BoycottBelfast.blogspot.com Take Rape Break Intake 4 JustUs More More More: 7/17/2019- 1rst Harassment 10/17/2017 Motion to Dismiss & Narrative

July 15, 2019

State of Maine

Laurie L. Allen

Docket No. WALCD-CR-2017-00862

Laurie Allen, pro se (court appointed Tom Shehan refuses to draw up motion and is withdrawing) motion to Dismiss Class E Harassment- “On or about October 17, 2017, in Belfast, Waldo County,

Maine, Laurie L. Allen, without reasonable cause, did engage in a course of conduct with the intent to harass, torment, or threaten Mark A. Rae, after having been forbidden to do so by a sheriff, deputy sheriff, constable or police officer or justice of the peace or by a court in a protective order issued under Title 5, sect. 4654 or 4655 or Title 19-a sec 4006 or 4007.”

Special motion to dismiss without prejudice, title 14 sec 556 (see #7 below) with financial restitution of costs and injury already given to ADA Entwisle.

1. Belfast Police Department refused to give Laurie Allen the “original to person served” cease harassment notice signed on 9/7/17 as mandated on the notice. Repeated requests to Chief McFadden, Bailiff Ryan Otis, ADA Entwisle, Judge Mathews, Judge Robert Murray and Judge Fowle for the original have been refused to date.

Exhibit 1 is a copy of the cease harassment notice from ADA Entwisle’s discovery.

2. Per ADA Entwisle’s discovery, the evidence is a video that is not available.

3. Laurie Allen’s request with video documentation to Belfast Chief McFadden, Officer Rolerson and Officer Guba from June 2017- September 2017 for a cease harassment notice against Mark Rae and entities of 23 Seaview Terrace were refused.

From: Michael McFadden <chief@belfastmepd.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2017 10:51 AM
To: LAURIE ALLEN; ward3councilor@cityofbelfast.org; ward4councilor@cityofbelfast.org; ward5@cityofbelfast.org; ward2councilor@cityofbelfast.org; ward1councilor@cityofbelfast.org; mayor@cityofbelfast.org
Cc: Gregory Stearns; Jeffrey Trafton; Governor; robert.a.williams@maine.gov
Subject: RE: Cease Harassment against 23 Seaview Terrace

Ms. Allen,

Over the past couple months there have been several complaints generated by you and/or your neighbors regarding a boundary line dispute. The Belfast Police Department has responded to every one of the calls for service made by you and/or your neighbors. As with most if not all boundary line disputes the actual situation cannot be resolved by the police due to the fact that we have no authority over boundary lines. This has been explained to both you and your neighbors. The officers have given sound advice as to how both parties need to proceed in order to come to a resolution on this issue.

As far as your repeated requests to have your neighbors issued harassment notices along with the real estate agents who sold the property, I would explain that the Belfast Police Department does have the authority to issue harassment notices, however we do so if/when we're able to determine harassing conduct is present. I have reviewed the videos you've posted to your YouTube channel regarding the alleged harassing behavior and find no behavior on your neighbors part that would justify a harassment notice being served on them.

I have not responded to your repeated emails until now due to the fact that you seem to ignore what I say and simply make another identical demand to have a harassment notice served on your neighbors.

As I've said before, at this time the Belfast Police Department will not be issuing a harassment notice on anyone based on the information you provided. I will say that should you provide us with information that justifies a harassment notice be served we will most certainly follow through with that function.

Thank you for your understanding.

Chief McFadden.

June 2017 @ 3:08 Mark Rae threatens that if I don't move my boat by tomorrow morning, he is taking it. https://youtu.be/oOPXGgKgBrE

June 2017 Scary Agent Terry LaCombe, in-law to Kayla Cameron LaCombe Trespass/Threaten/Take https://youtu.be/7Fu8ITHQP2c

June 2017 KaylaLacombe (grandaughter to BO Cameron) trespassing and throwing my personal property https://youtu.be/KWg8IegpaZA

July 2017 Mark Rae threatens to throw my personal property off of my property. Mark lies stating he has had it surveyed and fails to produce it in Court where Judge Sparaco issued me a protection order against Mark Rae 5/2018. After first minute there is nothing, just waiting for police. https://youtu.be/qZin170SEAU

July 2017 Officer Rolerson responds and agrees it's a civil matter, no jurisdiction for police, threatens me that it could be a criminal matter. Kayla LaCombe states a new survey line. They don't have a survey. Rolerson protects them. https://youtu.be/DEuvPBIR5Ws

July 2017 Mark Rae mauls my boat, slices my boot lock, slices the air valve off my tire, straps a bungee cord to try and get boot lock off, leaves permanent tar boot prints on the deck of my boat. Officer Guba does nothing. I ask for a cease harassment again. @ 1:33 I see for the first time that Mark Rae destroyed my tire. I hadn't noticed it with all the other destruction he did. Lots of f cursing. Venting verbally. For 7 years while protesting and attending City Hall meetings, I did not curse. All these men and a few women coming after me made me lower myself. No more. https://youtu.be/S9X9_GwzOX0

(In this video,9/13/18 video below I have my survey proving my boundary line, the Waldo deeded with seal 1965 original CK Archer plans for Seaview Terrace with boundaries and the protection order granted to me against Mark Rae in May 2018. The survey and deeded plans were used in the protection order court hearing and Judge Sparaco did look at them as I explained the boundary. Mark Rae did not bring a survey and stated he had not viewed his survey.)

https://youtu.be/-B4NIjf3I08 9/13/18 Officer Richards Tries To Illegally Arrest Me For Civil Boundary Issues that as Chief McFadden stated in his 9/7/2917 email above and parking my SUV legally in the City Right of Way. “ As with most if not all boundary line disputes the actual situation cannot be resolved by the police due to the fact that we have no authority over boundary lines.”

Abutting lot, 23 Seaview Terrace, has garage on boundary line, built prior to 1994. Out of compliance- 20 ft side set back. Illegal sale of illegal lot in 5/2017 to Mark Rae, Penny Rae Cameron, BO Cameron. They illegally claim my property to get the house/medical office? illegally built protection of Belfast police, Waldo Sheriff, Judge Worth, City Hall. Chief McFadden refused to give me a cease harassment notice from 5/2017-9/2017 with many video's of threats, trespass, vandalizing, destruction of property, etc. Instead he gave them on against me to fabricate evidence and 2 charges, summons on 10/23/17 and falsely arrested 11/1/17. I was falsely arrested again on 2/23/18, charged with terrorizing with a dangerous weapon. I did not and all charges still have not been heard in court for easy dismissal as of June 2019! In May 2018 I won a protection order, pro se against Mark Rae by Deputy Chief Judge Susan Sparaco. Rae stated in court that he has not ever seen and does not have the survey he claims to have to take my property. BPD cannot get involved in civil boundary disputes but does to protect the illegal JustUs people. Here I am proving my boundaries and Richards is going to arrest me for parking on my property in the city right of way. Then goes over to Mark Rae to bond. Regardless of court protection order police enforce lawlessness. 2 days prior, 9/11 Detective Greeley made me sign contract to force me to pay $150 a month for the ankle shackle to make me look like a convict.

The Maine Supreme Court upheld Laurie Allen’s pro se protection order awarded against Mark Rae.

https://www.courts.maine.gov/opinions_orders/supreme/lawcourt/2019/19me053.pdf

4. October 20,2017 Belfast Police Chief McFadden, posing as a mental health expert, unable to stop Laurie Allen’s freedom of speech and rights, resorting to fabrication of mental health illness to institutionalize using Laurie’s children as his weapons. McFadden states that Laurie Allen is not a danger or anyone else and does not “overly threaten” anyone. emails Laurie Allen’s daughter does

Subject: RE: Regarding Laurie Allen

Date: October 20, 2017 at 7:35:35 AM PDT

To: my daughter

xxxxxx,

Thank you so much for reaching out. It's been obvious to me for a number of years that your mom is suffering from untreated mental illness. There are a couple of things that prevent me from being an effective part in addressing those issues for her. First and foremost, it's my strong opinion that your mother would not be willing to seek treatment voluntarily. I have engaged her in conversation a few years ago when she would actually speak with me, and she was highly offended that I was even suggesting she should try speaking with someone. I may be wrong, but there's nothing she's done or said in the last 5 years that I've known her, which would indicate that I am wrong. Second absent her agreeing to accept help, we would be forced to take her into protective custody involuntarily in order to have a physiological evaluation done. In order for me to do this I would first have to determine she is a danger to herself or someone else. At this time I don't feel I can argue effectively that she presents an actual danger to herself or others. She's created considerable inconvenience to a number of people but she has also been very careful not to overtly threaten them. I have a tremendous amount of experience dealing with individuals suffering from mental illness, and although your mother is struggling she simply isn't going to meet the criteria for involuntary hospitalization in the typical way. Ultimately however, it's my strong belief that hospitalization is exactly what your mother needs.

I would agree that your mother's condition has deteriorated in the last several months. She's made numerous comments recently about her alcohol consumption, and I'm left to wonder if the addition of regular drinking is in some way contributing to the decline we're both noticing in her behavior, having no idea if this is a new development or not it's hard to say how much of an affect if any her drinking is having on the situation though.

This situation is not a typical one. Unfortunately the people who are best positioned to help your mother are the very people she's convinced are evil and out to get her. I know this is part of her mental illness and I personally take no offense to the things she says because of that. But my fear is that she simply won't trust me nor any of the officers here. She's also convinced the hospital along with the doctors and administrators of it are corrupt as well.

Honestly in evaluating the entire situation I believe her family (you and your brother) may be the best people at this time to get her the help she needs. I would suggest speaking with someone at Maine Behavioral Healthcare (207-338-2295) to see what options are there for you. I'm more than happy to assist you in whatever way you think I might be able to. It might be beneficial for you to mention that I'd be more than happy to talk with any of the case workers who you speak with at MBH, sometimes it makes a difference if they understand the background and type of behavior we're seeing from a public safety point of view.

If you'd like to speak with me directly please feel free to call (207-338-5255)

I do appreciate you contacting me and I hope my response is of some help.

Chief McFadden.

5. Belfast Police Chief McFadden and officers have violated color of law violations mental abuse of excessive force, false arrest and fabrication of evidence, fabricating evidence against or falsely arresting an individual also violates the color of law statute, taking away the person’s rights of due process and unreasonable seizure, the 14^th amendment secures the right to due process, the 8th amendment prohibits the use of cruel and unusual punishment and failure to keep from harm.

Color of Law Violations

U.S. law enforcement officers and other officials like judges, prosecutors, and security guards have been given tremendous power by local, state, and federal government agencies—authority they must have to enforce the law and ensure justice in our country. These powers include the authority to detain and arrest suspects, to search and seize property, to bring criminal charges, to make rulings in court, and to use deadly force in certain situations.

Preventing abuse of this authority, however, is equally necessary to the health of our nation’s democracy. That’s why it’s a federal crime for anyone acting under “color of law” to willfully deprive or conspire to deprive a person of a right protected by the Constitution or U.S. law. “Color of law” simply means the person is using authority given to him or her by a local, state, or federal government agency.

The FBI is the lead federal agency for investigating color of law violations, which include acts carried out by government officials operating both within and beyond the limits of their lawful authority. Off-duty conduct may be covered if the perpetrator asserted his or her official status in some way. Those violations include the following acts:

Excessive force: In making arrests, maintaining order, and defending life, law enforcement officers are allowed to use whatever force is “reasonably” necessary. The breadth and scope of the use of force is vast—from just the physical presence of the officer…to the use of deadly force. Violations of federal law occur when it can be shown that the force used was willfully “unreasonable” or “excessive.”

Sexual assaults by officials acting under color of law can happen in jails, during traffic stops, or in other settings where officials might use their position of authority to coerce an individual into sexual compliance. The compliance is generally gained because of a threat of an official action against the person if he or she doesn’t comply.

False arrest and fabrication of evidence: The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right against unreasonable searches or seizures. A law enforcement official using authority provided under the color of law is allowed to stop individuals and, under certain circumstances, to search them and retain their property. It is in the abuse of that discretionary power—such as an unlawful detention or illegal confiscation of property—that a violation of a person’s civil rights may occur.

Fabricating evidence against or falsely arresting an individual also violates the color of law statute, taking away the person’s rights of due process and unreasonable seizure. In the case of deprivation of property, the color of law statute would be violated by unlawfully obtaining or maintaining a person’s property, which oversteps or misapplies the official’s authority.

The Fourteenth Amendment secures the right to due process; the Eighth Amendment prohibits the use of cruel and unusual punishment. During an arrest or detention, these rights can be violated by the use of force amounting to punishment (summary judgment). The person accused of a crime must be allowed the opportunity to have a trial and should not be subjected to punishment without having been afforded the opportunity of the legal process.

Failure to keep from harm: The public counts on its law enforcement officials to protect local communities. If it’s shown that an official willfully failed to keep an individual from harm, that official could be in violation of the color of law statute.

6. Canon Rule violations: Evidence is the court’s refusal to hear and dismiss clear fabrication and false arrest since the first hearing on 12/8/2017 and the 10^th hearing, dispositional conference on 7/23/2019.

https://www.courts.maine.gov/rules_adminorders/rules/text/mc_jud_conduct_plus_2017-9-5.pdf

Last reviewed and edited September 7, 2017 Amendments effective September 5, 2017 MAINE CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT

MAINE CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTORY NOTE TABLE OF CONTENTS COVERAGE AND EFFECTIVE DATE PREAMBLE TERMINOLOGY CANON 1 A JUDGE SHALL UPHOLD AND PROMOTE THE INDEPENDENCE, INTEGRITY, AND IMPARTIALITY OF THE JUDICIARY; SHALL AVOID IMPROPRIETY; AND SHOULD AVOID THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY.

RULE 1.1 Compliance with the Law RULE

1.2 Promotion of Confidence in the Judiciary RULE

1.3 Avoiding Abuse of the Prestige of Judicial Office

CANON 2 A JUDGE SHALL PERFORM THE DUTIES OF JUDICIAL OFFICE IMPARTIALLY, COMPETENTLY, AND DILIGENTLY. RULE

2.1 Giving Precedence to the Duties of Judicial Office

2.2 Impartiality and Fairness; Upholding the Law

2.3 Bias, Prejudice, and Harassment

2.4 External Influences on Judicial Conduct

2.5 Competence, Diligence, and Cooperation

2.6 Ensuring the Right to Be Heard

2.7 Responsibility to Decide

2.11 Disqualification or Recusal

2.12 Supervisory Duties Disciplinary Responsibilities

2.16 A Judge Shall Comply with Disciplinary Authorities

CANON 3 A JUDGE SHALL CONDUCT THE JUDGE’S PERSONAL AND EXTRAJUDICIAL ACTIVITIES TO MINIMIZE THE RISK OF CONFLICT WITH THE OBLIGATIONS OF JUDICIAL OFFICE. RULE

3.1 Extrajudicial Activities in General

3.5 Use of Nonpublic Information

3.6 Affiliation with Discriminatory Organizations

3.7 Participation in Educational, Religious, Charitable, Fraternal, or Civic Organizations and Activities 3.8 Fiduciary Activities

3.9 Service as Arbitrator or Mediator

3.10 Practice of Law

3.11 Financial Activities

3.12 Compensation for Extrajudicial Activities

3.13 Acceptance and Reporting of Gifts, Loans, Bequests, Benefits, or Other Things of Value

3.14 Reimbursement of Expenses and Waivers of Fees or Charges

7. Special motion to dismiss without prejudice, title 14 sec 556 with financial restitution of costs and injury already given to ADA Entwisle.

www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/D/DismissalWithoutPrejudice.aspx

Justice Schall of the United States Court of Appeals (Federal Circuit) wrote the opinion of the court in 2002 case Graves v. Principi:

“A dismissal without prejudice is a dismissal that occurs without and adjudication on the merits. The dismissal of an action without prejudice leaves the parties as though the action had never been brought...A voluntary dismissal without prejudice leaves the situation as if the action never had been filed.”

http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/14/title14sec556.html

§556. Special motion to dismiss

When a moving party asserts that the civil claims, counterclaims or cross claims against the moving party are based on the moving party's exercise of the moving party's right of petition under the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution of Maine, the moving party may bring a special motion to dismiss. The special motion may be advanced on the docket and receive priority over other cases when the court determines that the interests of justice so require. The court shall grant the special motion, unless the party against whom the special motion is made shows that the moving party's exercise of its right of petition was devoid of any reasonable factual support or any arguable basis in law and that the moving party's acts caused actual injury to the responding party. In making its determination, the court shall consider the pleading and supporting and opposing affidavits stating the facts upon which the liability or defense is based. [2011, c. 559, Pt. A, §13 (AMD).]

The Attorney General on the Attorney General's behalf or on behalf of any government agency or subdivision to which the moving party's acts were directed may intervene to defend or otherwise support the moving party on the special motion. [1995, c. 413, §1 (NEW).]

All discovery proceedings are stayed upon the filing of the special motion under this section, except that the court, on motion and after a hearing and for good cause shown, may order that specified discovery be conducted. The stay of discovery remains in effect until notice of entry of the order ruling on the special motion. [1995, c. 413, §1 (NEW).]

The special motion to dismiss may be filed within 60 days of the service of the complaint or, in the court's discretion, at any later time upon terms the court determines proper. [1995, c. 413, §1(NEW).]

If the court grants a special motion to dismiss, the court may award the moving party costs and reasonable attorney's fees, including those incurred for the special motion and any related discovery matters. This section does not affect or preclude the right of the moving party to any remedy otherwise authorized by law. [1995, c. 413, §1 (NEW).]

As used in this section, "a party's exercise of its right of petition" means any written or oral statement made before or submitted to a legislative, executive or judicial body, or any other governmental proceeding; any written or oral statement made in connection with an issue under consideration or review by a legislative, executive or judicial body, or any other governmental proceeding; any statement reasonably likely to encourage consideration or review of an issue by a legislative, executive or judicial body, or any other governmental proceeding; any statement reasonably likely to enlist public participation in an effort to effect such consideration; or any other statement falling within constitutional protection of the right to petition government. [1995, c. 413, §1 (NEW).]

SECTION HISTORY

1995, c. 413, §1 (NEW). 2011, c. 559, Pt. A, §13 (AMD).

Exhibit #3

https://casetext.com/case/schelling-v-lindell

Title 14 sec 556 Maine Court Hearings and Anti-Slapp Per Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, No. Docket: Han-07-133, Schelling v. Lindell:

A. Application-

6- “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, is designed to guard against meritless lawsuits brought with the intention of chilling or deterring the free exercise of the defandant’s First Amendment right to petition the government by threatening would-be activists with litigation costs. Morse Bros., Inc. v. Webster, 2001 ME 70, 10, 772A.2d 842,846. The anit-SLAPP statute provides defendants who are the targets of such suits with a “special motion to dismiss,” a statutory motion designed to minimize the litigation costs associated with the defense of such merit-less suits. Id., 15,7 772A2.d at 848.

7- To prevail on a special motion to dismiss, the defendant carries the initial burden to show that the suit was based on some activity that would qualify as an exercise of the defendant’s First Amendment right to petition the government. 14 M.R.S. sec 556. Once the defendant demonstrates that this is the basis for the suit, and therefore that the statute applies, the burden falls on the plaintiff to demonstrate that the defendant’s activity (1) was without “reasonable factual support,” (2) was without an “arguable

basis in law,” and (3) resulted in actual injury to the plaintiff.. Id.

8- We allow interlocutory appeals from denials of special motions to dismiss *1230 brought pursuant to the anti-SLAPP statute because a failure to grant review of these decisions at this stage would impose additional litigation costs on defendants, the very harm the statute seeks to avoid, and would result in a loss of defendants’ susbstantial rights. Morse Bros., 2001 ME 70, 15, 772 A.2dat 848,

11- Maine’s anti-SLAPP statute very broadly defines the exercise of the “right to petition.” The statute includes within the definition of petitioning activity: Any statement to a legislative, executive or judicial body;

*Any statement made in connection with an issue under consideration or review by a governmental entity;

*Any statement likely to encourage consideration or review of an issue by a governmental entity;

*Any statement likely to enlist public participation in encouraging a government body to consider a particular issue; and

*Any other statement falling within constitutional protection of the right to petition the governement.

21- To clarify the nature of the injury Schelling would be required to show in order to give rise to compensable damages for purely emotional or psychic harm under the anti-SLAPP statute, we briefly review the development of the compensability of emotional damages.

22- There was a time when purely emotional injury was not compensable in Maine unless the plaintiff had also suffered some physical harm or contact as a result of the tortfeasor’s conduct. See Herrick v. Evening Express Publ’g Co., 120 Me. 138, 113 A. 16 (1921). Over the past thirty years however, we have moved away significantly from the strict common law limitation. We began the modernization of emotional damage compensability in Maine with our decision in Wallace v. Coca-Cola Bottling Plants, Inc., 269 A.2d 117 (Me. 1970). In that case, we held that purely emotional or psychic suffering, if borth “severe” and manifested by some “objective 1233 symptomatology” (such as nausea) could *1233 be compensable. Id. At 121. At that time, we concluded that the demonstration of objective symptomatology associated with the plaintiff’s emotional distress was a necessary bulwark against a deluge of fraudulent and spurious claims of emotional injury. Id.

24- The rule that emerged from Culbert was a simple one that allowed compensation for emotional harm that was “serious” provided that all other elements of the tort claim were satisfied. Id. We held that “serious mental distress” existed “where a reasonable person, normally constituted, would be unable to adequately cope with the mental stress engendered by the circumstance of the event.” Id.

25- Following the Culbert decision, the rule regarding the types of emotional injuries compensable in Maine has remained substantially the same. Since that time, we have clarified the foundational aspects of compensable emotional harm by explicitly concluding that minor emotional injuries, such as hurt feelings, are not compensable. Gammom v. Osteopathic Hosp. Of Me., Inc., 534 A.2d 1282, 1285 (Me. 1987). In other words, we have made it clear there is no recognition of damage to an “eggshell psyche” in Maine. Id. Most recently, in Curtis v. Porter, we reiterated that emotional distress alone is not compensable unless it is “so severe that no reasonable person could be expected to endure it.” 2001 ME 158, 10, 784 A.2d 18, 23 (citation omitted).

Laurie Allen, pro se

pro se
Elmore v. McCammon (1986) 640 F. Supp. 905
“… the right to file a lawsuit pro se is one of the most important rights under the constitution and laws.”
Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1959); Picking v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 151 Fed 2nd 240; Pucket v. Cox, 456 2nd 233
Pro se pleadings are to be considered without regard to technicality; pro se litigants’ pleadings are not to be held to the same high standards of perfection as lawyers.
Maty v. Grasselli Chemical Co., 303 U.S. 197 (1938)
“Pleadings are intended to serve as a means of arriving at fair and just settlements of controversies between litigants. They should not raise barriers which prevent the achievement of that end. Proper pleading is important, but its importance consists in its effectiveness as a means to accomplish the end of a just judgment.”
Puckett v. Cox, 456 F. 2d 233 (1972) (6th Cir. USCA)
It was held that a pro se complaint requires a less stringent reading than one drafted by a lawyer per Justice Black in Conley v. Gibson.
Picking v. Pennsylvania Railway, 151 F.2d. 240, Third Circuit Court of Appeals
The plaintiff’s civil rights pleading was 150 pages and described by a federal judge as “inept”. Nevertheless, it was held “Where a plaintiff pleads pro se in a suit for protection of civil rights, the Court should endeavor to construe Plaintiff’s Pleadings without regard to technicalities.”

42 USC § 16913

Affidavit

7/16/2019 Narrative for 10/17/2017 criminal class E charge Harassment WALCD-CR-2017-00862

Narrative for 11/01/2017 criminal class E charge Harassment WALCD-CR-2017-00839

Laurie Allen purchased 17 Seaview Terrace, Belfast, Maine 04915 on 6/28/10. Listing real estate agent, Bill Ingersoll gave Laurie the Good Deeds 1992 Survey Plan Estate of Dr. Caswell 17 and 23 Seaview Terrace (attached in this affidavit with the original Waldo county deeded registry, plan book 6, pg 23 Plan of Wendell MaCleod Housing Development, Belfast, Maine, drawn by C.K. Archer, Palermo, Maine, March 1965, named Seaview Terrace.)

The Good Deeds survey plan shows the boundary line between the 2 lots runs along side the garage on 23 Seaview Terrace. The garage is a zoning violation because it required a 20 ft side set back (zoning ordinance changed to 15 ft side set back in 2014). Laura Tarpley, the previous owner of 23 Seaview Terrace told Laurie Allen that the Caswells moved the capped survey stake to make it look like the garage had a side setback. Laurie Allen did not remove the stake because she thought it was illegal to remove a capped stake as the Caswell’s had done.

Laurie Allen went to Good Deeds in Belfast and spoke with Gusta Ronson, owner of Good Deeds. Gusta stated that she did this plan for the Caswell’s. They wanted to subdivide the lots to give 23 Seaview the needed 20 ft. side set back to put it in zoning compliance. Gusta stated that the subdivide could not be done because there was not 40 ft distance from the eaves of my house on17 Seaview Terrace and the eaves of the garage on 23 Seaview Terrace.

Karen Caswell, owner of 23 Seaview Terrace put the zone violation garage lot up for sale in 2011. In May 2017, a very large man was walking in Laurie’s backyard along side her fence to the back end of her property. Laurie asked the trespasser what was he doing? He introduced himself as the new owner of 23 Seaview Terrace, Mark Rae and stated he wanted to see the back boundary stake. Laurie was alarmed and did not know why he didn’t walk on his property to see the stake on the other side of her fir trees.

That week, an elder man, B.O. Cameron (Mark’s step father) introduced himself as another owner of 23 Seaview Terrace with his wife, Penny Rae Cameron from Cedar Street, Belfast, Maine. Laurie told Mr. Cameron that the lot was a zone violation and needed a variance. Laurie stated that she would sign off on the variance and they could live happily ever after as neighbors. Mr. Cameron stated that he was a friend of Belfast resident, Cedar Street, Judge Patricia Worth. Laurie knew Judge Patricia Worth first hand from her corrupt rulings against Laurie in small claims court, costing Laurie over 10k and devastation to Laurie and her children since 2012. With the assistance of Judge Fields.

Laurie told Mr. Cameron that even though he was protected he should still go and get the variance so that he would not have any future problems if Laurie sold her house at 17 Seaview Terrace. Mr. Cameron, Mark Rae, Penny Rae Cameron and Kayla Cameron LaCombe (B.O.’s grand daughter) chose to illegally claim 15 ft. of Laurie’s property instead with protection and intimidation tactics from the Belfast Police Chief McFadden and his officers.

Ms. Allen,

Thank you for your understanding.

Chief McFadden.

June 2017 @ 3:08 Mark Rae threatens that if I don't move my boat by tomorrow morning, he is taking it. https://youtu.be/oOPXGgKgBrE

June 2017 Scary Agent Terry LaCombe, in-law to Kayla Cameron LaCombe Trespass/Threaten/Take https://youtu.be/7Fu8ITHQP2c

June 2017 KaylaLacombe (grandaughter to BO Cameron) trespassing and throwing my personal property https://youtu.be/KWg8IegpaZA

July 2017 Mark Rae mauls my boat, slices my boot lock, slices the air valve off my tire, straps a bungee cord to try and get boot lock off, leaves permanent tar boot prints on the deck of my boat. Officer Guba does nothing. I ask for a cease harassment again. @ 1:33 I see for the first time that Mark Rae destroyed my tire. I hadn't noticed it with all the other destruction he did. Lots of f cursing. Venting verbally. For 7 years while protesting and attending City Hall meetings, I did not curse. All these men and a few women coming after me made me lower myself. No more. https://youtu.be/S9X9_GwzOX0

https://youtu.be/-B4NIjf3I089/13/18 Officer Richards Tries To Illegally Arrest Me For Civil Boundary Issues that as Chief McFadden stated in his 9/7/2917 email above and parking my SUV legally in the City Right of Way. “ As with most if not all boundary line disputes the actual situation cannot be resolved by the police due to the fact that we have no authority over boundary lines.”

The Maine Supreme Court upheld Laurie Allen’s pro se protection order awarded against Mark Rae.

https://www.courts.maine.gov/opinions_orders/supreme/lawcourt/2019/19me053.pdf

4. October 20,2017 Belfast Police Chief McFadden, posing as a mental health expert, unable to stop Laurie Allen’s freedom of speech and rights, resorting to fabrication of mental health illness toinstitutionalize using Laurie’s children as his weapons. McFadden states that Laurie Allen is not a danger or anyone else and does not “overly threaten” anyone. emails Laurie Allen’s daughter does

Subject: RE: Regarding Laurie Allen

Date: October 20, 2017 at 7:35:35 AM PDT

To: my daughter

xxxxxx,

Thank you so much for reaching out. It's been obvious to me for a number of years that your mom is suffering from untreated mental illness. There are a couple of things that prevent me from being an effective part in addressing those issues for her. First and foremost, it's my strong opinion that your mother would not be willing to seek treatment voluntarily. I have engaged her in conversation a few years ago when she would actually speak with me, and she was highly offended that I was even suggesting she should try speaking with someone. I may be wrong, but there's nothing she's done or said in the last 5 years that I've known her, which would indicate that I am wrong. Second absent her agreeing to accept help, we would be forced to take her into protective custody involuntarily in order to have a physiological evaluation done. In order for me to do this I would first have to determine she is a danger to herself or someone else. At this time I don't feel I can argue effectively that she presents an actual danger to herself or others. She's created considerable inconvenience to a number of people but she has also been very careful not to overtly threaten them. I have a tremendous amount of experience dealing with individuals suffering from mental illness, and although your mother is struggling she simply isn't going to meet the criteria for involuntary hospitalization in the typical way. Ultimately however, it's my strong belief that hospitalization is exactly what your mother needs.

I would agree that your mother's condition has deteriorated in the last several months. She's made numerous comments recently about her alcohol consumption, and I'm left to wonder if the addition of regular drinking is in some way contributing to the decline we're both noticing in her behavior, having no idea if this is a new development or not it's hard to say how much of an affect if any her drinking is having on the situation though.

This situation is not a typical one. Unfortunately the people who are best positioned to help your mother are the very people she's convinced are evil and out to get her. I know this is part of her mental illness and I personally take no offense to the things she says because of that. But my fear is that she simply won't trust me nor any of the officers here. She's also convinced the hospital along with the doctors and administrators of it are corrupt as well.

Honestly in evaluating the entire situation I believe her family (you and your brother) may be the best people at this time to get her the help she needs. I would suggest speaking with someone at Maine Behavioral Healthcare (207-338-2295) to see what options are there for you. I'm more than happy to assist you in whatever way you think I might be able to. It might be beneficial for you to mention that I'd be more than happy to talk with any of the case workers who you speak with at MBH, sometimes it makes a difference if they understand the background and type of behavior we're seeing from a public safety point of view.

If you'd like to speak with me directly please feel free to call (207-338-5255)

I do appreciate you contacting me and I hope my response is of some help.

Chief McFadden.

Below is an email to Belfast Chief McFadden, then Attorney General, now Governor Mills and Sheriff Trafton reporting criminal crimes by Mark Rae to Laurie Allen several times. No response, no actions. Video documentation is on Laurie Allen’s youtube channel playlist Rae Thug Trust Belfast Corruption

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQ6aJhzv8r1EFBXC9YGwWPizGX17iAZ61 and Belfast Chief Pee Wee McFadden’s Playhouse https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQ6aJhzv8r1GOJQMuugC-Keq2KC_HCKuF

From: LAURIE ALLEN <laurieallen55@msn.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2018 1:55 AM
To: LAURIE ALLEN; Jeffrey Trafton; attorney.general@maine.gov
Cc: Governor; chief@belfastmepd.org; senatorthibodeau@aol.com
Subject: Charge Mark Rae 4 criminal counts

Waldo County Sheriff Trafton and Attorney General Janet Mills,

Deputy Chief Judge Susan Saparco is requested as the ONLY Judge for hearings and decisions on these crimes. Judge Sparaco issued the May 14, 2018 Protection Order From Hasrassment 5 M.R.@. $4655 and has made decisions fairly in 3 of my open and shut dockets in Waldo District Court. First hand Canon rule violations of at least 4 of the 6 to silence my 8 year investigative corruption from Belfast to Augusta. Judge Patricia Worth, Judge Fields, Judge Mathews, Judge Fowle and Supreme Court Judge Donald Alexander and the video trial Judge while I was falsely imprisoned for 7 consecutive days at Waldo County Jail (2) and Two Bridges Correctional Facility. I do not know her name. Those are first hand which indicates a mass majority of Maine Judicial Judges that are not familiar with this long and brutal 8 year hell.

Immediately charge Mark Rae and email me the legal documents of such for one Class C, one Class D, and twos Class E criminal crimes. More than enough evidence of hate crimes galore and more. Please immediately notify me via email of decision and order.

Truly,

Laurie Allen

1a-d cites Maine statutes for the counts A, B, and C immediately below. Number

2 is the email thread to Belfast Police Chief McFadden from April 24,2018 to May 18, 2018 (no response to any) with my you tube video's of proof but Chief McFadden has tampered or deleted my you tube video's. Number

3 gives true google drive video's of key documentation to Dismiss Without Prejudice of all charges to me Laurie Allen.

I called 911 this morning and spoke with Liz located inside the Waldo Sheriff compound on Public Way, Belfast. I called approx. 2 pm today and spoke with Officer Richards in the Sheriff Trafton's staff. I wanted the violation of the protection order issued immediately. Officer Richards stated that he was contacting Belfast PD Officer john Gibbs and requested Officer Richards to call me ASAP with my case against Mark Rae.

A. 1 count - Class C: Crimes punishable by up to 5 years incarceration and a $5,000 fine

Aggravated criminal mischief is a Class C crime.

Intentionally damages, destroys or tampers with the property of another, having no reasonable ground to believe that the person has a right to do so, for the purpose of causing substantial harm to the health, safety, business, calling, career, financial condition, reputation or personal relationships of the person with the property interest or any other person.

B. 1 count - Class D: Crimes punishable by up to 364 days incarceration and a $2,000 fine

Violation of a protection from harassment order issued under Title 5, section 4654 or 4655, subsection 1, paragraphs A to C-1, is a Class D crime as provided in Title 5, section 4659, subsection 1.

C. 2 counts - Class E: Crimes punishable by up to six months incarceration and a $1,000 fine

Enters any place in defiance of a lawful order not to enter that was personally communicated to that person by the owner or another authorized person. Violation of this paragraph is a Class E crime

What are felonies and misdemeanors?

Crimes were traditionally classified as felonies (serious crimes punishable by more than one year in prison) and misdemeanors (less serious crimes punishable by one year or less in jail). Maine no longer uses these categories, but classifies crimes as follows:

Class E: Crimes punishable by up to six months incarceration and a $1,000 fine
Class D: Crimes punishable by up to 364 days incarceration and a $2,000 fine
Class C: Crimes punishable by up to 5 years incarceration and a $5,000 fine
Class B: Crimes punishable by up to ten years incarceration and a $20,000 fine
Class A: Crimes punishable by up to 30 years incarceration and a $50,000 fine

How does the Judge figure out what sentence to impose?

There are many factors that affect sentencing. In addition to the maximum fines and periods of incarceration set out above, a judge can impose probation, conditions of probation and order a convicted person to make restitution and perform community service. The judge will consider the nature and seriousness of the offense committed, and all relevant aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Such circumstances may include the age of the defendant, any prior criminal and social history of the defendant, the effect on the victim, the age of the victim, the need to protect the public, the defendant's ability to make restitution, the defendant's motive in committing the crime, and the need to deter this defendant and others from committing future offenses. The victim's input is an important factor in reaching an appropriate sentence. Sometimes a statute establishes the "mandatory minimum" sentence that a judge must impose. For example, a person convicted of reckless conduct with a firearm against a person must be sentenced to a minimum of one year in prison. 17-A M.R.S.A. §§, 211, 1252. The statutes governing sentencing are set out in Part III of the Maine Criminal Code, which is found at 17-A M.R.S.A. §§1151-1346.

The criminal mischief charge is punishable by up to five years in prison, and the two misdemeanors are punishable by up to a year in prison.

1a.

ttp://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/17-A/title17-Asec805.html

Title 17-A: MAINE CRIMINAL CODE

Part 2: SUBSTANTIVE OFFENSES

Chapter 33: ARSON AND OTHER PROPERTY DESTRUCTION

§805. Aggravated criminal mischief

1. A person is guilty of aggravated criminal mischief if that person:

A. Intentionally, knowingly or recklessly damages or destroys property of another in an amount exceeding $2,000 in value, having no reasonable ground to believe that the person has a right to do so; [2005, c. 660, §1 (AMD).]

B. Intentionally, knowingly or recklessly damages or destroys property in an amount exceeding $2,000 in value, to enable any person to collect insurance proceeds for the loss caused; [2005, c. 660, §1 (AMD).]

C. Intentionally, knowingly or recklessly damages, destroys or tampers with the property of a law enforcement agency, fire department or supplier of gas, electric, steam, water, transportation, sanitation or communication services to the public, having no reasonable ground to believe that the person has a right to do so, and thereby causes a substantial interruption or impairment of service rendered to the public;[2005, c. 660, §1 (AMD).]

D. Intentionally, knowingly or recklessly damages, destroys or tampers with property of another and thereby recklessly endangers human life; [2005, c. 660, §1 (AMD).]

E. Intentionally, knowingly or recklessly damages or destroys property of another by fire, having no reasonable ground to believe that the person has a right to do so, and the property damaged or destroyed is neither a dwelling place as defined in section 2, subsection 10 nor a structure as defined in section 2, subsection 24; or [2005, c. 660, §1 (AMD).]

F. Intentionally damages, destroys or tampers with the property of another, having no reasonable ground to believe that the person has a right to do so, for the purpose of causing substantial harm to the health, safety, business, calling, career, financial condition, reputation or personal relationships of the person with the property interest or any other person. [2005, c. 660, §1 (NEW).]

[ 2005, c. 660, §1 (AMD) .]

1-A. As used in this section, "property of another" has the same meaning as in section 352, subsection 4.

[ 1975, c. 740, §87 (NEW) .]

1-B. As used in this section, "value", if the property is destroyed, shall be determined pursuant to section 352, subsection 5. If the property is damaged, "value" shall be determined by the cost of repair unless that determination exceeds the determination of the value of the property had it been destroyed, in which case the property shall be deemed destroyed for purposes of this subsection. Amounts of value involved in mischiefs may be aggregated in the same manner as provided in section 352, subsection 5, paragraph E. Prosecution for an aggregated aggravated criminal mischief may be brought in any venue in which one of the criminal mischiefs which have been aggregated was committed.

[ 1977, c. 510, §67 (AMD) .]

2. Aggravated criminal mischief is a Class C crime.

[ 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW) .]

SECTION HISTORY

1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW). 1975, c. 740, §87 (AMD). 1977, c. 510, §67 (AMD). 1995, c. 224, §8 (AMD). 1995, c. 434, §1 (AMD). 1995, c. 625, §A20 (AMD). 1997, c. 482, §§1-3 (AMD).2005, c. 660, §1 (AMD).

1b.

http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/17-a/title17-Asec506-B.html

Title 17-A: MAINE CRIMINAL CODE

Part 2: SUBSTANTIVE OFFENSES

Chapter 21: OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER

§506-B. Violation of protective order

1. Violation of a protection from harassment order issued under Title 5, section 4654 or 4655, subsection 1, paragraphs A to C-1, is a Class D crime as provided in Title 5, section 4659, subsection 1.

[ 1993, c. 475, §6 (NEW) .]

2. Violation of a protective order in crimes between family members issued under Title 15, section 321 is a Class D crime as provided in Title 15, section 321, subsection 6.

[ 1993, c. 475, §6 (NEW) .]

3. Violation of a protection from abuse order issued under Title 19-A, section 4006 or 4007, subsection 1, paragraphs A to G, is a Class D crime as provided in Title 19-A, section 4011, subsection 1 or a Class C crime as provided in Title 19-A, section 4011, subsection 4.

[ 2005, c. 207, §1 (AMD) .]

SECTION HISTORY

1993, c. 475, §6 (NEW). 1995, c. 694, §D25 (AMD). 1995, c. 694, §E2 (AFF). 2005, c. 207, §1 (AMD).

1c.

http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/17-a/title17-asec402.html

Title 17-A: MAINE CRIMINAL CODE

Part 2: SUBSTANTIVE OFFENSES

Chapter 17: BURGLARY AND CRIMINAL TRESPASS

§402. Criminal trespass

1. A person is guilty of criminal trespass if, knowing that that person is not licensed or privileged to do so, that person:

A. Enters any dwelling place. Violation of this paragraph is a Class D crime; [2001, c. 383, §56 (AMD); 2001, c. 383, §156 (AFF).]

B. Enters any structure that is locked or barred. Violation of this paragraph is a Class E crime; [2001, c. 383, §56 (AMD); 2001, c. 383, §156 (AFF).]

C. Enters any place from which that person may lawfully be excluded and that is posted in accordance with subsection 4 or in a manner reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders or that is fenced or otherwise enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders. Violation of this paragraph is a Class E crime; [2001, c. 383, §56 (AMD); 2001, c. 383, §156(AFF).]

D. Remains in any place in defiance of a lawful order to leave that was personally communicated to that person by the owner or another authorized person. Violation of this paragraph is a Class E crime; [2001, c. 383, §56 (AMD); 2001, c. 383, §156 (AFF).]

E. Enters any place in defiance of a lawful order not to enter that was personally communicated to that person by the owner or another authorized person. Violation of this paragraph is a Class E crime; or [2001, c. 383, §56 (AMD); 2001, c. 383, §156 (AFF).]

F. Enters or remains in a cemetery or burial ground at any time between 1/2 hour after sunset and 1/2 hour before sunrise the following day, unless that person enters or remains during hours in which visitors are permitted to enter or remain by municipal ordinance or, in the case of a privately owned and operated cemetery, by posting. Violation of this paragraph is a Class E crime.[2001, c. 383, §56 (AMD); 2001, c. 383, §156 (AFF).]

[ 2001, c. 383, §56 (AMD); 2001, c. 383, §156 (AFF) .]

[ 2001, c. 383, §156 (AFF); 2001, c. 383, §57 (RP) .]

[ 1979, c. 701, §23 (RP) .]

1d.

https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/17-A/title17-Ach15.pdf

Title 17-A: MAINE CRIMINAL CODE Chapter 15: THEFT

§353. THEFT BY UNAUTHORIZED TAKING OR TRANSFER 1. A person is guilty of theft if: A. The person obtains or exercises unauthorized control over the property of another with intent to deprive the other person of the property. Violation of this paragraph is a Class E crime; [2005, c. 199, §4 (AMD).] B. The person violates paragraph A and: (1) The value of the property is more than $10,000. Violation of this subparagraph is a Class B crime; (2) The property stolen is a firearm or an explosive device. Violation of this subparagraph is a Class B crime; (3) The person is armed with a dangerous weapon at the time of the offense. Violation of this subparagraph is a Class B crime; (4) The value of the property is more than $1,000 but not more than $10,000. Violation of this subparagraph is a Class C crime; (5) The value of the property is more than $500 but not more than $1,000. Violation of this subparagraph is a Class D crime; or (6) The person has 2 or more prior convictions for any combination of the Maine offenses listed in this subparagraph or for engaging in substantially similar conduct to that of the Maine offenses listed in this subparagraph in another jurisdiction. The Maine offenses are: theft; any violation of section 401 in which the crime intended to be committed inside the structure is theft; any violation of section 405 in which the crime intended to be committed inside the motor vehicle is theft; any violation of section 651; any violation of section 702, 703 or 708; or attempts to commit any of these crimes. Section 9-A governs the use of prior convictions when determining a sentence. Violation of this subparagraph is a Class C crime; or [2007, c. 476, §10 (AMD).] C. The person knowingly operates an audiovisual or audio recording function of any device in a motion picture theater while a motion picture is being exhibited for the purpose of making a copy of the motion picture, without the written consent of the motion picture theater owner. Violation of this paragraph is a Class D crime. [2005, c. 199, §4 (NEW).] [ 2007, c. 476, §10 (AMD) .] Generated 11.3.2017 §353. Theft by unauthorized taking or transfer | 5 MRS Title 17-A, Chapter 15: THEFT 2. As used in this section, "exercises unauthorized control" includes but is not limited to conduct formerly defined or known as common law larceny by trespassory taking, larceny by conversion, larceny by bailee and embezzlement. [ 2001, c. 383, §156 (AFF); 2001, c. 383, §33 (RPR) .] SECTION HISTORY 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW). 2001, c. 383, §156 (AFF). 2001, c. 383, §33 (RPR). 2001, c. 667, §D3 (AMD). 2001, c. 667, §D36 (AFF). 2005, c. 199, §4 (AMD). 2007, c. 476, §10 (AMD).

From: LAURIE ALLEN <laurieallen55@msn.com>
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2018 2:20 PM
To: chief@belfastmepd.org; Jeffrey Trafton; attorney.general@maine.gov; Governor; Michael Rolerson; laurieallen55@msn.com

Subject: 24 daysRe: 17Re: 15 DAYS DERELICTION Re: 10 days No Response BP Chief McFadden=Re: 3rd req ARRESTRe: Mark Rae Theft by unauthorized taking/transfer class c

Maine Attorney General Janet Mills,

Belfast Chief of Police Mike McFadden is not responding to press charges against Mark Rae for theft per my complaint. Judge Susan Sparaco issued a protection order for me against Mark Rae, the theft being key and "mean". McFadden protects this criminal and incarcerates me with prejudice, threatening my life every moment since becoming Chief of Police in 2011.

Detectecitve? Greeley of the Waldo Sheriff department would not allow me to go to the Belfast Police Department on Tuesday , 5/14/2018. I was allowed to go when I filed the protection order with he court and across the street to press charges for theft 24 days ago. Greeley said to contact you.

Order Mcfadden to press charges, arrest and email me the report and confirm today. Please.

Sincerely,
Laurie Allen

From: LAURIE ALLEN <laurieallen55@msn.com>
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 11:45 AM
To: chief@belfastmepd.org; Jeffrey Trafton; attorney.general@maine.gov; Governor; Michael Rolerson; LAURIE ALLEN

Subject: 17Re: 15 DAYS DERELICTION Re: 10 days No Response BP Chief McFadden=Re: 3rd req ARRESTRe: Mark Rae Theft by unauthorized taking/transfer class c

Attorney General Janet Mills and Belfast Police Chief McFadden,

Judge Mathews denied my request for immediate protection from Mark Rae/23 Seaview Terrace with proof of theft, terrorism, hate crimes, vandalism to my personal property, failed attempt to steal my sunfish and trailer, daily threats and trespass, illegal cease harassment notices to me from Chief McFadden and Mark Rae/23 Seaview Terrace with a false violation per a video that is not available per your ADA Entwisle.

I continue to abide by the law and accountability. Chief McFadden is refusing to charge Mark Rae with theft of my property reported and documented to the Belfast Police Department with Officer Guba 17 days ago. The "final hearing" for protection against Mark Rae is Monday, 5/14/18 @ 1pm Waldo County District Court.

Please order Belfast Police Chief McFadden to charge Mark Rae with theft and arrest. Please provide confirmation of action today and email the report today for my protection order to be granted on Monday, 5/14/18, 1 pm final hearing.

Sincerely,
Laurie Allen

From: LAURIE ALLEN <laurieallen55@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 9, 2018 5:54 PM
To: chief@belfastmepd.org; Jeffrey Trafton; attorney.general@maine.gov; Governor; Michael Rolerson; LAURIE ALLEN

Subject: 15 DAYS DERELICTION Re: 10 days No Response BP Chief McFadden=Re: 3rd req ARRESTRe: Mark Rae Theft by unauthorized taking/transfer class c

Belfast Police Chief Mike McFadden

15 DAYS OF DERELICTION OF DUTY BY THE BELFAST CHIEF OF POLICE MIKE MCFADDEN
PLEASE RESPOND TODAY WITH REPORT AND ARREST OF MARK RAE AND RETURN OF MY PROPERTY.

Again for clarity

Please mail me police the report for the charges to Mark Rae by unauthorized taking/transfer, class c.
Please confirm that docket BELDC-PA-2018-000058 was delivered to Mark Rae.

Sincerely,

Laurie Allen

From: LAURIE ALLEN <laurieallen55@msn.com>
Sent: Friday, May 4, 2018 3:02 PM
To: chief@belfastmepd.org; Jeffrey Trafton; attorney.general@maine.gov; Governor; laurieallen55@msn.com; Michael Rolerson

Subject: 10 days No Response BP Chief McFadden=Re: 3rd req ARRESTRe: Mark Rae Theft by unauthorized taking/transfer class c

PLEASE RESPOND TODAY WITH REPORT AND ARREST OF MARK RAE AND RETURN OF MY PROPERTY.

From: LAURIE ALLEN <laurieallen55@msn.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 1, 2018 11:49 AM
To: chief@belfastmepd.org; Jeffrey Trafton; attorney.general@maine.gov; Governor; LAURIE ALLEN

From: LAURIE ALLEN <laurieallen55@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2018 2:25 PM
To: chief@belfastmepd.org; LAURIE ALLEN; Jeffrey Trafton
Subject: Mark Rae Theft by unauthorized taking/transfer class c

Belfast Police Chief Mike McFadden,

Please mail me police the report for the charges to Mark Rae by unauthorized taking/transfer, class c. Officer Guba was given my complaint yesterday with pictures for proof. After I left and came directly home, my stole property was still on the side of the garage at 23 Seaview Terrace. Guba asked me for color pictures, apparently he did not like my black and white pictures of gray boulder/rock. Here they are with my complaint.

Guba left saying he would go talk to Rae (if it were me- I'd be arrested already) and he would not let me attend. I had to leave the station before Guba returned. I gave the receptionist the court papers to deliver to Mark Rae, clearly Guba knows his address and the court clerk said BPD will deliver it to him, no charge to me. Please confirm that docket BELDC-PA-2018-000058 was delivered to Mark Rae.

Again for clarity

Please mail me police the report for the charges to Mark Rae by unauthorized taking/transfer, class c.
Please confirm that docket BELDC-PA-2018-000058 was delivered to Mark Rae.

Sincerely,

Laurie Allen

From: LAURIE ALLEN <laurieallen55@msn.com>
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2018 1:33 PM
To: chief@belfastmepd.org; Jeffrey Trafton; LAURIE ALLEN; attorney.general@maine.gov; Governor

Subject: Re: Mark Rae Theft by unauthorized taking/transfer class c

BPD Chief McFadden

(all this because of buying undisclosed hell at 17 Seaview Terrace and protecting it from all the corrupt. You could have bought me out but instead beat me daily, hurt my children and have cost this low income, unemployed Mom over 20k in court corruption and 8 years of my life.) My honor. To Stand .

Where is the report charging Mark Rae with theft by unauthorized taking/transfer of my property? And please provided the video where you had me arrested for violating an illegal cease harassment notice that you offered Mark Rae when he came to you with a video that ADA Entwisle confirms is not available but is clearly Laurie Allen's voice being vulgar. Additionally the all the illegal cease harassment notices that you issued to me are not legal because at MINIMUM, I did not get my original forced signed notice as stated on the form. And finally, cease harassment is step one and then a protection order from the court. Then an arrest if violated. You refused to issue a cease harassment against Mark Rae from 6 months of hate, terror, threats, mauling my property and private property, documented on video.

