The Plea – Chapter Three

It’s painful to think of my brother and what happened so I try and push it from my mind.  Then I feel guilty because I don’t think of it.  Some days I can’t even remember what his face looked like.  I find it hard to remember that joyful man with the keen sense of humor.  He had a spark and it was forever extinguished by false allegations.  Any hope the government would try to get at the truth were dashed from the onset of the case.  Seventy-five days AFTER my brother left the home he shared with his ex-wife and her teenagers,  federal authorities arrived on the scene to search the premises.  According to federal documents dated September 4, 2004, law enforcement confined their search to the living room of the home.  Prior to the authorities arrival the computers, computer games, discs, paperwork, and cameras were compiled in one place by Rick’s ex-wife.  According to the public federal documents available for this case, the officials limited their “scope” to what Rick’s ex-wife alone provided and what she said belonged to him.  Rule 41. Search and Seizure  (a) Scope and Definitions.  (1) Scope. This rule does not modify any statute regulating search or seizure, or the issuance and execution of a search warrant in special circumstances.  (2) Definitions. The following definitions apply under this rule:  (A) “Property” includes documents, books, papers, any other tangible objects, and information.  (B) “Daytime” means the hours between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. according to local time.  (C) “Federal law enforcement officer” means a government agent (other than an attorney for the government) who is engaged in enforcing the criminal laws and is within any category of officers authorized by the Attorney General to request a search warrant.  (D) “Domestic terrorism” and “international terrorism” have the meanings set out in 18 U.S.C. §23311  (E) “Tracking device” has the meaning set out in 18 U.S.C. §3117 (b).  NOW THEREFORE, YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED within 10 days of the date hereof to search the above-named person, persons, house, conveyance or place for the property specified in the annexed affidavit and application, and to search any  occupant or occupants found in the house, place, or conveyance above named for such property, serving this warrant and making the search in the daytime, or in the nighttime if the property to be searched is not a dwelling house, and, if the property, papers, articles or things, or any part thereof, be found there, to seize it, giving to the person from whom or from whose premises the property was taken a copy of the warrant and a receipt for the  property taken, or leaving the copy and receipt at the place from which the property was taken, and to prepare a signed inventory of the goods seized in the presence of the person from whose possession or premises the property was taken, if they are present, or, if they are not present, in the presence of at least 1 witness, and to return this warrant, accompanied by the written inventory, to me forthwith.  It shall not exceed ten days because the possibility of scene being contaminated is too great.  Example:  Morgan vs. Leviene.  Morgan left his home in February of 1995.  Ninety days later an investigation squad was called in to search the home.  Drugs and other drug related items were confiscated.  Leviene insisted it was Morgans.  Too much time has lapsed between Morgan leaving and the search to determine with any real specificity that the items did indeed belong to him.  If Leviene wanted to set up Morgan that was the perfect time to do so.  Nothing obtained from search was admissible in a court of law.  Seventy-five days.  Rick had been out of his home seventy-five days.  Even by the government’s own standards what they did was wrong.  The government further contaminated the search by not looking through the entire house but simply taking the word of the ex-wife who had much (personally) to gain by Rick being taken away.  It is incumbent on federal agents investigating a case to be unbiased.  The agents who arrived on the scene after my brother had left readily admitted the slant they were going to take on the investigation. One agent in particular became quite close to my brother’s ex-wife and even gave her money.  How could a credible investigation be done a that point?  It couldn’t. One of the (many) problems with government is not that power corrupts or even that it is magnetic to corruptible people; rather, it is that we have been conditioned to tolerate corruption in power, and so we don’t even try to hold government officials accountable.  Over the coming weeks I will post items that will show the corruption that ran unchecked in the investigation of my brother.  When you have been denied justice you are incomplete.  

The majority of the responses I’ve received about the book The Plea have been overwhelmingly supportive.  The information has prompted many people to reach out and get help for their loved ones who have been falsely accused of sexual molestation and more have expressed their appreciation for bringing this subject matter to the public’s attention.  The outpouring of affection from those struggling with devastating loss because of this life altering accusation has been encouraging.  At least I know Rick’s struggles were not in vain.  Among the kind messages, however, were quite a few that were laced with obscenities and veiled threats.  All were signed with phony names.  The internet has given cowards a forum.  Fortunately I have a devise on my computer system that tracks cowards who leave messages and run.  I also have the capability to track those who spend time on my site.  In recent months my brother’s ex-wife has spent a lot of time on my website.  She works at a hospital in Liberty and does all her internet exploring about her ex-husband from there.  The vile emails I’ve received came from two different locals, Brigham Young University in Utah and a college in the Missouri Ozarks.  After contacting the authorities at BYU, my brother’s ex-wife’s niece, LJ Goettsch who attended the school, admitted to writing all but two of the letters.  My brother Rick’s ex-wife’s son attended college at College of the Ozarks, but insisted he did not write any emails.  The physical proof does not support his claim.  Please be advised that most of the emails I’ve posted contain obscene language.  I want people to see what has happened and provide proof of my ex sister-in-law and her relative’s involvement.  The internet can allow people like them to distance themselves from the effect of their words.  I put myself on the firing line because I know my brother is innocent and will continue posting proof of such until I die.  It seems odd to me that those so convinced of his guilt would be interested in the information I have then lash out in the virtual darkness.