City still hopes to prevent mayor from taking stand in deadly crosswalk lawsuit

Dorian... one of the subjects of your article is "Attorneys for the family of seven-month-old girl who died in 2015 accuse city of stonewalling" .... In fact, the actual conduct of the city is far beyond just simple "Stonewalling"...It is Federal Crime of Obstruction of Justice. On 11/10/2016, City in a smart and professional manner, convoy a Threatening Message to me by SDPD that they would send me "UNDER GROUND" after an Article published in San Diego Reader on 10/27/2016 about conduct of the City against " Public Records Act" and "Public Safety". Then, I escaped from San Diego for my Safety on 12/05/2016 !!! Mayor Faulconer had threatened me !!!
— March 31, 2017 7:34 a.m.

City still hopes to prevent mayor from taking stand in deadly crosswalk lawsuit

Dorian... please see my previous posts on this article. Currently, I am involved, as a **plaintiff**, in a case against the city. On **10/27/2016**, you published an article from me in San Diego Reader about the unlawful conducts of the City against **Public Record Act** and **Public Safety** (the following Link). http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2016/oct/26/ci… Prior to your interview with me in 2016, Office of the City Attorney , **DCA Keith Phillips**, had repeatedly **threatened** me not to interview with media and not to involve **Mayor Kevin Faulconer** in my case, although I had never have any intention to involve Mayor Kevin Faulconer in my case. **Shockingly on 11/10/2016** , SDPD contacted me and conducted an unlawful investigation from me in the street. During the investigation on 11/10/2016, **SDPD in a very smart and professional manner Threatened me.** During the investigation on 11/10/2016, I found out that **Mayor Faulconer** was behind the conduct of "**Threat**" and "**Obstruction of Justice**" because of publishing **an article in San Diego Reader from me on 10/27/2016** . The investigation on 11/10/2016, was **Audio Recorded**. During the unlawful conduct of the City against me on 11/10/2016, I clearly stated to SDPD that **Mayor was behind the conduct.** Please see the picture of my Email Communication with Deputy City Attorney, **Keith Phillips** and **Catherine Richardson** , defendant's attorney in point Loma Case on 03/30/2017.**Catherine Richardson** is in possession of the **Audio Record** of the incident on 11/10/2016 and she **MUST** act with good faith in all of the future Motion Hearings in Point Loma Case. Mayor Kevin Faulconer must be investigated. He does not act with Good Faith. http://www.sandiegoreader.com/users/photos/2017/m…
— March 31, 2017 6:23 a.m.

City still hopes to prevent mayor from taking stand in deadly crosswalk lawsuit

Dorian... I have sent an email to the Deputy City Attorney for Point Loma Case, **Catherine Richardson**, to read my above comments in this article. I am a plaintiff in another case against the City and the name of the Deputy City Attorney in my case is **Keith Phillips**. Attached to this post is the picture of my email to **Catherine Richardson** and **Keith Phillips** on **03/31/2017** http://www.sandiegoreader.com/users/photos/2017/m…
— March 31, 2017 4:28 a.m.

City still hopes to prevent mayor from taking stand in deadly crosswalk lawsuit

Dorian... The above formula is a "Universal Formula" to calculate the Required Design SSD. The "Metric Unit" of the above formula is being used in other countries too. The above formula is the source for all tables and guidelines such as AASHTO, etc... Any kind of guidelines that are being used in the City had to also comply with the above formula. In the above Formula, the minimum Required time, considering the Traffic Engineering Time Safety Factor in any kind of Road and situation is ***2.5 Second***, which is the total of ***1.5 Second*** for Driver Perception/Reaction Time and ***1 Second*** for Maneuver Time such as "Pushing the Brake Pedal" at Speed Limit of " V (mph)". In the above article there is an statement that "...dragging the young girl's stroller for 68 feet until coming to a stop...". In fact, the total reaction time and maneuver time of the driver of the SUV in Point Loma Case was fast and less than 2.5 Second after passing by the Bush and tree. But regardless of this matter and based on the calculations, the start point of SSD is on the curve of the transition to Canon Street. This is the reason that residents at Point Loma visually ***FELT*** that the Crosswalk was Unsafe at the Speed Limit of the area and had reported the Unsafe Crosswalk to the City. There is NO DOUBT that the City and the City Traffic Engineering is Guilty of of being negligence in Point Loma Case.
— March 31, 2017 2:32 a.m.

City still hopes to prevent mayor from taking stand in deadly crosswalk lawsuit

Dorian… My name is Farhad J. Bastani. I am former employee of the City. On 10/27/2016 you published an article in Reader after interviewing me. The subject of the article was “***Did an unwritten city policy result in death?***”. In the above article in this link, I noticed that the Vehicle had traveled 68 Ft. before full stop in Canon Street. Even regardless of any other matters in Point Loma Case, **The location of the Crosswalk** does not have “**Traffic Engineering Minimum Required Safety Factors**” and is within the “***Required Design Stopping Sight Distance”, SSD***. In fact, the City should not have any defense in Point Loma Case. The City had to consider this matter that the location of Crosswalk was within the Stopping Sight Distance and does not comply with the required Traffic Engineering Safety Factor. The formula for calculating the Stopping Sight Distance, SSD, in Traffic Engineering is: ***SSD= 1.47. V(mph). t + (V(mph)^2)/ (30. ((a/32.2)+G))*** The transition ramp from ***Catalina Blvd. to Canon Street*** is also a “***Simple Circular Horizontal Curve***”. The above formula is the reference for all of the design standards tables for “Stopping Sight Distance” in many guidelines such as ***AASHTO***. Any types of standard that may have been used by the City Traffic Engineering, should also comply with the above formula. The City should not have any defense and/or excuse for negligence in Point Loma Case. Office of The City Attorney should not cause "**Delay**" in Point Loma case anymore. **NO ONE** in the City can argue and/or oppose the above formula. Even NO JURY can oppose the above Formula. Thia is a FACT that the City was Negligence in Point Loma Case and had to: 1- Move the location of Crosswalk 2- Implement the Maximum Possible Traffic Signals and/or Safety Devices in that location. Even based on the calculations, the start point of SSD is on the curve of transition to Canon Street. http://www.sandiegoreader.com/users/photos/2017/m… http://www.sandiegoreader.com/users/photos/2017/m…
— March 31, 2017 1:11 a.m.

The crosswalk cover-up on Canon Street

Dorian... as another example, there is an "Standard Statement" in Public Employee Performance Plan section "CITY STANDARDS , REGULATIONS AND POLICIES" that : "Observes Safety Reporting Procedures and take Corrective Measures to Prevent Recurrence of Safety Hazard". Apparently in Point Loma Case, there were various reporting of "Unsafe Crosswalk" in Point Loma that the City had to follow the complaints/reports. Unfortunately, even some MANAGERS in the City had been "Negligent" and even conducted "AGAINST" the Pubic Employees Performance Plans.
— March 8, 2017 4:01 a.m.

The crosswalk cover-up on Canon Street

Dorian… In this article, I noticed that the City has blocked the **Testimony Under Oath** by **Mayer Kevin Faulconer** in Point Loma Case. Mayer Faulconer even should be **FIRST SUSPENDED** and then being **INVESTIGATED** and then **PROSECUTED**. He has participated in conduct of “**OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE**” by abuse of **SDPD Force** against me for the Published **Article in San Diego Reader on 10/27/2016** in the link below: http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2016/oct/26/ci… Please see the **Three (3) Pages letter dated 11/28/2016** attached to this post. I am also in possession of the **AUDIO RECORDS** of the incidents explained in this post. 1-On **10/27/2016** an Article Published in San Diego Reader. The subject of the Article was conduct of the City against **Public Record Acts and Public Safety**. **Katie Keach , The City Spokeperson,** had also made comment in the article. 2- Office of The City Attorney had repeatedly threatened me not to involve Mayer Faulconer **in my case against the City** and not to disclose any evidences for the Public. 3- In an Ex Parte Hearing on 11/02/2016, I handed San Diego Reader dated 10/27/2016 to both **Judge Joel M. Pressman** and **the City Attorney, DCA Keith Phillips** and encouraged the Judge to Read the Article. 4- Then on **11/09/2016**, DCA Keith Phillips contacted me and left a “**None Sense Voice Message**” on my Cellphone about the Article in San Diego Reader dated 10/27/2016. 5- Then, in the morning of 11/10/2016, SDPD **unexpectedly** contacted me and requested to meet me out of my Residential. 6-Then I **shockingly and while being confused**, met a SDPD Detector out of my residential. In the unlawful investigation in the street on 11/10/2016, SDPD delivered “**INDIRECT MESSAGE OF THREAT AND INTIMIDATION**” to me because of publishing an Article in San Diego Reader on 10/27/2016 and disclosing the documents to Public. This conduct was **PLOTTED** by the Office of The City Attorney. During the investigation, I found out that **KATIE KEACH and MAYER FAULCONER** were behind the conduct and Immediately notified SDPD that: ***“This is sabotage…this is sabotage in favor of mayor…Mayor is not above the law… this is because of the sensitivity of Mayor and Office of The City Attorney for the Article in San Diego Reader… Keith Phillips is abusing Police Force against me in favor of Mayor”. (Audio record dated 11/10/2016 is available)*** 7- After reading your article and learning about **Point Loma Case**, it has **NOW** come to clarity for me that without any doubt **Mayer Faulconer** was behind the Conduct on 11/10/2016 against me while he was involved in Point Loma Case. http://www.sandiegoreader.com/users/photos/2017/m… http://www.sandiegoreader.com/users/photos/2017/m… http://www.sandiegoreader.com/users/photos/2017/m… http://www.sandiegoreader.com/users/photos/2017/m…
— March 7, 2017 7:19 a.m.

The crosswalk cover-up on Canon Street

Dorian... This is the Picture of Tony Heinrich former Director of The City Engineering and Public Works Department. He is now retired and I wish him read this article to see and know what was the consequences of their conducts and negligence against Public. http://www.sandiegoreader.com/users/photos/2017/m…
— March 7, 2017 5:15 a.m.

The crosswalk cover-up on Canon Street

Dorian… I strongly believe that in Point Loma Case, Attorney for Avang Family should be cautious that the City Employees do not attempt TO DESTROY THE EXISTING EVIDENCES. In several instances during my employment, I even noticed that the City Employees even “DESTROYED THE EXISTING EVIDENCES” OR “PLANTING/FABRICATING EVIDENCES”. JAMES NAGELVOORT is one of the individuals who has HISTORY OF DESTROYING THE EVIDENCES AND HARDCOPY DOCUMENTS in 2013, with concern of filing LAWSUIT against the City for Negligence against Public Safety. I am fully aware his conducts. Unfortunately, James Nagelvoort is THE CURRENT DIRECTOR OF THE CITY ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.
— March 7, 2017 3:56 a.m.

The crosswalk cover-up on Canon Street

Dorian… at the time of the Accident in Point Loma, **JAMES NAGELVOORT** was the Director and Responsible person in the City of San Diego Engineering and Public Works Department. In an incident in **April 8th. 2013**, I **CORRECTLY** notified one of the Residents of San Diego of an “**UNSAFE SITUATION**” during one of the City Pavement Projects. I had “SIMPLY” replied to the RESIDENT’S EMAIL and notified him of “UNSAFE/HAZARDOUS SITUATION” which could potentially cause ACCIDENT for that resident. Even another Resident of San Diego, whose name was **Kathleen McAllister** had filed a “CLAIM” in The City Risk Management for the same Safety Matter, which was a correct claim. Then, I immediately subjected to “**Retaliation**” by supervisors with this essence that “**I HAD NOT TO MADE SAFETY WARNING BY EMAIL**” to the Resident and if an accident happened, that resident could SUE the City by that Email dated 04/08/2013. On 05/03/2013, I received a **RETALIATORY WRITTEN REPRIMAND** by Supervisors and David Zoumaras, Deputy Director. Among various “Fraudulently Fabricated Allegations” against me, **SHOCKINGLY** I received an ITEM in the Written Reprimand for my “SAFETY WARNING BY EMAIL TO A RESIDENT ON 04/08/2013”. Also my “**Annual Performance Evaluation**” which had been included with “**STATEMENTS AGAINST PUBLIC SAFETY**” was attached to the Written Reprimand. In the “Hearing Meeting of the Written Reprimand” on 05/03/2013, I **DID NOT SIGN THE REPRIMAND** and Employee’s Union Representative made note on the Reprimand as: “**DECLINED TO SIGN**”. Please see the attached document in this Post. Then in MAY 2013 for multiple times, I opposed the conduct and policy of the City against Public Records Act and Public Safety. I argued with the City managers that **Negligence** of the City against “Public Safety” would cause **INJURY and even DEATH for Public**, if not being corrected and conduct of the City against “Public Record Act” could “Obstruct the Evidences and Reality”. The hearing officer of the Written Reprimand dated 05/03/2013 was NAGELVOORT. On **06/18/2013** and during the **APPEALING HEARING OF THE WRITTEN REPRIMAND , I ONCE AGAIN** notified JAMES NAGELVOORT that **NEGLIGENCE** of the City against PUBLIC SAFETY and PUBLIC RECORD ACT would cause INJURY and even DEATH for Public, if not being corrected, and the ITEM in my Written Reprimand was against “PUBLIC SAFETY”. On 06/18/2013, NAGELVOORT **SHOCKINGLY** responded to me that the statements of David Zoumaras were correct and the City Employees should be **CAUTIOUS and ALERT** about this matter to **PREVENT ANY POTENTIAL LAW SUIT** against The City **EVEN AT THE COST OF INJURY TO PUBLIC**. Then he UPHELD THE WRITTEN REPRIMAND against me and even DID NOT REDUCED the duration of Written Reprimand. http://www.sandiegoreader.com/users/photos/2017/m… http://www.sandiegoreader.com/users/photos/2017/m…
— March 7, 2017 2:13 a.m.