It is apparent the man had some other designs on my life. The man had been given an accurate representation of my circumstances when he would let me. The man would frequently listen in part to what I had to say and without comment or empathy just say "Next" as I went through the list of circumstances that were complicating my life and preventing me from attaining autonomy from the man.
It is my observation that the man did not really care what interference I have been getting, nor that it was unlawful and criminal. He just wanted results complying with his agenda. I would periodically rehash or go over my circumstances so that the man would understand my predicament and he would just side track same.
I thought that I had gotten through to him in our last personal meeting in Westmont on or about May 14, 1999 at or about 8 P.M. at the Burger King when I detailed my difficult state of affairs. I related specifically that my HEALTH was so poor that I was not functioning normally and that I had a cold like infection that was so bad that I was seriously considering checking into the hospital. I related that I was just not Rebounding as I had in the past. He gave me the impression that he understood. He, at that time, gave me an additional $20 for my bicycle axle repair which I had prior spent out of my pocket: he seemed to appreciate my problem and due to my extremely low finances he helped me replenish same.
(In the Summer and later in 1997 I related the Dorta Charges in the Criminal Trespass allegations and he sounded like he could help me get an attorney but I said I was trying to get the case dismissed but if not I would have the Public Defender represent me. Note that at some point in 1998 after my Public Defender was disallowed me by the State when they reduced my penalty to non-jailable, that I again approached the man and he said that he had no attorney or other contacts with whom he could connect me. It was during November or December that the man said he had a heart attack, I am told. Note also that the man has not shone any realistic concern about me succeeding in overturning the verdict in my criminal trial, he seems not to care if I retain a criminal record for the rest of my life for something I did not do, not to mention that a record follows one throughout ones work record and job applications. The man has ignored the fact that I have to prepare all my legal work myself and that that in of itself is a very difficult and time consuming job especially when you are not familiar with the ropes of criminal law.)
The man does not apparently understand that preparation in the litigious forum is very complicated and convoluted especially in my case. That comparatively I am a novice up against professionals that do their litigation every day. He was given my whole case file including court transcripts sometime in the middle of this last year, 1998. He said he read them but led me to feel as if I had imposed on him and that he could not help me. It seemed to me that any citizen could see that something very wrong was going on in the Dupage County court and law enforcement arenas and that he would have someone that he could get a hold of since he is a long time resident of Dupage County and since he is somewhat familiar with my demeanor over the last 25 years.
It was approximately the second week in May that I coordinated with the man to do work at their homes. It was approximately two weeks later on May 28, 1999 that the man left his first letter in my storage. It said: " Dear Scott: All things come to an end, but sorry so abruptly. Had we been in touch these last few weeks, I would have reminded you of our limited income. We cannot continue to carry you financially. I'm sorry you haven't found work by now, employment of any kind would have enabled you to pick up these monthly payments. This locker is paid for through July. I believe this to be more than a reasonable arrangement. I will be closing this account soon. To keep the contents of this locker available you must sign a new contract. Sorry" the man. "P.S. The Lemont Jewel Store has a sign needing HELP WANTED. Corner of State & 127th St. (630) 243-1925", WHICH SEE, I was not aware of same notice until approximately June 7, 1999 when I called the man in good faith to touch bases with him and discuss further service for he and his son. At that time I understood that he would no longer pay the storage rent after July 1, 1999. Same was quite a shock!
