On June 16, 1998 at approximately 10:A.M. District Justice Mark Devlin dismissed the initial set of tickets, in short order.

chief Holtzgraver stated immediately afterwards...

"he disagreed with the outcome" "he was considering bringing in a prosecutor from town to do it again" Maybe Ken Starr could be brought in to do it???

a strong insinuation was made that an attempt to bypass Justice Devlin will be made

"parking in that area of my property puts pedestrians in jeopardy of being hit when the car pulls out"Pedestrians are always at risk, particularly so in situations like diagonal parking outside your police station, where vehicles must back-up with little or no visibility. Many of the vehicles along the highway in this area must back onto the highway to exit their parking space. Backing out is certainly safer!---YEAH RIGHT--c'mon chief get real! WHY NOT ABOLISH VEHICLES IN THE BORO OF WEST VIEW COMPLETELY--then the risk drops to ZERO. If your "pedestrian at risk" theory had any validity, there would be no parking anywhere in the entire world!

"you've been parking with part of your vehicle extending past the edge of the building, and we've let it pass" SUCH SCRUTINY FOR AN ALLEGED PARKING INFRACTION!! SO VERY SORRY cHIEF, FOR BLOCKING ACCESS TO MY OWN PROPERTY, I APOLOGIZE TO MYSELF!

Two hours after the dismissals, a new ticket was issued for the same imaginary offense, at the direction of chief Charles Holtzgraver.

This time the ticket stated that the car was there for over 1 hour. The car was parked on my own private property, and for 30 years there have never been any time limits, nor are any posted! Is this official oppression?

What next chief---are you going to ticket me if I sit here for some arbitrary length of time?

and then...another ticket...the very next time the car was parked in the same spot

...and once more for the precise same violation that had been dismissed!

This is merely a civil matter. Can you imagine what he might do in a criminal trial if he disagreed with the verdict, or HIS PERCEPTION WAS that the defendant was guilty?

IT IS INTERESTING TO NOTE, TRUE TO HIS WORD, THE VENUE WAS CHANGED, AND A HEARING WAS HELD IN BELLEVUE, A NEARBY COMMUNITY. A PROSECUTOR WAS BROUGHT IN, IN A WAY...THE BOROUGH SOLICITOR ACTED IN THAT BEHALF. OF COURSE AN ADVERSE RULING. THEN THE ADVERSE RULING IN BELLEVUE WAS OVERTURNED, AND THE CASE WAS RETRIED IN FRONT OF DEVLIN. THIS TIME HE RULED AGAINST ME, AND THEN FINALLY ON APPEAL.....