I had ineffective counsel who wouldn’t do anything more than what he had to do, which pressured me into taking the deal (APB, Page 1).

I would not have received a fair trail because I had a judge who had her mind made up about me (APB, Page 1).

The State violated Brady Laws in the initial investigation (APB, Page 1).

The State has continuously reneged on the terms of the plea deal to which I agreed, and is prepared to continue changing the true circumstances of 2002 (APB, Page 21).

I have been victimized as a result of the plea deal (APB, Page 4).

I was emotionally delayed approximately nine years as a result of my traumatic brain injury without any college or counseling so that I was more like a 16 year old when I was 25 (APB, Page 15).

In 2002, the year my charges stem from, Mrs. Meek and her family intentionally inflicted emotional distress on me by playing games surrounding the conception of my daughter, including Mrs. Meek’s father, Paul Terjelian, leading me to believe my daughter was aborted, and their friend, Ms. Place, initiated contact with me while I was in a Vermont chatroom, lied to me about her age, and pursued me since July, 2002, including sending 10-20 e-mails without a response that I read at a library in Anderson, North Carolina while I was with the fair.

She lied to me about her age and pursued me so that I would get a similar charge as Mrs. Meek’s uncle, Ted Terjelian, her father’s brother (APC, Pages 10-11).

On October 26, 2002, I was cited for DWI3 by CPD, ‘the most corrupt police force in the state,’ after Mrs. Meek’s father challenged me to a fight over the phone, and all I could think about were the games he had played that entire year surrounding the pregnancy, and I accepted his challenge after I had finally been intentionally provoked by his games from the entire year. (Amendment) They called CPD before I got there, and CPD waited in the trailer park for me to drive 10 miles, rather than calling ahead to MPD to get a potential drunk driver off the road sooner than later.”

A couple weeks after I was isolated in Milton as a result of the loss of my license, I met Ms. Place, our relationship was discovered, and I learned she lied to me about her age.

I learned in March, 2008 that Mrs. Meek, Ms. Place, and their families are friends when I saw each of them on each others’, “~sexy lil cha cha’s~” and “Krizzle’s,” Myspace friend pages (APC, Pages 1-3).

They were such good friends, and Ms. Place felt so betrayed by everything she and her family did for the Terjelians to eliminate me from my daughter’s life: everything I will show she did to help Mrs. Meek, that she left a comment on Mrs. Meek’s profile from her “Wifey” profile, on November 15, 2007, my daughter’s birthday, “hows it feel to be sued with me[?]” (APC, Pages 4-5).

I had initially filed suit against Ms. Place and her family and employees of the State in March, 2007, claiming conspiracy, for the false reports from her, and I later added Mrs. Meek and her family for their intentional infliction of emotional distress.

I did not know who “Wifey” was initially, and I e-mailed the person in 2008, essentially stating ‘an enemy of my enemy is my friend.’

The picture on the “Wifey” profile was changed, and I received an e-mail from the profile asking, “Do you know who this is?” (APC, Page 6).

On December 2, 2005, it was brought to my attention that Ms. Place was at the same local bingo hall I was, the American Legion in Milton, and I removed myself without incident and called my mother for a ride.

I later learned that Ms. Place had filed a report alleging that I gave her the finger and her parents made it sound like I was driving. Her father “advised that Mr. Forney had left in a silver car and he was sure that Mr. Forney could not drive” (APC, Page 33).

Ms. Place alleged that I went “to the snack bar on 10 different occasions to purchase items…” The officer stated, “After [Ms. Place’s mother] leaves Mr. Forney walks back in gives her a scary grin, grabs his belongings [the “purchase[d] items” from “10 different occasions”], and on the way out gives her the middle finger” (APC, 33-34).

My hands would have been too full with all those “items” I “purchase[d]” on “10 different occasions.”

“Do you recall his getting up ten or twenty times to go to the concession stand [on December 2, 2005]?” “No” (VOP MERITS HEARING OCTOBER 6, 2006, Page 19 Lines 2-4).

The officer stated: “[Ms. Place] was repeatedly rubbing her hands together and kept looking at her mom for reassurance” (APC, Page 33).

She was looking for reassurance to continue lying and was nervous about lying.

“…I’ve raised with the State my concern that and I guess I would invite Corrections to respond to, but particularly in light of the extreme departure from all prior comments about the events in question concerning K.P. we have an objection to virtually all of that, particularly in light of -- Chris Place -- Cindy Place and K.P. in large part, first of all, they do not appear to be, um - reliable on the main points in question which is the nature of the offenses with regards to the pills and the issue of consent (emphasis added) (SENTENCING HEARING JULY 13, 2005, Page 3 Lines 16-21 & 24 and Page 4 Lines 1-6).

When my probation officer, Suzanne Dubuc, told me not to return to the Legion around December 12, 2005, I told her I would just continue going “to the Grange on Tuesday nights.”

Ms. Place and her boyfriend, David Ballard Jr., planted themselves at the Grange on Tuesday, December 27, 2005, and, without my knowledge, they spoke with the manager, Marge LaFromboise.

Ms. LaFromboise was asked: “So as far as you know this was the first time that they were at the Grange?” and she replied “Yes” (VOP MERITS HEARING OCTOBER 6, 2006, Page 35 Lines 5-7).

The State asked, after Ms. LaFromboise mentioned where she told Ms. Place and Mr. Ballard Jr. to sit, “That night [December 27, 2005]… when you put them at their table you hadn’t seen Larkin yet, is that correct” and Ms. LaFromboise responded, “He wasn’t there yet” (VOP MERITS HEARING OCTOBER 6, 2006, Page 43 Lines 23-25).

After Ms. LaFromboise’s testimony indicated that Ms. Place and Mr. Ballard Jr. were probably sitting when I got there, which they were, the State then tried making it like I went by Ms. Place’s table to get to my table: “Can he walk by that table to get to his table?” M.L: “Well, he’d have to go out of his way in order to do it.” State: “But it’s possible to go by that table to get to his table?” M.L: “Well, yeah, he could go to it, but he -- you know, ordinarily he comes in and goes right straight down to his table” (VOP MERITS HEARING OCTOBER 6, 2006, Page 43 Lines 15-22).

(As Ms. LaFromboise was testifying, I remembered two people with their backs to us getting up and not returning. They were sitting when I got there, then Mr. Ballard Jr. went to Ms. LaFroboise, while Ms. Place went to the snack bar. I wasn’t aware it happened when it happened, other than two stereotypical fat brown haired people, from the back, got up and never returned.)

The State had no reason to try and make me go around tables in their questioning, because in Ms. Place’s statement, she said I “took the route [past the snack bar/straight] that went right by me” (APC, Page 35).

The State tried making an awareness of her presence on December 27, 2005 when there wasn’t any: “You only see Larkin that night when you have to go speak with him after the young man and woman came to you and said that Larkin was here, is that correct?” and Ms. LaFromboise said: “I didn’t go speak to him that night… It was next time [January 31, 2006] I talked to -- I had his mother talk to him” (VOP MERITS HEARING OCTOBER 6, 2006, Page 44 Lines 4-7 & 13-14).

Ms. Place and Mr. Ballard Jr. filed reports against me on December 28, 2005, and in Ms. Place’s report she alleged “While David was returning our cards to the woman… Larkin… brushed my chest with his hand” (APC, Page 35).

Mr. Ballard Jr. writes, “I saw him walk by Kristen… I saw Larkin rub against Kristen’s chest… Then I said don’t touch her again” (APC, Page 36).

Combine their statements together and make it like Mr. Ballard Jr. is the one speaking: “While [I] was returning our cards to the woman… I saw Larkin rub against Kristen’s chest… Then I said don’t touch her again” (APC, Pages 35 & 36).

If this actually occurred, then, according to the statements, this would have happened as Mr. Ballard Jr. was returning the cards, and the manager would have heard him say that.

When cross-examined, Ms. Place said that she had just testified that “[she] went to complain… And [she was] told [she] had to leave” (VOP MERITS HEARING MARCH 15, 2006, Page 24 Lines 12-15).

According to Ms. LaFromboise, 7 months after Ms. Place’s contrary testimony: “[December 27, 2005]…the guy come up to me and he said, could I get my money back for these cards? And I said, sure. I said, what’s wrong? And he said, well, she can’t be around Larkin. And I said, do you want to sit somewhere else? And they said no. He said no” (VOP MERITS HEARING OCTOBER 6, 2006, Page 34 Lines 19-23).

Regarding her communication with Ms. Place: “…I said, what’s wrong? And she said he should leave... I said I can’t ask -- I said I’m sorry, but I can’t ask him to leave, because he’s been here every week. So I said I guess you will have to leave. So they left.” Ms. LaFromboise was asked if anything was said about what Ms. Place and Mr. Ballard Jr. alleged in their reports, and she said, “No.” She was asked if I was “doing anything out of the ordinary?” She responded, “No, he was just sitting at his seat” (VOP MERITS HEARING OCTOBER 6, 2006, Page 35 Lines 16-25 and Page 36 Lines 1-8).

“They left without further complaint” (VOP MERITS HEARING OCTOBER 6, 2006, Page 37 Lines 12-13).

At a hearing regarding other matters, but talking about December 27, 2005, Ms. Place said, “Okay. In the bingo hall, he literally touched my chest. I remember this. I was standing at the snack bar, I closed my eyes … I just felt him brush against right here with his hand” (emphasis added) (NOVEMBER 7, 2008 HEARING, Page 24 Lines 12-16).

When Ms. Place indicated a spot with her hand, the Court said: “…you just touched yourself below the nape of your neck, across the upper part of your chest,” and then Ms. Place changed it “Or, I meant right here” (NOVEMBER 7, 2008 HEARING, Page 24 Lines 17-20).

When the Court verified where she changed the position, she said, “Yes. I closed my eyes… I was just like hoping he would go around me, but…” (emphasis added) (NOVEMBER 7, 2008 HEARING, Page 24 Line 25 & Page 24 Lines 1-2).

The Court asked her, “Okay, so you didn’t actually see him do it?” (NOVEMBER 7, 2008 HEARING, Page 25 Lines 4-5).

Ms. Place had also alleged on October 20, 2008 that Ms. Mead, and I were outside her house in Ms. Mead’s car, while Ms. Place was on the phone with Mrs. Meek, five days after Mrs. Meek, like the VSC, received my motion to file a supplemental Brief for custody of my daughter stating: “The second Brief, which have references to Ms. Kristen Place, the person who pursued me and lied to me about her age in 2002 and stalked me and falsely accused me in 2005, also further shows why my record should be expunged and a slight reference to their friendship…” (APC, Pages 76-78).

At the arraignment on December 29, 2005, the State said: “…as I understand it, using the internet to lure a minor into his home, taking advantage of her, assaulting her…” (VOP MERITS HEARING DECEMBER 29, 2005, Page 2 Lines 16-18).

“That statement [from the State] is repeatedly contradicted by K.P.’s many prior statements during the course of the [2002] investigation and by K.P.’s statements to Defendant himself via the internet as seized and preserved in evidence with warrant by the State” (APC, Page 31).

My Probation Officer, Suzanne Dubuc, even lied--caught herself from telling the truth--at the hearing. “No. Only that, Your Honor, I did tell Larkin that after the first incident that he should not go anywhere near that [bingo hall, the American Legion] -- the victim and not go back to the [American Legion] -- play bingo, and he did go back. It wasn’t the same place, but it was a different area where she was, [the Grange, after he told me he would just go to the Grange,] after he had been advised not [return to the American Legion] -- after he’d been ordered not to [return to the American Legion]” (VOP MERITS HEARING DECEMBER 29, 2005, Page 3 Lines 9-14).

Her lines are full of elliptical pauses, which indicates invention and deception.

The words in the brackets are, mostly, what she was about to say, because it was the truth and what she was stopping herself from saying. Read straight through without the brackets, and it makes no sense.

On March 15, 2006, the State asked me if I had reported to my probation officer what had occurred on December 2, 2006. I slowly remembered: “I believe I might have -- yeah. I wrote her a letter on a [attached to] a sign-in sheet. She didn’t always have me checking in, so I filled out sign-in sheets and… within a day or two right after [December 2, 2005].” (VOP MERITS HEARING MARCH 15, 2006, Page 46 Lines 10-15).

The State had an issue with a copy of the letter I sent to Haesler being admitted into evidence and was “prepared to call the probation officer on that point” (VOP MERITS HEARING MARCH 15, 2006, Page 50 Line 16).

The State did not call her “on that point” for the obvious directions testimony would have gone leading to her producing the sign-in sheet that would say “See Attached” the letter I left with it.

Ms. Dubuc even lied in her affidavit when I self-reported January 31, 2006 to her on February 1, 2006 about Ms. Place and Mr. Ballard Jr. attempting to enter the Grange, after they waited outside for me to enter.

(I had just told Ms. Dubuc at a previous VOP Merit’s hearing where Judge Cashman recused himself, right before January 31, 2006 occurred, that I was still going to the Grange, but making sure that Ms. Place and Mr. Ballard Jr. were not in there before I entered.)

In her affidavit, she wrote: “On 2/1/06, Larkin Forney reported to this officer as [was previously scheduled]. At this time, Larkin reported that he had been to a bingo function at the Grange in Milton, on 1/31/06. While at bingo, he was told by one of the worker’s that a male entered the building, prior to his arrival, and asked if Larkin was there” (emphasis added) (APC, Page 82).