It is interesting to note that with all this great
concern that the man had about me getting a job and
paying my way because he could not "carry" me
financially, he did not distribute any of the flyers
that I had given him understanding that he would help
me do same. He knew of my long association in the
community as an established business and blew off the
very great potential of an already established customer
base that just needed to be informed. A customer base
that could gross almost a hundred dollars a day if given
a legitimate chance! Simply put, the man did not want
my business to survive knowing that it would be the
easiest and most realistic way to get back on track and
likewise for me to become autonomous.! He wanted me to
take a low income job and start at the bottom at if not
minimum wage a low wage which would not realistically
help me to deal with my Court obligations nor my creditor
obligations. (9-10-99) Also the man nor his brother-in-law never
offered to call me back at the pay phone so to mitigate
my immediate cash problems for the purposes of increasing
my ability to contact them more often! It just did not
seem to sink in, or did it, that I did not have money to call them
like they perhaps desired and that the charges eat up
the change real fast. (9-14-99) Note also that the man did not even take into
consideration the money he owed me for services rendered
him! He in fact could not "carry" $300.00! He is a man that
owns many acres of land in and around a prime and new
and expanding industrial district and he could not spring for
me especially while I was and am under duress from
criminal elements in and about the Dupage area! His
disrespect for my services and my right to be paid for
my legitimate services rendered follows suit with my
other customers who effected a theft of services! (9-10-99)
Considering that I used the spending money he gave me very stringently and for good use and considering that I held off on getting a cell or pcs phone on line due to the fact that the man bulked at anything in excess of $50 to $100 to get set up and same would mean using pay as you go which was not realistically cost effective in running a business. I related to him to get cost effective phones it would cost at least $150 to $300. So even doing without any further assist than the storage payments the man wrote the notes above noted. Notably also he complained about me not getting a cell or pcs phone to get by business back on line. Hypothetically speaking, even if the pcs or cell phone was in use it would take some time to get the word out and he was not even cooperating with flyers I had given him. It appears to me that I was the "car" spinning his wheels trying to get out of the rut while he was standing there watching adding sand and bricks every once in a while and the rest of the time sneaking in oil and grease and water and then asking me why are you spinning your wheels!
He also knew that to get my regular phones back on with
their original and advertised numbers would probably
involve protracted litigation as Ameritech owes me for
business lost somewhere in the vicinity of $20,000 by
estimate. I told him that the pay phone call was
expensive and that I would discuss same with him on
June 17, 1999 when I would come out to the Dupage
County Courthouse for a hearing in my case.
I called him on or about June 17,1999 and let him know that my
circumstances were very poor and that there had been
severe discrimination in the shelter scenario in the city. It meant nothing to him. I also had been informing him in the court papers
in my case but apparently he did not care nor take the time to go
to the courthouse periodically to find out what was
happening to me and my case. I hashed over his conduct toward me at St. Mary's Gostyn and his appearances
unannounced at various of the Dupage P.A.D.S. and indirectly circumstances in the city that suggested he was minimally being
informed by his contacts keeping an eye on me covertly. I reminded him that he was not dealing with a fourteen or fifteen or
twenty three year old. That I had received the letter above noted located inside my storage suggested additionally that he had
been snooping in my personal papers and the like. The man seeming to be similarly spiritually oriented as I was admonished
with scripture from the Bible which directs children to obey their parents in the Lord
for this is right and conversely that Fathers or Parents to provoke not their children unto wrath.
I said that I have been doing the best I can. I said
that I would appreciate him setting me up with an
interview with the pastor of his church as he was suggested by them at the very start as a possibility if the man could not help
any further. He then said that that was his brother-in-law's idea and I said fine I would call his brother-in-law. He
said at some point to let it go at that.
After that point I decided that from that point on it
would be better for me to interface through his brother-in-law rather than him
directly as I felt his brother-in-law was of a more levelheaded, conscionable, objective and hearing disposition. In the last week
of June or the beginning of the first week of July I contacted the
man's brother-in-law. I gave him my new voice mail
number provided by the shelter with which I was associated. I asked him to interface with the man and that he not give the
phone number to the man and
that any messages should be left by him on my voice
mail. He agreed and took my number.
I related to him
that I thought that his buffering would be best due to the fact that I did not want it to be a he said I said
type experience. I said that he seemed to be the more level headed person involved. This man never said or did anything in my
presence that impressed me as negative especially when he accompanied the man.
I asked him to follow through on his suggestion to
set me up with an appointment so to try to secure
funding through the church as I had understood the
man had suggested originally. He made some calls and
he returned a call and gave me the number of the
minister that would interview me.
The minister contacted me on or about the first
week of July and stated that he was available Tuesday through Thursday. I called back and set same
meeting up for July 7, 1999. Due to some complications in the minister's hospital calls he was delayed about an hour from our
3:30 P.M. appointment. I discussed my options with him and
he said that they could not help me due to the fact that I was not a member and even if they could,
it would be only for a one time food subsistence. I said that the brother-in-law gave me a different impression and he said he
was mistaken. I asked him
if I could approach the church board and he said no.
