Friday, August 25, 2017

'Jail Cam' in Privy Turned Off After Privacy Complaints

'Jail Cam' in Privy Turned Off After Privacy Complaints

Rights: Cameras installed as crime deterrent showing female inmates were viewed on the Web. Sheriff removes one but says rest will stay.

April 28, 2001|From Associated Press

PHOENIX — Sheriff Joe Arpaio turned off one of his "jail cams" that showed female inmates using a toilet, a view that could be accessed via the Internet.
The decision followed complaints from inmate rights groups and the state attorney general.
Donna Hamm, director of Middle Ground, an inmate-rights group in Tempe, said Thursday that the camera exploited the women and was linked to pornographic sites on the Internet. She asked the Justice Department to investigate for civil rights violations.
Jack MacIntyre, an attorney for the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, told the Arizona Republic that a short partition blocked the camera's view of the toilet itself. No juveniles would have been displayed unless they "look older and lie to us."
A camera misalignment was corrected after the attorney general's complaint, but no women could be seen using the toilet, the sheriff's office said
A Web surfer could see the view on a site called (As seen in April 2001) by providing a name and e-mail address and completing a consumer survey. Arpaio said his office got no revenue from the Santa Monica organization that operates the site. The organization didn't respond to calls seeking comment.
"First live Web cam from inside a working jail. You may see violence or sexually inappropriate behavior," the site says beneath a small picture said to be a view from one of the jail cameras, which also focus on holding and search cells.
Arpaio said he has done nothing wrong and that the rest of the Web cameras will stay.
Arpaio, dubbed the "nation's toughest sheriff," has gained widespread publicity for such practices as housing prisoners in tents, dressing them in pink underwear and re-establishing chain gangs in old-fashioned striped uniforms. He also banned coffee, R-rated movies and magazines showing nudes.
When the Web cameras were installed in July, Arpaio said they would be educational and a deterrent because people being booked would know they could be seen by anyone anywhere. An Arizona Civil Liberties Union official called the display an invasion of privacy because many people who would be seen hadn't been convicted.

Thursday, August 3, 2017

Nebraska State Patrol forcing vaginal exams of new hires?

Associated Press
August 2nd 2017

The Nebraska State Patrol has for years forced female recruits to submit to invasive, medically unnecessary pelvic exams performed by a male doctor before they can be hired, according to a new federal lawsuit that has prompted a criminal investigation.
State Trooper Brienne Splittgerber filed the lawsuit Tuesday against the patrol, the state of Nebraska, two former patrol heads and various other people, accusing them of creating a hostile work environment for women.
"Immediately upon learning of these allegations in June, the Governor instructed his Chief Human Resources Officer to review this matter, which has subsequently resulted in a criminal investigation by the State Patrol," Taylor Gage, a spokesman for Gov. Pete Ricketts, said in a written statement Wednesday.
State Patrol spokesman Cody Thomas said no NSP recruits have undergone the pelvic exams since December 2016. Thomas did not comment on who was under investigation.
The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages, saying women recruits for years have been required to undress from the waist down for a vaginal and rectal examination. The lawsuit says Splittgerber was told the exam was required to check for hernias, but male recruits were generally not required to undress or undergo such invasive exams.
"Subjecting the plaintiff and other female trooper candidates to a medically unnecessary and sexually invasive procedure is outrageous conduct which goes beyond all possible bounds of decency and is utterly intolerable in a civilized community," according to the lawsuit, filed by Omaha attorney Tom White.
Splittgerber submitted to the exam in 2014 before she was hired by the patrol in 2015, saying in her lawsuit that she was required by a Lincoln doctor hired by the patrol to remove her pants and lie on her back, then her stomach, to be examined.
Splittgerber complained to her superiors after being told by her family doctor that there was no legitimate medical purpose for the exam. She was told an investigation was underway, the lawsuit says, but was disturbed that female patrol candidates from subsequent recruitment classes continued to be sent to the same doctor to submit to the exams.
Dr. Karen Carlson, an OB-GYN with Nebraska Medicine in Omaha, said it would be highly unusual to conduct a pelvic exam for a possible hernia. Pressing the abdomen with a hand would be standard for such a check, she said.
"There would be no reason to look in the genital or anal area," Carlson said. "We might have them loosen their pants, but I wouldn't think there would be any need to disrobe."
An attorney for the State Patrol declined to comment Wednesday, citing the pending litigation, and referred questions to the Nebraska Attorney General's office, which will defend the patrol and state against the lawsuit. A spokeswoman for the Attorney General's office would say only that her office is currently reviewing the lawsuit.
The lawsuit is the latest of several controversies that have hounded the patrol in recent years.
Earlier this year, Ricketts fired Col. Brad Rice, who was the head of the Nebraska State Patrol during most of Splittgerber's tenure with the patrol. His firing came amid an internal review launched after officers were accused of changing their story about a crash that killed a South Dakota driver who was fleeing from a trooper.
Rice's firing followed a union survey of state troopers that found widespread dissatisfaction among rank-and-file employees with the agency's management.
Ricketts appointed Rice as head of the agency in 2015 despite concerns that Rice was complicit in gender discrimination while he was a captain in the patrol. Rice served on an interview panel that denied several promotions to a female sergeant, who successfully sued for gender discrimination. Rice was also accused of saying that women shouldn't be in law enforcement — a comment Rice said was taken out of context.
SOURCE: - Retrieved Agust 3rd, 2017

