By Definition: My sons are missing PENAL CODE SECTION 277-280

CALIFORNIA MISSING PERSONS

The Missing and Unidentified Persons Unit in the California Department of Justice assists law enforcement and criminal justice agencies in locating missing persons and identifying unknown live and deceased persons through the comparison of physical characteristics, fingerprints and dental/body X-rays.

Subscribe to receive Missing Persons Bulletins in your e-mail inbox.

In California, a missing person is someone whose whereabouts is unknown to the reporting party. This includes any child who may have run away, been taken involuntary or may be in need of assistance. It includes a child illegally taken, held or hidden by a parent or non-parent family member (See California Penal Code Sections 277-280).

• Paradise Unified School - held, hidden and concealed 
• San Ramon Unified 2007 - Held, Hidden and concealed 
• Paradise CA - hidden, false police reports, deliberate mispresentation of court orders, knowingly and willingly destroying court orders 

General Damages
On about May 27th 2013 Paradise Unified School district willingly, willfully and knowingly concealed minor children from non-custodial parent.  That said administrators deliberately altered court orders, deleted school files then upon non-custodial parent discovery that said files were deleted, altered and that Lawful Court Orders were replaced with Falsified documents so that other teachers would interpret court orders as falsely reflecting that a Temporary Restraining Orders

There is NO waiting period for reporting a person missing. All California police and sheriffs' departments must accept any report, including a report by telephone, of a missing person, including runaways, without delay and will give priority to the handling of the report.

Schools are part of the network to help find missing children, not only through notices required to be given to a public school district or private school within 10 days of a child's disappearance but also through use of our Missing Person Bulletin.

By making photographs of missing persons available, we seek to aid in the identification and recovery of missing persons. According to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, one in six missing children are recovered as a direct result of someone recognizing their photo and notifying authorities. We also offer resources on this website for locating missing persons and safeguarding your children.

The following offers a summary of some of our programs. Further information is available by selecting the program categories on the right menu.

PENAL CODE 
SECTION 277-280 

277.  The following definitions apply for the purposes of this
chapter:
   (a) "Child" means a person under the age of 18 years.
   (b) "Court order" or "custody order" means a custody determination
decree, judgment, or order issued by a court of competent
jurisdiction, whether permanent or temporary, initial or modified,
that affects the custody or visitation of a child, issued in the
context of a custody proceeding. An order, once made, shall continue
in effect until it expires, is modified, is rescinded, or terminates
by operation of law.
   (c) "Custody proceeding" means a proceeding in which a custody
determination is an issue, including, but not limited to, an action
for dissolution or separation, dependency, guardianship, termination
of parental rights, adoption, paternity, except actions under Section
11350 or 11350.1 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, or protection
from domestic violence proceedings, including an emergency
protective order pursuant to Part 3 (commencing with Section 6240) of
Division 10 of the Family Code.
   (d) "Lawful custodian" means a person, guardian, or public agency
having a right to custody of a child.
   (e) A "right to custody" means the right to the physical care,
custody, and control of a child pursuant to a custody order as
defined in subdivision (b) or, in the absence of a court order, by
operation of law, or pursuant to the Uniform Parentage Act contained
in Part 3 (commencing with Section 7600) of Division 12 of the Family
Code. Whenever a public agency takes protective custody or
jurisdiction of the care, custody, control, or conduct of a child by
statutory authority or court order, that agency is a lawful custodian
of the child and has a right to physical custody of the child. In
any subsequent placement of the child, the public agency continues to
be a lawful custodian with a right to physical custody of the child
until the public agency's right of custody is terminated by an order
of a court of competent jurisdiction or by operation of law.
   (f) In the absence of a court order to the contrary, a parent
loses his or her right to custody of the child to the other parent if
the parent having the right to custody is dead, is unable or refuses
to take the custody, or has abandoned his or her family. A natural
parent whose parental rights have been terminated by court order is
no longer a lawful custodian and no longer has a right to physical
custody.
   (g) "Keeps" or "withholds" means retains physical possession of a
child whether or not the child resists or objects.
   (h) "Visitation" means the time for access to the child allotted
to any person by court order.
   (i) "Person" includes, but is not limited to, a parent or an agent
of a parent.
   (j) "Domestic violence" means domestic violence as defined in
Section 6211 of the Family Code.
   (k) "Abduct" means take, entice away, keep, withhold, or conceal.