He said that he was the only one that could. I said
then would he do it for me and he said he would. I related that I have over twenty years of
business property at stake. He said sensitively that he would check with the board and let me know. He let me know that he
and the man had been out to the storage on June 29, 1999 to determine the procedure for further arrangements. Upon further
conversation with the minister I learned that he and the man had gone out to the storage on June 29, 1999 and checked on the
contractual requirements.
On July 29, 1999 the man left his second letter in my storage again well inside the door tripping security mechanisms
suggesting he again opened the door. The note said: "Too bad, your time is up and starting next week everything is going out
and swept clean. Sorry" the man. WHICH SEE, I found
the letter on July 31, 1999 when I had gone out there to meet the man.
On July 30, 1999 I called the minister again and
asked what the out come was on the board's position. He
said they could not help as I was not a member and that
the man and his brother-in-law were only constituents
even though the brother-in-law was my advocate. He said
that the man wants me to take over the payments after
July 31, 1999. He further said that the man will be out
there on July 31,1999 to deal with the storage scenario.
I made a note to be there. He criticized me for relating
the bad experiences I have had with the man. My response
was I just told him what had happened to me that was all.
The Pastor started to give me the "bum's rush" that he had
to get off the phone and I left him with the thought to
pray about it at which time he cut me off hanging up.
On Saturday, July 31, 1999 I went out to the
storage in the far west suburbs from Chicago. I arrived
at approximately 9:45 A.M. and stayed through 6:00 P.M.
I put a seal on the lock of my storage and came back
around 10:30 P.M. and the seal was not disturbed nor
were there any notes left by the man thus indicating that he never showed up! I went out again the next day, Sunday, and
arrived there at approximately 11:45 A.M. and stayed
till about 3:00 P.M. and the man never showed up! I
again put a seal on the lock of my storage and went to
talk to a colleague in the area to see if I could raise
some money somehow and then returned later in the
evening around 7:30 P.M. before I caught the train back
to Chicago and the seal on the lock had not been
disturbed. The man did not show up! In both instances
the man never showed up while I was there nor did he a
attempt entry while I was away.
I called the brother-in-law at the train station
and let him know that I was very low on change but that
I wanted to find out what the man's plans were as he
did not show up as the minister had stated he was going to do. He said he had heard nothing. I then asked him what the man had in mind and He said the man was not doing anything for a
couple of days and I still had that time to make
arrangements in effect before anything would be done. I
said fine in effect I would call then.
I called in concert with the most stringent
definition of a couple of days, (being two days), Tuesday
evening from Chicago with very little money, basically,
just enough to make the call to the brother-in-law.
When I asked him if there were any messages or what was
the drift: he said that he has no legal obligation to
relay anything to me and that I should talk to the man
directly. I said the the agreement between he and I
was that he would relay information so to prevent any
negative responses from the man because I did not want
to be accused of "lipping off" or the like. He said he
made no such agreement and I said to him that if that
were so then why did he take my voice mail phone
number to leave me messages? He was silent. He said,
laughingly, that the man and his son had been out to
the storage and removed some wash that needed cleaning
and that they were washing it for me. I said then he
went inside the storage already! I then said to him that
I would be going out to the storage on Wednesday to
pick up some equipment for an appointment I have on
Thursday and would like to meet with them to hash out a
solution to the storage problem. I said I would call
when I got out there.
I did not know when I would get out there as I had
only some change in my pocket and needed fare to the
storage in the far west suburbs. Wednesday morning as I
was on my way to talk with some friends to see if they
could negotiate some coupons I had for cash I came upon
a man on the road that had a car break down. I happened
to steer him to a solution and got him running and he
gave me $20 unsolicited dollars.
I then picked up food
from the churches as usual and got to the loop to catch
the 4:00 P.M. express train. I arrived at the storage at
approximately 4:45 P.M. and using the entry code I had
been given to access the storage I opened the gate and
entered the yard.
Upon entry I discovered that the man
had apparently done more than just removed some wash
for cleaning but had taken a third of the property
entrusted to me and recklessly thrown same into the
dumpster. I went over to the dumpster and noted my
property: books, files, pillows, newspaper clippings,
equipment, a TV and food inside same.
