile show up - especially since they were clearly based in Richmond. When you top it off with the fact that this is also a bank that I have an account with it just seems like far too much of a coincidence.

Given my line of work in maritime engineering there isn't any reason I would show up for someone working at a bank. Based on my Linkedin notifications the only other industries that have me pop up in search results are companies related to the marine industry. So the only reason I would have shown up in the search results for someone at a bank was if they were searching for my name and my area. To have someone at a bank I have an account with searching for Rudman and then later for me - there just isn't any way to dismiss that as pure coincidence. Especially not with the other views I'm seeing.

I'm not sure what to fully make of it. I'm not seeing what purpose the police could possibly have calling up a bank I have a credit card with. First, how would they even know I have an account there? Obviously it would require Rudman running a credit history check on me, but I better not find out he's pulling that kind of stunt. His head's on the chopping block already when this entire thing goes public. With distrust and even hate being leveled at cops in the media today, does Rudman really want to go on the record as having run credit history checks on a guy who has shown proof that Rudman got it wrong in 2006? That's not going to be a good look. It'll be seen as harassment because that's exactly what it is.

They certainly didn't need to contact any of banks to get my address. My contact info, including my address, were listed on the motion I filed. So they can't be trying to find out where I live since they have that info already. Not to mention you don't need to call up a bank or even be a cop to find that kind of info out. All you need is a connection to the internet these days. As a cop all Rudman had to do was call DMV.

I'm very interested to see what the legality of Rudman's credit check investigation is. He was obviously operating in a law enforcement capacity. Even if he tried to do this "off the books" on his own time, no bank is going to give private information to someone unless they are a police officer. And there is no purpose to him calling up a bank I'm a member of other than to get information. So even if he's not using department resources in a private investigation, he's still using his authority as a police officer to obtain information that he's not suppose to be accessing in such a manner. And would he not require a search warrant to obtain financial information from my bank even if it were done officially? Certainly C'ville law enforcement can't be stupid enough to play that game again, because that'll just end up getting me the media attention I need to blow this whole thing wide open. Then again, Rudman investigating my financial records without legal authority would be just as massively stupid.

Clearly this shows the Charlottesville law enforcement is trying to poke around in my life again. Just like they did when Rudman was first downloading pages from this blog to analyze the code so he could hide his views. This kind of nonsense is making me even angrier, and that isn't going to help them in the least when it comes time for them to answer for all this. The only thing this has accomplished is to give me more ammo to take to Internal Affairs. I'm sure they will be quite interested to know why Rudman is clearly contacting banks to get information on me.

I wasn't having any high hopes for Internal Affairs at first, but with Rudman looking up financial information on someone who has evidence proving law enforcement screwed up in 2006, it just looks far too bad for them to not step in. It would make the IA department look corrupt and inept for them to not take action here. Rudman has likely just handed me enough to sink his department and discredit them all, and he would have certainly done it on the orders of Joseph Platania.

Rudman and Platania are well aware I've caught what they did in 2006, and given the views on my blog they have seen more than enough evidence to show Manweiler faked the emails they based the charges on. If neither Rudman or Platania did anything wrong in 2006, then they should be doing everything in their power to make it right. They should be all to willing to either discussing things with me and dismissing the charge to restore my rights (something completely within their power to do), and they definitely should be investigating Michelle Manweiler. A competent and irreproachable law enforcement agency would be investigating Michelle Manweiler (Dickerman) right now given the evidence they have been shown. The fact that they have no interest in doing the right thing only helps demonstrate that they have something to hide.

Granted I have no way of knowing if they are indeed investigating Manweiler. But given that Rudman is clearly looking into my financial records, that doesn't suggest that they are planning on knocking on Michelle Manweiler's door for an arrest any time soon. Nothing in possession of the bank would have helped in an investigation of Manweiler's wrongdoing. So the Charlottesville law enforcement appears to still continue to focus on harassing me instead of fixing their mistakes or dealing with a rich UVA alumni who lied to them. That's going to cost them a great deal if they keep it up. No one is going to find it acceptable that they continue to harass me when it is blatantly clear that Manweiler lied to them. The fact that Rudman and Platania continue to plays games like this only further proves their guilt and their cooperation with Michelle Manweiler.

I'm going to make sure that this, and their past attempts at playing games, go public with everything else they've done. I doubt the public and media will look very favorable on law enforcement that knows they got it wrong but still continues to harass the person they harmed - especially in the climate of today. And there is enough evidence and shady behavior on the part of the Charlottesville police and District Attorney's Office to justify an investigation of them at the state and federal levels.

As I said, this game by Rudman and Platania go back to around 2011/2012. It was after Michelle Manweiler contacted the Charlottesville law enforcement and pointed them towards this blog. It happened after I posted some of the information from my former attorney, specifically about the deal he offered to avoid a felony charge. A deal that all attorneys and law enforcement members who I've shown it to have said was extremely reasonable - and that there was no excuse for the Manweilers and the prosecutors rejecting it for the route they ended up taking. Indeed, had they accepted it none of this would be going on right now. I was prepared to accept misdemeanors, even to crimes I did not commit, so long as I was allowed to walk away. Everything that happened afterwards has not only led to this point, but ended up handing me all the evidence I need to destroy lives and careers.

Obviously Manweiler contacted either Rudman or Platania after I posted that letter, because I began receiving views from the City of Charlottesville ISP. Detective Rudman then began using methods to attempt to hide his views while he investigated my blog (I've previously posted the evidence proving Rudman was doing this). It was pointed out to me by a family member that perhaps Manweiler hadn't been shown this deal by the prosecutors, and that her contact with law enforcement afterwards was to raise hell over not being shown this.

I had actually considered that idea before it was mentioned to me, especially given her parents hopped on the blog to view it before she made that LE contact. I dismissed that scenario as unlikely. Platania and his boss Chapman made it quite clear throughout the case that they were keeping the Manweilers appraised of everything. It was specifically said that Michelle Manweiler and her parents wanted the felony charge and would accept nothing else. This is also the impression my former attorney had, and he confirms this on tape.

Platania also stated at the guilty plea hearing that Ms. Manweiler had read the plea agreement and was "in full agreement with the terms of the plea deal". The terms of this deal, especially the 20 years good behavior contingency (admitted that day by Platania to be the most Charlottesville circuit court had ever handed out in its history), has been described as "sick" by lawyers I've spoken to about my options. While both Platania and Chapman are snakes and can't be trusted further than they can be thrown - the same exact thing can be said of Michelle Manweiler and her parents.

As I said, others have agreed that those terms were ridiculous and even sick. Manweiler definitely knew of those terms. She was a VSB licensed attorney at the time, so she was completely aware of how overboard the so called "deal" was. She did nothing about it in 2006. In the years since, Manweiler has expressed no remorse for her lies nor for the acts committed in her name, nor ever attempt to fix the wrongs she has committed. Indeed her only response so far, besides contacting Charlottesville law enforcement, has been to leave an insult in the comments of a post.

In addition we both live in the Arlington county region, and thus have actually crossed paths by chance with each other at public events and locations. I don't bother showing that I'm aware of her presence when it's happened, but during some of those times I've observed Manweiler express amusement upon seeing me. That amusement doesn't suggest someone who is the least bit remorseful, or even someone who was lied to by the prosecution. Instead it just demonstrates mental illness on her part, given that only someone with mental issues would find amusement in harming someone over lies she made to law enforcement. It takes some bad wiring in the head to knowingly receive such massive favoritism and special treatment and not even find anything wrong with that. As I've pointed out before, I'm sure the hypocrite would claim how such things are wrong in other cases, even as Manweiler grins to herself about how she has personally allowed it to benefit her.

So no, I don't believe for a moment that Manweiler's contact with Platania or Rudman the first time was her complaining about them not showing her that letter. But that's just one reason I'm filing the FOIA request for all email messages Manweiler has exchanged with Rudman/Platania. Internal Affairs can also obtain any emails Rudman/Platania have deleted and get their phone records. I intend on finding out the truth of what's been going on between these corrupt individuals.

There is more than enough evidence to suggest continued cooperation between Michelle Annette Manweiler, Detective Rudman, prosecutor Joseph Platania, and previously former prosecutor Warner Chapman. In fact, some of the views I've received since filing the motion suggest that even in his retirement Warner Chapman is still being kept in the loop. All four named individuals stand to lose if the details of this case were to make it out to the public, so it makes sense they continue to keep in contact with each other.

I've mentioned before that the cover up in 2006 wasn't some grand courtroom conspiracy. Now granted Ms. Manweiler (and potentially her father) had outside influence push law enforcement, the courts and even the jail to treat this case as being more serious than what it actually was. The fact a corrections officer warned me that "someone has it out for you" suggests probable reasons behind things like the denial of bond, etc. But when it comes to the actual cover up only four people knew what Manweiler had done to the emails at the time - Michelle Manweiler, Joseph Platania, Warner Chapman, and Detective Rudman.

All four of those named individuals stood to suffer consequences if any of this were revealed in 2006. It doesn't take much to derail the legal system when the prosecutors and the investigating officer have full control of all the evidence - and possess the will to cover up their mistakes. The police and prosecutors didn't think they had anything to gain by admitting to the public that they screwed up. Better to just throw me under the bus and be done with it - nobody will ever know, right?

Throw in the motivation to avoid lawsuit and scandal, and you have a recipe for corruption. It wasn't a bad plan in theory. Where they all went wrong was that they got greedy with the penalties, and they allowed all the evidence to fall into my hands because they trusted an idiot defense attorney. Doesn't help that Manweiler was also arrogant enough to be blatant with what she did.

My former attorney William Johnson appears to have realized what was going on, given that he sounds like he is panicking on the tape recording when my mother demands he explain the March 12th timestamp on emails Manweiler dated as being sent in April and May. He likely wasn't in the loop with the others but I believe he knew what was happening. He held no desire to see the woman he gushed about constantly through the entire case ruin her budding career. Having a defense attorney play along was a welcome advantage for the four other guilty parties - and likely the reason prosecutor Chapman panicked and threatened me when I attempted to fire my attorney.

The blatant corruption and obvious cover up by law enforcement is just one reason why I'm not concerned about any backlash from the motion, the FOIA requests, or the IA report. I'm not even worried despite the apparent attempt to investigate my financial history. I want people to keep something in mind as you view my blog. If my statements on what took place in 2006 were complete garbage, action would have been taken against me long before now. For all of the monitoring by Manweiler, Rudman and Platania since the first appearance of this blog - none have ever lifted a finger against me despite the seriousness of the situation. They haven't touched me because they know that's a trap.

The reality is that they can't ever move on me without risking their actions generating quite a lot of media interest. Certainly any arrest or search will bring media attention instantly. They would be idiots if they thought that this time I wouldn't speak to the media. My family knows what went on as well, and has access to the various locations where saved evidence is stored away. Then you have this blog of course. I've saved backups of it online, ready to deploy it again just in case they try to pull any stunts. There is nothing they can do to stop people from finding out what they did. All of their actions will come into the light. And they all know just how bad their actions from 2006 will look.

Too much went on for there to have not been something illegal and underhanded taking place during this case. Just take a glance at the motion I filed in Charlottesville court recently (posted up here), and you'll immediately see just how shady things look. That wasn't even bringing up all that happened, and I wasn't even trying to make their actions look corrupt and underhanded. Merely stating the facts did that on its own. With the negative view of law enforcement in the media and public eye lately things would go very, very bad for Charlottesville were they dumb enough to try me.

I'll give you a nice summary and you tell me how all this looks. Feel free to skip these bullet points if you already know the story.

Listing of incidents during the 2006 case

• Previous to the 2006 case, Michelle Manweiler attempted to falsely accuse me of a crime during a dispute when she attended William & Mary College (around 2000/2001). An officer John Coleman of the campus police came to my family's home stating his intent to arrest me. In front of my mother and sisters (thus there are witnesses to this), he said that Michelle Manweiler accused me of driving a car down to W&M and following her around the campus with the vehicle. The officer attempted to force a confession, refusing to listen when I denied doing any such thing. Once it was pointed out that I didn't have a driver's license or vehicle, and thus it wasn't possible for me to have done what Manweiler accused me of, the officer could not leave the house fast enough. No arrest ever took place despite the officer traveling from Williamsburg for that stated purpose. The officer also took no action against Michelle Manweiler for her rather serious lie, instead demanding that both of us drop the entire thing. My mother and sisters all recall this event and what the officer said - that Manweiler was the one accusing me of this false act. This establishes a past of Manweiler lying to police, and a very similar accusation would be attempted again in 2006 by her. Both my mother and I informed Detective Rudman of this incident but we were ignored.

• In 2006, Michelle Manweiler waits months before taking any action. Despite claiming in her victim impact statement that she was in fear for her safety, her roommates safety, her coworkers, her family, her friends, the children, her dog, her goldfish, etc. You get the point. Yet she waited until graduating law school before she actually did anything. I think that's just mentally ill if you believe all those people are in danger yet make them wait for help because you have exams.

• Unlike C'ville police claims to the contrary made to the media, I was actually arrested in Hampton. Two Hampton police officers ambushed me right down the road from my apartment the day of my arrest. My landlady watched them put the cuffs on me from her house. After the interview with Detective Rudman I was put in the Hampton Lockup for morning transport by the sheriff's department. Later that evening Detective Rudman returns to the Hampton lockup. I witness him telling the booking officer that he was halfway to Charlottesville when his supervisor calls him to make him turn around and bring me to Charlottesville that night. After dragging me down to Charlottesville themselves, the police department tells the news media that they arrested me in Charlottesville attempting to confront Michelle Manweiler over her protective order - that I didn't even know existed until Rudman told me about it while in custody in Hampton. This helps the police and prosecution to sell to the public an otherwise stupid case as being something more than what it really was.

• Not long after my arrest, the Charlottesville police claimed they "lost" the recording of the interview with Detective Rudman. This tape made it all the way from Hampton to Charlottesville intact. Yet it was "misplaced" after the prosecution listened to it. After this "loss" of critical evidence (that the prosecution insisted was so much in their favor), both Rudman and Platania began claiming in court that I had confessed to all charges. This was a complete work of fiction, but by conveniently losing the record of that interview it came down to my word versus the word of a police officer. I'll give you three guesses who the court was going to believe. My lawyer confirms this happened on tape recordings made by my mother.

• The evidence used against me were printouts created by Michelle Manweiler and handed to Detective Rudman. In this day and age of Photoshop, Detective Rudman and the Charlottesville law enforcement weren't competent enough to verify the evidence before charging me with a crime and throwing me in jail.

• Detective Rudman, with the aid of Magistrate Edward Rex, charged me with a class 6 felony when the code of Virginia says such a crime is a class 1 misdemeanor. I had no criminal record not even a parking ticket. No history of violence. I had never raised a hand to Michelle Manweiler, nor had I even been in the woman's presence since 1999. The first time she laid eyes on me (well actually stuck her nose in the air in a literal sense) was the preliminary hearing after my arrest. My felony conviction on this false charge appears to be a first for the state of Virginia, and a definite first for the city of Charlottesville. 

• This excessive punishment was done solely because Michelle Manweiler was a student of the University of Virginia. Even corrections officers told me this was normal in Charlottesville and that they were not surprised what was going on. I was told that if you punch a UVA student in the face in Charlottesville you might as well have punched a cop in the eyes of the legal system there. I was even warned by a corrections officer that I needed my lawyer to get a change of venue because "someone has it out for you". The Andrew Alston case is an excellent example of Charlottesville's behavior - where a rich UVA student stabbed someone to death and received a mere slap on the wrist as penalty. I actually received steeper penalties, with the exception of my five years suspended versus his two and a half years in a white collar prison. But with the prosecution's threats, I'd have likely spent more time behind bars than a rich UVA student who stabbed someone to death. I wouldn't have been put in a white collar prison like he was - Warner Chapman and Joseph Platania threatened to send me to the most violent of the region's prisons if I refused their demands. 

• Michelle Manweiler was a University of Virginia law school graduate. Not only do lawyers cover for each other, but prosecutor Warner Chapman graduated from there and prosecutor Joe Platania works there as an adjunct professor. There is every chance that Manweiler and Platania had known each at UVA before my case happened. Michelle Manweiler also has a rich father (Gregory Manweiler) who was the chief financial officer of a bank, graduated from University of Virginia and William and Mary like his daughter, and was a donor to the university. I've heard he even teaches at William and Mary now - the same college whose campus police covered for his daughter in the first instance of her lying to law enforcement. In the past I've seen photos of him shaking hands with politicians, and he thus potentially had enough contacts to influence what happened in Charlottesville. It is possible my lawyer's lack of desire to do his job was via financial influence from her father, but I have no evidence of this at the moment so it's just a belief and opinion of mine currently. I have good reason to believe it took place however.

• The emails exhibited blatant tampering that would have taken criminal negligence to not have noticed by Rudman and Edward Rex. One email has "To Rick" when as my lawyer notes it should say "From Rick". In the evidence post I show how this proves Manweiler was forwarding my emails. My attorney admits on tape that from the very beginning I told him there were things in these emails I never recognized saying. He dismisses it to my mother as a non-issue in the recordings. Problem is that I had no knowledge at the time that Manweiler had done anything to the emails. So there was no reason for me to make that statement (her previous lies never involved evidence tampering far as I know) - I genuinely did not recognize many statements in those emails and my lawyer confirms I said this on tape recording. 

• Additionally Manweiler wrote fake dates on individual sheets, so that she could claim more emails were sent to her than what was truthfully received. There were March 12th timestamps on emails Manweiler dated as being sent to her in April and May. Did Rudman think Ms. Manweiler had a time machine? How much easier did this have to get for Detective Rudman, Edward Rex, Joseph Platania and Warner Chapman?! When my mother points this problem out to my former attorney on the tape recordings, it sounds like there is panic in his voice and he clearly wants to stop talking about those discrepancies. What defense attorney doesn't want to talk about evidence that could win his case? 

• Because Manweiler had given them individual sheets with her false dates written on them, Charlottesville law enforcement was operating on the belief that she only gave them bits and pieces of emails. Understand that folks - they didn't even ask her for the emails in entirety, they just accepted bits of emails and not the whole thing. Had they been competent enough to ask Manweiler to give them the entire emails, they would have caught her right away. Since she wrote fake April and May dates on page 2 and 3 of a March 12th email, Manweiler would never have been able to give them the April and May emails in entirety. Because the April and May emails never existed! They were three sheets of one email - not three different emails like Rudman and the prosecutors believed! 

• Detective Rudman, Joseph Platania and Warner Chapman clearly became aware of Michelle Manweiler's tampering very early in the case. This is because by the last bond hearing, my lawyer was informed that the police had "damaged" my computer hard drive so considerably that they couldn't get anything off of it. For nine months! This was the most critical evidence of the case, and was a major source of verification of Manweiler's email printouts. It would have proven that she tampered with the emails they based the entire case on. In addition, there were emails that Manweiler withheld from police that would have proven I never threatened her. 

• Not only does my lawyer admit this computer damage happened on tape, but I witnessed Joseph Platania admitting to this in court at the final bond hearing. It was the only time I witnessed him get upset and off balance during the entire case. When my lawyer mentions the damage to the judge, Platania gets red in the face and glares at my attorney. He begins to stammer and try to tell the judge that they don't need anything off my computer. Yes ladies and gentlemen, the incompetent Joseph Platania thought they didn't need to verify bits and pieces of emails handed to them by the claimed victim for a felony case! Screw proper legal procedure and evidence handling! Manweiler obviously traveled through time to retrieve April and May emails so she could print them up in March! Perfectly reasonable explanation for that timestamp, let's not question it right? Needless to say that this damage to the computer was a lie, so they never had to retrieve evidence that would proven the whole case was built on a lie.

• Right after hearing of my arrest, Michelle Manweiler took down her Myspace account. This erased all email evidence on her account - thus destroying a major source of evidence against her. This was obstruction of justice and interfering with a police investigation. Especially since as a lawyer Michelle Manweiler knew better. Even my lawyer admits "she was wrong, she shouldn't have done that" on tape recording. My lawyer admitted to me that Manweiler told him she did this, when he spoke to her at the final protective order hearing. He records this in his notes on that hearing and admits to it on the tape recordings my mother took. I also possess a news article that states Manweiler deleted her profile after my arrest. I mistakenly said it was a Daily Press article, but it was actually the write-up from one of the local news stations in Hampton. Additionally, when my mother saw this mentioned in the article, she attempted to check that Manweiler's profile was gone. She confirms that Manweiler's profile was gone. This means another massive repository of evidence was "lost", and exculpatory evidence withheld by Manweiler (that the prosecution was informed of) was lost along with those emails. Joseph Platania and Warner Chapman know of this incident and yet took no action.

• Between the lost tape of my interview with Detective Rudman, the damage to my computer hard drive preventing verification of blatantly tampered emails, and Michelle Manweiler's own destruction of evidence with the deletion of her account after my arrest - seems an awful lot of extremely important evidence just managed to up and disappear at such a critical point in time didn't it? I'm betting an investigation will show that never before has so much evidence been "lost" by the Charlottesville law enforcement. What a shocking series of coincidences, right? Are you starting to see what happened here? I'm sure you can tell just why this all will look bad for Manweiler, Rudman, Platania, and Chapman when the story finally comes out. The conclusion people will reach is extremely obvious, especially in this climate towards law enforcement. But we aren't done yet, it gets even better!

• I was denied bond despite the fact I had no criminal record, nor had even been in Manweiler's presence. A well respected psychiatrist, used even by the prosecution, evaluated me and reported I was never a threat to Michelle Manweiler. His statement to my lawyer was "he's as harmless as an amoeba". He was so angered by what the prosecution did, that he asked my mother to bring me by his office after my release so he could give me a pep talk. The judge even argued with Platania, demanding to know where these deaths threats were because he couldn't find them in any of the emails - and Platania just threw up his hands and didn't respond. Still the judge denied bond. Upon return to the cell block, both inmates and corrections officers expressed shock at being denied bond over such a case. I was told that the judge sat on some board of alumni for the University of Virginia. I don't know whether this was true or not, and I don't like thinking this was a factor considering the judge hugged my mother afterwards and told her it would all be okay.

• During the bond hearing Platania brought up an email I wrote to Manweiler from work upon hearing the Charlottesville police were looking for me. Platania read off a fictional quote to the judge that was never stated by me in that email. He made the mistake of doing that to an email that I still possess to this day - because I had the forethought to CC the email to my personal account of the time when I sent it to Manweiler. So Joseph Platania lied to a judge about the email contents, and then this email magically disappeared later and was never mentioned again by the prosecution. You want to know why Platania hid this email? Because here is an exact quote from that email that sounded bad for the prosecution's case - "I never physically threatened you, though I'm sure something got blown out of proportion like always". Even then I knew Manweiler was pulling the same stunt as before.

• That email is still in my possession, and it's header proves it was sent to Manweiler's UVA email the day of my arrest. I knew she had lied when the Charlottesville police called my work. I knew because this is all repeat behavior by Michelle Manweiler. She spread rumors and lies about me in the past to get people to harass and bully me. Those same lies were repeated by her in her victim impact statement, so clearly she was the one behind it all. She told a W&M campus police officer I had followed her around the campus in a car, only to have that lie crash and burn thanks to me not having a license or a car at the time. My family were witnesses to that lie by Manweiler. So I was not surprised she lied to police again. Nor was I surprised she fibbed and exaggerated about events in her victim impact statement. I was surprised she went as far as to fake evidence, because I didn't think she was crazy enough to risk it. But I'm not surprised that she'd be capable of doing it. Lying is a religion for Michelle Manweiler. She's lied so many times and to so many people, I don't think she even knows what really happened anymore. She's so convinced she's the good guy here, but I'm the one holding evidence where people are telling me she's lied. I'm even looking at documents in her own words that prove she's lied. My lawyer even wrote down the next lie I'll mention.

• Michelle Manweiler accused me of going to her place of residence in Charlottesville, and of making in person contact with her within the city limits. Sounds familiar right? It mirrors the lie Manweiler gave Officer John Coleman in 2000 - the lie my family witnessed themselves. This lie of Charlottesville contact was the source of the stalking charge Charlottesville took out on me. The problem is that this event was a work of pure fiction by Michelle Manweiler yet again. It was stated to my father at the bond hearing (by Rudman or Platania) that Manweiler claimed I came to her home in Charlottesville, called her on her personal cell phone, and told her I was waiting outside to kill her. I told my father this never happened, and that it doesn't even make sense. Because why did she not call police then and there? He acknowledged that this story didn't sound right. The simple fact is that in the months before Manweiler went to police, I hadn't even bothered trying to find out where she lived in Charlottesville. I didn't care. I had no interest in making in person contact, and was too busy playing video games to waste my time. I also never knew her cell phone number, and something like that was unlikely to be found in 2006 without her actually giving it out. The reality is that no in person contact ever took place, nor had I ever attempted to find where Manweiler lived in Charlottesville. If I really wanted to find her address in 2006 I could have easily done so, and I feel I've more than made my point to Ms. Manweiler. Yet for months I didn't even try. You don't even have the basis of proof of intent to justify misdemeanor charges, let alone a felony, considering I never attempted to locate the claimed victim. Last I checked you kind of have to possess that kind of info if you want to follow through with a threat. When that person doesn't bother getting that necessary info, you don't even have a claim that the person was threatening harm to someone.

• My lawyer records in his notes that Michelle Manweiler claimed I made in person contact in Charlottesville while she was testifying at the final protective order hearing, I've even posted the proof on here. He admits on tape recording that she claimed this. Detective Rudman told me that Manweiler accused me of this as well. And as I've already mentioned, they told my dad she said this at the bond hearing. So I have multiple people telling me that Michelle Manweiler accused me of doing something that she and I both know damn well never took place. You can imagine I'm not happy about that. This is the second time Manweiler has falsely claimed to law enforcement of in person contact that never took place. However, Manweiler forgot her lie months later and tripped up in her victim impact statement. She admitted she was aware I never knew her location in Charlottesville the entire time. Oops. So how could I have gone down to her Charlottesville home like she claimed in the beginning of the case, if she knew I was never aware of the address? Platania knew she outed her lie as well, because he made a big deal about reading that victim impact statement to the judge. He's going to be in trouble for not taking action when he read it.

• During the case, my lawyer and Mr. Platania were observed fawning over Michelle Manweiler. Upon meeting Michelle Manweiler at the final protective order hearing, my lawyer William Johnson visits me at the jail. The first words out of his mouth are "I just have to say you have excellent taste, I can see why you liked her so much" and then goes on to describe her appearance. He only stops once he looks over at me, I guess noticing the bewildered look on my face that would have reflected exactly what I felt in that moment. He would later continue to bring up his thoughts on Manweiler's appearance to my mother at just about every meeting, and there is enough on tape to back that up. 

• During one meeting with my lawyer at the jail, Johnson tells me about a conversation he had with prosecutor Joseph Platania about Ms. Manweiler. He mentions how he and Platania were discussing "Ms. Manweiler's achievements and her assets". He emphasises "assets" and gives a big smile. When men refer to a woman's "assets" they are rarely referencing her stock portfolio. Johnson stated that during the conversation the prosecutor made an excited outburst that gave even him some concern. Johnson gives a mocking rendition of Platania's statement, excitedly exclaiming "So you want to go talk to her again?!" It sounded like Platania thought it was the greatest thing in the world to talk to Michelle Manweiler. Johnson said this kind of statement from the prosecutor bothered him, and he told Platania that his practice in Mathews County was too far from Charlottesville for him to waste time on something that would have no effect on the case. Additionally, Platania was witnessed by a family friend and neighbor (the elderly woman attending the hearings with my mother) giving some rather inappropriate attention to Manweiler. At a hearing when Manweiler was walking away, our neighbor said she observed Platania staring at Manweiler and watching her until she went out of sight. When I later discussed this with the neighbor, she commented that the entire time Platania was staring at Manweiler, "He had this big stupid grin on his face".

• An additional show of inappropriate interest in this case was further demonstrated by Platania at the sentencing hearing. We were not in the main courtroom but instead a side office sitting at a table. Platania and the probation officer who did my PSI were sitting across from me. Platania turns to her and says that he wants the contact information for the probation officer in Hampton who will take over my case, so that Platania can have a phone conversation with him. The probation officer agrees, but I noticed her roll her eyes once Platania turns away. She was quite upset at what happened, to the point that she told me she wanted me to get a lawyer as soon as I was released from probation. She stated that the lawyer could easily remove the remainder of that 20 years good behavior sentence and then I could ask for a pardon to get my rights restored. She stated she was certain I'd have no problem with getting the pardon. She said that my case just came at a bad time and that it was wrong that it went that far. It appears Platania did indeed call the Hampton probation officer, but the officer quickly realized I wasn't the bad guy I was being made out to be, even telling me "You aren't one of the people in my charge I'm worried about". I have been told that Platania's request to have a conversation with the Hampton probation officer is very odd and not standard practice.

• The prosecutor refused to comply with a motion of discovery filed by my former attorney, and my lawyer William Johnson was too lazy to actually force compliance. He didn't even go look at the evidence until the day prior to the preliminary hearing, thus making him completely unprepared (he admitted he was completely unprepared when speaking to me in the holding cell before I was to go before the judge). Thus we only obtained "four" claimed emails, with the prosecution claiming they had "a dozen or more" emails but never giving those to my lawyer. I told my lawyer that there were never that many emails (and he admits this to my mother on tape). The reason for this is that Manweiler split up each email by putting fake dates on individual sheets. The four emails my lawyer was given were actually three in total. Manweiler put April and May false dates on page 2 and 3 of a March email. The other pages of the February and June emails likely were split up by Manweiler as well (the ones in my possession were first pages of three to four page emails), thus making less than a handful of multi-page emails appear to be "a dozen or more". As far as Charlottesville law enforcement knew in the beginning, they only had bit and pieces of the emails. Keep that in mind - these morons went forward on this case believing that they had only pieces of emails and not the entire contents of the emails. It doesn't get more negligent than that. Had they simply asked to see the entire emails they would have caught Manweiler in the act.

• After the lie of damaging the computer hard drive and the denial of bond, the preliminary hearing would come next. Attorney William Johnson waited until the last minute to obtain evidence, receiving only "four" of the claimed "dozen or more" emails the afternoon prior to the hearing. During his meeting with me at the jail, Johnson had already written down the information he received from the prosecution on the emails. This page of his notes has already been shown on this blog. Johnson turns to me and asks if I know any reason for one of the emails to say "To Rick" instead of "From Rick". I didn't at the time and he didn't persue it further. It was clear he brought this email discrepancy up to the prosecution while retrieving the evidence - meaning that Platania and Chapman continued prosecution with evidence they knew had serious problems. 

• On the day of the hearing, my lawyer springs the threat by the prosecution on me minutes before I was to walk out into the courtroom. I was in complete shock which was likely his intent. Based on his actions and Platania's email, it appears my lawyer was aware of the threat well before and was cooperating with the prosecution, though I would not realize this at the time. He tells me he wasn't prepared for the hearing and that he's "got nothing". He insists that he can still do something, but he needs me to waiver the hearing so he can get to work. Still in shock I didn't question it. He writes "Y" and "N" on his notepad and tells me to answer only what he points to, otherwise the prosecution will make good on their threat and I'll be in prison for a long time. He doesn't point to anything when the question is asked if I'm satisfied with the job my attorney is doing, but he said in the holding cells that if I tell the judge I'm not that I'll end up in prison. He would do this same thing again at the guilty plea hearing, and I have the actual sheet from that hearing where he wrote the "Y" and "N" as he directed what he wanted me to say. To demonstrate how in shock I was during this time, as my lawyer turned and walked out of the courtroom (in order to go yell at my mother for running out of the courtroom in tears because she didn't know what was happening) I actually turned and stumbled in my shackles to follow him out without realizing what I was doing. The bailiff had to run up and direct me back to the holding cells.

• After the hearing Johnson has a fit in the lobby over the progress of the case, throwing papers and swearing in front of his 8-10 year old son he brought with him (brought with the intention of avoiding talking to me at the jail after the hearing, since he used the kid as an excuse for just that). My mother confronts him on whether he knew ahead of time that all this was going to happen, and Johnson refuses to answer her or make any eye contact during the questions. He knew. Given Platania said in his email that my waiving the hearing was a requirement, it was pretty clear both prosecutor and defense attorney worked together to ensure the hearing was waived - since the judge presiding in that hearing was the one that argued in the bond hearings that he saw no evidence of death threats being made in the emails.

• The threat made by the prosecution has been shown here previously by sharing the very email Platania sent to my attorney with it in writing. Biggest part of it was that I had to plead guilty to the single felony, otherwise the prosecution would file multiple felonies for every email sent to Manweiler. This is a violation of civil rights and against Federal criminal statutes. But given that Manweiler blatantly split up singular emails by writing fake dates on each sheet, it makes that threat even more serious thanks to Charlottesville law enforcement not doing their job. They would have given multiple felony counts for what was actually one email because they didn't pay attention to their job. This incompetence combined with the violation of civil rights would have resulted in severe bodily harm to me. Given their threat of sending me to the most violent of prisons in the region, it could have even cost me my life. So Platania and Chapman's threat becomes far more serious now because of Manweiler's actions and Charlottesville negligence. That's a costly lawsuit shaping up I'd imagine.

• As pointed out above, an additional part of that threat involved the prosecutors claiming that they would send me to the most violent of prisons in the area as punishment for not going along with them, and they informed my lawyer that the next judge in line to hear the case was a hanging judge who would help them do it. I've posted the portion of the letter when my attorney mentions he was told about the hanging judge, which further backs up what he told me in person. This threat was done to railroad me into pleading to a charge that Detective Rudman, Joseph Platania and Warner Chapman knew I was innocent of - because they knew Michelle Manweiler faked the emails that they based the entire case on. 

• C'ville law enforcement's actions ever since this case ended has more than demonstrated their prior knowledge of Manweiler's actions. During the 2011/2012 viewings of my blog, Detective Rudman (and presumably Platania and Chapman based on the views) deliberately avoided looking at any evidence that demonstrated how Manweiler tampered with the emails. I had a post explaining what Manweiler did, complete with the posted evidence I've shown here already, all proving beyond a doubt that she had tampered with the evidence. I made several mentions of this in my posts as Charlottesville law enforcement continued to go through my blog. Based on their viewing records, C'ville law enforcement viewed everything single post of mine except the very post going over Manweiler's actions with the evidence. Rudman had far more of a desire to try figuring out a way to avoid being tracked by my blog than he did with seeing the evidence of Manweiler's criminal actions. The fact that they suspiciously avoided looking at that post more than suggests a prior knowledge of what they would find. Even now with having looked over the evidence I have provided, it appears Charlottesville law enforcement is far more interested in running credit history checks on me then in correcting their mistake. A law enforcement agency that has done nothing wrong would not behave in such a manner. 

• In order to hide what Manweiler did and continue prosecution at a trial, it would require the prosecutors to commit a crime themselves by altering the evidence to remove the blatant tampering. I believe this act took place anyway, since Platania had to present these emails to a grand jury and the circuit court judge presiding over the guilty plea. All it would have taken was one grand juror or the judge seeing the March 12th timestamp on April and May emails to ruin everything for the prosecution. So unless they were ridiculously overconfident in the negligence of others, which is possible, the prosecutors would have to have hidden the evidence of Manweiler's tampering anyway in order to avoid the risk of derailing the case. But having a jury trial would have risked far greater scrutiny of the evidence, and risked something else being found by a juror that the prosecution missed. So they needed to railroad me to avoid the trial and the greater scrutiny. 

• With my lawyer William Johnson refusing to do his job, my mother attempted to hire Charlottesville attorney Katherine Peters to take over. We hid this from Johnson out of fear he would damage the case further (he would have). When Peters' talked to Joseph Platania at the courthouse to get more info on the case (she told me over the phone she would do this), Platania ran back to his boss Warner Chapman and told him I was going to fire my lawyer. On the Friday before the Monday guilty plea hearing, Johnson comes to the jail for an unscheduled meeting. He shouts and swears at me, stating "If you want to fucking fire me, tell me to my fucking face! I had to find out from the fucking prosecutor!" Johnson informs me that Warner Chapman called him up and warned Johnson he was being fired, as well as to deliver another threat to me. Chapman and Platania's actions cross a line as prosecutors by interfering with a defendants counsel.

• The threat that Warner Chapman delivered was that if I attempted to fire my incompetent attorney to hire someone actually willing to do their job, which is a right protected under the civil right to counsel, he would carry out the threats previously made. In fact Johnson stated that Chapman claimed to be so angry that come the guilty plea hearing, he might file all felony counts anyway regardless of my actions and force me to plead guilty to all of the counts that day. Johnson did not elaborate on how Chapman intended to force this. After my release, I captured on tape recording Johnson's admission of this conversation and Chapman's actions. I deliberately misquoted what Johnson said to me to get him to correct me, which he quickly does just that, thus showing this conversation took place and that he recalled it clearly.

• William Johnson further backed up Chapman's threat with one of his own. He did not state that he would simply quit as my attorney if I refused to plead guilty, as I understand it he legally cannot do that, but happily told me that if I refused the plea deal that he would not take any steps to defend me during the trial. Johnson stated that he was refusing to be "party to that madness" of trying to fight the charges in court. I have been told by an appellate attorney that this is a very serious act committed by my former defense attorney.

• There is evidence to suggest my former attorney was either working with the prosecution to cover for Manweiler, or at least working on his own to do just that. Johnson noticed himself some of Manweiler's tampering, as I've shown with the page from his notes. Johnson however would completely dismiss this, and even refuse to believe me when I told him about some of Ms. Manweiler's past actions of lying to law enforcement. On the tape recordings conducted by my mother, she points out to Johnson that there are March 12th printer time stamps on emails Manweiler has dated as being sent in April and May. She also points out that the April and May emails have the same message ID number unlike the February and January emails (because the April and May emails are actually a single email she split up). My mother asks Johnson how this is possible, and on the tape it sounds like panic in his voice as he begins to blurt out unrelated and wrong info to get off subject. In fact my mother stated that she became concerned he would kick her out right then because of how upset he got. It is very clear on the tape that Johnson doesn't want to discuss this evidence. What defense attorney refuses to speak about evidence that would clear his client?

• The threat by Chapman wasn't carried out on the guilty plea hearing, and as mentioned previously Johnson directs my comments via the "Y" and "N" he points to on his notepad. While in the holding cell, Johnson makes it clear to me that if I say anything other than what he points to, or if I state I'm not happy with his job, that I'll be going to a violent prison for years.

• The terms were extremely excessive (one lawyer used the term "sick" to describe Manweiler's agreement to it). I was forced into pleading to a class 6 felony written threats (a charge that is a misdemeanor in the state of Virginia), given five years suspended sentence and 20 years of good behavior terms. Joseph Platania admitted to the judge at the guilty plea hearing that this was the most good behavior sentencing that the C'ville circuit court had ever handed out in it's history. Keep in mind that I had no criminal record (not even parking tickets), no history of violence, had no knowledge of Manweiler's residence in the city, had never raised a hand to her, nor had we even been in each other presence since 1999. Meanwhile rich UVA student Andrew Alston received about three and a half years for voluntary manslaughter after putting 18-20 (according to the papers) stab wounds in a man. I was punished more harshly for a couple angry emails to a rich UVA student which showed blatant tampering, than what another rich UVA student received for actually stabbing someone to death. Given that Platania himself admitted the 20 years good behavior was never done before, it means neither Chapman or Platania felt a rapist or child molester in Charlottesville deserved what I got. The fact that Michelle Manweiler, Joseph Platania, and Warner Chapman even thought any of this is remotely acceptable shows serious signs of sociopath behavior in my opinion.

• After the case is resolved to my determent, at some point attorney Katherine Peters started working for Warner Chapman at the Charlottesville District Attorney's office. You'll remember that Katherine Peters was the attorney I attempted to hire to replace my incompetent lawyer. My mother and I pointed out the discrepancies with the emails (Peters said she found them very interesting and wanted to look at that further), and she was additionally informed not only of Platania's earlier threat, but I let her know I couldn't hire her because Chapman threatened me out of doing so. When Charlottesville law enforcement was first poking around on my blog at the beckoning of Michelle Manweiler, I noticed Katherine Peters on the district attorney website when I went to view it. Upon pointing out on this blog that Katherine Peters was working for the DA's office, it didn't take long for her name to disappear off the website - more than suggesting something shady on Warner Chapman's part.

• In their first viewings of this blog around 2011/2012, the Charlottesville law enforcement deliberately avoided looking at the post where I laid out the evidence proving how Manweiler lied to them. They looked at every post by me except that one post. Law enforcement blatantly showed that they did not want to be seen viewing this evidence for some reason, likely because they knew I was tracking them and ignoring that evidence after looking at it would be very bad for them legally. So they figured not looking at it would cover their butts. Why would a police department and district attorney's office that had done nothing wrong deliberately refuse to look at evidence proving they made a mistake?

Conclusion

The above list isn't even everything that happened. Anyone looking over the details of this case can clearly see that something very wrong and illegal took place in 2006 and beyond. There is too much about this case that doesn't smell right at all. All of the guilty parties know exactly what all this looks like. It looks like a cover-up took place because that's exactly what happened. The more Charlottesville law enforcement act in such a shady and guilty manner, the more clearly they prove my case against them.

I am accusing the Charlottesville police and district attorney's office of being completely aware of Michelle Manweiler's tampering of evidence during the very beginning of the case - after they tossed me in jail and lied to the media. They then made the decision to cover the entire thing up and railroad me so that nobody would know they screwed up, and so that a rich UVA student wouldn't lose her promising career. That was when the lie of the computer hard drive damage was made. I believe the police never damaged that drive, just made that up so that nobody would find proof that Manweiler faked the emails they based the entire case upon. They then threatened me into pleading guilty because they knew someone would notice the issues with the emails if the case went to trial. When I tried to fire my attorney, they panicked and threatened me again to avoid their cover up being discovered now that they were neck deep in criminal behavior. For them to claim they never noticed such blatant tampering as a March time stamp on April and May emails, it would be an admission of serious negligence on the part of Rudman, Platania, and Chapman.

The more they keep playing games, the worse they keep making themselves look. Joseph Platania can't pretend he isn't aware of what Michelle Manweiler did and the evidence in my possession, not after that motion was forwarded to him. The ball is now in his court, and what Platania and the Charlottesville law enforcement choose to do now will become public knowledge. The longer Platania goes without correcting this, the guiltier he looks and the more damages can be sought against him and the city. We'll see what Internal Affairs digs up when it comes to Detective Rudman's apparent investigation into my financial affairs.

I offered either party an out to fix this situation and minimize damages to themselves to the greatest extent possible, but it increasingly looks like I'll just have to move forward on my own. Which I'm perfectly willing to do, and I keep getting handed more and more evidence to make it easier to do that. More than ten years of my life already has gone down the drain thanks to the damages they have inflicted. My life has been massively set back and derailed thanks not only to their actions, but additionally thanks to the severe penalties they hammered me with. The more of my life that slips away the less interested I become in deals and settlements, and the more damage to their lives I'm prepared to inflict.

I've already written off Manweiler long ago, she has more than demonstrated that she has no interest in taking responsibility for what took place. I'll admit of all the parties at fault here, Michelle Manweiler is the most in need of receiving punishment for her actions. She has lied to everyone around her just to get back at someone she wronged. She knew what kind of position she put the Charlottesville law enforcement in when she did that. She knew what she did in 2006 was absolutely wrong. So I don't have a problem with her being the only party that gets heavy punishment out of this if that's the way things play out. It still really amazes me just how bad of a person she really proves herself to be. To have lied, tampered with evidence, and pushed for special treatment is already sick enough. But now she's just forcing all this upon her family because she refuses to take responsibility for what she did.

Michelle Manweiler has shown that she finds what she did to be a bit funny, and she knows most of what she has told her family and friends is garbage. She abused someone in the past who didn't deserve to be treated that way, that person ended up lashing out because of that abuse, and in retaliation she decided to lie to ruin that person's life. But in order to sell the lie that I'm some psycho out to get her to the rest of her family, she has to scare them to make them all look over their shoulders and live in fear. What kind of nut does that?

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if she's even teaching her children to look out for the "bad man" in order to keep up with the ruse. After all, if she isn't teaching her kids to watch out for me then that proves to her family that she was never in fear in the first place. It proves her stories of me to be a lie to anyone remotely competent. So if she's at all attempting to keep up with the lie, she's likely making her kids look over their shoulders and live in fear. All because their mother doesn't want to take responsibility for what she did. That's pretty twisted for a person to make their kids live their life like that just because their mother refused to do the right thing.

But this is what I've been saying about Michelle Manweiler since the very beginning. Manweiler truly doesn't care about the people around her, no matter how much she pretends otherwise. She claimed that she was in fear for the safety of those around her in 2006, but she didn't do anything to protect those people until after she graduated law school. The only thing that matters to Michelle Manweiler is her achievements and her career. Everything and everyone around her is just fodder to be used towards her goals. Yet she tries to pretend I'm the evil person here.

Manweiler tried to say that I put a weight on shoulders since when we first met, but this has been nothing more than another one of her lies. Any weight on her shoulders she does happen to carry around wasn't put there by me - she did that to herself. Manweiler forced herself to carry that weight because she refuses to ever take responsibility for the things she does to other people. Every enemy that Ms. Manweiler has ever made in her life is an enemy she created for herself (and I'm not the only enemy she's ever made). Her problems are ones that she created herself through her bad choices and her inflated ego. She doesn't get to treat other people like garbage and then play the victim card when they aren't okay with it. Pointing the finger at me will never take away her responsibility for the situation she has created for herself. She was the only party in this feud that refused to talk things out peacefully. And I wasn't the one that made the decision to walk into the police station with exaggerated claims and emails modified to sell a story she knew wasn't the truth. Nobody forced her to do any of that, she decided it was acceptable to do it all on her own. But nothing I've ever said will get through that arrogance of her's, it'll always be everyone else that is wrong.

So it just remains to be seen whether Charlottesville will still continue to join in on thumbing their nose at me and daring me to come at them. I'm never going to back down, so I guess we'll see what they decide to do. Given that the views and searches from this Capital One employee are a complete fluke, Rudman and Platania likely never considered I'd found out about this. If indeed they have been doing exactly what the evidence appears to show, then this makes them look even worse and we'll see if it ends up changing their interest in my offer now.

If not, I'm perfectly okay with doing whatever it takes to make all parties answer for what they've done. I'm not stopping. Even if I don't get any traction with recent actions, I'm never going to stop until I get justice for what happened in 2006. If it takes me another ten years so be it, but it'll be more costly the longer this goes on. With my mother's recent bad health and trips to the ER however, there is a chance that something could happen to her without warning. I'm already considerably angry that my grandmother passed away before this legal crap was resolved, especially to hear that in her stroke damaged state she was in panic that "her son" was going through something bad. For my mother to pass away without seeing this all fixed, that'll truly be the last line in the sand.

One thing to keep in mind Detective Rudman and Joseph Platania. When this goes public, and it'll go public, everything you are doing now will become known. Ask yourselves how the public and media will view any investigation you've done into my financial records? Before you do any other stupid moves like that, think about how everything from 2006 and beyond will play out with a news media that is increasingly hostile towards the behavior of law enforcement. Even if you cease any further mistakes and decide to ignore it all, when it comes out that you knew what proof I had and still refused to do anything to fix it - how do you think it'll play on the local news? Even if it's years later, what do you think you'll be portrayed as when it's shown you refused to fix what you did in the face of such evidence?