When asked about January 31, 2006, Mrs. LaFromboise responded: “That night the guy come in, and he wanted to know how much it was going to be for nine bingo cards… looked around the hall, then he asked [how much]. Then he left” (emphasis added) (VOP MERITS HEARING OCTOBER 6, 2006, Page 37 Lines 14-21).

Mr. Ballrad Jr. did not ask if I was there, that is not what Ms. LaFromboise said to me, and that is not what I said to Ms. Dubuc.

Mr. Ballard Jr. would also have no reason to come in and ‘ask how much nine cards were, look around, and leave’ on January 31, 2006, unless he and Ms. Place were staking out the Grange, because he had already asked how much they were on December 27, 2005 and returned them for the same amount: “I got a phone call, it was a guy, and he wanted to know how much it was going to be for nine cards. I told him” (emphasis added) (VOP MERITS HEARING OCTOBER 6, 2006, Page 34 Lines 14-16).

Regarding January 31, 2006, after Mr. Ballard had asked “how much it was going to be for nine cards… looked around the hall… then… left,” Ms. LaFromboise was asked, “Did he -- did Mr. Ballard come back?” And she said, “After Larkin did, yes” (emphasis added) (VOP MERITS HEARING OCTOBER 6, 2006, Page 39 Lines 17-18).

At the hearing on March 15, 2006, Judge Grearson also sequestered everybody from the courtroom who would be testifying: “…to the extent there are witnesses in the courtroom [mostly on my behalf, aside from Mr. Ballard Jr., who never testified anyway], they will have to be sequestered,” (VOP MERITS HEARING MARCH 15, 2006, Page 12 Lines 14-15).

Ms. Place was only doing this because she “wants [me] to do every single [day] in jail that [I] possibly can [to help her friend eliminate me from my daughter’s life and not be able to stop her abuse]” (VOP MERITS HEARING MARCH 15, 2006, Page 8 Lines 22-23).

After Ms. Place and I were finished testifying, Grearson chose to continue the hearing rather than allow for an extra hour for my witnesses to testify, but it made no sense for him to sequester everybody from the courtroom, if he was just going to do that.

After fewer than three months had passed, and her perjury didn’t match her false sworn statements, and it was brought to her attention that they didn’t match, Ms. Place said, “Yes. It’s been awhile” (VOP MERITS HEARING MARCH 15, 2006, Page 25 Line 25).

It was longer for my witnesses, and still their testimony matched. Ms. Place even alleged in one of her reports that Ms. Mead “waved and smiled” at her (APC, Page 35).

At the end of questioning Ms. Mead, I told Ms. Strahm, since she never spoke with me nor knew the case, to ask Ms. Mead if she waved at Ms. Place.

First Ms. Strahm asked: “…do you recall anybody waving at you?” Then she asked, “Did you wave at anybody?” Ms. Mead responded, “I do not. I did not, no... I don't normally wave at people I do not know” (VOP MERITS HEARING OCTOBER 6, 2006, Page 23 Lines 4-11).

Ms. Place alleged we were outside her house in Ms. Mead’s gold car, but “Ms. [Mead] no longer has a gold car, that got destroyed in an accident ten months ago, but that’s the car Kristen remembers from when she stalked me in 2005... These are lies… These are just to try and allow the abuse of my daughter to continue” (NOVEMBER 7, 2008 HEARING, Page 31 Lines 15-17).

I fired Mr. Haesler on July 7, 2006, my 29th birthday. At the hearing he said, “His concerns about my representation of him now and then are appropriate.” He also mentioned how David Ballard Jr. was supposed to be called as a hostile witness. This hearing does not exist, but that can just be looked at as part of the conspiracy.

At my final Merit’s Hearing on October 6, 2006, Mr. Ballard Jr. was not there, and Ms. Strahm didn’t respond when I asked her where he was. I just wanted to get the matters resolved, because they should have been settled on March 15, 2006.

I later learned that Ms. Strahm had represented Mrs. Meek when she lost custody of our daughter, after she “yanked baby Madison from brother’s arms” and assaulted every member of her family (APC, Pages 48-51).

Ms. Strahm was not looking to me as a client, but as the “Father” of Mrs. Meek’s, her former client’s, daughter, who would have overblown my “sex offense” and called me a “child molester” to Ms. Strahm, just like she does to me in front of my daughter and in court. Ms. Strahm wrote “Father,” instead of Defendant on her Notice of Appeal, even though the case had nothing to do with family matters. (APC, Pages 72-74).

Ms. Strahm is a psychopath who is part of the “moral decline of society” and our system, which is why she chose to write one short, vague “self-righteous” letter to the editor on the subject in 2000 to deflect attention from herself (APC, page 84), just like Ms. Place getting me a “sex offense” would help Mrs. Meek deflect any attention from her family’s abuse of my daughter, and she can constantly call me a “child molester” and use the “sex offense” against me and try to cause me distress such as when the Family Court allowed her to speak directly to me: “You’re a lifetime member of the sex offenders -- registry list -- you are,” without me even saying anything (MOTION HEARING AUGUST 27, 2008, Page 12 Lines 17-18, 20, 22).

In Ms. Strahm’s letter to the editor, she writes: “I am worried because it seems that so many self-righteous people think nothing, absolutely nothing, of concocting lies, of spreading lies, and of doing anything to destroy good people” (APC, Page 84).

Ms. Strahm’s letter is “self-righteous” to deflect attention away from herself. She is talking about people like herself, Mrs. Meek, Ms. Place, Ms. Andreson, Ms. Dubuc, etc., etc., who “think nothing, absolutely nothing of concocting lies, of spreading lies, and of doing anything to destroy good people” (APC, Page 83).

When I took the plea deal, it was my understanding that I would only be on the ten year registry. Shortly after I was discharged from probation, I was told by my new former probation officer, Dale Crook, that I would be on the lifetime registry, regardless of what he had said in the letter he sent to me where it was only ten years, which is what I understood when I took the deal (APC, Page 80).

Mrs. Meek uses that for more than it’s worth, but her uncle is the one on the Maine Internet Sex Offender Registry, and her father is the one who abused her and my daughter, stuck a book in his pants for my daughter to retrieve, which is why there were so many fights in the family, specifically between Mrs. Meek and her father--repressed feelings of hostility from when he sexually abused her (APC, Pages 10-11 and 47-58.)

Mrs. Meek couldn’t and can’t even deny he abused her, and that he wasn’t a child molester, in a text session argument on August 1, 2007: (These are saved on my phone too).