I then went over
to the storage which was assigned to my storage and
noted a different lock on same and wondered what game
the man was playing on me now. I looked to see if my
security systems had been tripped and same were tripped.
I checked my key chain for a key that fit the lock and
found one and opened the lock.
Upon opening the door I
found that approximately a third of my storage contents
were gone. I further noted a sack of camera equipment
had been gone through and spread out on an empty shelf.
I noted that the two front most shelving units were
empty or almost so. One of the shelving units was out
by the dumpster. I noted that the place where I had
stored tape recordings had been discovered and the
material inside and to the front of where they had been
hidden had been removed. If any tapes were missing I
could not tell. I noted clothing and electronic
equipment missing as well as furniture, court files
related to current litigation and research work
produced in the last six months.
It was clear that whoever went through the storage was looking for
anything that was directly tied to my court hearings
and anything that would enable me to get my business
back on its feet which included electronics test
equipment as well as valuables.
I then closed the lockup door and re-locked it. I
went and looked at the dumpster again to see just what
was in it in addition to that noted prior and seeing
the destruction of organization and property just
thrown in it provoked me to go out and call the police.
About a half hour after I called the police
an officer appeared in the parking lot and I
approached him to notify him that I was the person that
had called. We proceeded to the back gate at which time
I again entered the code and let ourselves in. I
showed the officer the dumpster and the storage but did
not open the storage as he said that he believed me.
The officer ventured to say that he thought the
entry to the storage is not a criminal matter due to the
fact that the storage was in the name of the man. I
related to him the terms of the arrangement with the
man. I pointed out to him the terms of his entry and
said that he clearly breached those terms. I said that
the man understood his having a key was for the sole
purpose of entry if "something should happen to me" I
emphasized that nothing had happened to me and yet he
entered illegally. He asked me what laws were broken
and I stated that criminal trespass, breaking and entry,
criminal damage to property, invasion of privacy,
burglary and the like appeared to be viable. I
understood the officer would talk to the States
Attorney to see if they would agree.
No compliant was issued by the officer against the man pending his further investigation. He asked me what I was going to do at this point and I said take "my" Property out of the dumpster before the garbage truck gets to it. He said that sounded like a good idea and then left.
I then proceeded to remove the property from the
dumpster and worked on same through out evening, night
and early morning hours getting only a few hours sleep
and managed removing all to the storage by approximately
9:00 A.M. the next morning, one hour before the garbage
truck arrived and emptied the dumpster. I moved same
property to the storage and unlocked the lock,
which I understood had been changed by the man, with a
key I had on my key ring and attempted to do a cursory
inventory of what was missing as well as reload the
property from the dumpster in an organized fashion back
into the storage.
While I was taking inventory, of what was missing
and trying to reorganize my storage back to the way I
had set it up and replacing the property that had been
put into the dumpster, around 11:00 A.M. a man
approached me and asked me what I was doing. I responded that I was
taking inventory and replacing property illegally
disposed of in the dumpster. I asked who he was and he
said that he was the owner of the property. I said how
can that be. He said that two older men sold the entire
contents of the storage to him Tuesday for $50. I said
what did these men look like and he gave the
descriptions of the man and his brother-in-law. At this
point it became apparent that the brother-in-law held
out on telling me what actually occurred on Tuesday
when he, the man and his son came out to the storage.
I told the buyer that those people had no authority to
sell "my" property. I stated that I am the owner. I
said obviously there is a problem but that I would work
it out with him and get it straightened out. He agreed
but said he would have to talk to the owners of the
storage facility and let them know the problem. I said
fine and asked specifically who he was and he gave me
his first name and indicated that he was with the
auction company. I said fine I know the owner. He asked
me how I got into the storage and I showed him the key
and matched it up with his and both looked, for all
practical purposes, identical. I went back to working
on the storage.
About forty five minutes to an hour later three
policemen arrived, two in uniform and one in plain
clothes, and asked what was going on and then asked for
my identification. They then asked how I got into the
storage and I said by key. They asked to see the key and
I produced the key and they compared it with the other
"owner's" key. They then said that the owner of the storage
facility no longer wants me on the property. I asked
why and was told that because my other storage is in
arrears and in foreclosure I am not allowed on the
property. The police then told me that I was taking
their time and that they had important things to do and
that I would have to put all the property taken from
the dumpster, which was piled in front of the storage,
into the storage in five minutes. I said I will do the
best I can and keep a reasonable access to the storage
but that I do have a bad shoulder, arm and back. I
related that I was in progress loading the storage
anyway but was just trying to inventory what was missing
and put back the property in a way that would allow easy
accessibility.
