The co-owners of Rose Speaks.com will be offline approximately 12-36 hours beginning approximately 7 PM CDT on September 1, 2009. We will have no access to ANY programs as Ken packages up the hard drives from both computers and the electronic storage media to be shipped to the Special Master Craig Ball on the morning of September 2.
We will be offline for AT LEAST 12 – 36 hours or longer as we wait for hard drives to be returned.
Your site moderators are Roxanne @ rosepeaks.com and Heath @ rosespeaks.com they will be in charge so be nice to them, please!!!! The site, blog, forums, chat link, etc. will of course still be online just we won’t have access to anything so the two of them will be running the blog, problem solving, approving those “spam” messages. So play nice and don’t give them bloggers’ headache.
Diamond Girl is in charge of the www.rosespeaks.com/public-forums so you can leave her a message on the forum and she will get back to you as quickly as possible.
Liann and Sammy1 are of course the moderators for the chat link as well as Roxanne and Heath. The chat link as the SITE will be here should hopefully NOT go down in our absence but email Roxanne or Heath if any major problems come up.
I will be checking all of the cases we are following for paperwork and getting them coded in and uploaded for you to download with a short list of what documents we have up for all of you before we shut down at 7 PM CDT. The calendar on the main site will also be up to date with the newest deadlines.
I will also try to have one short article for you to discuss any of these cases or one of the other cases we are following: Casey Anthony, Michael Jackson, Roland Carnaby, Lori Drew, something from John J. Nazarian. Maybe a couple of new ones.
I am going to gather your questions on the Daniel Smith “A Question of Murder” that you have all presented on that article for the interview I will be doing while we are offline.
Now just pray the depositions are NOT unsealed before we are back, I will check that before we go offline also. Hopefully this will go smoothly with out a hitch (sure cough cough) and that we will be back before you know it.
As always Ken and I as well as your hard working non-paid, the complaints stop here moderators’ thank you all for flying Rose Speaks.com.
The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.
I want to thank y’all for the outpouring of love and support being shown towards Rose during this time, especially after learning yesterday from the doctor about the serious downturn in her health. We are deeply touched that not only has it come from the members of the blog here but it also seems that no matter what side of this case you fall upon, there is well wishes and prayers being sent her way. Thank you again.
Many of you have reached out and offered to help with the site any way you can, here is what we need:
1. Public Forum Moderators (you will have control of the forums and the topics…where and what is discussed…. And we will stay off of the forums and out of your way. We will support you and your decisions 100%).
2. Site Moderators. Right now there are three and it is hard now that we are not on the board as much for them to do this. If you are interested in helping contact Roxanne @ rosespeaks.com, Heath @ rosespeaks.com, Daisy @ rosespeaks.com or myself, webmaster @ rosespeaks.com.
3. Chat moderators. Liann has stepped forward and offered to do that, thanks Liann. Hopefully the chat will become more active with the friendship and chats available, Rose will drop in as she feels up to it.
4. Writers. We of course need writers for articles.
Rose has made a list of cases y’all are following:
Birkhead vs. Opri, Opri vs. Birkhead in Los Angeles
California state vs. Stern, Dr. Kapoor and Dr. Eroshevich
Casey Anthony, everything to do with the Florida case
Dr. Cyril H. Wecht new trial in Penn.
DC Madame and her estate
USA vs. Lori Drew (in federal court in California – cyber stalking)
USA vs. Hollywood Madam, Michelle Braun
Estate of Anna Nicole Smith vs. G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley
Howard K. Stern vs. Mark Speer and Jackie Hatten in California civil court
Howard K. Stern vs. Rita Cosby and Hachette Books in New York
Susan Carnaby vs. Harris County Police dept in shooting death of alleged CIA operative
All of the multiple cases in different jurisdictions on the Anna Nicole Smith Estate.
Arthur vs. Stern, TMZ, et. in state court in Houston Texas
I am sure there is more but these are the cases Rose’s Computer shows that she is following.