Larkin: It’s funny how i can say i’m not a child molester but you can’t even say your dirty daddy wasn’t a child molester. When the judge asked you how you would feel if somebody called mr mute a child molester. All you were violini [thinking] about were all the times he diddled you. And i just might be around
Ashley: Cause you are
Larkin: No your daddy was the molester of you[.] see you still can’t say [he] wasn’t because you remember all the times if [he] molested you. And how you allowed him to abuse madison. The universe got rid of that perverted red neck for a reason. To stop him from abusing Madison
Larkin: Change if to he. You remember how he abused you etc
Larkin: Also if my charge with your lying friend is your concern with me then why is it that i am the one to give her [Madison] the bad touch talk and not you? Oh because you loved your daddy so much-wrong kind me [of] love-that you just let him do to Madison what he did to you. At least I’m alive because I have a bigger purpose than that dirt bag. To stop your abuse of Madison. The universe eliminated him beautifully. I thought it was funny that he couldn’t even eat for a year. So when do you plan on stopping your freak friends from abusing madison

(She did not respond, because she knows it’s true, and if it wasn’t, then she would have defended his name, especially considering that he is deceased. I couldn’t eat or drink for a month or so because of my throat injury as a result of 12/20/02, if I‘m to be thought of as cruel for what I said--it was poetic.)

On March 27, 2007, I was arraigned for various things that arose as a result of the false accusations, wrongful violation, and Ms. Dubuc’s blackmail attempts, such as not going to see her or to my “last group,” and my website, and I went to jail. It wasn’t going to be my “last group” anyway and group wasn’t even recommended in the psychosexual evaluation (APC, Page 93). Prior to her blackmailing me to accept responsibility for the violation, Ms. Dubuc should have realized there was something wrong with the Court’s findings: “January 31st… there’s no testimony or evidence before the Court that Mr. Larkin (sic) was aware of her presence there” (VOP MERITS HEARING OCTOBER 6, 2006, Page 47 Lines 8-11).

I had an awareness Mr. Ballard Jr. ‘came in and left,’ and they tried entering after I entered, which is what I told Ms. Dubuc the next day, causing her to write her affidavit, so she had to realize the Court wasn’t paying attention in it’s ruling. If I had no awareness of that, then I couldn’t have self-reported it the next day for Ms. Dubuc to write a distorted affidavit about (APC, Page 82).

All the State and DOC were doing, like Ms. Place and Mrs. Meek and their families, was trying to create another time of “significant stress and turmoil in [my] life” (APC, Page 92).

On March 28, 2007, the day after I went to jail, and my computer was taken, Mr. Meek sent an e-mail to my account: “I AM GOING TO ASK U ONE MORE TIME TO REMOVE MY NAME AND PICTURES AND ASHLEYS FROM YOUR SITE…” (emphasis added) (APC, Page 41).

Mr. Meek sent me another e-mail on March 29, 2007, also meant to cause me distress, stating “…your whole fucking loser family needs to get ur heads out of ur asses and start supporting my daughter maddison meek” (APC, Page 42).

Mrs. Meek told me in 2002, while we were still together, “My parents have connections in the system.” Mrs. Meek’s father’s friend, Richard (Uncle Dickie-Doo) Brown gave him a lot of “care and support” and shares the same name as the Chief of Police in Weathersfield, Dick Brown, and he had something to do with bothering a sex offender (APC, Pages 11 and 83).

That may just be a coincidence, but the rest of this is not.

I was in a position, jail, where I really couldn’t do anything about what was said in the e-mails, and Mr. Meek is only with Mrs. Meek because of my daughter, and he thinks she is his “Baby Girl.” He put a picture of her in a dress in a semi-provocative pose on Myspace. Mrs. Meek commented, “No she is my Baby Girl!!!!!! J/K I’ll share her” with her sister and Mr. Meek, but deprives her of her protective father (APC, Pages 18-19).

In one of two letters Mrs. Meek had written to me while I was in jail, postmarked July 10, 2003 and sent to me at the jail, while CHINS hearings were happening, Mrs. Meek wrote: “I am not trying to neglect you of her… You don’t know how bad I want you to see her… She is ours and you will see that one day hunny. But we really need to talk before the [CHINS hearing] 29th” (APC, Pages 65-68).

Before an upcoming Family Court hearing on visits in jail, Mrs. Meek wrote me her second and last letter postmarked in May, 2004: “Listen I’m not trying to deprive you of Madison… I have to look out for her and whats best for her… But you don’t know how much I want u to be a part of her life… u have to remember that my parents have helped me in so may ways and I can’t go and stab them in the back… so I hope u can understand that… she doesn’t know you, which I know is my fault… so why throw u in and out of her life and confuse her right now” (APC, Pages 69-70).

I was in jail pending the same charges Mrs. Meek is now throwing in my face, but she only wrote the letters, because she knows how bad she is and that she could manipulate my compassion as a father and get me to say little about my concerns, because she knows exactly what she is, the truth, and what they did, and she manipulated me and my fragile state all she could to think differently about her, but not anymore.

On an untitled picture of my daughter and me, Mrs. Meek commented: “THAT IS MY DAUGHTER NOT YOURS SO DON’T CALL HER YOUR DAUGHTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!UNDERSTOOD AND GET HER PICTURES OFF YOUR PROFILE” (APC, Pages 20-20b).

Mrs. Meek has a problem with a nice father-daughter picture, but not of Mr. Meek posting a picture of my daughter in a provocative pose in a dress or the picture of him with the dildo in front of him (APC, Pages 14 & 18).

In February, 2008, after I, through my sister, finally located Mrs. Meek and my daughter with a visitation order, the State Police became involved, and they wrote an affidavit against Mrs. Meek being “out of control” around my daughter and being noncompliant with the court order, and they tried pressing charges on her for not complying with the Family Court ruling, but “Colin McNeil (Deputy States Attorney)… advised they would not prosecute” (APC, Pages 60-64.)

They seem really not to prosecute her for anything she does, aside from one little unlawful trespass, and her father was given one simple assault, but not her for her assaults, anything to do with my daughter, and me, just little things (APC, Pages 47-64).

On April 11, 2007, the State and DOC lied about the contents of my site: “…has created a website which contains pages and pages of written material that he wrote containing veiled and not so veiled threats towards judges, prosecutors, the young woman that was the complaining witness… I have read several portions of those materials. Most of what Mr. Forney writes is inaccurate… I think he should be held without bail… for public safety reasons. It’s concerning and disturbing to read what he wrote” (STATUS CONFERENCE APRIL 11, 2007, Page 4 Lines 23-25 and Page 5 Lines 1-6).

Nothing threatening was on my site, and most of my site regarded/regards my daughter.

On May 7, 2007, I tried getting bail, because my lawyer, Paul Jarvis, wasn’t there, but rather his partner, Mark Kaplan, who “was asked to fill in for him at the last minute [and] didn’t understand [the case] to be as complicated as it is” (VOP MERITS MAY 7, 2007, Page 2 Lines 19-20 and 22-23).

The State also continued to lie about the contents of my site: “…establishing his own website, putting personal ads onto the website, seeking female companionship” (VOP MERITS MAY 7, 2007, Page 6 Lines 20-21).

My site was to expose the situation around my daughter and them, and a girlfriend, “female companionship,” was/is one of the furthest things from my mind, not something I was “seeking… putting personal ads onto [my] website” for.

I had inactive personal accounts where people could e-mail me, if they were interested and had a paid account, but I was not actively “seeking” anything.

On May 7, 2007, the State continued to lie on the word of Ms. Dubuc: “She’s spoken to his mother, his mother insists that he’s done nothing wrong [regarding the false accusations and wrongful violation Ms. Dubuc was blackmailing me to accept], would not put him on the telephone. So the family has demonstrated an unwillingness to assist…” (VOP MERITS MAY 7, 2007, Page 7 Lines 5-9).

To contradict the State’s and Dubuc’s lie, when my mother was asked if there was “an incident when the probation officer called and wanted to speak with [me],” and if I got on the phone “voluntarily,” my mother stated, “No. I urged him to” (BAIL REVIEW HEARING MAY 8, 2007, Page 9 Lines 9-18).

The State and DOC were just trying to recreate similar conditions to that of 2002 by being accessories and accomplices in the conspiracy between Mrs. Meek and co., to cause another “period of specific turmoil and crisis in [my] life” (APC, Page 92).

That is why they just held me in jail for one extra day--to try to provoke a reaction from me and get “evidence.”

The State made me wait one more day to review the bail by stating: “Your Honor, if you’re contemplating imposing bail, I would ask for a few days to notify certain officials” (VOP MERITS HEARING MAY 7, 2007, Page 10 Lines 14-16).

The next day, when asked for their “evidence” why I shouldn’t get bail, all the State could say was, “Your Honor, the State does not have evidence…” (BAIL REVIEW HEARING MAY 8, 2007, Page 25 Lines 6-9).

They just wanted to hold me in jail for one extra day to try to get that evidence by trying to cause me more distress to do something. (The supervising guard, Graham, raised his arm and stuck his pit in my face, when I returned from court, and said, “Hey Larkin, you’re back, give me five.”)

On May 21, 2007, they continued to renege on the terms of the plea deal by making Ms. Place younger than she was when we met when they said she was “Thirteen,” but she was 14 (BAIL REVIEW HEARING MAY 8, 2007, Page 29 Lines 3-7).

She and I only met for a brief two weeks after November 4, 2002, and I can prove we did not meet before then and put an end to that. I dissected the majority of the 2002 affidavit so that it even put reasonable doubt in my mind, but Haesler was unwilling to do anything.

The only thing I couldn’t completely dispute was medical stuff, but they were previously aware of that through my disclosure, but in the PSI, they said Ms. Place had a “clean bill of health.” That’s not possible for what the original affidavit said; however, the test they conduct can also get a misreading if a person is having sex with multiple partners in the same time period.

“Kristen advised that she has engaged in sexual intercourse on three occasions, the last of which occurred on Sunday, November 17, 2002[, the day before she brought over her pills,] with a male she identified as “David” [Ballard Jr.]” (APC, Page 24).

Not that it seems to matter, I was, naturally, as a result of my traumatic brain injury, set back emotionally approximately nine years from my chronological age, and I was in an especially vulnerable state of mind and emotion in 2002 as a result of what Mrs. Meek and her family were intentionally doing surrounding the conception of my daughter: “…in age -- in terms -- he’s closer probably in age than some people would be, given his level of maturity” (BAIL REVIEW HEARING MAY 8, 2007, Page 29 Lines 8-11).

By the time I was hit by the car, I was supposed to have gone through Erickson’s phases of trust versus mistrust, autonomy versus shame and doubt, initiative versus guilt, and I would have just been two years into industry versus inferiority. After I was hit by the car when I was almost nine years old I lost all previous phases of development and had started over with guilt and inferiority as a result of my traumatic brain injury, and things obviously got screwed up along the way. I feel closer to the maturity of someone in their mid-20’s--I briefly felt emotionally secure and like that of my own age, before the false accusations, which just made me feel closer to that of my deficit--nine years behind, but it was still in the range of mature adult thinking, which is why I’ve been able to handle this.

I did not initiate contact with Ms. Place in 2002, she initiated contact with me, lied to me and pursued me.

To end the argument of when she and I met once and for all… In the initial affidavit from 2002, she and her family make it sound like we met longer than what it was, and the investigator, Chris Carlson, guessed we met either “October 19 or 26, 2002” (APC, Pages 23 & 24).

I was in jail for the DWI3 on “October 26, 2002” as is indicated by the Booking Log Slip (APC, Page 71), and I didn’t have a license after that. I think Carlson could have found that out, probably did, but he was hiding things like that, and the 10-20 e-mails from Ms. Place, and so was the State.

I didn’t meet Ms. Place on October 19, 2002 either, otherwise I would have driven; however, the affidavit states: “She advised that Forney’s mother picked her up [with me] and brought her to Forney’s residence…” (APC, Page 23).

That is because my mother took me to get her, because I didn’t have a license, and I thought she was of age.

During a hearing for Ms. Place’s no-stalking order on November 7, 2008, she continued to lie by saying, “You drove” (NOVEMBER 7, 2008 HEARING, Page 34 Line 7).

In the 2002 affidavit: “In addition, [Chris and Cindy Place] later discovered that Larkin Forney’s mother had been picking Kristen up from their house…” (APC, Page 22).

On November 7, 2008, the Court asked her if there had been any other contact between her and me other than the 23-31 day old e-mails on which she based the no-stalking order request, and her first response was, “No… Just those…” (NOVEMBER 7, 2008 HEARING, Page 18 Lines 14 & 16).

The Court asked her if she had seen me, and her immediate first response was, “No…” and her mother made a noise reminding her to lie, and excitedly changed from “No…” to “…Yes, yes. Yes. On the road -- I came outside, I was talking on the phone with Ashley Meek… [on October 20, 2008]” (NOVEMBER 7, 2008 HEARING, Page 18 Lines 19-22).

Mrs. Meek and Ms. Place were just manipulating on what to try to do to get me to prevent me from filing my supplemental brief, which Mrs. Meek and the VSC had just recently received a request to file, where I said I could prove the conspiracy (APC, Pages 75-78).