278.  Every person, not having a right to custody, who maliciously
takes, entices away, keeps, withholds, or conceals any child with the
intent to detain or conceal that child from a lawful custodian shall
be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year,
a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or both that
fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h)
of Section 1170 for two, three, or four years, a fine not exceeding
ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or both that fine and imprisonment.



278.5.  (a) Every person who takes, entices away, keeps, withholds,
or conceals a child and maliciously deprives a lawful custodian of a
right to custody, or a person of a right to visitation, shall be
punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, a
fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or both that fine
and imprisonment, or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of
Section 1170 for 16 months, or two or three years, a fine not
exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or both that fine and
imprisonment.
   (b) Nothing contained in this section limits the court's contempt
power.
   (c) A custody order obtained after the taking, enticing away,
keeping, withholding, or concealing of a child does not constitute a
defense to a crime charged under this section.




278.6.  (a) At the sentencing hearing following a conviction for a
violation of Section 278 or 278.5, or both, the court shall consider
any relevant factors and circumstances in aggravation, including, but
not limited to, all of the following:
   (1) The child was exposed to a substantial risk of physical injury
or illness.
   (2) The defendant inflicted or threatened to inflict physical harm
on a parent or lawful custodian of the child or on the child at the
time of or during the abduction.
   (3) The defendant harmed or abandoned the child during the
abduction.
   (4) The child was taken, enticed away, kept, withheld, or
concealed outside the United States.
   (5) The child has not been returned to the lawful custodian.
   (6) The defendant previously abducted or threatened to abduct the
child.
   (7) The defendant substantially altered the appearance or the name
of the child.
   (8) The defendant denied the child appropriate education during
the abduction.
   (9) The length of the abduction.
   (10) The age of the child.
   (b) At the sentencing hearing following a conviction for a
violation of Section 278 or 278.5, or both, the court shall consider
any relevant factors and circumstances in mitigation, including, but
not limited to, both of the following:
   (1) The defendant returned the child unharmed and prior to arrest
or issuance of a warrant for arrest, whichever is first.
   (2) The defendant provided information and assistance leading to
the child's safe return.
   (c) In addition to any other penalties provided for a violation of
Section 278 or 278.5, a court shall order the defendant to pay
restitution to the district attorney for any costs incurred in
locating and returning the child as provided in Section 3134 of the
Family Code, and to the victim for those expenses and costs
reasonably incurred by, or on behalf of, the victim in locating and
recovering the child. An award made pursuant to this section shall
constitute a final judgment and shall be enforceable as such.




278.7.  (a) Section 278.5 does not apply to a person with a right to
custody of a child who, with a good faith and reasonable belief that
the child, if left with the other person, will suffer immediate
bodily injury or emotional harm, takes, entices away, keeps,
withholds, or conceals that child.
   (b) Section 278.5 does not apply to a person with a right to
custody of a child who has been a victim of domestic violence who,
with a good faith and reasonable belief that the child, if left with
the other person, will suffer immediate bodily injury or emotional
harm, takes, entices away, keeps, withholds, or conceals that child.
"Emotional harm" includes having a parent who has committed domestic
violence against the parent who is taking, enticing away, keeping,
withholding, or concealing the child.
   (c) The person who takes, entices away, keeps, withholds, or
conceals a child shall do all of the following:
   (1) Within a reasonable time from the taking, enticing away,
keeping, withholding, or concealing, make a report to the office of
the district attorney of the county where the child resided before
the action. The report shall include the name of the person, the
current address and telephone number of the child and the person, and
the reasons the child was taken, enticed away, kept, withheld, or
concealed.
   (2) Within a reasonable time from the taking, enticing away,
keeping, withholding, or concealing, commence a custody proceeding in
a court of competent jurisdiction consistent with the federal
Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act (Section 1738A, Title 28, United
States Code) or the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (Part 3
(commencing with Section 3400) of Division 8 of the Family Code).
   (3) Inform the district attorney's office of any change of address
or telephone number of the person and the child.
   (d) For the purposes of this article, a reasonable time within
which to make a report to the district attorney's office is at least
10 days and a reasonable time to commence a custody proceeding is at
least 30 days. This section shall not preclude a person from making a
report to the district attorney's office or commencing a custody
proceeding earlier than those specified times.
   (e) The address and telephone number of the person and the child
provided pursuant to this section shall remain confidential unless
released pursuant to state law or by a court order that contains
appropriate safeguards to ensure the safety of the person and the
child.



