A CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE CIVIL RIGHTS, OBSTRUCT JUSTICE, AND HARASS

Your Ad Here

Out of five reports to HPD, about the same situation (something missing from my room when I return), with the same circumstances surrounding the events, only one is designated a burglary. The others are classified Miscellaneous - Public. The last being May 08, 2008.



January 2008: Unlike the DCCA of Hawaii, who I supplied documentation to, the Department of Health and Human Services "Region 10", without documentation, finds that Dr. Au did violate the privacy act by charging me too much for copies of my records.
But, Region 10 tells me they cannot proceed on the 6 other allegations


1. Along with saying I did not see as well with the new glasses, I said
that the prescription that I was given was weaker than the one I had the

previous 7, count them, seven years. Your office nor the DCCA responded
to this charge.

2.The reason I asked Dr. Au to change the prescription was because the
NEW one, I repeat, was weaker in one eye. This was the only alternative
Dr. Au gave me other than accepting the weaker prescription.

3. The "Vision Certificate" Dr. Au provide, had no licsense number
where it should have been and she did not sign it where it should have
been signed.

4. Dr Au refused to give me photocopies of my records and did not give
me a reason, per her offices policy, when I asked for them in her
office.

5.Dr charged me 2.00 dollars per page, totaling 20.00 dollars, which I
believe is exorbitant.

6.There are conflicting numbers on my records, that I would like
explained. This, no one has addressed. And I doubt that my records were
reviewed by an impartial optometrist, as any reasonable person would
assume to be a part on what your office calls an investigation.

7. I was trespassed from Dr. Au's office for no other reason than
asking for copies of my files, and in her response to the DCCA she says
I was escorted out of her offices by mall security, which is a lie by a
optometrist that pracitces deceit.





If the situation is threatening enough to cause a change in levels moment to moment, it stands to my reason, it would remain at a certain level until there is a sufficient enough change or stabilization to bring it to a lesser level. But that's just me.

Oct. 17, 2006 I submit a complaint to the Police Commission relaying concerns about the treatment I experienced at the security checkpoint at HPD District 1 the previous day. An investigator tells me it is the policiman's job to "interpret the law".

Returning to the station to locate a article I left, I am told by Officer Kahele, in the presence of one officer Hung, and another, that it is mandatory that I produce ID, and that I remove everything from my pockets, and take off my belt before passing through the metal detector.

I point out this information is not on the signs, and officer Kahele says there will be no furthering of my purpose if I do not comply. After complying, I am told by officer Kahele that I must sit down, or she will not take my report. Previous to this occasion , when at the HPD headquarters, I was never asked to remove everything from my pockets and, or to remove my belt, or that I had to produce ID to enter. Officer Lau, the sergeant for this post, tells me the same.

I am told by a detective that it is not mandatory to produce ID, "We don't care who you are. Anyone has the right to come in here". Sergeant Lau, who I am told is the officer in charge of the post says depending on the threat level, procedures may change day to day. He says one may be required to remove everything from ones pockets etc., or be required to submit to different procedures. I inform him that on the same day, when I was there previously, I was not required to do so. He inform me that the security level may change from moment to moment.

On Oct. 16, 2006 I submit a complaint to HPD Internal Affairs relaying concerns about not being asked to identify the driver of the vehicle that hit me on the 8th of Sept., and the fact that the person who stood as Chris Pa at the arraignment was not the driver of the car.

Oct. 6, 2006, I go to the arraignment of A Mr. Chris Pa. I am surprised to see that this Mr. Pa is not the driver I saw, while laying on the hood of the car and peering through the windshield, and definitely not the man I looked in the face and spoke to through an opened window. This may be due to the fact that I was not asked to identify the person located, arrested, or cited, on the night of the incident or at any subsequent time, until I see him at the arraignment. I am directed by the presiding judge to inform the prosecutors office, which I do.

Oct. 2, 2006: I am told at traffic court there is no court date set, but have found online there is one on Oct. 6, in room 4B, and I am not included as the victim. I still get correspondence from the insurer's agents telling me of medical coverage available, although I told the driver, the responding officer, and previously the insurer's agent, I am OK.


Sept.21, 2006: I go to City Hall to get a voters registration card and am told it will cost .50 cents.

I am surprised to get a "Certificate", ala Lens Crafters, and ask is this it? I am told yes by the clerk. Today, on "The Bus" I see a man who says he works at the polls, who tells me there is still a little yellow card that comes in the mail and is surprised to see the "Certificate".

Sept. 8, 2006: I am hit by a car bearing license plate JST 203, that was stopped at a crosswalk. The driver is looking at me when he accelerates. The driver doesn't wait for police to arrive. They find him at his home. The police report reads Crime Code 550, which I am told means, a collision with damage of more than 3000 dollars. I am told the responding police officer decides if there will be an investigation. More Honolulu HOKUM.