When she remembered her lie for October 20, 2008, she proceeded to say: “Yes, the 20th of October, I came outside to go smoke a cigarette, I’m on the phone talking to Ashley, and I go outside, “Are you serious?” I walked over, I see him in a, in a gold car, it was him. I’m 100 percent sure it was him, I saw his face… It was twenty, thirty feet away from my house on my [road] at 9 o’clock at night… It looked like his friend, [Mrs. Mead], but, it was a gold car, but… It’s a private road, it has three houses on it, and he was parked on the side of the road, on my road, with the lights off, except the dome light in the car” (emphasis added) (NOVEMBER 7, 2008 HEARING, Page 19 Lines 4-9 & 12-14 & 16-17 & Page 20 Lines 4-7).

During a pre-trial conference for my lawsuit, when Mr. and Mrs. Meek were asked if they knew who the Places are, Mr. Meek stated: “We have no idea who they are” (PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE AUGUST 2, 2008, Page 3 Line 20)

On May 21, 2007, after my retained counsel’s partner, Mark Kaplan, had been to the bench and listened to the State, he had me plead guilty to events that were my reactions to the conspiracy, and the State said: “Judge, as I indicated at the bench, the State is looking for the underlying in this matter and I thought it might be helpful if Ms. Dubuc could outline for the Court, from the Department’s point of view, why the underlying is appropriate” (VOP MERITS MAY 21, 2007, Page 15 Lines 5-11).

Mr. Kaplan should not have been advising me on these matters, having me plead guilty, but he mentioned how he was covering for his partner, my retained counsel, Paul Jarvis, because of a “conflict.” He did not elaborate, but when he first said this, I just thought that Mr. Jarvis may have been doing something else, had another case to handle.

On Mrs. Meek’s father’s obituary, there is a comment from Dottie/Dorothy (Fagan) Jarvis stating: “I have fun memories of my cousin Paul” (emphasis added) (APC, Page 13).

Jarvis and Kaplan’s invoice was $1/hr for 3,000 hours (APC, Page 79).

Jarvis should have been advising me but he was a “conflict,” because he is related to Mrs. Meek’s family, and that would make the entire firm a conflict.

To further show the Court had it’s mind made up before the plea deal on July 13, 2005, and I had no choice: “The fact that you set fire - set fire in your parents’ home [specifically focused on my room, and nowhere else] with apparently no thought to the impact upon other people when you could have not only destroyed their home as you did, but killed your mother who you knew was in the house…” (SENTENCING HEARING JULY 13, 2005, Page 126 Lines 13-17).

This was after she changed her mind about putting me in jail. As I said, I had no chance other than to try to salvage my life with the plea, and I wouldn’t have received a fair trial where any of this would have been revealed.

I barely knew where I was, let alone that my mother, as well as our animals and my cat I had since I was 10 years old or all my sentimentals: trophies, awards, pictures, letters, baseball cards, coins, gifts, were in the house and would be at risk, nor the fact that I had a daughter to live for, because I was having a breakdown and attempted suicide, and all I thought about, although unreasonably at the time, was how Mrs. Meek and Carlson were working together to eliminate me from my daughter’s life.

I had an approaching Family Court hearing for visitation in November, 2007, after a reversal from the VSC, and at the end of October, 2007, Ms. Place filed a TRO against me in Family Court, instead of Superior Court, regarding the motions for my lawsuit for her father that he had been getting since about April, 2007.

She changed the circumstances of 2002 when she did this. “… he sexually assaulted me in 11 incidences… He also made me take pills to kill myself…” (APC, Page 37).

“When asked why she took the pills, she advised that she wanted to hurt herself advising that her mother “makes me mad all the time [by calling her names and hitting her all the time]…” Kristen then disclosed a second incident of sexual intercourse… Kristen advised that there were no additional incidents of sexual contact with Forney” (APC, Pages 24-25). The Places even tampered with evidence: “It should be noted that during [Cindy Place’s] review of the above noted cassette tape, towards the end of the conversation recorded, the cassette player “ate” the cassette tape causing same to break” (APC, Page 28). As Ms. Place was speaking about her treatment at the police station, and her beginning to talk about her taking the pills, she was telling them about the way her mother mistreated her, and it was conveniently ‘eaten’ in this spot, rather than any other spot regarding things to do with me, and it picks up where she was “Sitting there almost crying I’m like what the hell, I go why? They kept like how many did you take…” (APC, Page 29).

Her parents were still working on their programming of Ms. Place as is shown in another part of the call: “…they’re like yeah you’re just his little bitch” (APC, Page 28b).

On October 15, 2008, the VSC, as well as Mrs. Meek, received my motion to file a supplemental brief where I said I could prove the conspiracy between Mrs. Meek and Ms. Place if I was allowed to file it, and they were talking about it on the phone on 10/20/08.

On October 21, 2008, Ms. Place filed a no-stalking order only mentioning two e-mails I had sent her at the end of September, 2008. The e-mails were sent to try to get her to file something so that I could get her father’s address since he skipped court for the lawsuit against him, and I was rude in them to push her to do it, and if she didn’t do it right off, then that would prove her lack of fear since she isn’t an actual victim, and I also added the truth in them so that it would also give her reason not to file, unless if she was actually afraid of me, which she has no reason to be other than she’s really now aggravating/aggravated me with her lies, harassment, and false reports, and my relationship with my daughter is damaged because of her and her friend, my daughter’s mother, and I still haven’t done anything but endure all this wrongful stress and distress, as well as my daughter, but the system allows it to continue (APC, Pages 7-9).

In Ms. Place’s October 21, 2008 no-stalking request: “He told me if I didn’t take the pills he was going to cut my throat. He had a razor in his hands” (emphasis added) (APC, Page 39).

In her TRO filed one year earlier on October 29, 2007, she wrote: “He also made me take pills to kill myself and he told me if I didn’t he would cut me with a razor blade that he had in his bedroom” (emphasis added) (APC, Page 37).

When I pled guilty to the “sex offense,” I did not expect that to be used to continue to harm me, nor for Ms. Place and her family to blatantly distort the events of 2002 in their attempts to publicly slander me, nor for the State to continue wanting to change and changing the “underlying facts” revealed throughout the course of the investigation.

In the initial investigation, Ms. Place said that we were only together two times and that “[she] wanted it to happen,” but that was only so that I would get a similar charge to Mrs. Meek’s uncle, and she stated how she removed her own clothes and was on top, all of which indicates no ‘force,’ just like the response to the PSI says (APC, Pages 23 & 30-32).

She says she went to the DWI3 hearing, but I went to that hearing straight from jail, before we met, and it was a violation hearing. “She advised that Forney’s mother brought she and Forney to court where he was to appear for a [drinking violation] hearing” (APC, Page 23).

That would have been the appropriate time to say something, or while I was in jail, or during the PSI, etc.