279.  A violation of Section 278 or 278.5 by a person who was not a
resident of, or present in, this state at the time of the alleged
offense is punishable in this state, whether the intent to commit the
offense is formed within or outside of this state, if any of the
following apply:
   (a) The child was a resident of, or present in, this state at the
time the child was taken, enticed away, kept, withheld, or concealed.
   (b) The child thereafter is found in this state.
   (c) A lawful custodian or a person with a right to visitation is a
resident of this state at the time the child was taken, enticed
away, kept, withheld, or concealed.



279.1.  The offenses enumerated in Sections 278 and 278.5 are
continuous in nature, and continue for as long as the minor child is
concealed or detained.


279.5.  When a person is arrested for an alleged violation of
Section 278 or 278.5, the court, in setting bail, shall take into
consideration whether the child has been returned to the lawful
custodian, and if not, shall consider whether there is an increased
risk that the child may not be returned, or the defendant may flee
the jurisdiction, or, by flight or concealment, evade the authority
of the court.



279.6.  (a) A law enforcement officer may take a child into
protective custody under any of the following circumstances:
   (1) It reasonably appears to the officer that a person is likely
to conceal the child, flee the jurisdiction with the child, or, by
flight or concealment, evade the authority of the court.
   (2) There is no lawful custodian available to take custody of the
child.
   (3) There are conflicting custody orders or conflicting claims to
custody and the parties cannot agree which party should take custody
of the child.
   (4) The child is an abducted child.
   (b) When a law enforcement officer takes a child into protective
custody pursuant to this section, the officer shall do one of the
following:
   (1) Release the child to the lawful custodian of the child, unless
it reasonably appears that the release would cause the child to be
endangered, abducted, or removed from the jurisdiction.
   (2) Obtain an emergency protective order pursuant to Part 3
(commencing with Section 6240) of Division 10 of the Family Code
ordering placement of the child with an interim custodian who agrees
in writing to accept interim custody.
   (3) Release the child to the social services agency responsible
for arranging shelter or foster care.
   (4) Return the child as ordered by a court of competent
jurisdiction.
   (c) Upon the arrest of a person for a violation of Section 278 or
278.5, a law enforcement officer shall take possession of an abducted
child who is found in the company of, or under the control of, the
arrested person and deliver the child as directed in subdivision (b).
   (d) Notwithstanding any other law, when a person is arrested for
an alleged violation of Section 278 or 278.5, the court shall, at the
time of the arraignment or thereafter, order that the child shall be
returned to the lawful custodian by or on a specific date, or that
the person show cause on that date why the child has not been
returned as ordered. If conflicting custodial orders exist within
this state, or between this state and a foreign state, the court
shall set a hearing within five court days to determine which court
has jurisdiction under the laws of this state and determine which
state has subject matter jurisdiction to issue a custodial order
under the laws of this state, the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction
Act (Part 3 (commencing with Section 3400) of Division 8 of the
Family Code), or federal law, if applicable. At the conclusion of the
hearing, or if the child has not been returned as ordered by the
court at the time of arraignment, the court shall enter an order as
to which custody order is valid and is to be enforced. If the child
has not been returned at the conclusion of the hearing, the court
shall set a date within a reasonable time by which the child shall be
returned to the lawful custodian, and order the defendant to comply
by this date, or to show cause on that date why he or she has not
returned the child as directed. The court shall only enforce its
order, or any subsequent orders for the return of the child, under
subdivision (a) of Section 1219 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to
ensure that the child is promptly placed with the lawful custodian.
An order adverse to either the prosecution or defense is reviewable
by a writ of mandate or prohibition addressed to the appropriate
court.


280.  Every person who willfully causes or permits the removal or
concealment of any child in violation of Section 8713, 8803, or 8910
of the Family Code shall be punished as follows:
   (a) By imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year if
the child is concealed within the county in which the adoption
proceeding is pending or in which the child has been placed for
adoption, or is removed from that county to a place within this
state.
   (b) By imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170,
or by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, if
the child is removed from that county to a place outside of this
state.

Read More

The Danville Council has known about CNET since 2004

By PETE BENNETT - Contra Costa Watch EMAIL
Phone: 510-460-5641
Posted: 06/13/2013

Many reading my blog will wonder why this litigant is upset, first take a look at my son here and see the near emaciated state in 2008 .  In 2007 my son melted down at the Pinewood Derby but what happened would be Violation of my Civil Rights Under 

Tanabe was present, as was Judge Joel Golub and unknown to me a slew of police officers who used the Boy Scouts of America event to cover their connections to CNET as they all knew that Butler knew Tanabe, they all knew that my I was beaten in my house, they all knew my truck was set ablaze, they all knew Gary Vinson Collins was the assailant, they also knew Loretta Hale, many would know attorneys at Greenan via his representation of Contra Costa County and Seeno Construction.  

I would surmise that many appear to be glaring light so bright it's hard not see that I told an officer of the court that a Danville Building Inspector nearly killed me and that someone rigged my truck for arson.  What gives Joel is it possible that you unfairly fined me over 12,000 for tickets when you gave out $75 fines to the guys here illegally working in the Gardens of Contra Costa County.  According to the Cannon of Ethics you screwed up. 

When a truck erupts in flames at 90 mph chances of survival are slim but I was lucky. Nearly ten years later the Alamo 1st Mormons suspected then are living large and apparently guilt free of a near attempted murder.  









The Danville Town Council knew about CNET long before Tanabe was arrested

http://www.law.cornell.edu/ethics/ca/code/CA_CODE.HTM

Read More

Contra Costa County Litigant Adjustment Bureau - Division of the Contra Costa Bar Association

By PETE BENNETT - Contra Costa Watch EMAIL
Phone: 510-460-5641
Posted: 08/09/2013

Walnut Creek CA: The Contra Costa Bar Association secret division exposed.  It has come to my attention that my 2006 Lawsuit was derailed when my counsel Sage Sepahi was beaten in Walnut Creek CA which effectively ended my litigation against Contra Costa County. 

This is same way they handle all disputes as in 2001 my attorney was Donald Gene Moats offices were burned down at 1776 Ygnacio Valley Road Walnut Creek forcing insurers to endure an estimate 2 million dollar loss.  

It seems another player in this story is retired SFPD Lt. David Oberhoffer who first appeared in my Pleasant Offices at 1932a Oak Park Blvd Pleasant Hill CA - where Ian Lotta Scott mother, a retired employee of the Solano County District Attorney offices was helping me.  Izzetta could not figure out how I'd endured so many accidents and incidents.  Sadly her son died of a sudden asthma attack on September 21st 2011 a year after I was forced out of those offices.  

This litigant adjustment bureau has a long history of roughing up litigants in a mormonesque type approach they'll do what's needed to whistle blowers like Ernie Scheerer or me.  

This victim father once headed the Contra Costa Bar Association whose Litigant Adjustment Bureau probably rigged my truck for arson in 2004, tampered with my ABS systems so in 2004 my 1994 Ford Explorer right front wheel would lock up at high speed which occurred right around the time this woman served me with Divorce Papers in Fairfield CA.  

I know that they took that Ford Explorer as my ex said she needed to move some things a few weeks later I almost became a Ford Explorer Rollover Victim when just my right front wheel locked up at high speed.  

Read More

CNET Officer Tanabe living large as ever

A Letter to my son 

The reality is you were kidnapped 

Dear William,


I am sorry that you've had to go through all this, that you've living a trailer, that you've had to watch another driver who tried to kill us hit the wall at High Speed ultimately kill himself, or that your father almost burned to death on 680 but like magic there is no record of that arson fire.


There is little chance that I can help you as I've been decimated financially, spent in total about 14 days in jail, lost seven cars via accidents, arson, hit and runs, and expert vandalism that the State Department of Insurance should really investigate.

A few months ago I made a desperate plea for help with the Walnut Creek City Council but apparently Officer Burns decided on July 27th that Pete Bennett needed a talking too and once again labeled a mentally ill assailant and denied my requests to call an attorney. Officers Burns all I'm trying to do is get access to my sons. Seems like you guys want to kill me for some reason and no officer Burns you don't know what I told the FBI 25 years but you appeared quite nervous. By the way whenever have a hearing, file a claim or file a lawsuit the Contra Costa County Litigant Adjustment Bureau finds me before I can appear.

The Walnut Creek Police are about as close to Uber Ops Domestic Terrorism Operation you'd ever find as when I called 911 back in June 2011 from 140 Crosby Court #1 Walnut Creek less than a month later after conversations with Chief Bryden and DA Investigator Darryl Jackson my car was totaled. I know it's just a coincidence but perhaps there is connection. Would you guys like to consider that my phones have been under surveillance for about ten years by Chris Butler plus others - so I am sure my calls are recorded.


By the way I was driven from Apartment by the legal associate of Former Walnut Creek Bomb Squad member Richard Grossman who is probably friends with Lt. David Oberhoffer (SFPD - retired) (Cops the same ages around here know each other) who showed me pictures in June 2010 of the Piedmont Lumber Fire? The same fire I'd mentioned in the November 1st 2011 meeting with Bryden and Nordoff. This meeting is so critical as I'm going to say out loud "over the course of 2011/12 numerous persons near me were killed" and it's not some coincidence to be ignored.


In between a now former Walnut Creek Officer who first name is Greg with possible full name of Greg Fish was a regular at Dallimontes which is in the same shopping center. I had the pleasure of nice short fist fight with Ron who threw me out of his pathetic Italian Joint but if it happens again I won't be so cordial.






My Suspect Officers are from these Departments


Walnut Creek, Pleasant Hill, CCSO and SFPD.










The sad reality is many officers are clearly connected to totaling my car but LPD Chief Christensen who's name bears a very strong resemblance to David Christensen which is very common spelling of Local Mormons. Even though former Bishop Clark said he would call he has not, even Pastor Reed of Hillside Church whose friend.

It seems that Hillside Covenant Church doesn't want to acknowledge my concerns, that it took six months for them to turn over their insurance company, that the Walnut Creek Police let go home when I was trying to get you the court order IME which was scheduled on July 6th 2011 but your mother drove all the way down to intercept my attempts to get to a medical professional.

You may not know this but I attempted on May 23rd 2013 by coming to Paradise High School to take you to a doctor. The principal Ms Johns called the Paradise Police when I discovered your school records were altered. When I took your to court in Family Law.


I know that you were deathly afraid of Officer Tanabe at the Pack 36 Meeting on February 4th 2007 the same day your mom vanished. At that meeting were meeting were police officers from Contra Costa Sheriff, Concord Police Department and Judge Golub who I told many, many times that someone tried to kill us on the 680 back in winter 2004/05 in months after the same F-250 truck was rigged for arson. I am sure that Alamo 1st Mormons are connected to this arson fire but they've got Pete Amnesia but one important fact they also sue the Airlines when planes crash. Even though I called NTSB with simple fact I know two pilots killed in rather coincidental accidents they don't believe a connection exists. I tried getting legal help from the Contra Costa Bar Association but ... that association is under a legal spell called "don't assist Bennett" but do what you can to kill him.

Of course my crazy story happens to include far too many deaths from far too many accidents that they call coincidences that I call far too coincidental. I know it's just a coincidence that the it's coincidental that it's a coincidence that many are connected to my mail servers taken in Dec 2010 when I was coincidentally running from a San Francisco Cop who coincidentally once show me pictures of the Piedmont Lumber fire that all Central Costa County Residents know was not some coincidence but they said it was accidental. My one opinion is the owners are taking the unfair brunt of the allegations.

Loretta Hale: November 1st 2013 former Danville Pack 36 parent who attended the same cub scout meetings with Judge Golub who's nephew is same Golub you tutored at Montair Elementary
Nathaniel Greenan: April 18th 2011 whose father is James Greenan who represents Contra Costa County and Seeno Construction - please read about their troubles here http://diablodynasty.blogspot.com ,whose company stiffed me for 20K in 1999 which in theory is part of your lost college education fund. The Seeno's take but give so others can think they are givers but they are takers and in the 80s a whole lot of people near these givers in the 80s turned up dead. That cabinet shop I lost in 1989 was related to those takers. I am telling you this via the blog in the hopes that one day you'll discover this site as your email has blocked.
Brian Schewling: Alamo 1st Member He died right after services at Alamo 1st and quite frankly looked very bad that day but coming a survivoir of poisoning he looked as bad as me. I would have died that night in 2005 from a heart attack today as I doubt at 56 I could last through a 105 fever, vomiting blood requiring 3.5 liters of fluid.
Patricia Noel: Alamo 2nd Member died of apparent drug overdose suicide - I don't be really blunt but former Officer Tanabe is connected to a person that is connected the court, the same family law center that concealed my documents from Presiding Judge Barry Goode

Read More

Walnut Creek Library

By PETE BENNETT - Contra Costa Watch

This page and others will contain the chronology of events at the library where your children go and yes they carried guns into your library


Please read about this case.  The City Attorney offices will go to any length to discredit litigants but my case allow officers to cover-up an assault of an officer of the court so that Danville Officers can get away with all kinds CNET related antics. 

This drug deal could easily have occurred in the Library.  

http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/Informant-Sues-City-Over-Shooting-Walnut-2771618.php

Read More

Open Letter: Bryan Wenter former Walnut Creek City attorney

By PETE BENNETT - Contra Costa Watch EMAIL
Phone: 510-460-5641
Posted: 08/08/2013

Bryan Wenter, 
Walnut Creek CA 

Open Letter

Dear Mr. Wenter, 

I am sure you're fully aware of my plight and the pages on my blog.  Last week I was detained and questioned at the N. Main Starbucks.  The accusations were baseless like so many other but it was another attempt to dissuade this witness.  