I was at the court house across the street for 2 hours before coming to the station to press theft charges against Mark Rae/23 Seaview Terrace. Worth was on the bench and recused. Justice Alexander passed the request for immediate protection against Mark Rae/23 Seaview Terrace to Rockland to Judge Mathews who began the not allowing me to be heard for dismissal of all cease harassment charges on 12/8. Illegal. Yet, I am shackled with a electronic device since March 1, imprisoned for 5 days, hunger strike for days knowing the only way I was getting out would be organ shut down until your State corrupt criminal attorney, David Sinclair sandbagged me and now dropped me after I called him out on many, many issues to send me away. I'm not allowed to be heard for dismissal of the ridiculous terrorist charge for target shooting, freedom of speech.

I wrote up my own motions in the truck when Sinclair did not present my motions, only his to drop me pn 4/10/2018. Again, Dishonorable Judge Murray would not dismiss anything, nor the bail conditions where the bracelet is cancerous and my father, sister and 2 brothers have died from cancer. I can't go into town, can make a left on to Northport Ave from Seaview. Where my Dr is at WCGH, The City Park, The Library, City Hall, City Council Meetings, all the way up High Street to Hurleyville somewhere. Nor to Mcdonald's all the way down to town. Or Starret Drive and my drugstore Walgreens, Not left onto Rte 1 South- Irving's is right there, my store, the 3 autopart stores in Belfast are in my restricited zone. Can't go down Swan Lake Ave and down past Mill Lane. Probably can't go to Youngs either, and I think finally Waldo Ave 137? The only west road I can take is Route 3. For NOT BREAKING ANY LAW AND A TARGET EVERY MOMENT AND WAS NOT TO GET OUT OF 2 BRIDGES BUT I DID BECAUSE OF MY JAIL GIRL KIM LEAVING. MY GUT HAD BEEN TRYING TO PAY MY BAIL FOR 2 DAYS IN BELFAST AND GOT RUN AROUND AFTER RUN AROUND. FRIDAY MORNING I ASKED THE MEAN MEN IF MY BAIL WAS POSTED YET. SMIRK, NO, WHO KNOWS WHEN. I CRIED ONLY THEN. KNOWING I WS IN THEIR HANDS AFTER GIVING UP THE HUNGER STRIKE BECAUSE OF SINCLAIR AND SIGNED FOR MEDICAL TREATMENT, NURSE SAYING SHE COULDN'T GIVE ME A TYLENOL UNLESS I SIGNED. Them Kim was leaving 15 minutes later. I hurried a letter for her to take to the outside. Mean men saw me give it to her. 15 minutes later. "ALLEN TRANSPORT TO BELFAST' SHACKLED AND SCARED TO DEATH SINCE. ASK MY NEIGHBORS. NEXT COURT DATE IS NOW JUNE 6. IN CLOSED SUPERIOR COURT TO TRY AND TAKE ME OUT AGAIN. THAT WILL BE 4 MONTHS OF THIS CANCER MONITOR. YOU ALL ARE THE TERRORISTS. SHAME ON YOU.

The court criminal attorney to represent me was hired to set me up, take the psych eval and what? Lock me up in a psych ward if I live? I've never been arrested in my life and these arrests are hate crimes and terrorism by the corrupt judicial, law enforcement and government to stop me from exposing your corruption.

Mathews denied immediate protection and now another court date to protect the terror and hate of Mark Rae to me, day in and day out since May 2017.

Documentation for Court Protection Order against Mark Rae and to press charges with against the same for theft of my property with the Sheriff’s office.

April 23, 2018

One and a half hour movie of only SOME of the hate/terror crimes by Mark Rae @ 23 Seaview Terrace. https://youtu.be/sL8Hi83SpYQ from May 2017-August 2017 with Officer Rolerson in many protecting Mark Rae and abusive to me.

Chief Mcfadden refused to issue my 9/1/2017 a cease harassment statement form notice (attached) in below email. Rae and 23 Seaview Terrace constantly trespasses, destroys my property, my personal property, see pictures of my land, my boat boot lock, sliced the air valve off my tire, took my green bungee cord off of my boat and wrapped it around the lock, he damaged the boat deck as he stomped on top of it. In the movie he threatens to steal my boat after vandalizing it. I moved my boat to work on it and he immediately got this huge trailer and parked it on my property for weeks. Pictures of my boat damages and his huge trailer are attached..

Mark Rae and 23 Seaview Terrace has illegal plowed snow, at every snow, while ripping up my land and pushing gravel, rock, garbage from 23 Seaview onto my property, his workers do the same. One almost tipped the front loader over on my land as he tried to go along the side of the illegal garage (not in compliance with code while Karen Caswell tried to sell 23 Seaview Terrace since 2011- 20 ft side setback required. Karen told me that the fir trees between the lots were planted on my property. The protection order must be against Mark Rae and 23 Seaview Terrace. This short movie is recent after I was illegally arrested for illegal cease harassment notices and false terrorizing where I was sent to Twin Bridges and got out against the power to silence me for good. Officer Mark Kelly is abusive to me and does not care about the crime. Both on the movie. The third is a worker shoveling snow to my property, calling me a retard, dummy, and the f word, knowing I am taping him. I have many more video’s, but I do not have internet, a landline or cable after Spectrum corruptly cut my services (7 year customer) after ripping my entire system out because of Chief McFadden and his secret TWC/Spectrum (not sure if he still works there) private home/computer access Tom. It is life threatening for me to step outside my door and very scary to be out in public and driving alone.

Here is that movie link for definite immediate protection. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UxFkmhqKGApIVj9v_Se55bjEvMabSnLP/view?usp=sharing

Saturday, 4/19/2018, I saw the boulders I had placed to stop them from making ruts and more destruction to my property were stolen by 23 Seaview Terrace. Pictures below of where I had used tape but like the boundary tape, they run it down, trespass, cut the bottles and throw it further onto my property. I am pressing charges for theft with Sheriff’s department today since the Belfast Police Department supports the hate and terror crimes of Rae and 23 Seaview Terrace. I am also requesting permission to deliver this protection order to the Waldo District Court today since I am not allowed to go into Belfast.

20 year Belfast City Tax assessor Bob Whitely gave be the original 1965 development plans with Waldo Countyy the deeded registry seal, plan book 6- p23 which had been removed from the registry. Bob said City Manager Joe Slocum “flipped out” when he learned Bob gave me a copy. Bob said these are the final plans that was formalized in the 1966 entry. However, that has been removed from the Waldo Deeded Registry. Any other documents of boundaries and surveys are false. Lot 5 is 17 Seaview Terrace and lot 7 is 23 Seaview Terrace (1965 plan and seal attached.)

Please mail me police the report for the charges to Mark Rae by unauthorized taking/transfer, class c.
Please confirm that docket BELDC-PA-2018-000058 was delivered to Mark Rae.

Sincerely,

Laurie Allen

BoycottBelfast.blogspot.com Take Rape Break Intake 4 JustUs More More More

Pages

7/17/2019- 1rst Harassment 10/17/2017 Motion to Dismiss & Narrative

§556. Special motion to dismiss

What are felonies and misdemeanors?

How does the Judge figure out what sentence to impose?

§805. Aggravated criminal mischief

§506-B. Violation of protective order

§402. Criminal trespass

No comments:

Post a Comment