Twenty minutes passed and I finished the job being
coerced frequently during that time to hurry up and when
I was finished the officers complained that I took too
long. At that point I closed the door of the storage and
locked same. Moments after I had done same, being
distracted by the coercion, I realized that I had left
my lunch in the storage. I immediately asked if I could
get it and I was refused. I related that I do not have
enough money to buy lunch and asked again and they
refused and escorted me to the front property where we
were met by the storage representative.
The police and she talked and then I related that
the whole circumstance is news to me as I was
blindsided. I said I am just finding out what has been
going on just as they. She said that you knew that you
owed on the property and I said yes but was not aware
that I could not come on the property on someone else's
access. She said that she never would have rented to
the man if she knew that it was my property. I replied
and said that the man's credit has nothing to do with
my credit. She gave me a copy of the letter the man gave me and I indicated I had one already.
She then
said that my property in the other storage was up for
auction and that they had sent me notice to my last
known address and I said that I did not get any notices
and that was because my mail had been illegally
interfered with at the Lemont Post Office and that I
have not another address to give due to the fact that
I was evicted from my office on February and have been
living in shelters in Chicago. When I started to get
some rapport with the representative the police officers
intercepted my further conversation and told me I would
have to leave after she gave me a copy of the notice
that she had mailed me. I received a copy of the notice
of foreclosure and auction and was leaving. The notice
of payment demand on my storage was for approximately
$1,500.00 of which 75% would be due in 25 days, (her
giving me an additional 10 days later via phone),
due to receipt of the notice at the present date. It
notified me that if I did not have payment in by the
date specified, in fact August 23, 1999 by 7 P.M. I
would have my property auctioned off on September 2,
1999.
The officers then told me that I could not come on
the property. I said that another business is on the
property and is separate ownership from the storage
business and they said I could NOT go there either. I
have had a good rapport with the other business's personnel over several years and I thought the police were overstepping their authority.
In a later phone conversation that day with the representative
of the storage company she stated that I could come on
the property and access the other business and she
arranged for me to be given my lunches from the storage.
As noted above she gave me another 10 days over and above
the 15 days noted in the demand to pay the 75% or $1000.
With reference to resolving the payment status on the
storage, the man still refuses to advance any funds to
secure another month's rental in spite of his "losing"
at least a couple of thousand dollars of my electronic
test equipment and supplies. He and his pastor have
refused, apparently, to do anything to recover from the
parties responsible the equipment and supplies lost. The
pastor refuses to be involved as a mediator or moderator.
The storage representative has refused to act as an
moderator, arbitrator or mediator between me and the man.
She has put the onerous on me to get in contact with the
man even though I am the one who can't afford the phone
calls, i.e.: I have not the funds for same and when I
do make phone calls of late I have to yield to the
shelter who has provided the phones whose schedule I
have to follow. I believe it is the man who should be
trying to arrange the meeting and finding an amicable
mediator-witness as he has unlimited phone access and
resources comparatively speaking.
My calls to the police for mediation assistance
have not been responsive to the deadline of September 5,
1999. Shelter social workers did not want to get
involved.
The man, because of his non-responsiveness, and loss
of my service equipment and supplies has severely
interfered with my business' recovery and does prevent
my efficient response to consumer requests. Same prevents
me to be able to pay my creditors.
The storage representative obstructs my viability
in making good on her demands by denying my access to
my property and has possibly insured permanent denial of
my possession of my property in the future. With no
access how am I to utilize what supplies and tools are
yet available in the storage so to pay my bills? (APX. 9-7-99)
THIS PAGE LAST UPDATED 11-10-2000
SELECTIONS:
STORAGE SCENARIO
& SURVIVAL PAGE 1
URGENT & EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCES
MAIN PAGE
CLICK ON THE ICON!
YOUR OPINION HELPS ...E-MAIL ME AT: