Law, facts speak for validity of petition

I write this in response to Bob Hickox' view of the grand jury, Judge Fondi and the law. Perhaps Robey Willis should pay attention here as well. Were you in court to hear the testimony that Judge Fondi heard? No! Have you seen any of the evidence or ever read any of the transcripts of any of the proceedings? No! Have you ever looked up NRS 171.104, which provides that a private person has the same power to arrest as our beloved police? No!

Have you ever looked up NRS 171.126 which provides as found by Judge Fondi that circumstances under which a private person may make a felony arrest? No! Have you ever looked up NRS 171.138 which provides for a private person to kick down doors or break windows in any structure to apprehend a felon? No! Before you pick up a big ol' rock and heave it at Fondi, you might do well to look up our assault statute NRS 200.471(1)(a) which states in part, "Assault means an unlawful attempt." This is the statute I was charged with; there is nothing unlawful about the attempted arrest.

As for the grand jury, it cannot even look into my actions or Judge Fondi as those actions pertain to this issue. You write about me going into a neighborhood and terrorizing it when I attempted a legal arrest. Perhaps I should have called the Bustamontes in advance and asked them to have met me at the shooting range so I could arrest them. Instead, the tapes show I called the police, not once but twice, before I attempted to arrest and then only after the cops failed to show.

Has it even occurred to you that certain members of our law enforcement community have not only turned a blind eye to the conduct of John and James Bustamonte, but also, they've aided these two to avoid arrest and prosecution for crimes that some of these same law enforcement community members actually have acknowledged in court during their depositions. Depositions that will be turned over to the grand jury.

As for Robey Willis and his comment that grand jury signature procurers lied or were making misleading statements in an effort to get signatures, I offer the following. What Robey and his pals don't like and what he terms as a lie is them being associated with criminals. Unfortunately for them, under Nevada law they are, as provided by NRS 195.030: "Accessories. Every person not standing in the relation of husband or wife, brother or sister, parent or grandparent, child or grandchild, to the offender, who: 1. After the commission of a felony harbors, conceals or aids such offender with intent that he may avoid or escape from arrest, trial, conviction or punishment, having knowledge that such offender has committed a felony or is liable to arrest, is an accessory to the felony."

Robey and his pals, like it or not. put themselves in that position. Remember the federal judge in Reno did not rule that Robey Willis was innocent of the civil charges brought against him, but rather, he ruled that Robey was immune from any "civil" financial responsibility. We are appealing that ruling. My contention is "civil" immunity or not, there is no safe harbor for criminal liability because Robey Willis and the others named in the grand jury petition fit the criteria of "every person," making them in my view accessories to drug dealing as well as all the other crimes alleged in the petition. In other words, pursuant to Nevada law, no one has misled or lied to anybody in an effort to get their signature.

Those are just some of the facts. I often wonder how many people out there including Robey's friends have privately asked themselves why hasn't Robey or any one of these public officials brought suit against Weddell for slander? Could the answer be that in order to slander someone, one first has to make a false statement about that person?