I will continue to get the papers from the various jurisdictions and court filings and continue to code them in for downloading.
The RoseSpeaks YouTube channel will continue to be maintained and updated as new videos are received. We have a volunteer helping us with it.
Again our thanks for the outpouring of love and support, from all sides of all the cases we are following. As we know more, I will post updates as I am able to here on the board.
Rose wants the site to continue, as do those of us behind the scenes. Y’all have put a lot of work into the site and I believe we can keep it going.
As Rose and I have said many times, thanks for flying Rose Speaks, we enjoy every minute of it.
Ken, Rose and all of your overworked moderators/admins.
Howard K. Stern has moved up his arraignment date to April 7, the same day as Dr. Khristine Eroshevich is scheduled to be arraigned. This is good news, in my opinion, as the two defense teams might be able to help each other prepare and go through all of the evidence Danny Santiago and unnamed investigators accumulated in just a tad over two years including the lists and statements of everyone Mr. Santiago and/or others interviewed.
Then there will be the preliminary hearing within 10 court days to “show probable cause”, (since this was a Warrant and not a grand jury indictment the defense teams get a lot more lead way in the preliminary hearing), which will be on or no later than April 22. This hearing must not be later than ten court days after the arraignment per California statute.
The prosecutor must prove all charges and conduct enhancements against the defendants at the preliminary hearing. Howard K. Stern’s legal team, led by Steven H. Sadow of Atlanta Georgia, and Dr. Khristine Eroshevich’s attorney, Adam Braun, will get to cross examine any witnesses and challenge the evidence against either of them at this hearing. The defense team can also file motions to suppress evidence against either of them, remember after the April 7 hearing will be the first time either defendants’ defense team will be granted full access to all of the evidence. However at the preliminary hearing both defendants’ legal team are restricted by Penal Code section 866. The legal teams are only allowed to put on evidence that will establish an affirmative defense, negate an element of the crime charged (I. E. intent for a crime as is charged in this case), and they will also be allowed to impeach the testimony of witnesses.
If the judge determines that the prosecution has presented sufficient evidence to hold both Stern and Dr. Eroshevich, the threshold is not like that at a trial it is much lower for the judge, for trial, following the arraignment and preliminary hearing the judges in California criminal courts normally will then order both to appear for a “second arraignment” on a charging document known as an “information.” That arraignment must occur within 15 days of the conclusion of their preliminary hearing which would be on or before May 7.
Stern and Dr. Eroshevich can ask for a “speedy trial”, which must begin within 60 calendar days from the second arraignment date “document of information hearing”, which would be by July 7, 2009.
It seems to me both want to get this started so their defense teams with their investigators, we don’t know the names of Stern’s investigators, but Dr. Eroshevich’s investigators will be headed up by John J. Nazarian P. I. and his firm Nazarian and Associates, can begin to research the witnesses, interview them, find out who all the state investigators (Danny Santiago) has talked to and all records looked at that were included in the sworn statement of Mr. Santiago used when obtaining the warrants for arrests issued on March 12.
In other news Howard K. Stern won his hearing against Mark Speer on Friday March 27, and so that defamation case is going forward with discovery beginning now. I would think this hearing and beating the “anti slapp” statute of California is a big win and will strengthen Stern’s suit against Rita Cosby and Hachette Books.
It looks like it is going to be a busy spring and summer. We have new Casey Anthony papers up as well including the transcript of the interview with the private investigator, Dominic Casey whom worked for the George and Cindy Anthony family. There are the statements of Roy Kronk and Mr. Hoover the photographer that was in the area and filmed Mr. Casey in November 2008 in the same location where Caylee’s remains were later found. We will try to have all of these coded for you to download later today.
There are also new filings in the Roland Carnaby case that needs to be coded in and then you can look at some of the people listed as witnesses in the civil rights violation trial including the ex-president, the first President Bush.