Thursday, June 29, 2017 domain updated.

We have noted that the following changes occurred between June 20, 2017 and June 29, 2017:
The registrar has been changed:
   NEW: NAME.COM, INC.                  
The domain expiration date has been changed:
   OLD: 22-Sep-2017                     
   NEW: 22-Sep-2018                     
The WHOIS server has been changed:
The domain name servers have been changed:
   NEW: NS1NTW.NAME.COM                 
The domain status has been changed:
   OLD: clientdeleteprohibited          
   NEW: clienttransferprohibited        
for the following name(s):


Thursday, June 8, 2017

Brent Oesterblad appealing WA Rodrick vs Galvez case

On May30th 2017, Brent Oesterblad has filed documents with the Court of Appeals in District I in relation to the Washington case known as Rodrick vs Galvez et el.

It is now June 8th and I've received 3 additional documents reflecting communication between Oesterblad and the Court of Appeals.

My friends, it's not over until the fat lady sings. But they will not be singing for they will be crying and yet that will bring music to my ears.

The Funny Bunny observing the Internet is known for not messing around. I will continue to do what is asked of me, which is to remain patient.

Saturday, May 6, 2017

Feds tell Supreme Court that mug shots should stay secret

Feds tell Supreme Court that mug shots should stay secret

The Justice Department won’t budge from its position that federal mug shots of criminals should be kept secret, arguing in a U.S. Supreme Court brief that jailhouse photos are “embarrassing, nonpublic” moments that add to defendants’ grief.

Friday, April 7, 2017

Rodrick vs Galvez in Washington State: CASE DISMISSED!!!


We did it. Case has been dismissed. Charles Oesterblad and Brent Rodrick are the real losers today. Oops, i meant Charles "Chuck" Rodrick and Brent Oesterblad. My bad.

A special thanks to the fine attorneys for defendants and the defendants who appeared telephonic-ally.

Update: Here's a copy of the Order of Dismissal (2017-04-12-Rodrick_vs_Galvez-Dismissal.pdf)

--Nicholas Maietta ([email protected])

Wednesday, April 5, 2017

BREAKING NEWS: Charles Rodrick and Brent Oesterblad are completely fucked.


In just 2 days, we'll be appearing in King County Superior Court in Washington State to learn if various motions by the defendants will be granted. We'll also likely get to hear the questions the Judge will have in this case. Apparently the Judge has some serious questions. I was wondering what those questions were and questing why the case wasn't just thrown out on day one. I now believe I have my answers, 2 days ahead of the hearing.