The recent coroners inquest results on Banta match very closely to my blog just a few weeks before that incident.  My concerns are for my safety and it's clear something is going on near me, the city and how they are derailing police reports and obstructing justice.  

In a few weeks I'll sending in dozens of ethics letters to the State Bar with an intense focus on City Attorneys.  In Danville they settled the Katz matter saying they had no prior knowledge but in fact they are well aware. 

The accusations against the bar will be RiCO level as few know about the insurance fraud part of the CNET story.  You might which is why you exited but I got wind of it years ago.  

Your police department operates with more than one agenda but more than officer has thrown me out of City Hall.  

The other issue is you should be very careful and seek protection from the State Police, Bell, Polllecek and Shimansky plus the 20 from 2001 at Doc's pharmacy are no accident.  I doubt you knew the younger business partner committed suicide so just like the 1776 Ygnacio Arson Case, or that Stuart Safine died days after his case against Contra Costa County was gutted by the Judge, or that an attorneys near the Seeno stories are turning on dead in Nevada but the para glider death night be more than an accident but I've heard via attorneys that a case against Seeno opposing counsel was killed in a accident.  I can't confirm it but Contra Costa County has a far higher rate of death of public officials than anywhere in the country.  

At the end of the day the database programmer gives you the answers that looked fishy but you couldn't or didn't have time.  

I started with them in September 2011 and I've only know ten persons to be killed.  You bet I am blunt now and when my Database goes online few will disagree.  

Enjoy your new path but I'd prefer that you'd send letters as a concerned citizen about any event that seems fishy.  Your job is balance ethics between client privilege. In my matters I've lost millions but once I discovered Butler, Wielsch and Tanabe were connected to Benny Chetcuti then i realized that my near fatal incidents were not so accidental.  I am now positive that CNET was employed to take me down and that my life insurance policy was the $900,000 target.  


There are more in Danville that match my allegations.  


http://www.law.cornell.edu/ethics/ca/narr/CA_NARR_4.HTM 

One last thing - this company plays heavily into this story as my attorney's (former) father in-law represents them and it just happens overlay the same agencies that have harassed me, found me via my EBT card or payroll and would have the ability track my credit cards.  

It was used on me here in Walnut Creek so don't think that Bryden and others were deaf dumb and blind about CNET - they've taken houses, stolen property, planted false evidence and driven people out of business - why do you think the bartender at Havana is dead?  read about Chuck Silverman accidents on Pleasant Hill road.  There are five cases between 680 and the tunnel. 


If you need a little nudge - its pretty obvious the Walnut Creek Police operate in a callous and dangerous manner, leading a young man into a dangerous scenario that nearly killed him.  This little game has been a played on me in front Safeway, Starbucks and I've had officers and undercover taunting me in MacDonalds and the Walnut Creek Library with the use of informants leading me astray.   

That means ladies and gentleman they are willing to create unexpected scenarios with your children in the crossfire when they could easily wait for a better day.  

`Informant' Sues City Over Shooting / Walnut Creek police abandoned him, he says

Read More

Clear and Present Dangers To Residents of Walnut Creek

By PETE BENNETT - Contra Costa Watch EMAIL
Phone: 925-399-1082
Posted: 08/08/2013

Posted to Protect My Sons

Walnut Creek CA:  This citizen has endured a near continual barrage of attacks spanning over 25 years.  I've lost multiple businesses, endured robberies, holdups, and business setbacks.  On July 27th 2011 I endured the second interrogation of the year but back in May I attempted execute lawful court orders to gain access to my sons and was met with Police Force - that's two years after a police officer totaled my car in Lafayette and nearly ten years from when someone arranged to have me burn to death but for unknown magical hilarious joke persons near law enforcement have free reign to operate like a RICO organization.  

Headlines Only To be continued . . .  

The Library and Concealed Weapons Your Kids At Risk With Their Games 

The Safeway Incidents 

The Super Stalker Safeway Specials - Harass and Follow Resident Under Color of Authority 

Just another 5150 call at Starbucks

Chucked out of City Hall By Lieutenants and Detectives - you can't talk to the City Attorney 

The Attack of Living Mowers

The Perjury Box - It's Too Late Baby now It's Too Late
  

The man who could have stopped CNET in 2004 -  

Read More