Huh?

Warrants? We don't need no stinkin' warrants!!!!

"We feel it sends an unnerving message to the public, as well as showing a lack of support for law enforcement officers who are assaulted in the course of their lawful duties."

LOL.....this could only come form a GED educated cop.

1) there was no crime committed, with the possible exception of the GED educated deputy assualting innocent people.

2) No deputy was "assaulted". In fact that is a preposterous statement given that this "party" consisted of social security aged attendees and was in fact over.

The bonehead deputy will be lucky if he is not civilly sued for his boneheaded actions. I can't wait to see what a jury of 12 would say about his actions.

There was no crime being committed, no crime had been committed and no crime was about to be committed, therefore Boneheaded deputy had no legal authority to detain anyone, to ask for birthdates or to effect an arrest.

I hope they sue the bonehead and he quits the SO.

If you are holding a party for 100 people in the evening and all your neighbors aren't attending, you should certainly be aware of the possibility that the police will visit to investigate 'disturbance' complaints. Cooperation is the method by which law abiding citizens defend themselves from complaints made by their neighbors. Cooperation includes responding to routine inquiries about their identity.

Apparently Ms. Busby is a typical politician, which believes that the rules (+ retirement plans and health care) apply to everyone but her.

No one seems to have tracked down the hecklers and annoyed neighbors to determine what axes they might have to grind.

Surf if you ever need the Sheriff's assistance, I hope you get exactly the service you deserve.

If all, especially the 'elect' were truly intelligent, it would not have boiled down to this type of event...but, that's the realm of politics, such that of 'party goers' who are here to only raise up chaos, problems, and more troubles, rather than solving them and making a better atmosphere for all. Riots induced from politicians, I am most definitely not surprised about and they are the cores expecting all the rest and as an influence among the free populations as well, to follow and 'be' like them. A lot of them besides some free citizens are not Good examples, to learn and or pick up their demeanor and behaviors from, which they are never held accountable or found at fault for their instigations in LIFE.

If you are holding a party for 100 people in the evening and all your neighbors aren't attending, you should certainly be aware of the possibility that the police will visit to investigate 'disturbance' complaints.

No one seems to have tracked down the hecklers and annoyed neighbors to determine what axes they might have to grind.

By jreddan

There were not 100 people, there were less than 25 when the deputy showed up.

If there was no noise at that time the deputy arrived, then the deputy had no legal authority to detain anyone because there is no crime being committed, even with "disturbing the peace" being strecthed to a "crime" in this case.

As for the heckler-the sheriff's office knows exactly who he is, but have not released the info-and I am sure the reason is because he did have an axe to grind. Why they won't release who it was just raises more suspecion and reflects badly on the SO.

When somone is yelling anti-gay slurs at a gay persons home then they have an axe to grind-and making such slurs to incite violence or be a disruption could in fact be considered a "hate crime" under current law.

The bottom line is this-this incident was NOT even on the level of a speeding ticket-you do NOT try to arrest someone under these circumstances.

If they won't give you a DOB, then you say fine-you give them a noise warning and you leave. If you get called back, and there is indeed a distrubrance, then you have cause to arrest and go from there. But this was a very stupid move on the deputy, and I blame the deupty because they have the power, and when you have the power you do NOT abuse it over something that is not a ctime, is not going to be a crime and would have been over within a few minutes since the party was breaking up.

Surf if you ever need the Sheriff's assistance, I hope you get exactly the service you deserve.

By rickeysays

Well, if I ever needed Sheriff's assistance they would show up 5 hours after I called, which is what happened the last time I called 10 years ago on a noise complaint-at a real party that was going on at 12 midnight.

So where do I get my refund of taxes for services not performed?

re: #5: WOW! AW, what ARE you smoking? You could definitely ace those beauty pageant quizzes :)

whatever it is, i want some of it...

Call a cop on a noise complaint issue here, and the cops will laugh at you. There's no such thing. If the neighbors get too out of hand, I simply slide some angry-music-CD into the stereo, face the speakers out the window, and turn it up full blast. Within minutes, all is calm again.

I've discovered the secret to understanding AnotherWorld's prose, with the help of W.S. Burroughs: Take a screen shot of AW's comment. Print it out. Cut the page into cubes roughly one inch square. Rearrange at random. Presto! It now makes perfect, logical sense.

Not a fan of Naked Lunch, eh, russl?

"No glot... ...C'lom fliday."

Daniels observed:

"re: #5: WOW! AW, what ARE you smoking? You could definitely ace those beauty pageant quizzes :)"

LOL. I think it's Miss South Carolina herself!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WALIARHHLII&feature;=related

Gotta love them handy subtitles!

I swear to God, that's gotta be Palin DNA talking. I wanna see that chick's family tree. Bet it doesn't fork much.

Tell it to your mama, Carillo. Barham et al may have been testy with the Deputy after having had gay slurs made by the neighbor from hell, but the officer should have had the presence of mind and skills to defuse the situation before the K-9 unit and helicopter were dispatched. Bonnie Dumanis may be taking a prudent course.

Surf I can't let it go. So you're saying if someone refuses to identify themselves for the cop (which they're required by law to do) the cop should just say "OK never mind" and walk away? Get real.

And monaghan....how can cops "defuse a situation" when people at the party aren't showing ID or answering officers questions?

The only thing baffling me in this case, is that the 911 call isn't going to be released, or that the person making it isn't slapped with some kind of fine for making a 911 call for something that is clearly not an emergency.

I'm so tired, though, of hearing about the city or police, "settling" lawsuits with losers like these partygoers, who as was stated earlier...didn't realize when you throw a party, inevitably, SOMEONE calls the cops. It happens 90% of the time (I know, i witness this at all the parties I go to).

On a side note: just read about that show "To Catch a Predator", and after they aired some adult male showing up at a teen girls house, he ended up killing himself. The family sued the show for $135 million and there was a settlement.

I'm guessing the settlement was at least a million bucks. SO...money going to the family of a pedophile. Gotta love this idiotic country we live in!

What you guys are forgetting is that the cop didn't have the right to ask anyone for ID. If I'm walking down the street doing nothing but minding my own business and a cop arrests me because I refuse to show him ID,he's violating the 4th Amendment.

Stop and frisk "However, in certain circumstances, authorities are permitted to conduct a limited warrantless search on a level of suspicion less than probable cause. In Terry v. Ohio 392 U.S. 1 (1968), the Supreme Court decided that when a policeman "observes unusual conduct" that leads him to reasonably believe "that criminal activity may be afoot" and that the suspicious person has a weapon and is presently dangerous to the policeman or others, he may conduct a "pat-down search" (or "frisk"), to determine whether the person is in fact carrying a weapon. To conduct a frisk, the policeman must be able to point to specific and articulable facts which, taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant his actions.[21] A vague hunch will not do. Such a search must be temporary and questioning must be limited to the purpose of the stop (i.e., if the policeman stopped you because he had reasonable suspicion to believe that you were driving a stolen car, after confirming that it is not stolen, he cannot force you to answer questions about anything else, such as the possession of contraband).[22]"

Arrest "A police officer does not have the authority to arrest someone for refusing to identify himself when he is not suspected of committing a crime.[32] A search incidental to an arrest that is not permissible under state law does not violate the Fourth Amendment, if the arresting officer has probable cause.[33][34]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Surf I can't let it go. So you're saying if someone refuses to identify themselves for the cop (which they're required by law to do) the cop should just say "OK never mind" and walk away? Get real.

By rickeysays

Well, your first mistake is no one is under a legal duty to IDENTIFY themselves to the law-which you said they must do (big case out of San Diego on this issue when Kolander was Sheriff). The rule is LE must have at the very least "reasonable suspecion" that a crime has been commmitted, is being committed or will be committed in the near future.

PistoPackingPete has cited Terry v. Ohio-which gives the rule.

So yes, if she refused to give Barney Fife her name then the Barney has to walk away and there is NOTHING he can do about it.

What was the Kolander case? I'm just curious as to what happened and how it's gotten to the appeals court.

The Kolander case was a case out of San Diego in the early 80's where this homeless guy was always walking around high end Point Loma neighborhoods and the police would stop him and ask for ID and run warrant checks, for no reason other than he looked out of place, under an "anti-loitering/vagrancy" law.

The guy finally had enough and said screw you, you cannot just ask someone for ID without "reasonable suspicion" (Terry stop). They arrested him on the anti-loitering/vagrancy laws, which many muni's had on the books at that time. Case went up to the SCOTUS, and the anti vagancy laws were struck down as violating the 4th Amendment.