This is the place where, those who would complain about wrongdoing are persecuted, harassed, smeared and railroaded. Where the perpetrators are bribed to keep quiet, or go along with the cover-up, promoted, and transferred.


I have initiated a suit in federal court, Jan. 2005 that I can not pursue, due to the lack of time and funds necessary for an undertaking such as this, and the skill I do not have in these matters. I have all but given up searching for representation, believing word has gotten to many legal ears on the island and no one wants to go against the state that has all but coddled and cuddled business here.

I have contacted the ACLU, and given them much information, but they seem more interested in writing briefs for exotic entertainers, arrested for doing lap dances. First they tell me they cannot help unless the matter involves a government agency, then they tell me they can if a decision is against me, then they tell me they do not have the manpower and time. Each of the criteria, I met at the time I contacted them.

Coincidentally, I find a lawyer, Roger Fonseca, at the firm representing my former employer, is the national representative for the Hawaii chapter of the ACLU, and their staff also have a few names that are the same as those associated with Hawaii real estate. They cannot help, but they can accept my information.

I have tried to interest many, many lawyers and firms by email, letters and personal visits, to no avail. I have had a lawyer in San Francisco who participated in a well known case here try to find someone without success. This situation has been surrounded by complicity, cronyism, and bias.



Mrs. Pietsch is a general in the U.S. Army Reserve, and an attorney, a very powerful position with ties to D.C., I'm sure. It has long been my suspicion that this may have played a roll in the lack of effort on the part of officials that has attended this matter. Each party's history I research has some relation to another, be it professional, academic, and even familial.

I now look at web sites for all the organizations I sought help at - e-mail to the Governor and Lieutenant Governor, all representative's and senator's offices, Legal Aid Society, Hawaii Dept. of Labor and the DOL - national, EEOC - Hawaii, district, and national offices, NAACP Hawaii, Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, ACLU of Hawaii, Hawaii - Department of Health, HIOSH and OSHA ( regional and national ), Volunteer Legal Services of Hawaii, the Hawaii Office of Information Practices, the Ombudsman's Office where my letter explaining the situation and their reply stating they could do nothing, are the only correspondence I had during it's investigation, and the Hawaii State Bar Association, where the lawyers who are members of the Real Property and Financial Services Section, are also affiliated with these other organizations, or directly associated with my former employer, or the firm that represents them - Torkildson, Katz. Fonseca, Heatherington, and Moore.

The Real Property and Financial Services Section includes a lawyer I was assisted by, one Andre Wooten, who at the time told me nothing of his involvement with this organization. He was suggested to me by church members and NAACP officer Alfonso Braggs. I pull up the staff or the particular board of directors of these organizations and there are last names that are the same and have some relationship, mostly with real estate, and more than a few with ties to California.

Two names in particular are quite suspicious. A Kouchi, at Volunteer Legal Services, which was the last name of the HR assistant at Title Guaranty, Pang which is the name of a front desk worker at the YMCA, who I complained about signing for my mail. and that of a Appeals Officer at Department of Labor - Security Appeals Referees Office. Hirayama the appeal referee, and the owner of the restaurant at the YMCA. And on and on.

There are too many relationships here to be mere coincidence, and are questionable, at least. My information was passed by one Elain Chao - Department Of Labor, in D.C. to Tin Shing Chao Department of Labor here in Hawaii, who used an erroneous date to nullify my complaint. This was after a layover in California with Ms. Alison Pauly at the regional offices. Whose CASPA investigation stated that I should have made this a written complaint, when Hawaii law states it does not matter, whether written or verbal. Could she be related to the Pauly's who have donated to the University of Hawaii, and have owned land here?

The complex in Hawaii that houses the Department of Labor, is also where the HIOSH offices and the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission offices are located. This name, Pang, pops up in various places dealing with state government and real estate. I now know these agencies to be straw dogs that do everything but contend with the status quo.

For the most part, the agencies that pretend to help, most notably the NAACP and ACLU, only collect information and then say they can do nothing; I wonder what happens to the information in a state that treats confidential information as a comodity. Incidentally my former employer's representation is one of the largest contributors to Legal Aid Society. Concerning Volunteer Legal Services of Hawaii, I have recently discovered that one of two lawyers they referred is an attorney at the law firm representing my former employer, and the other is a realtor in Honolulu, and also liscensed to practice in California. And another is the member of a firm with old ties to the Pietsch family. Who were these lawyers going to "help"?



After contacting the librarian's office, there is no record or remembrance of this aspect of the report. This tactic of "bait and switch" has been used on more than one occasion, by different entities. After not being online for 3 days I saw where someone had requested an Army Knowledge Online account in my name, or I should say my screen name. I saw an attorney - John L. Knorek - from the firm representing my former employer enter the philosophy department and ask for a librarian, Kathy, by name.

Your Ad Here