Ms. Place alleged: “he sexually assaulted me in 11 incidences,” but the investigation only revealed two potential incidences, and they were not “assaults.”

She wrote, “I told him no to some sexual things…” (emphasis added) (APC, Page 37).

Nobody who is being assaulted is going to say no to “some” sexual things, they are going to say no to all sexual things.

Mrs. Meek started contacting me again, after the DUI3, on December 6, 2002, the day my name was in the paper regarding Ms. Place. She and I spoke for the next two weeks, even though it was technically a violation of my conditions, even though I wasn’t “contacting her.”

On December 20, 2002, the investigation was becoming oppressive. Detective Chris Carlson first came to my house that day, and then he later called and spoke to me in a sarcastic (haha, your life is over) tone. The end of the conversation:

Forney: Because I, well see I could have just, whatever, I mean, talk to my attorney Bob Backus because I mean, that’s just ah, lets just say I could have sat there and lied my ass off, whatever, maybe I was lying, who knows, maybe I’m insane, who knows.

(Spoken like a true sane person)

Det. Carlson: Okay, alright man, anything else, you all set or?
Forney: No, I’m fine
Det. Carlson: Ok, have a nice day sir
Forney: Yep
Det. Carlson: Bye, bye

(He had already told me to “have a nice day,” not that he meant it, so there was no reason for him to say, “Bye bye.” (Perhaps he was predicting my later phone call with Mrs. Meek). He could have just said, “Bye” or nothing since he had already said his departure. He did that, the epiphany reveals at the end, because he was involved in the conspiracy at this point, December 20, 2002 (APC, Page 29c)).

Later that night, 12/20/02, Mrs. Meek and I were speaking as we had been for the past two weeks. Mrs. Meek and we got “disconnected,” which had never happened before, and I thought she and Carlson were working together and setting me up to eliminate me from my daughter’s life, even though they were seemingly unconnected at the time, and I just wasn’t supposed to have any contact with Mrs. Meek because of the DWI3.

Right after we were disconnected, I had a total breakdown, which I had been headed for since October, 2002, if not sooner, and I attempted suicide by fire (APC, Page 29c).

Setting oneself on fire is not sane. I was broken down because of all the distress that had been inflicted on me that entire year causing a “time of significant crisis and turmoil in [my] life” (APC, Page 92).

That was a suicide attempt, not “arson,” something the State used to pressure me to plead guilty, because my ineffective counsel would not file a 12-D on it, and the State and DOC even reneged on the agreement to get rid of that. “He has the sexual assault, an arson…” (VOP MERITS MAY 21, 2007, Page 15 Lines 16-17).

I pled guilty to reckless endangerment and the unjust “sexual assault” to get rid of the unjust “arson” and move on with my life, but they only used the plea deal to harm me, hold me back, and they continuously reneged on it.

On a side note, Chittenden County DCF is just ignoring the situation around my daughter. They ignore it because they already returned custody to Mrs. Meek in 2003 against my objections, after she “yanked baby Madison from brother’s arms,” and she was not doing anything she was supposed to do, and they didn’t do family counseling, ‘because of her father’ (APC, Page 48).

In a report dated December 11, 2004, Mrs. Meek writes: “…my dad Paul Terjelian was walking behind me and took me by my left coat sleeve and swung me around… then I believe with his knee he kicked me in the upper part of my stomach when I am 5 ½ months pregnant… In the past my father has hit me several times in numerous places the most severe time he smashed my head in to our front door in the summer of 2002 [when she was also pregnant with my daughter] that left a huge egg in the center of my forehead” (APC, Pages 54-55).

In a letter regarding my concerns about Mrs. Meek smoking pot, “something else,” around my daughter (Mrs. Meek blew it in her face when she was younger, once that I’m aware of through reliable sources), the Intake Supervisor for Chittenden County DCF, Larry Martineau, responded to my concern: “Report indicates that mother smoked pot in the past, no information that mom is currently using and is unable to care and properly supervise her child” (emphasis added) (APC, Page 81).

They didn’t give her a drug test to determine that, and I’m certain she’s using other things. She still does pot. Look at the Myspace pictures, but Chittenden County DCF just excused it like the bruises on my daughter’s back from being kicked by Pat Duxbury (APC, Pages 4 & 15-16).

I’m not saying responsible smokers, as well as drinkers are unable to care for their child, and that is not what makes Mrs. Meek unable to do that. It is how messed up she is from the abuse she suffered from her father, the same abuse she has allowed to happen to my daughter, it is her allowing Pat Duxbury to kick my daughter and leave bruises on her, it is her allowing anybody to do what they want with my daughter--she only isolates her from my side of the family and went to the lengths of a conspiracy for a reason, and the State is only ignoring it for some unethical reason.

Aside from the tampered phone call, there was also tampered Internet evidence--a duplicate chat session.

December 15, 2002:
Babyme7777666: are you spouting off my name in the room???
kami802: no
kami802: thanks a lot
(APC, Page 26)

December 16, 2002:
Babyme7777666: are you spouting off my name in the room???
kami802: no, thanks a lot
(APC, Page 27)

(All of the text in both of the logs is the same. The only difference is that both of kami802’s messages were combined for December 16, 2002 with a comma.)

December 15, 2002:
kami802: who have u been talkin to
Babyme7777666: and I don’t know who… only three people on here know… You, Beth, and Traci
(APC, Page 26)

December 16, 2002:
kami802: who have u been talkin to
Babyme7777666: and I don’t know who… only three people on here know… You, Beth,and Traci
(APC, Page 27)

(The questions are the same, and she would not need to ask again, and my answer would not be exactly the same--the conversations are the same with editing and tampering. The only difference with this is that now all the text on both is italicized, unlike the beginning text on December 15, 2002, including the screen names.)

December 15, 2002:
kami802: what is traci sn name
Babyme7777666: cutegirl93080
Babyme7777666: why???
(APC, Pages 26-27)

December 16, 2002:
kami802: what is traci sn name
Babyme7777666: cutegirl93080, why???
(APC, Page 27)

(This is also the same question and not one that would need asked again. The text is exactly the same. The only difference is that both of Babyme7777666’s messages were combined with a comma added.)

December 15, 2002:
kami802: just wanted to know
kami802: nothing really
(APC, Page 27)

December 16, 2002:
kami802: just wanted to know, nothing really
(APC, Page 27)

(Combined with a comma again. The alleged second conversation is just a duplicate of the first, but clearly not a conversation that would have happened.)

Even all the lines in the phone calls maintain consistency on the use of italics, bold, and underline, but not something from a computer, because it was tampered with, just like the excluded 10-20 e-mails from Ms. Place without a response from me (APC, 28-29c).