The case is Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352 (1983).

Okay, let me ask you two legal experts something. Because, I write about parties for this publication. And I've seen many college kids and others, get citations for having a loud party and not turning down the volume after cops have asked them.

So...what you're telling me is...on a "noise complaint," a cop can ask who the home owner is an for ID...and the person that owns the home can simply refuse.

And the cop just has to walk away with his tail between his legs. He can't walk over and turn the stereo down, or unplug the amps that the heavy metal band is using in the backyard. He can't taze the drunk people gathered around him yelling "Go catch a real criminal!"

He simply has to walk away, because...well, they simply refused to show ID, as is their right.

I don't buy it.

If there IS a crime in progress that they observe,they have every right once they're in the house. That's the thing though,Josh. There was no crime in progress that the cop could observe. He had NO right to even be in the house in the first place. I used to throw hellacious house parties when I was a teenager. Underage drinking,copious amounts of sex,drugs,LOUD rock'n'roll. You name it,we probably did it. Everytime the cops would arrive,I'd simply tell everyone"DO NOT open the door". It's simple. If they can't get in without a warrant,they can't arrest. It doesn't matter how many laws were being broken. I didn't allow any drinking and driving so my friends had no reason to leave. The cops stayed outside one night ALL night long. By 8am,the house was silent,my guests were sober and it was before curfew. They couldn't stop anyone when leaving the house. This went on for years. A few times,friends of mine would sneak out the back door to the garage when I wasn't looking to leave for a little while. Those people were arrested.

So...what you're telling me is...on a "noise complaint," a cop can ask who the home owner is an for ID...and the person that owns the home can simply refuse.

He simply has to walk away, because...well, they simply refused to show ID, as is their right.

I don't buy it.

By JoshBoard

A "noise complaint" is a violation of the law-isn't it JB.

If the cop was there, and the music was LOUD and disturbing the peace, then there is a misdemeanor being committed in the cops presence-but that is not what happened at the Busby party, was it JB. There was NO noise being played and the party was actually dispersing. So your comment has no relation to what happened under the Busby party facts.

You need to pay attention to the facts.

Surf...it's not me who needs to pay attention to facts. I've asked at least 20 cops, to clarify HOW they come up to a house and justify whether or not the noise complaint was valid. I've explained to them, you could have some old kooks that live next door that are just mad when ANYONE has a party, even when it's quiet, simply because it takes a parking space in front of their house.

The cops ALL SAID THE SAME THING, which I've written in these debates countless times. So you, need to pay attention.

The officers all do the same thing. And that is, they go to the house where the "noise" is. They sit in their car, with windows down. If they don't hear it, even if they can tell it's the biggest rager in the history of parties, they won't go up to the door.

IF, upon sitting in their car or standing outside, they hear "excess" noise, they approach the party and tell them it needs to quiet down.

One cop even told me about getting multiple complaints about the same house. They drove by it two or three times, only to find it was always really low-key. He figured once in a while, someone probably screamed or did something noisy, but since the crowd wasn't out of control, they ignored whatever neighbor complained.

So why in the world, do you guys think the big, bad police force just pulled up, reading to bug a bunch of older, political folks? It just makes no sense. And if they weren't doing anything wrong, they can simply answer the cops questions.

It's the same thing I said about that idiot Harvard d-bag Gates. The cops actually showed up for more of a reason. A possible break-in, by two guys pushing on a front door. And they were upset about it.

Fundraisers are dull affairs. They serve a bit of wine, people mingle, the politician asks for contributions amidst polite chit-chat.

Josh, you'd be bored out of your mind. Let's picture what happened...

According to press accounts I've read, they had a microphone and probably one of those small speakers you've seen, and when the candidate started giving her stump speech a heckler hidden in the trees shouted anti-gay and anti-liberal slurs.

The small audience, wearing rather formal clothes, didn't chase the guy down and beat him to a pulp. They shouted back a bit, and probably turned up the volume so they could hear the candidate and drown out the heckler. She finished her speech. The heckler seemed to have disappeared, and they began wrapping things up.

A bit later, up pulls a sheriff. He probably just wants to tell some party to quiet down. Instead he sees well dressed older women who immediately begin shouting at him about the heckler. He doesn't want to hear it. He says he's there for the noise complaint and they'd better quiet down. "Who's the owner here? Show me ID."

He gets angry (using steroids? been tested?) and demands identification. They refuse indignantly, and tell him there's something called the 4th Amendment.

Remember, there's another observer we've heard nothing from. A member of the "Psychiatric Emergency Response Team" is there...doing what?

The cop should have backed off and called a supervisor, or he ought to have used the Emergency Response person, sitting or standing right there, to defuse the situation, get more information and cool down.

He attempts to take the belligerent woman into custody, and as a former professional athlete, knowing she's broken no law, surrounded by indignant friends...well, she's not going to come easily.

They protect her, quickly turning the tables on the cop and he calls for assistance. Thinking he's being overwhelmed by an angry mob, the cops come rolling in with as much force as they've got nearby.

This cop escalated the situation, didn't listen to the home owners or recognize that he'd been pranked in the first place.

Josh, he didn't sit outside and listen for noise to see if there's actually a problem. Instead, he lost his cool and embarrassed himself.

He also revealed a dangerous mind-set that cops are apart from and superior to "civilians".

Challenging a cop is not tolerated, even when the cop is clearly wrong. Charges will be fabricated to ensure that anyone who challenges a cop will be punished, in addition to whatever physical abuse the cop can deliver personally while you are "resisting arrest".

When older women at fundraisers are put under false arrest, made the subject of national news reports, and then attacked by political rivals as somehow attacking the cop...

...our country is in trouble, my friends.

Oh, no. See, the Tree Heckler (Insigneor Arbolitae) is an endangered species. The police were definitely wrong, the entire area should have been secured and ecologists brought in. I'm expecting an environmental impact study to be done at once. I won't stand for this!

They approach the party? How? Just because a cop knocks on my door doesn't mean I have to answer it. I'll yell to them through the door"GET A WARRANT AND I'LL GLADLY LET YOU IN". Without a warrant,they have no right. Most people are stupid. Most people suck cops c***s. Most people don't know the law and that's what cops count on. Think of it as a false sense of security.

LMAO refried. :-D Fred about summed it up. Why is it that most political stories in Sandy Eggo are much ado about nothing? There's a definite class war going on out here. The bad news is,that's boring. The good news though is that class wars WILL eventually escalate to bloody riots. :-D THAT'S when things in this country will change. When you see dead cops hanging from trees,politicians being paraded around like cattle,rest assured,the revolution WILL be televised.

This is the kind of s*** we should be up in arms about. Views this groups videos and tell me there won't be an uprising of some sort within the next decade.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQnLjLTEKoE

I don't agree with their agenda 100% but I agree with them not taking s*** from the piggies.

Fred, with all due respect, are you an idiot?! How in the hell do you know what the cop did when pulling up to the house? All these cops tell me, that's their procedure. To listen FOR THEMSELVES, to see how loud the noise is. Yet, you're jumping to the conclusion that this officer didn't do that. Incredible.

Second, that neighbor sounds like a complete tool. But, you're now saying, that because of HIS idiotic behavior, the thing to do is to turn up your speaker and drown him out by being louder. Well, that's real thoughtful for all the OTHER neighbors that might want some peace and quiet in their own homes. Which they're entitled to.

So, here in lies the problem. And it's a big problem for people.

When you own a home. Or rent an apartment...YOU HAVE TO keep the noise down. You have neighbors.

It doesn't matter that it's "only 8 p.m." Heck, the cops have told me it doesn't matter if it's Sunday afternoon, and the kids are playing video games loud with the windows open. Neighbors shouldn't have to hear the noise of another neighbor. As said before...something like lawnmowers, well...that's just life. But people making noise with a party, music, speakers, amps, or simply loud voices...is a no-no.

If people don't like that, they can go buy a few acres of land near Jamul, and make noise without worrying about having a neighbor.

Or, for a party, you can rent a hall. Go to a restaurant and/or bar.

For apartments, rent the rec room or whatever facility they may have. I've written about a few parties where people do this, and it works perfectly. And it's relatively inexpensive.

But if you have an apartment, and would rather have the party at the pool...well, you again, have a whole host of other problems. And you can't get mad when the cops show up.

It baffles me how much others just don't give a crap about people that don't want to hear THEIR noise.

Josh? Fred said that was how it went down according to the newspapers. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/24709.html http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/06/busby-blames-local-residents-political-agenda-sheriffs-department-officer-in-raid-on-fundraiser.php http://crooksandliars.com/logan-murphy/francine-busby-fundraiser-raided-poli http://weblog.signonsandiego.com/weblogs/afb/archives/034630.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francine_Busby

Josh-you simply do NOT know the facts as they were reported.

There was NO noise, so the cop had NO case.

Fred is 100% correct.

Barney Fife is facing civil liability-as well as the county and taxpayers- for being a pretender. The GED cop did not know the law, exceeded his lawful authority and now looks like the clown he is because of it.

If I was a County Supervisor I would do everything in my power to get him fired.

That seems kinda harsh, to want a cop fired for looking into a noise complaint (assuming, for a second, that there was no noise).

I met a retired cop at a party a few years ago. He looked like Yaphet Kotto. Very interesting dude, although a bit too into science fiction and crap movies. I think he ended up becoming a pychiatrist for cops, or something along those lines.

They had to go to a house in Santee, where lots of domestic desputes occured. They knock on the door, and hear a gun being loaded. They looked at each other and said "This isn't worth it. Let them shoot each other, and we'll come back later."

Well, they didn't get a call later. So, the couple obviously settled their little spat.

But is this what we want our cops doing? Not investigating things, because they might be sued? Or they might lose their job if a county supervisor doesn't like a quick, split-second decision they made?

If there was no noise, as you guys claim (I'll go with that, for this argument)....why not tell the cop your name, birthday, give him your ID, and CALMLY explain to the cop WHY the neighbor called 911, and how the neighbor was yelling homophobic slurs, etc.

The officer would've then went over and given the neighbor crap. Instead, you start mouthing off to a cop, you end up in cuffs (and sometimes, with a beer in your hand at the White House, but I digress).

Basically, it works like this. Has anyone ever yelled at a cop when they DIDN'T do anything wrong? And if they do, well, they're doing something wrong right there. Cops are trying to constantly access situations. They've been trained to do that. They know all the excuses. They've heard all the BS stories. So, they can be rude and curt, and you just have to go with the flow, and do what they say.

Here's something to do if your bored and want to ruin a random stranger's day....next time you see an armored car,flip off the driver.

The difference with Gates and Busby was the fact that Gates was outside of his house. The Busby cop entered illegally. If you enter my house illegally,I'm not giving you jacks* either. It's nunya business who I am. Outside my house? I'll ask what probable cause. If the cop wants to give me a legitimate reason,I'll gladly cooperate. If not,he can get fked.

That seems kinda harsh, to want a cop fired for looking into a noise complaint (assuming, for a second, that there was no noise).

You assume I want him fired for a noise complaint. Not so. I want him fired for being a bonehead, escalating a nothing situation into felony stupidity, stupidity that could have ended with people hurt, major liaibility for the county and basically either intentionally violating the law or grossly negligent in carrying out his lawful duties. I guarantee you this-this is will NOT be the last questionable brush up this deputy has with the public. . . . .

They had to go to a house in Santee, where lots of domestic desputes occured. They knock on the door, and hear a gun being loaded. They looked at each other and said "This isn't worth it. Let them shoot each other, and we'll come back later."

Well, they didn't get a call later. So, the couple obviously settled their little spat.

But is this what we want our cops doing? Not investigating things, because they might be sued?

Again, this was not the situation as with Busby's party, and to try to compare the Busby's case as being worthy of police intervention is nonsense. There was no violation of the law at Busby's party.

BTW, the police DO have a duty to protect the public, and if they did have a domestic call, and heard a gun being loaded in the home, they could intervene into the home-under the "exigent circumstances" doctrine exception to the 4th Amendment.

. . . . If there was no noise, as you guys claim (I'll go with that, for this argument)....why not tell the cop your name, birthday, give him your ID, and CALMLY explain to the cop WHY the neighbor called 911, and how the neighbor was yelling homophobic slurs, etc. =============================

For the simple reason I don't want to-that's why.

If YOU want to, no problem, but you cannot tell others they have to waive their constitutional rights. I would be happy to give my name and calmly explain the situation, but I would not give my DoB, my address, my phone number or anything else-because it is NONE of the cops business. Do you know that all the information you give to the cop goes into their datatbase, and everything you give will be on the record forever in the police computer hardrive? No thanks, I don't want the gov to know my address, my phone number, or anything else-that is my private, confidential information. . . . . The officer would've then went over and given the neighbor crap. ================================ Says who-you?