Lastly, we are waiting on the Phil Spector trial verdict as well, that case was given to the jury on March 26, and we look forward to Sprocket’s coverage of the verdict when it comes in.
Lot’s of papers to read and lots of trials to follow. We look forward to your input on these cases with good discussions of the facts and documents.
This article is the sole property of Rose Speaks unless otherwise stated. This article as with other articles is based on the opinion of Rose Turner, or our guest authors if so indicated. Please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this article are the opinions and sole property of the site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.
In a saga that appears to be getting stranger by the day, the Houston Police Department disciplined both officers involved in the fatal shooting of Roland Carnaby for not following policy.
Could the sweeping elections including ousting the current District Attorney for Harris County where Houston Texas is located, warrant a look again at the Roland Carnaby shooting? Are there new questions in the suit brought by Carnaby’s widow Susan Carnaby against the city and the police department in the Southern District Federal Court in Houston for violating her husband’s civil rights in the fatal shooting?
Last summer a grand jury failed to indict either officer, although the autopsy report clearly labels the death as a homicide. However, this week the Houston Police Department found both officers involved in the suit had failed to follow policy in the high-speed chase and shooting and issued letters to the officers dated Nov. 5, the day following the election. It was the department’s internal affairs division, which found that Sgt. Andrew J. Washington and Officer Cecil A.T. Foster did not use sound judgment and did not follow department policy in the incident.
Disciplinary records filed with the Civil Service Commission state that Washington and Foster did not follow department policy when they left their positions of cover and approached Carnaby’s vehicle without trying to talk with him first. The records also state that Washington did not properly supervise Foster.
Per the Houston Chronicle article, Chief Harold Hurtt suspended Washington for one day and gave Foster a written reprimand. Washington has appealed his suspension while Foster has filed a grievance.
Per KHOU of Houston, “In a statement released Tuesday afternoon, HPD said it issued three disciplinary actions to the officer who fired the shots and two to his supervisor following an internal affairs investigation.”
“We feel that the judgment calls they made, were the correct calls. We certainly intend on appealing the discipline,” said Gary Blankenship, HPOU to KHOU in a statement.
In accounts picked up first by the Houston Chronicle, this newest development quickly covered the national and international news setting off a new round of questions. “The Houston police officers involved in the shooting death of a man who claimed to have ties to federal law enforcement were disciplined for not trying to talk to the man before they approached his car after a high-speed chase earlier this year, according to the department’s investigation of the case.”
According to the reports, an officer pounded with a nightstick on the passenger side door. Then, as Carnaby started to get out of the driver side, another officer ran around to the front of the SUV with his gun drawn.
According to former HPD officer Tommy Nixon, in an interview with KHOU, after watching the video of what happened with Carnaby, Nixon agreed that there were violations of conduct and behavior, as well as police procedure.
Nixon also said that he had met Carnaby years earlier in a group of former intelligence officers. Nixon said that he believes Carnaby was a CIA operative, which may be why he fled.
Per TXCM.com, the investigation was launched after the death of Roland Carnaby, a 52-year-old Houston man with no prior criminal record who led police on a high-speed chase and claimed to be with the CIA.
In a sworn deposition, that officer blamed the City of Houston for poor training in high-risk vehicle approaches.
The on-scene supervisor also criticized HPD’s training process.
The disciplined supervisor has had previous actions taken against him by the department, including a suspension from duty for the violent striking of a prisoner, failure to abide by laws, insubordination and speeding.
The conspiracy site of Opednews.com has added even a stranger twist to this story by reporting, “That according to Wayne Madsen, he has been told to cease and desist reporting on the case of the shooting death of Roland Carnaby…”
Rose Speaks.com has talked to a long time friend of Roland Carnaby who asks to remain anonymous but which Susan Carnaby’s lawyer, Randy Kallinen, has verified the friendship and the source as reliable. This person describes the shooting as an “assignation” not a police shooting, and predicts the public is going to be surprised as to how deep Roland Carnaby’s connection to federal agencies including the CIA will be as the civil rights violations trial begins to unravel this mystery.
Rose Speaks.com did report that Carnaby’s laptop computer was quickly moved to the Houston Police Departments forensic department for extensive testing and that department just happens to be in the same building as the CIA’s forensic department. In Court papers filed June 7, 2008, it was shown that the Secret Service had taken possession of the laptop.
All of the newest developments unfolded after the Court Order the Houston Police Department to make available the dashboard camera views of police cars to Ms. Carnaby’s lawyer, Randy Kallinen, who then released them to the media.
Stay tuned to Rose Speaks.com as we have promised to cover all of these developments and the trial of Mrs. Carnaby against the city of Houston and the Houston Police Department.
You can pick up all of the papers in this case in our download section, opened to All not just members of Rose Speaks.com.
This article is the sole property of Rose Speaks unless otherwise stated. This article as with other articles is based on the opinion of Rose Turner, or our guest authors if so indicated. Please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this article are the opinions and sole property of the site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.
The main stream media has now picked up the video of Roland Carnaby being shot to death by the Houston Police Department, [HPD], and the coroner ruled it homicide but was it murder? Why did the HPD and the City of Houston fight so hard to keep this video and the others out of the public domain?
If you look at Susan Carnaby’s list of witnesses, she has an expert by the name of Roger A. Clark, from California, that is listed as a court certified expert in jail and police procedures in Federal and State Courts. The HPD however does not list anyone that is not connected to the HPD. Which leads to the question of why no FBI or ex-FBI? The other question is since the computer in Roland Carnaby’s SUV ended up in the same building as the CIA, why are there no CIA or ex-CIA are listed on the HPD witness list? Why did Don Clark allegedly lie about knowing Roland Carnaby, to have it however later be shown Clark not only knew him, Carnaby had introduced Don Clark at a speech he gave only the year before.
Why was there no aid rendered to Carnaby after he was shot in the back? Some reports right after the shooting said that no police personnel had “rubber gloves that would have allowed them to render aid”. However, they did handcuff Carnaby so they were not afraid to touch a man that lay bleeding to death in front of them.
The video is graphic and caution should be used viewing it. However as I watched it, I noticed a couple of things, I could see both of Carnaby’s hands as he got out of the SUV, that an officer slammed the SUV door on Carnaby as he was exiting the SUV, thus Carnaby had both hands out and viewable as he began to fall to the ground. Carnaby was shot in the back, and yet there were officers that could clearly see Carnaby from a front view and could see that both hands were out of the SUV. Why did an officer slammed the SUV driver door on Carnaby? Accounts say that as Carnaby was exiting the SUV, that an officer on the passenger side of the SUV was using a baton to smash the side window, thus another question of why?
Per the records and witness list of the HPD, Carnaby made multiple calls to the FBI and the Internal Affairs of the HPD, could they and did they assess Carnaby’s fear level, and if he was agitated and angry enough to be of danger to any officer in pursuit? Why did so many police vehicles including a HPD sniper join the pursuit?
I have more questions then answers, but why was there not an outside agency called to come in and investigate the shooting in a total objective view of all of the video, statements of officers, and decide if it was justifiable homicide or murder?
Roland Carnaby was “afraid” to be arrested and had never been arrested before, so why was the officer that pulled him over for speeding was told to “find something to arrest Carnaby on”? The fact that Carnaby like thousands of others in the state of Texas had passed the rigorous requirements to possess a concealed weapon is listed as one of the reasons officers felt threatened and shot Carnaby, so if any citizen of Texas with a conceal weapon permit is pulled over, should they fear being shot? Why was there no weapons located in the car at the scene of the shooting, but they were later found after the SUV had been impounded? Who had Roland Carnaby’s computer and will we ever know what was on it? Does an outside agency need to investigate how the HPD handles these situations as Susan Carnaby is asking that the HPD began to handle these situations in the future differently?
