According to Kern County Sheriff Donny Youngblood, “it may be months before an investigation determines exactly what happened Friday night when a sheriff’s deputy hit and killed two pedestrians in Oildale.” Police who responded to the incident took the deputy to the hospital — and arrested grieving relatives on the scene.
Daniel Hiler ran out of gas during an evening motorcycle ride in Oildale, California on December 16. While walking his bike to a gas station, the twenty-year-old father of two ran into a family friend named Chrystal Jolley. The pair was crossing a street at a widely-recognized intersection when they were fatally blindsided by a vehicle traveling at a speed well in excess of the posted speed limit. Despite the fact that darkness had descended, the driver hadn’t turned on his headlights. The victims were killed instantly.
Within minutes, police swarmed the scene, and arrests were made — none of which involved the driver, Deputy John Swearengin of the Kern County Sheriff’s Office. The four people arrested were relatives of the victims, who got into what the Sheriff’s Office described as an “altercation” with California Highway Patrol officers when they attempted to identify the victims.
“I was at home on Friday night working on my car when someone came running over and told me that a deputy ran over my daughter in the street,” recalls Jimmy Clevenger, Jolley’s father. “I ran down here, I was very upset…. The next thing I know, they had me by the neck and threw me to the ground and said I resisted arrest. My daughter was dead in the street and it was their fault.”
The outraged relatives were taken to jail, and face criminal charges. Swearengin, the killer, was taken to the hospital and wasn’t compelled to undergo drug or alcohol screening
The posted local speed limit (for Mundanes, of course) is 45 miles per hour. According to several on-scene accounts from horrified witnesses, Swearengin blew through the intersection at a speed of 75–90 miles per hour. Despite the fact that he was obviously in a hurry, Swearengin didn’t activate his siren or running lights — or, according to at least one eyewitness, his headlights.
Sheriff Donny Youngblood told the Bakersfield Californian that the deputy “was responding to a report of a stolen vehicle with a suspect still at the scene” when he struck his victims. This would mean that he was not involved in a high-speed pursuit. Furthermore, as some skeptical witnesses pointed out, the main office of the Sheriff’s Department is about a mile or two west of the intersection where Swearengin killed Hiler and Jolley — and he was headed that direction at the time of the incident. This suggests that the deputy wasn’t motivated by an urgent call from an isolated and over-matched comrade, but rather engaging in a favorite pastime of uniformed adolescents — “Kickin’ ass and drivin’ fast.”
Some residents of Oildale, a suburb of Bakersfield, describe the Kern County Sheriff’s Deputies as notorious for their habit of speeding through the town’s narrow streets, blithely ignoring speed limits without bothering to activate their lights or sirens.
“They have no consideration for the other public,” objects Michelle Cameron, a distant relative of Jolley. Her assessment is seconded by Forrest Faulkner, an 11-year resident of Oildale who claims to know and be on good terms with most of the department. “They’re great people,” Faulkner maintains, even as he criticizes the department’s habit of putting the public at risk by needlessly reckless driving. “I’ve seen sparks fly from the car’s undercarriage when they hit a dip,” Faulkner recounts.
According to Whittney Peaker, Hiler’s fiance, the night before he was killed the young man had complained about the habitual disregard of traffic safety rules displayed by the department: “The night before, we left McDonald’s and a sheriff pulled out right in front of us with no lights on and Daniel said ‘I freakin’ hate when they do that.’ The next day they freaking take his life because he didn’t have his lights on.”
“I just see them flying through the air I mean like rag dolls. It didn’t even look real. It sounded like an explosion, like a stick of dynamite went off. It was at least a half a block down the street where they landed. It was far,” said Chris Moody, who witnessed the accident.
Under section 192 [c][2] of California state law, the deaths of Hiler and Jolley resulted from an act of vehicular homicide — one involving “gross negligence,” and therefore a felony. No charges have been filed against Swearengin, and the deputy faces only an “administrative” inquiry, rather than a criminal investigation. The outcome of the administrative procedure isn’t exactly shrouded in mystery.
“What gets me is we already know the outcome,” complained Anna Rodriguez, one of Hiler’s friends, to a local reporter. “The officer will go on paid suspension. Then they will say he didn’t do anything wrong. And that will be the end of it.”
For more on this story, go to KGET.com.
December 22nd, 2011 at 1:05 pm
It is like I live in the Soviet Union that I grew up being taught to hate.
December 27th, 2011 at 5:40 pm
At least people are waking up Larry. It won’t be long now until we take back the world.
December 28th, 2011 at 3:41 pm
Anna got it right, the pig will go on “paid suspension” aka paid vacation! Rewarded for his Nazi crime!
The police committed an unlawful arrest of the relatives. It is common sense that an unlawful arrest is an assault like any other and it is your RIGHT to resist assault. Up to and including the death of the assailant if necessary! It would be unwise to think that an armed thug pig would not use his gun if you resist his unlawful assault so the logical conclusion is draw on them the moment they violate your rights! Shoot to kill the corporate state henchmen!
If it were my daughter I would have arrived armed and when I saw a cop behind the wheel of another assault vehicle I would have opened up on the pig in reasonable self defense ! They are obviously out to kill, steal, and destroy!
December 28th, 2011 at 4:32 pm
One of the many reasons for the second amendment is for the sovereign citizens of this country to effectively react to any government agency that flaunts the rule of law. Vigilantes anyone?
December 29th, 2011 at 1:24 am
This comment will probably go into the cyber ether and little , or no research will be done resulting in any action, or provided to the victims surviving this rights violation in order to effect a much different outcome. I will, however post the information that includes case law citations that should be applied to the suit for criminal and civil prosecution of the actors for their actions, and lack of actions required by law. Real law not the code bullshit ,which is colorable policy, not law itself. Here are a few areas to consider, and should anyone have access to the family of this crime ad gross culpable neglience:
“When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.
“These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.
“An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).
Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case, the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense.” (State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).
“One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance.” (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910).
And on the issue of actually killing an arresting officer in self defense:
“Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer’s life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529
” A statutedoes not trump the Constitution.”
People v. Ortiz ( 1995) 32 Cal. APP.4 TH At
P.292, Fn 2
Conway v. Pasadena Humane Society
(1996) 45 Cal. App 4th 163
” An officer who acts in violation of the Constitution ceases to represent the government.”
Brookfield Const. co. v. Stweart , 284 F. supp. 94
” An officer may be held liable in damages to any person injured in the consequence
of a breach of any of the duties connected with his/her office…
The liablity for ANY nonfeasance,misfeasance,and for malfeasance in office is his/her individual,
not official capacity.”
70 Am Jur 2d. Sec. 50 VII civil liability
VIOLATORS OF RIGHTS CAN BE SUED
“It is the duty of all officials whether legislative, judicial, executive, administrative, or ministerial to so perform every official act as not to violate constitutional provisions.” Montgomery v state 55 Fla. 97-45S0.879.
Under USC Title 42 §1986. Action for neglect to prevent states: “Every person who, having knowledge that any wrongs conspired or to be done…and having power to prevent or aid in preventing … Neglects or refuses so to do …shall be liable to the party injured…”
“…an officer may be held liable in damages to any person injured in consequence of a breach of any of the duties connected with his office…the liability for nonfeasance, misfeasance, and for malfeasance in office is in his ‘individual’, not his official capacity.” 70 Am. Jur. 2nd Sec. 50, VII Civil Liability.
“The attempt of a State Officer to enforce an unconstitutional statute is a proceeding without authority… is an illegal act, and the officer is stripped of his official charter and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to its officer immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States.”
Ex Parte Young, 209 U. S. 123, (1908). [Supreme Authority = Private men and women “we the people”.]
“No public policy of a state can be allowed to override the positive guarantees of the U. S. Constitution.” 16 Am.Jur. (2nd), Const. Law, Sect. 70.
“The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.” Miller vs. U. S. 230 F 2d 486, 489.
“At common law an arrest could not be made of a person charged with a misdemeanor except on warrant of a magistrate.” Carpenter v. Mills, 29 How. Pr. 473
The International Organization Immunities Act of 1945 placed all courts under the jurisdiction of the United Nations (reference Title 22 CFR Foreign Relations with Oaths of Office under section 92.12 and 92.31). Under Title 8 USC 1481all oath takers (judges, law enforcement officers, etc.) voluntarily forfeit their citizenship via the Oath of Office thus becoming foreign agents and are required to register under the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act (though they never do).
The police are not public officers (see state constitution) but are paid agents of “municipal corporations” and
have NO GOVERNMENTAL POWER OR AUTHORITY OF ANY KIND.
The Supreme Court has ruled that the police are under NO obligation to protect anyone.
“neither a public entity nor a public employee is liable for failure to establish a police department or otherwise provide police protection service.” California Government Code, § 845
“police officers have no affirmative statutory duty to do anything.” Souza v. City of Antioch, 62 California Reporter, 2d 909, 916 (Cal. App. 1997)
It is not the duty of the police to protect you. Their job is to protect the Corporation and arrest code breakers. Sappv. Tallahasse, 348 So. 2nd 363, Reiff v. City of Philadelphia, 477 F. Supp. 1262, Lynch v. N.C. Dept. of Justice 376 S.E. 2nd. 247.
The following should be applied by the victim’s survivors and followed through with if they wish to see remedy, I realize it will not ring back their loved ones. However it will serve as an atom bomb upon the county by dissolving its charter and that should be out to about eleven decimal points. Does anyone think that would have an impact to assist the family? I know it would. The government will never admit it is wrong, but it will pay you. Were I in this position I would forego the money and look for punishment by way of jail, fines and leins upon all assets of every official involved including the Sheriff and his deputies, get everyone. Cops are not immune, I have listed law as proof of this. Now it’s up to YOU PEOPLE to ensure they get it and use it, and if you need it use it too.
Respectfully in truth and liberty,
Phillip – Defender of the Republic, OAthKeeper, and One of the People of the Preamble.
December 29th, 2011 at 1:31 am
Quo Warranto
Here is how a Quo Warranto action works to secure its remedy:
First, an aggrieved party writes a letter to the Attorney General (hereinafter, “AG”) showing cause for the Quo Warranto action and asking the AG to bring the action against the officer acting without lawful authority.
Second, the AG either brings the action or they decline the request.
If the AG declines: The aggrieved party automatically has the right to proceed as an independent prosecutor for the AG’s office with the AG’s full authority to prosecute the case.
Third, the case proceeds to trial.
Forth, if the evidence provided at the trial proves the answer to any of those three questions was, “Yes”, the judge(s) must acknowledge that Quo Warranto applies.
Fifth, if Quo Warranto applies the judge has no choice but to issue the Quo Warranto Writ, which ousts the officer in question from office. This is an important point; though the judge reviews the facts to determine whether the answer to any of the three questions was, ’Yes’, if that is the answer, they have no choice but to apply the remedy.
The court has no jurisdiction to determine what the remedy will be or whether the remedy should be applied; they can only execute the remedy; to fail to do so would make the judge subject to a Quo Warranto action.
This will dissolve the municipality known as the COUNTY OF ( your county here) as it will demonstrate a clear abuse of office and the Constitutional limitations of officials. USE IT PEOPLE!
Phillip
December 31st, 2011 at 4:42 pm
We the people must begin using the courts to file suit against cops as well as corporations that violate the law and our rights. I have filed suit against several corporations and won all. I have not filed against a cop yet though I plan to. In OR small claims suits can go up to $10,000 take a crooked cops car and put a lien on his house or garnish their paycheck and maybe others will start to pay attention.
February 9th, 2012 at 2:35 pm
Organized Crime, by definition of the U.S. Supreme Courts consists of any and all parties who partake in any illegal activities consisting of extortion, threats of un-willful imprisonment, threats to do harm, physical force being used, use of intimidation and fear to seek financial gain.
The KGB, TRIAD, YAKUZA, ITALIAN MOB, etc. Have been condemned the title of organized crime because they act in all the above to seek financial gain.
The U.S. Government extorts its citizens, Pay taxes or go to jail (un-willful imprisonment, intimidation), if an officer tells you to do something and you refuse they apply physical force (physical force, fear), Officers use threats of imprisonment, physical harm, intimidation. By the U.S. Supreme Courts own definition our government is in fact Organized Crime.
May 15th, 2012 at 7:55 pm
You people need to organize and form grand juries. There is no need to rely upon agents of state to form your grand juries. The people are the state in fact. The people are sovereign, not their agents. Get together 26 men and women and a number of alternates. Bring statements of fact before them in allegation of crimes, the same being sworn under penalties of perjury. Choose a foreman. Deliberate and if the facts are sufficient to conclude that a crime has been committed and a certain party is named who is likely to have committed it, then make up a true bill.
You can give your public servants first right of refusal to prosecute if you wish, but knowing how corrupt their courts are, you may wish to go directly to the military provost marshal.
Publishing the true bill in a local paper is not a bad idea either.