How do YOU know what the COP would do next? Do you have a crystal ball or are you just SPECULATING? The cop should have went to the COMPLAINING PARTY FIRST-and got the story-then headed over to the so called party.

Cops are trying to constantly access situations. They've been trained to do that. They know all the excuses. They've heard all the BS stories. So, they can be rude and curt, and you just have to go with the flow, and do what they say.

Josh, once again, what makes you THINK I "have to do" what the cops says? If I am not breaking the law, the cop cannot make me do anything. That may come as a surprise to you and many cops-but the last time I checked we were still in America. We're not in Iran, North Korea or China, this is the land of free speech and individual rights. People have died to protect and enforce those rights, and no one is going to infringe on my rights-including Barny Fife on a power trip.

Noise complaints aside, Busby is a good cheerleader...but not leadership material. I don't want someone representing me who doesn't know she doesn't have to answer the deputy's questions.

That's kind of too basic a lack of awareness, gives me the willies.

Busby has NO chance of being elected.

If she could not beat Bilbray after the Duke Cunningham/republican meltdown then she'll never get elected.

CBS 8 just revealed the name of the guy who called 911 on Francine Busby's"political"rally. His name is P.(Phillip) Dan Cook and you can read the entire transcript here: http://www.cbs8.com/Global/story.asp?S=11103877

That the man, Phillip Dan Cook, 65, Republican voter, has moved out is not surprising. Looks like he was renting a converted garage in the lower rent area along a busy road, and at the back to an angle is the stand of trees below the lavish custom house in the police report.

Google mapping both his address and the address of the residence where the incident took place you can see that there's a path right from his place to where the trees are. It's highly unlikely that some stranger walked up there, past his residence, so it sure seems probable he was the heckler.

Read the leaked incident report.

http://www.flashreport.org/blog.php?postID=2009062720361128

Again, according to the police report, it's clear that "Shari" had already agreed to comply with the noise warning and by trying to place her under arrest, Abbott acted in a way that even Bonnie Dumanis declared in her exoneration could be "inappropriate" according to Sheriff department rules.

See:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/8/26/204742/198

As has been noted elsewhere, there is NO requirement to identify yourself to police unless you are under suspicion of committing a crime. There was no crime. Abbott's job was to merely deliver a formal noise complaint, note it in his log and leave having noted that this was clearly NOT a raucous party but just a typical fundraiser that was being harrassed by a crank neighbor.

Can the D.A. use Google maps? Can they assemble the obvious enough prima-face evidence and conclude, yep, the crank and the heckler are the same dude, whose actions caused embarrassment, extraordinary expense, and nationwide news?

Abbott, according to Barman, was VERY aggressive:

"The next thing I know, Deputy Abbott violently grabbed my right wrist, twisted it behind my back and threw me to the concrete floor...twice. At some point, he was kneeling on top of me with his knee pressed into the back of my knee with the rest of his 250 + pounds on my back. I was then dragged across the floor through broken glass before he let me onto my feet. As I was being walked out of my home with my wrists handcuffed behind me, another sheriff's deputy with a police dog threatened to release the dog on me."

Barman's offence was knowing about and insisting on defending her rights under the law. After having received the officer's notification of a noise complaint, her obligation was through. Had she demanded that he leave the premises, the officer was obligated to go.

Instead, Abbott (has he been tested for steroids?) escalated the situation, following her and demanding her date of birth like a barking KGB interogator, then tackling the homeowner for attempting to walk away from him.

He should be fired. Abuse under color of authority is clear in this case.

All it takes is a federal lawsuit under section 1983 and Abott will be the one on the hot seat for escalating a minor infraction into felony stupidity.

So, the ball is in Barman's court.

Take it to federal court and GFT a ruling on the identification issue and that will put it to rest 100% (and also probably give Barman a pretty good chunk of cash because her chanes of losing are slim and zero, and slim might be out of town).

Someone Googled the guys name and came up with this;

Dr. Phillip Dan Cook Carlsbad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 1447 Summit Ave Cardiff-by-the-Sea, CA 92007 Phone: 760-586-5009 Email: [email protected]

http://membership.acs.org/C/CARB/letters/F08ACSCarbDivNews.pdf

Dan is at the top of page 4.

Re #43: "Hey, who let the gal in?" Can you say "Good ol' boy network"?