You see I have more questions then answers in this, but it does appear this is a trial in the federal court in Texas that many will be following, long after the 30 second clip of the shooting is no longer being shown by the main stream media. Which brings the final question, why is the mainstream media not covering who is Roland Carnaby?
Read the reports filed by the Houston Fire Department EMT, the autopsy report that Rose Speaks.com has obtained and watch the video. Then tell us what you think. Was this a “righteous shooting”, or was it murder?
The documents on the Roland Carnaby case is in our download section open to ALL, not just members of Rose Speaks.com.
This article is the sole property of Rose Speaks unless otherwise stated. This article as with other articles is based on the opinion of Rose Turner, or our guest authors if so indicated. Please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this article are the opinions and sole property of the site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.
In a brief article picked by the Houston Chronicle reporter, Brian Rogers stating in part, “HPD Sgt. A. Washington and Officer C. Foster were no-billed today, said Donna Hawkins, a spokeswoman for the Harris County District Attorney’s Office.
Roland Carnaby was fatally wounded on April 29… Carnaby, 52, of Pearland was stopped for speeding… He showed the officer an identification card that he claimed came from the Central Intelligence Agency, but fled after police learned he had a license to carry a concealed weapon.
The CIA maintains that Carnaby was not involved with the agency.”
When we contacted Susan Carnaby’s attorney, Randall L. Kallinen, for a comment, he said he was not surprise at this.
We also briefly touched on the subject that slowly Mrs. Carnaby is making progress in federal Court with the latest Order that the Estate was entitled to an imaged copy of the complete hard drive of the laptop computer that Roland Carnaby had with him at the time of his death. Likewise, Mrs. Susan Carnaby was entitled to any Blackberry PDA’s, any cell phones to have the data retrieved the data, and to have any print out of any data previously printed out by any agency in possession of those items.
The City of Houston and Mrs. Carnaby has also agreed to, submitted and the Court has signed into Order the joint agreed schedule with the jury trial now scheduled for August 3, 2009.
When ask if Mr. Kallinen felt he was beginning to make progress in the case and chip away at the objections raised in filings by the City, he did feel like slowly the truth would continue to come out.
You can download the documents from this case in our download section open to ALL, not just members of Rose Speaks.com.
This article is the sole property of Rose Speaks unless otherwise stated. This article as with other articles is based on the opinion of Rose Turner, or our guest authors if so indicated. Please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this article are the opinions and sole property of the site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.
On June 7, 2008, Mrs. Susan Carnaby filed a Motion to Inventory the Remaining Evidence in the City of Houston’s possession that is not “disposed” of and to preserve the evidence in the City of Houston’s control or possession. Ms Carnaby presents as evidence as more in needed to preserve the evidence since the “dispose by date” was before the hearing on May 23, or in the morning before the May 23 hearing later in the afternoon.
The City of Houston has also intimated in open court that the United States Secret Services has taken control of probably the most important piece of evidence Roland’s Carnaby’s laptop computer which was in his vehicle at the time of his killing.
Mrs. Carnaby alleged in her filing that the City of Houston had already disposed of all of the evidence, and did not include critical relevant evidence of the videotapes and audiotapes of the chase and shooting, records of the call Roland made after the chase ended and the critical CIA evaluations of Roland’s CIA identifications.
The Motion furthered alleged that Roland Carnaby, age 52, frequently worked as a contractor for various federal agencies provided information and investigations into security risks to the interests of the United State for at least the CIA and the FBI and the Secret Service.
In his vehicle, Mrs. Carnaby alleged that Roland had sensitive information in his laptop computer and elsewhere regarding his national security interest investigations. Roland showed the officer his identification and the officer checked Roland’s background via the HPD squad car computers.
Although Roland Carnaby via the background checked showed that he was an upstanding citizen not wanted for anything the officers at the scene were told by an HPD superior to arrest Roland “for something” which would entail impounding the vehicle and its contents.