Unburned potentially explosive fuel in a combustion engine can lead to a backfire when the things heat up. In this case, the engine is the machine we know as the civil process. And the backfire will be extremely loud and will be heard NATIONWIDE. They better have all their i's dotted and their t's crossed. Unfortunately for them and fortunately for us defendants, they've messed up at every single document in this lawsuit. However, it seems that the defendants are not actually defendants in this case, and that's the most glaring problem Rodrick and Oesterblad don't realize they have, even if we were to somehow lose the case. Collecting any kind of Judgement against any defendants will need to first come from the court verifying and acknowledging that there were no procedural errors in case. No matter what happens on the 7th, we're many steps ahead of the game and I intend to bring those steps to everyone involved, except for the plaintiffs.

And if i need to, i'll prove it and if I do, it will be very soon.

--Nicholas Maietta

Monday, April 3, 2017

SEE YOU ALL IN 20 DAYS (Share Your Stories)

I will be spending the next 20 days in Jail .... Will let the rift raft make up some stories as to why I'm being locked away. The truth is that I am dealing with a probation violation, traffic related and I have had this commitment date, for awhile now. As always Nicholas can be contacted via email at [email protected]

The action in the case should begin to happen soon and we will be keeping you all updated. Will be adding new stories as they come in. I recognize that the site has not been very active lately, give that sometime, it will be very active again soon. SO STAY TUNED....

I know many of you are going through some kind of issue that is making your life miserable that relates to the fact that you are a registrant. Please take the time to email me at: [email protected] and tell me your problems. I'm working on a new project and your input would be greatly appreciated. Don't worry nothing will be published. Please leave your contact numbers if you would like me to call you back.

Thank you everyone for your continued support!!


Adam Galvez (Founder of
[email protected]

Sunday, March 26, 2017

Updates On On-Going Lawsuits

Yes we are still being stalked by the same people, names won't be mentioned but we are sure most of you who have been following know the players. Scum Bags with pure evil in their hearts. Oh but they will go on about how terrible of a person I am because of something that happened 20 years ago. I think I have proven to be a safe asset to this community. Based on many years of lies these scum have been able to manipulate the system something they are used to doing. They have gone as far as trying to turn the story all around which doesn't work well for three convicts and we might be adding a fourth soon. They have all been convicted of crimes yet they pretend to play the crime fighters. They are good at convincing people of this in fact.


Not long from now we will be able to reflect back on this and realize that from the very beginning we did the right thing. I would not take a moment of it back as long as I know that in the end there will be some people put away for their crimes, their unjusts and mainly their untruths. We all will forever be effected in some way by the trauma these people have caused in our lives.
If by exposing them we harmed them then they get what they deserve, the harm they have caused others is unforgivable. This story is the true definition of CYBER STALKERS and they happen to be quite good at it. I do not fear that I will not see justice in this matter, it will come and when it does the victory will be ours.


Wednesday, March 8, 2017

Mugshotextortion Sites Warning

Welcome back, we have been able to keep you as viewers informed on what can happen if you contact these kind of websites and ask for your names to be removed. So it is my advice to never contact these mugshot extortion sites unless you have legal representation. It is also my advice to never pay these scam sites any money. Many of these sites will make promises that they will clear your name off their mugshot registries and will even tell you that they will make sure that you never come up on any mugshot website from here on out, this is a lie. We will be doing whatever it takes to get these mugshot websites removed permanently from the internet as it is nothing more then just another internet scam.

We will be posting information on who you can contact should you become a victim of one of these mugshot extortion sites. Hang in there with us while we gather resources for all of you that are being attacked by these thugs.

In the mean time please take our advice and steer clear of these sites and do not make phone calls to these mugshot websites.

Saturday, March 4, 2017

Where did we go?

There will be a brand-new website coming out called to which I will be contributing to. I will personally update you all as things develop. I do apologize to all of you that feel that we may have let you down but I want you to all know that I personally will not be stopping my fight to end mugshot extortion and the continued cyber stalking that comes along with it.

So please know that in the very near future there will be a site up to which I will be contributing to. I will personally update you in this area of the law. I want you all to know that I will not be stopping my fight to end mugshot extortion cyber stalking and harassment.

Adam Galvez