The State has no problems reneging on the terms of the plea deal: “…if defense counsel wants to start talking about the underlying facts of the sexual assault on a minor, the State would be happy to provide some additional [lies, perjury, manufactured evidence, things that result in us being accessories against him]… in that case” (BAIL REVIEW HEARING MAY 8, 2007, Page 30 Lines 1-6).

The events of 2002 and my charges wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t all for the conspiracy to cause me distress for reactions to discredit me and eliminate me from my daughter’s life. Mrs. Meek is such a lying projecting psychopath that she and Mr. Meek will do anything, including lie to my daughter to play off my error on when visits changed, so they can file police reports and use the “sex offense” and call me a danger, etc. (APC, Pages 43-46).

“It is my view that the fact that Mr. Forney committed this sexual offense that he committed here does not in any way suggest that he would abuse his very young female child and I’ve heard no evidence to suggest that,” but that is all the plea deal has done in the conspiracy (SENTENCING HEARING, JULY 13, 2005, Page 130 Lines 24-25 and Page 131 Lines 1-2).

The only reason the events of 2002 occurred and I have charges from those events is because of what I was going through as a result of a conspiracy. Ms. Place would have never happened had she and her family not “wanted it to happen” and had she not pursued me and lied to me about her age, while her family friends intentionally inflicted emotional distress on me. “Kristen advised that the sexual intercourse was her idea and that they did not engage in any other type of sexual contact other than kissing stating “we went at it that’s it”” (APC, Page 24).

CUSI had to have discovered the 10-20 e-mails without response, then probably asked Ms. Place, during the course of the investigation, why she was sending me that many e-mails without a response, at which point some of her connection with Mrs. Meek came out, and on December 20, 2002, after Mrs. Meek and I had been speaking for the past two weeks since my name came out in the paper regarding Ms. Place on December 6, 2002, Carlson came to my house, then called me, spoke to me in a sarcastic tone, then Mrs. Meek called me later, and we had never been “disconnected” before that night, and I thought she was working with Carlson, or vise versa at that point, to help eliminate me from my daughter’s life, I attempted suicide by fire, and they charged me with “arson” and reckless endangerment and used that as leverage to get me to plead guilty to the “sex offense” by saying they will dismiss the “arson,” but only to renege on that part of the plea deal, among the rest of it, and only used the plea deal to try to harm me and get a similar reaction as 2002 by creating another “time of significant stress and turmoil in [my] life… [and] specific crisis in [my] life” (APC, Pages 92-93).

“Dr. Candido and Dr. Nash have both, one testified, one the report, the parties agreed the Court could review, they both have opined that they do not see you as a standard profile of a pedophile, someone who’s like[ly] to commit a pattern of sex offenses with children and they obviously have some expertise in that area… I found convincing Dr. Candido’s testimony and Dr. Nash’s report that with regard to the sex offense issue your behavior did not come out of a pattern of pedophilia, but came out of your other emotional and mental issues [that Mrs. Meek and her family were intentionally targeting, while their friend pursued me and lied to me about her age], primarily I guess I would describe them I guess as emotional and personality issues [such as the type of personality who wanted to be a father and share the pregnancy experience and be there for the birth of his child and would feel distressed by that being intentionally deprived of him, and your Borderline Personality Disorder the State and DOC were aware you had and tried aggravating since December, 2005 by trying to create another “period of specific crisis in [your] life” with their parts in the conspiracy and acting as “connections” for Mrs. Meek and her family and Ms. Place and her family to eliminate you from your daughter’s life and keeping you too distracted to do anything for her]” (SENTENCING HEARING JULY 13, 2005, Page 120 Lines 13-19, Page 123 Lines 21-25, Page 124 Line 1) (APC, Page 92). The State and DOC still treated me like a pedophile/predator, after opining that “they do not see [me] as a standard profile of a pedophile[/predator]…”

“…if defense counsel wants to start talking about the underlying facts of the sexual assault on a minor, the State would be happy to provide some additional [lies, perjury, manufactured evidence, things that result in us being accessories against him]… in that case” (BAIL REVIEW HEARING MAY 8, 2007, Page 30 Lines 1-6).

If they want to start changing the “underlying facts” of the plea deal, which they have already done and will do in the future should anything happen to arise, even not of my own doing, and they bring up my past record and unsatisfactory discharge, instead of satisfactory, because of everything that happened as a result of the conspiracy, then I should be able to let a jury decide what the facts are in these matters are since they are constantly changing; however, the events from 2002 should be completely expunged from my record with prejudice, because of the unethical conduct surrounded in these matters, and I wouldn’t be doing any of this if it wasn’t a conspiracy and had the system just let me get on with my life.

I am not your typical person/“man,” and this is not your typical situation. The only reason I have any charges on my record from events in 2002 is because of a conspiracy, the distress I was going through as a result of the intentional infliction of emotional distress from Mrs. Meek and her family, and Ms. Place and I would have never happened had she not pursued me and lied to me about her age just so that I would get a similar charge as Mrs. Meek‘s uncle, so that I wouldn’t be listened to regarding my daughter and her situation, but I was also not much different than Ms. Place when we met. I was not taking advantage of her, which is what the law was meant to do--prevent someone from taking advantage of someone less mature, but that was not the case in these matters. All the evidence points to this being a conspiracy between Mrs. Meek and Ms. Place, and it’s even strongly possible, because of the 10-20 e-mails that should have been discovered but were excluded, that CUSI and the State were aware of what was happening between Mrs. Meek and Ms. Place since 2002. This plea deal has only been used to harm me and hold me back, and I cannot move on with my life until the events of 2002 are off my record. The fact that I have not done anything with everything I have had to deal with since December, 2005 is proof that I was just more emotionally able to handle it, because at that point I was ahead due to my counseling and college, but I would have still been about the emotional maturity of a 19 year old, if not for all that, and either way, I did not have effective counsel, the charges stem from a conspiracy while I was emotionally distressed, I had a judge who pre-judged me, there was no way I was going to get a fair trial so the plea deal was the only way to salvage my life, and the State and DOC have continuously reneged on it and become accomplices and accessories in the conspiracy between Mrs. Meek and Ms. Place, and I have more than shown why the events of 2002 should be expunged from my record. The stress I have felt as a result of everything will not go away until my record from 2002 goes away, and it will just keep building, because of everything I have had to suffer and endure as a result of the conspiracy. I will not comply with anything regarding the plea deal, and that includes the registry. Ms. Place is not a victim other than possibly that of real child abuse from her parents and that made her a sexually active lying teenage psychopath--a product of real child abuse, the same kind of abuse to which my daughter, also their family friend’s daughter, is subjected to become the same as that of her mother and Ms. Place, and this whole thing has just been one big fraud on the system, so please rectify it so that I can get on with my life and finally be a productive member of society and fully functioning father to my daughter. Thank you.