Mr. Carnaby allegedly became concerned if he was arrested and not permitted phone calls for several hours that sensitive information in Carnaby’s vehicle and computer could end up missing.
The Motion goes on to state that during the chase, the FBI contacted the HPD, confirmed Roland Carnaby’s status and asked HPD to call off the chase. HPD refused.
Mrs. Carnaby further requested that she be allowed to inventory the evidence and copy the laptop, Blackberry and cell phone records.
On June 9, 2008 after reviewing Mrs. Carnaby’s Motion the Court Order that the City of Houston and the Houston Police Dept. respond to Ms. Carnaby’s June 7, 2008 filing within 10 days, by June 19, 2008.
On June 19, the City of Houston filed its Response bringing up many objections including that the D. A was now involved as well as the Probate Court and those matters in Plaintiff’s Motion should be denied.
The City of Houston in their filings said the first Order on May 23, 2008 was by agreement of Plaintiff, Defense and the Court and the Motion filed on June 7 by the Plaintiff amounted to “Plaintiff now wishes to have a second bite of the apple”. If the Court grants this then all of the work done by the Court and counsel on, the order already on file becomes for naught claimed the City of Houston Response.
The city then brought up in their Response that some items requested would be best purview in the Probate Court and a Probate of Roland Carnaby’s Estate had been opened in Brazoria County court at Law#3 Cause No. PR030380. Therefore, an Order for an inventory for probate purposes should come from the Probate court. The City went on to state that any information contained on the hard drive of the laptop the Blackberry and/or the cell phone(s) is not necessary for any probate inventory.
The City of Houston goes on to state that this matter is still under investigation by the District Attorney’s office. Defendants’ information in this regard is that it should be presented to a Harris County Grand Jury possibly by the end of July. Therefore, the Plaintiff should address those things in the custody of the District Attorney’s office regarding the requested inventor.
Upon reading the City of Houston Response to the requests made by Mrs. Carnaby,’s Motion the Court contacted both sides and set a hearing for the afternoon of June 23, 2008 for oral arguments on the Motion and Response before issuing any additional Orders.
The Minutes of that hearing on June 23, 2008 shows that the Court ordered an Amended Order with Changes were discussed on the record and will be entered. Further the Court ORDERS the disposed of date be removed or changed to some far off future date. The Court FURTHER GRANTS Plaintiff’s request for a two week extension to obtain a gun expert until 7-15-2008 to retain a gun expert. The Defendant will work with Attorney Koutes to review data, information and/or items in the custody of the Defendant. However, one of the most stunning outcomes is the Court Order following this Hearing for the first time mentions the CIA has having some of the evidence in their possession.
In an exclusive with Mrs. Carnaby’s lawyer, Randall L. Kallinen, who had just came off of a big win in the Civil Rights Violation case involving K-Mart which settled for about $800k.
Mr. Kallinen had some thought provoking comments including, “There is no doubt that Roland Carnaby held a position with a Government Agency. The CIA came to check Carnaby’s credentials and then the Houston Police Dept. basically dropped it. Nothing was ever said again about Roland being a fake afterwards. They would have talked about this if they had been fake.”
Mr. Kallinen went on to point out, “There is NO criminal investigation of Roland Carnaby since he is no longer here. Therefore, there is no reason to look at his computers have nothing to due with investigation into the shooting death of Roland Carnaby.”
Mr. Kallinen ended with a prediction that his will be a very high profile case in due time.
We here at Rose Speaks.com intend to follow this case to its collusion, but the question comes up why are the CIA, FBI, Secret Service all interested in Mr. Carnaby’s death and in that computer?
You can read through all of the latest Court Filings and Orders in our download section which is open to ALL not just members of Rose Speaks.com.
This article is the sole property of Rose Speaks unless otherwise stated. This article as with other articles is based on the opinion of Rose Turner, or our guest authors if so indicated. Please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this article are the opinions and sole property of the site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.
Entries (RSS)