Monday, December 28, 2009

Dr. Dwight Hines, Ph.D. Has Some Questions for the FBI (and regular people) About Possible Misconduct in Bringing United States v. Thomas Manuel


1) Does McClure, et al running a wiretap on his conversation with the sheriff for the FBI make him an employee of the feds? Can he get workman's compensation?

1a) If we want to record conversations on illegal dumping, etc., can we avoid all the trouble of going to a federal judge and just get McClure, et al to do it for us?

1b) Why is it that the sheriff can get the FBI to investigate without any facts but we have tons of stinky facts and they don't even smell anything?

1c) Does the Sheriff have only admiration and show pure sycophancy for McClure, et al even though McClure, et al stayed on the phone far too long, as did Shoar, knowing the call was being recorded? I bet an analysis of the tape of that conversation would put it about 5 standard deviations away from a normal conversation (one where no one knows the call is being recorded) in number of pauses and length of pauses. It was an odd conversation to read, quite odd.

2) Does Sheriff Shoar referring to Peter Guinta, St. Augustine Reporter who can not find any corruption here in the County, as his "good buddy" meant to impress McClure, et al or threaten them?

3) If Guinta is Sheriff Shoar's good buddy, what dose of sleeping pills does Peter take at night to sleep?

4) Does the fact that it took 18 months to get Manuel to take a bribe dilute Shoar's claim that Manuel was dirty before he was elected?
4b) What is the record for how long the FBI will have someone work on a suspect before they realize the suspect is not going to take a bribe? 2 years, 12 years, 15 years. Forever, after all he must be guilty if he's a suspect.
4c) After 18 months or so, will the FBI change its bribe from money to women, good looking sexy women? Or even drugs? Do suspects have a choice of their temptations offered by the FBI or their untrained agents?

5) How come the St. Augustine Wreckerd spends so much time on this near failure by the FBI to get Manuel to take a cheap bribe and not on environmental poisoning?

6) How come Shoar is ashamed of his and McClure's, et al role in this? -- hell, if I had gotten a bad guy arrested, I'd be delighted and proud, not sneaky and quiet.

7) Could we have a bake sale to raise money for the FBI to get decent equipment so there would not be so many lost conversations when they have McClure, et al do the recordings?

8) Do you think any of the conversations that were not recorded had the temptationers softening up old Tom by talking about how if he had just a little more money he wouldn't have to worry about his health, he could go to specialists he could not afford without the extra money?

9) In any of the missing conversations did Manuel get threatened if he didn't take the money? How many conversations are missing now, 50%? 75%, 95%?

10) Did the fact that Tom Manuel repeatedly support people asking for public records, even to the point of having the Governor's Director of Open Government come to St. Augustine to speak to the Board of County Commissioners and employees about open government have any influence on McClure, et al wanting to oust Manuel since McClure, et al clients received over one million dollars in an arguable waiver of impact fees? How many waivers of impact fees have been granted in the past 10 years in the county?

11) Does the FBI take the unspoken motivation of the wannabe agent into consideration when the wannabe volunteers to help them catch a crook that might expose the wannabe for bigger crimes?

12) Does the fact that McClure, et al has the FBI as good buddies mean that if we were to do a statistical before and after test of waivers (before and after indictment of Manuel) there would be a specific increase or a general increase in waivers granted, arguable waivers and unarguable waivers?

No comments: