# Appendix — Vreeland v. Townsend > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386004_0742%3A2 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Appendix - **Published:** January 1, 1993 - **Citation:** 510 U.S. 918 ## Text Respondents. APPENDIX ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR SIXTH CIRCUIT John G. Rust, Esq. 4628 Lewis Avenue Toledo, Ohio 43612 (419) 476-0347 Attorney ror Petitioner. Opinion, urt tf Appeals, S1xth Circuit, ALTrirming, District Court Filed April 14, 1993 Court of Appeals, Order Denying Petition for ) dé rat Rehearing. Filed: May 27, 1993 District Court's Opinion and Order Denying Rule 59 Motion. Filed: March 23, 1993 District Court's Order Adopting Magistrate Judge's Two Reports and Recommen- dations and Dismissing Plaintiff's Complaint with Prejudice. Filed: January 3l, 1992 District Court's Judgment Dismissing Complaint Magistrate Judge Virginia Morgan's Order Denying Plaintiff's Motion Pursuant to Rule 56(f). Filed: November 27, 1991 Complaint Michigan Statutes Annotated, Section 14.800. Sheriff's Duty to Take a Mentally I11 Person to Hospital WN IN A in . 9. Title 28, Section 1367 Supplemental Jurisdiction -} 10. Transcript of 911 Tape, 58 Transcriber by Mr. Rust's secretary from the tape. ll. Certificate of Service ii of Appendix John G. Rust, Counsel for Petitioner hereby certifies that he, on July 13, 1993, served three (3) copies of the foregoing Appendix on Attorney Marcia L. Howe (Lead Counsel), Michael E. Rosati, Esq., Cummings, McClorey, 33900 Schoolcraft, Ste. G-l, Livonia, MI 48150-1392, Attorneys for All Defendants Except State Trooper Murphy, Brian D. Devlin, Esq., Michigan Department of Attorney General Tort Defense Division, P.O. Box 30217, Lansing, MI 48909, Attorney for Defendant State Trooper Murphy. Respectfully submitted, . / =e Dhae O SEES John G. Rust Attorney for Petitioner =" ' 4 eo APP. ii NO. UNITED STATES COURT FOR THE SIXTH ( MARK E. Plaintiff-Appellant, V. JAMES TOWNSEND: HARDAWAY; DONALD HORVATH: PAT LAUWERS; JAMES GRUBER; RICHARD SWEAT; VINCENT BURKEY; DANIEL BELLINO; MICHAEL MURPHY; WILLIAM FREY; MONROE COUNTY CENTRAL DISPATCH; AND MONROE COUNTY PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE, LYNN Defendants-Appellees, WALTER TROBRIDGE, et al.,: Defendants. >the Court. VREELAND, : >ON APPEAL -DISTRICT >Please see Rule proceedings car 92-1534 OF APPEALS -LRCUIT Filed: Apr. 14, 1993 FROM STATES COURT THE EASTERN THE UNITED FOR -DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN ‘NOT RECOMMENDED FOR , FULL-TEXT ‘PUBLICATION >-Sixth Circuit Rule 24 limits citation >to specific situa- tions. 24 before citing in a in a court in the Sixth Circuit. If cited, a copy >-must be served on other parties and This notice is to be : prominently :>decision APP. |} displayed if this is reproduced. BEFORE: MERRITT, Chief Judge; and BOGGS and BATCHELDER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. Mark Vreeland sued the de- fendants! under 42 U.S.C. §1983, alleging that his constitutional rights were violated when he was insulted by Monroe County dis- patchers, shot and arrested by Monroe County deputies, prosecuted by the Monroe County Prosecutor, and jailed when all the defend- ants allegedly should have known that vree- land suffered from an unspecified "mental illness."" Vreeland also brought several State law claims based on the same conduct. The district court granted the defendants' motions for summary judgment for failure to state a claim and dismissed all claims with prejudice. Vreeland now appeals that dis- missal. We affirm. 1 Defendant Townsend, Hardaway, Lauwers, Horvath, and Gruber are "911" operators for the Monroe County Dispatch. Defendants Bellino, Sweat, and Burkey are Monroe Coun- ty Sheriff's Deputies. Defendant Frey is the Monroe County Prosecuting Attorney. Vreeland also named the Monroe County Dis- atch and the Monroe County Prosecutor's ffice as defendants. However, these offices are not separate entities amenable to suit, pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. Civ. P. Vreeland did not name Monroe County as a Defendant. AfP. I-A ———————— On April 23, 1988, Vreeland, after drink- ing heavily, made a series of phone calls from his residence in Monroe, Michigan to the Monroe County Dispatch on the "911" em- ergency line. Vreeland made approximately twenty calls between 1:30 a.m. and 1:53 a.m. and continued to call the dispatch until 5:00 a.m. At first, Vreeland told the dis- patchers that he was possessed and that he waS a werewolf. He identified himself by name and revealed his social security number, but refused to reveal where he lived. In other calls, Vreeland growled into the phone, breathed heavily, simulated missile sounds, commented on Israel's military capabilities, expressed concern about the safety of his mother, threatened to kill his mother, him- self, or one of the dispatchers, expressed doubts about his own mental health, informed the dispatchers that "crack and aids is win- ning," traded insults with the dispatchers, muttered incomprehensibly, or simply abru- APR HW CP RTE SESH ae ars 48 on cr ptly hung up the phone. Over time, the dis- patchers became frustrated. They insulted Vreeland, used profanity, and made disparag- ing remarks about his sexual orientation and cowardice, One dispatcher asked Deputy Bellino to check out plaintiff's residence and investi- gate the possibility of taking him into custody. At 3:10 a.m., Bill Younglove, who lived with Vreeland, called 911 to request that a car be dispatched to his residence. Younglove reported that Vreeland had just left the residence, was possibly armed, and that he feared Vreeland might kill his own mother. At 3:15 a.m., Deputy Bellino, while crusing in his patrol car near Vreeland's residence, spotted a man with a shotgun in one hand and a beer in the other. After the man pointed the shotgun at Bellino and yelled, "I'm evil and I'm going to kili you," Bellino correctly surmised that the man was Vreeland. Bellino turned off his lights, | Ape. 3 (Ne Fae +) oe ca ial a ik hs RR EL RNA LAGS NI A INEM BTA Tk pean % bi NN a tga = backed away, and called for backup. Vreeland continued to approach Bellino, still brand- ishing the shotgun and repeated over and over, "I am evil and I'm going to kill you." Bellino warned Vreeland ten to fifteen times and even tried calling him by name and reasoning with him, but Vreeland continued to threaten him. Deputies Richard Sweat and Vincent Burkey arrived in a patrol car, pulling up close te Vreeland. The deputies took cover behind their patrol cars and attempted to persuade Vreeland to put his gun down. Vreeland replied that they would have to shoot him and continued to walk closer to Bellino. Several times Vreeland motioned as if he were firing the shotgun. Bellino reported that he fired a warning shot, but Vreeland kept coming forward and taunting the deputies. When Vreeland was about twenty feet away, Bellino shot him in the arm. Vreeland dropped the gun and tell to the ground. Vreeland was taken to the hospital Aer. S , ’ in an ambulance. On April 26, 1988, Monroe County Prose- cuting Attorney Fred authorized issuance of a warrant tor Vreeland's arrest on three felony counts. Vreeland eventually entered a plea of no contest to a misdemeanor charge of attempted assault, pursuant to a plea bar- galn. In his complaint, Vreeland character- izes his barrage of phone calis to the dispatch as a plea for help by someone suffering from an unspecified mental illness. Vreeland alleges that the four dispatchers -- Townsend, Hardaway, Lauwers, and Gruber -- defamed and ridiculed him, and exacerbated his confusion and distress, thus destroying his self-esteem and prompting him to take self-destructive, even suicidal, actions such as taunting and threatening the deputies. He also claims that their insults amounted to libel, slander, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Vreeland alleges that Horvath, the dispatchers' supervisor, is APP. & responsible for the dispatchers' unprofession- al conduct. Vreeland alleges that Deputies Sweat and Burkey encouraged his self-destrictive behavior and committed assault and battery by almost hitting him with their patrol car. Vreeland alleges that deputy Bellino used excessive force by shooting him. Finally, Vreeland alleges that Prosecuting Attorney Frey maliciously prosecuted him on the felony charge of assault with a_ dangerous weapon. The defendants moved for summary judg- ment, claiming that Vreeland has failed to State a claim against Monroe County because he has failed to identify a policy, custom, Or practice upon which the individuals acted and he failed to establish that the dispatch- ers were inadequately trained; that Prosecuting Attorrey Frey is entitled to absolute immunity; that Vreeland has failed to state a constitutional claim against the individual dispatchers because he has not Apa 7 established a special relationship between them and Vreeland; and that the deputies are entitled to qualified immunity. The district court granted the motions and dismissed both the federal and state claims with prejudice.* The district court also determined that any appeal from its decision would be frivolous and not in good faith and thus ruled that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(a), an appeal could not be taken in forma pauperis. Undeterred, Vreeland's counsel pressed forward and now challenges the dismissal of all federal and state claims and the denial of a motion to conduct further discovery. I] We review de novo the district court's grant of the defendants" motions for summary judgment. Baggs v. Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc., 957 F.2d 266, 271 (6th Cir. 1992). We 2Vreeland was a resident of Ohio at the time of his arrest; therefore, the district court had diversity jurisdiction over the state claims. APP. 8 atid can affirm the district court only if we determine that the pleadings, affidavits, and other submissions show "that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law."' Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). The moving party need not Support its motion with evidence disproving the non- moving party's claim, but need only "show[] -- that is, point[] out to the district court -- that there is an absence of evidence to Sup- port the nonmoving party's case." Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 325 (1986). The pivotal question before us is whether Vreeland, the party bearing the burden of proof, has presented a jury question as to each element of his case. Id. at 322. Vreeland must present more than a mere scin- tilla of evidence in support of his position; he "must present evidence on which the jury could reasonably find for the plaintiff." Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 252 (1986). APP. To prevail in a §1983 action, a plaintiff must show that the conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under the color of state law and that the conduct deprived the plaintiff of rights, privileges, or immunities guaranteed by the Constitution or federal statutes. 42 U.S.C. §1983; see Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527 (1981). The defendants concede that they were acting under the color of state law, but contend that their conduct did not deprive Vreeland of any con- Stitutional or federal statutory rights. On a more fundamental level, Vreeland's §1983 Claim is deficient because he failed to identify with specificity the constitutional right that was allegedly violated. In Wells v. Brown, 891 F.2d 591 (6th Cir. 1989), this court held that plaintiffs seeking damages under §1983 must set forth clearly in their pleadings the capacity in which they are Suing the defendants. Vreeland's pleading is ' AP?~. /0 ’ seriously deficient. No actions of specific defendants are tied to specific constitutional Or statutory rights. In fact, no particular constitutional provision or statute is even mentioned at all. As Vreeland's counsel candidly admits, "Plaintiff was represented by the only attorney that he could get, an attorney unfamiliar with the complexities of section 1981 actions." Appellant's Brief,. at v (emphasis added). Although we could afifirm the district court's dismissal of the federal claims on this ground alone, we briefly address Vreeland's §1983 ciaims against each defendant. B Prosecutor Frey is unqnestionably en- titled to absolute immunity because he was sued for conduct within the scope of his prosecutorial duies, prosecuting Vreeland for assault with a dangerous weapon. Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 420 (1976). C Dispatchers Townsend, Hardaway, Lauwers, i APP. Jj 1 and Gruber may have acted negliger*] id unprotessionally in dealing with Vreeland, but mere negligence is not enough to consti- tute a §1983 violation. Davidson v. Cannon, 474 U.S. 344 (1986). In Nishiyama v. Dickson County, Tenn., 814 F.2d 277, 282 (6th Cir. 1987), this court stated: In our view, a person may be Said to act in such a way as to trigger a Section 1983 claim if he intentionally does something unreasonable with disregard to a known risk or a risk so obvious that he must be assumed to have been aware of it, and of a mag - nitude such that it is highly probable that harm will follow. The only clear risk that was made known to the dispatchers was the threat that Vreeland might kill his mother. Although the dispatch- ers insulted Vreeland and engaged in needless bickering, they also ascertained Vreeland's address and his mother's address and acted to prevent the risk by notifying Deputy Bellino. Finally, this is not a case where the State actors owed an affirmative duty of care to the plaintiff. Such cases Only arise when APP. Ib q "the affirmative exercise of [the State's] power so restrains an individual's liberty that it renders him unable to care for hin- self, and at the same time fails to provide for his basic human needs, e.g., food, cloth- ing, shelter, medical care, and reasonable safety..." Reeves by Jones v. Besonen. 754 F. supp. 1135, 1140 (E.D. Mich. 1991) (citing Deshaney v. Winnebago County Dept. of Social services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989). Vreeland voluntarily called and harassed the dispatch- ers, and he chose to confront the deputies with shotgun in hand. D Vreeland claims that the deputies used excessive force in effectuating his arrest. In Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 5386, 388 (1989), the Supreme Court held that escessive force claims are to be analyzed under the "objective reasonableness" standard of the Fourth Amendment rather than under a substan- tive due process standard. The deputies Claim an affirmative defense of qualified APP 13 immunity. Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials performing discretionary duties "generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate Clearly estab- lished statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982). Thus, a defendant has qualified immunity unless the plaintiff's "rights were so Clearly estab- lished when the acts were committed that any officer in the defendant's position, measured objectively, would have understood that he was under an affirmative duty to have refrained from such conduct." Dominique v. Telb, 831 F.2d 673, 676 (6th Cir. 1987). Vreeland was drunk, brandishing a shotgun Claiming that he was so evil that he had to be eradicated, and threatening and taunting the deputies. Before Deputy Bellino shot Vreeland, he gave him ten to fifteen verbal Warnings, attempted to reason with him, fired’ a warning shot, and waited until Vreeland was APP. 1/4 ’ approximately twenty feet away, still approaching, and still making threats. The deputies are clearly entitled to qualified immunity. Vreeland's claim that sergeant Townsend inadequately trained Deputy Bellino fails for the same reasons that his claim of inadequate training of the dispatchers fails, as discussed in the following section. E Vreeland did not name Monroe County as a defendant, but the claims against the Monroe County Dispatch and the Monroe County Prose- cutor's Office -- neither of which is amenable to suit -- are best interpreted as claims against Monroe County. Even under this liber- al interpretation of the pleading, Vreeland has failed to establish a §1983 claim against Monroe County. First, Monroe County cannot be subjected to liability unless the allegedly unconstitu- tional act is linked to a policy, custom or practice. Monell v. Department of Social APP 15" RRO Ney SN nencnrarneenenenes PEON, «gan, ye Pee erneneeememmnmnannns PRET R a yEt ey: PNEINNR SOT RH Prom Ae KN arepe Services, 436 U.S. 658, 690 (1978). Vreeland simply has not cited any policy, ordinance, or regulation. Vreeland has merely alleged that Horvath, the dispatch Supervisor, is a responsible for the actions of the dispatch- ers whom he supervises. However, liability under §1983 cannot be established on the basis of respondeat superior. Rizzo V. Goode, 423 U.S. 362 (1976). Vreeland must show: ...that the supervisor encouraged the specific incident of misconduct Or in some other way directly participated it it. Ata minimum, a §1983 plaintiff must show that a Supervisory official at least implicitly authorized, approved, Or knowingly acquiesced in the unconstitutional conduct of the offending subordinate. Bellamy v. Bradley, 729 F.2d 416, 421 (6th Citi yc COTt, dented, 469 U.S. 845 (1984). The dispatchers may have acted unpro- fessionally by stooping to Vreeland's level and trading insults. However, there is no evidence that the dispatchers were following a policy, custom, or practice of Monroe County. Vreeland's only evidence is that more than one dispatcher engaged in the | APL 1b questionable exchanges with him. This evi- dence, standing alone, does not constitute a pattern. Vreeland's only specific allegation, ? other than a "'respondeat superior" theory, 1s that Monroe County inadequately trained the dispatchers. Inadequate training may serve as the basis for §1983 liability only when the failure to train amounts to deliber- ate indifference to the rights of persons with whom the municipality's employees come in contact. City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 578, 388 (1989). Vreeland's only evidence of inadequate trainging is an affidavit from a retired Toledo police officer with experience as a "911" dispatcher, in which the officer Stated that the defendant dispatchers' conduct was inconsistent with standard operating procedure. However, this does not reveal anything about the training program. It only shows that the dispatchers may have performed as if they were inadequately trained in this specific incident. The officer did APP. / not even hypothesize that inadequate training was the moving force causing the alleged deprivation of Vreeland's rights. see id. at 391 (plaintiff must prove that the deficiency in training actually caused the ultimate injury). To the contrary, the retired officer stated more than once in his deposition that he thought that the dis- patchers intentionally departed from standard operating procedure. IV Vreeland also brought state law claims: assault and battery against the deputies, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, libel, and slander against the dispatchers. The district court properly dismissed these state law claims with prejudice. First, Vreeland claims that by driving their patrol car very close to him Deputies Sweat and Burkey committed assault and battery. Battery requires unlawful touching, Espinoza v. Thomas, 472 N.W.2d 16, 21 (Mich. App. 1991), and Vreeland has not alleged any contact by APR /8 by these defendants. Second, the deputies claim they are immune from the assault Claim pursuant to M.C.L.A. §791.1407. Vreeland never responded to the defendants' claims of immunity on this point, and there is no evidence in the record that raises a genuine issue of fact material to this clain. Third, the dispatchers' conduct may have been inappropriate and unprofessional, but it does not rise to the level of intentional inflic- tion of emotional distress. See Tope v. Howe 445 N.W. 2d 452, 460 (Mich. App. 1989) ("Liability does not extend to mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty offenses and other trivialities."). Finally, Vreeland's allegations of libel and slander are frivolous. Vreeland has not specified which statements are untrue; nor has he explained how the dispatchers caused the Statements to be published by the local media. V Finally, we hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying APP. 1/9 Vreeland's motion to conduct further dis- covery under Rule 56(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. see York v. Tennessee Crushed Stone Association, 684 F.2d 360, 363 (6th Cir. 1982). We agree with the district court's summation: "To request an extension of time to take depositions now when he could have taken them during the past year and a half offends the discovery process." VI For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM the district court's dismissal of Vreeland's federai and state claims with prejudice. APP. oto UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT eee FILED perA5s4 MAY 27, 1993 LEONARD GREEN, CLERK No. MARK E. VREELAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, V. ORDER JAMES TOWNSEND, ET AL., ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Defendants-Appellees. ) BEFORE: MERRITT, Chief Judge; BOGGS and BATCHELDER, Circuit Judges. The court having received a petition for rehearing en banc, and the petition having been circulated not only to the original panel members but also to-all other active judges of this court, and no judge of this court having requested a vote on the Sugges- tion for rehearing en banc, the petition for rehearing has been referred to the Original hearing panel. The panel has further reviewed the petition for rehearing and concludes that the issues raised in the petition were fully considered upon the Original submission and APR 2/ APP 2) | decision of the case. } y 4 f ‘ i A ie 1 : Cisa page 3 of her Order denying the discovery motion: "To request an extention of time to take depositions now when he could have taken them during the past year and a half offends the discovery process," This Court whole- ? + heartedly agrees. The grounds for the granting of motions 2 ~ to alter or amend a Judgment are set forth in Eastern District of Michigan Local Rule /.i Ch) (3): (m) Motions to Alter or Amend a Judg- ment or for Rehearing or Reconsideration. lon January 27, 1992, Plaintiff Sub- mitted a new Rule 56 (f) discovery motion seeking the same discovery that he sought in his November 1991 motion which the Magistrate Judge denied. For the reasons stated above in this Opinion and Order and for the reasons Stated by the Magistrate Judge in her November Bis 1991 Order denying Plaintiff's previous Rule 56(f) motion, Plaintiff's new Rule 56(f) motion will be denied. *Although Plaintiff has alternatively Captioned his Motion as one for New Trial under Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 59(a), Since no trial was ever conducted in this matter, Rule 59(a) is inapplicable. Thus, the Court will treat Plaintiff's Motion aS one to "alter or amend a Judgment" under Rule 59(e). App WP APP. ab | i (3) Grounds. Generally, and without restricting the discretion of the Court, motions for rehearing or recon- Sideration which merely present the same issues ruled upon by the Court, either expressly or by reasonable implication, Shall not be granted. The movant shall not only demonstrate a palpable defect by which the Court and the parties have been mislead but also show that a different disposition of the case must result from a correction thereof. The Court finds that Plaintiff has merely presented the same issues already ruled upon by the Court, either expressly or by reasonable implication, in its January 31, 1992 Order and Judg- ment. Further, Plaintiff has not demonstrated a palpable defect by which the Court has been misled or that a different disposition of the case must result from a correction thereof. For these reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Plaintiff's February 12, 1992 Motion under Rule 59 be, and hereby is, DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Plaintiff's January 27, 1992 Rule 56(f) discovery motion is also DENIED. A PP27 Gerald E. Rosen United States District Judge APR 27 . UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION MARK E. VREELAND, ey) 440.0% Plaintiff, Hon. Gerald E. Rosen vs. JAMES TOWNSEND, LYNN HARDAWAY, DONALD HORVATH, PAT LAUWERS, JAMES GRUBER, RICHARD SWEAT, VINCENT BURKEY, DANIEL BELLINO, MONROE COUNTY CENTRAL DISPATCH, MICHIGAN STATE POLICE OFFICER MICHAEL MURPHY, WILLIAM FREY, AND THE MONROE COUNTY PROSECUTOR'S rrice, Defendants. / ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S TWO NOVEMBER 27, 1991 REPORTS AND RECOMMENDA- TIONS AND DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE At a session of said Court, held in the U.S. Courthouse, Detroit, Michigan on JAN 31 1992 PRESENT: Honorable Gerald E. Rosen United States District Judge This matter having come before the Court on two Reports and Recommendations ("R & Rs") submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Virginia M. Morgan on November 27, 1991 recommending in the first of pe. November 27, 1991 R & Rs, that the APP. 28 PAD. g Court grant Defendant Murphy's Motion for summary Judgment, and recommending in the second R & R that the Court grant the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defen- dants Townsend, Hardaway, Horvath, Lauwers, Gruber, Sweat, Burkey, Bellino, Monroe County Dispatch, Director of Central Dispatch. William Frey and the Monroe County Prosecuta’s Office; and Plaintiff having timely filed objections to the Magistrate Judge's Reports and Recommendations; and the Court having reviewed both of the Magistrate Judge's Reports and Recommendations, Plaintiff's Objections thereto, and the Court's file of this action and having concluded that, for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendatxrs summary judgment should be entered in favor of the all of the remaining Defendants in this action and this case should, accordingly by dismissed in its entirety; and the Court being otherwise fully advised in the premises, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's two Reports and : . j APR 29 APPR RF 7 Recommendations of November 27, 1991 be, and hereby are, adopted by this Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, for the reasons set forth in the Magistrate Judge's two November 27, 1991 Reports and Recommen- dations, (1) Defendant Murphy's Motion for Summary Judgment be, and hereby is, GRANTED, and (2) the Motion for Summary Judgment of the remaining defendants, --i.e., that of Defendants Townsend, Hardaway, Horvath, Lauwers, Gruber, Sweat, Burkey, Bellino, Monroe County Dispatch, Director of Central Dispatch, William Frey and the Monroe County Prosecutor's Office -- be, and hereby is, GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED in its entirety with prejudice. 28 U.S.C. § 1915 CERTIFICATION The Court further hereby sets forth its certification under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 that, in the event that Plaintiff seeks to appeal from this case, Plaintiff should not be permitted APA Bo ' APP. 306 to proceed with such appeal in forma pau- peris for the following reasons. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), "an appeal ay not be taken in forma pauperis if the [district] court certifies in writing that it 1s not taken in good faith." The Supreme my Court has further defined a "frivolous" action as one that "lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact." Neitzke v. Williams, (90 U.S. 319, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 1833 (1989). For the reasons stated in the Magis- trate Judge's Report and Recommendation which this Court has concurred in and adopted this date, Plaintiff's §1983 civil rights claims are tactuallya nd legally deficient. This Court, therefore, makes the finding that Plaintiff's claims are frivolous because they lack an arguable basis in law or fact. Accordingly, this Court determines that any appeal from this decision would be frivo- lous. It is clear, then, that an appeal could not be taken in good faith and, there fore, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(a), may APP 3] App. al t be taken in forma pauperis. ‘S/ Gerald E. Rosen Gerald E. Rosen United States District Judge APP. 32. RAD RE NT A BA em UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION MARK E. VREELAND, No. 91-CV-71130-DT Hon. Gerald E. Rosen Plaintiff, VS. al JAMES TOWNSEND, LYNN HARDAWAY, DONALD HORVATH, _ PAT LAUWERS, JAMES BRUBER, _ RICHARD SWEAT, VINCENT BURKEY, | DANIEL BELLINO, MONROE COUNTY _ CENTRAL DISPATCH, MICHIGAN STATE POLICE OFFICER MICHAEL MURPHY, WILLIAM FREY, AND THE MONROE COUNTY PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE, Defendants. / : JUDGMENT At a session of Said Court, held in the U.S. Courthouse, Detroit, Michigan on | PRESENT: Honorable Gerald E. Rosen United States District Judge The Court having this date entered an Order (1) adopting the Magistrate Judge's two November 27, 1991 Reports and Recon- mendations and (2) granting (a) the Motion for Summary Jdugment filed by defendant Murphy (b) the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the remaining defendants -- De- fendants Townsend, Hardaway, Horvath, apr. 33 ’ Lauwers, Gruber, Sweat, Burkey, Bellino Monroe County Dispatch, Director of Cen tral Dispatch, William Frey and the Monroe County Prosecutor's Office; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that sun- mary judgment be, and hereby is, entered in favor of the DEfendants and laintiff's Complaint, accordingly, is DISMISSED with prejudice. /s/Gerald E. Rosen Gerald E. Rosen United States District Judge APR 34 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION MARK E. VREELAND, ver IVIL ACTION NO. Plaintiff, a pane 0 i JUDGE GERALD E. JAMES TOWNSEND, LYNN ___ ROSEN HARDAWAY, DONALD HORVATH, 2 a PAT LAUWERS, JAMES GRUBER, RICHARD SWEAT, VINCENT BURKEY, DANIEL BELLINO, MONROE COUNTY CENTRAL DISPATCH, MICHIGAN STATE POLICE OFFICER MICHAEL MURPHY, WILLIAM FREY, and THE MONROE COUNTY PRO- SECUTOR'S OFFICE, Defendants. / ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION PURSUANT TO RULE S6(F) This matter is before the court on the plaintiff's motion pursuant Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 56(f) for additional time to take de- positions in order to oppose defendants' motions for summary judgment. Defendants have not responded. Plaintiff, Mark Vreeland, through his attorney filed this complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331 and presumably under 42 U.S.C. §1983 on May 2, 1990, alleging that defendants violated his constitutional rights. After considera- tion of all the issues raised; 404%. 83 IT IS ORDERED that the motion be and here by is DENIED for the following reasons, Fed.R.Civ. P Rule 56 (f) states with respect to opposition to a motion for sum- mary jdugment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 56: Should it appear from the affidavits of a party Opposing the motion that the party cannot for the reasons Stated present by affidavit facts essential to justify the party's Opposition, the court may refuse the application for judgment, or may Order a continuance to permit affi- davits to be obtained or depositions to be taken or discovery to be had Or may make such other Order as is This rule will not be applied to aid 4 party who has been lazy or dilatory. "Thus, a request for relief under Rule 56(f£) is extremely unlikely to succeed when the party seeking the delay has failed to take advantage of discovery," Wright, Miller & Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure Civil 2d, §§2740-7241 (West Supp. 1991). Here, plaintiff seeks to take the de- positions of defendant Hardaway, lauwers, Grub Sergeant Tow send, and the lieu- ruber, Serg py 3g tenant involved, and Other unidentified Persons in the Sheriff's office responsible tor the type of training given to dis- patchers, Plaintiff Claims that he been unable to obtain this information due to a "Cloak of silence" ora "conspiracy of Sllence," However, Plaintiff does not state what steps eh has taken to depose these indivi- duals or to obtain the necessary informa- tion. HE has known the ideitity of defend- ants since he filed the lawsuit in May, 1990. Plaintiff and defendants were given an ample discovery period and plaintiff did not request an extension. Defendants filed their motions for summary judgment in September and October, 1991, Plaintiff has not demonstrated why he Was unable to obtain this information before now. ie States that he had reason to believe that defendants' conduct departed from Standard practices after he listened to fhe tape and based t’ av, eorge ; . upon e a - PR 37 tired Toledo Police Officer. (John Rust Affidavit at p. 1) As such, he should have taken steps to inquire into the training of Monroe County dispatchers then and not now. To request an extension of time to take depositions now when he could have taken them during the past year and a half offends the discovery process. Therefore, for the reason discussed above, plaintiff's motion is denied. SO ORDERED. /s/ Virginia M. Morgan VIRGINIA M. MORGAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Dated: NOV 27 199] PURSUANT TO TULE 77(D), FED.R. CIV.P. COPIES MAILED TO ATTOR- NEYS FOR ALL PARTIES ON November 27, 1991. Lori Coons DEPUTY COURT CLERK Ss TO: John Rust /s/ Michael Rosati /s/ Lawrence Vanwassenova /s/ Brian Devlin 7) PE 38 APp 348 [N THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION Filed \PR 23 1990 rk E. Vreeland, Case No. 90CV71130D1 PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND ENDORSED HEREON ? John G. Rust (0000098) 4628 Lewis Avenue Toledo, Ohio 43612 (419) 476-0347 James Townsend nn Hardaway, Donald Horvath, Lauwer (first name unknown) James Gruber, Richard Sweat, Vincent Burkey, Daniel Balino, Walter Trobridge, lonroe County Sheriff, onroe County Central Dispatch J-1-1 Agency or Organization, arl VanWerdt, Henrik Kanavel, = Chael Murphy, = Llliam Frey, 'ffice of the County Prosecutor, APP. Defendants. APP 39 Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked inder Title 28 US CS 1330 for diversity of cr tizens, and under Paragraph 1331, as Plaintiff claims this action involves his ghts arising under the Constitution and Laws Of the United States of America. Plaintiff is a citizen and Laws of The United States of America. Plaintiff is a ‘itizen and resident of Ohio, and each of he Defendants are citizens and residents f Michigan. On April the 23rd, 1988, Plaintiff Mark E. Vreeland resided at 266 Hurd Road, fonroe, MOnroe County, Michigan. At that ime, he suffered a spell of temporary loss f control and of his senses, due to -onditions in his mind, a part of which had irisen during his service in The United tates Armed services, where unfortunately, i¢ had started the use of drugs and alcohol. n the early hours of April the 23rd, 1988, ‘laintiff was at his residence, had been jrinking beer for ever urs, WS Mtxi- A PP. do cated, and was, mentally in loss of control, . and telephoned for help to the 9-1-1-Organ- 1Zation or Agency in Monroe County Michigan, as shown by his numerous Statements, which were so known and recognized, or in the exercise of ordinary care, should have been SO recognized, by the operators, of the 9-1-1 Agency, and the Monroe Coutny Central Dispatch each of which are governmental Organizations. Defendant Lynn Hardaway, (first name unknown) Lauwer,,James Gruber, and Sargeant James Townsend, were employees of the Monroe County Central Dispatch, and either talked to, or heard the conversations with Plaintiff at that time. Plaintiff Stated, that among other things, he was "possessed," felt a "force" from outer Space, and made other comments, showing that he was in dire need of help. Defendant Hardaway and others of the named Defendants, then in talking with him, defamed him, held him up to ridicule, and caused him to he_ further troubled. and in,loss of control, by their remarks, ations and APP. 41 BEST AVAILABLE COPY tone of voice. Defendants James Townsend, as the Sargeant in Charge, Lynn Hardaway, (first name unknown) Lauwer, herein after referred to as Lauwer, and James Gruber, either Spoke, or ratified, or failed to correct in any Way, the danger Causing and improper wrods, "a bastard; you look like a chimpanzee," and Other defamatory and hostil- ity generating, ridiculing, Statements, which in Plaintiff's weakened condition, all proximately caused him mentally, and other- wise to be unable to defend himself as otherwise he would have. Each person, mentioned above, and the Monroe County Central Dispatch Persons did not act professionally, were not supportative, and failed to follow the standard of accepted practices of those in their position in that they did not use terms and tone of voice that was supportative, helpful, but instead made Plaintiff's Situation worse, by threat- ening and hostile actions toward him, to the Monroe County Deputies who heard the statements A PP. 42. a on the same telephone line of communication, to take steps to arrest and to incite and invite and entrap Plaintiff to commit an act, for which the deputies might arrest him. 5. Plaintiff would have remained in his home, but was provoked, incited, entrapped, by the statements made over the 9-1-1 line, by the people mentioned above, to leave his home; and walked up Monroe Street in French- town Township, Monroe County, Michigan. In doing so, he carried a can of beer in his left hand, and over his Shoulder, a shot-gun, with the breech open, in a non-firing position and continued so to do. About 3:15 A.M., on April the 23rd, 1988, he then was seen by a Depty Sheriff Daniel Belino, who passed him, in the night time, in an unlighted area, and then reversed his Sheriff's car, from the intersection of Hurd and Monroe Street. Through the Monroe Central Dispatch nine, communications went out then, to all the Sheriff's deputies, be on the lookout for APP. 43 r Vincent Berkey,in a Sheriff's Car, came upon Plaintiff, then committed an act of assault upon Plaintiff by driving the Sheriff Deputies car, as though it were going to hit the Plain- tiff and this Put Plaintiff in fear, and further caused a loss of ability for him to directly control himself and further contributed / to his temporary loss of control so that he Was not in a condition then, to be culpable or blamed for his act, because of his mental condition, Defendant Bellino then, without Sufficient cause or Provocation, and through negligence, and intentional wrong, fired a Shot-gun shot at Plaintiff, Striking Plaintiff in the right elbow, causing various fractures of the bones of his arm, and him to be per- mananently disabled, and to Suffer much pain and suffering, 4. Defendants Townsend, also Donald Horvath, the Supervisor of the Monroe Central Dispatch, Hardaway, Lauwer, and Gruber, by their acts md Apa MS andfr mn th fA PR, i alternative, intentionally, proximately caused Plaintiff to be in the position where he was so shot by Defendant Bellino. beeen: Donald Horvath, then Sheriff Walter Trobridge, Carl Van Werdt, then Commander or in charge of the Erie Post of the Michigan State Police, and Police Chief, Henrik Kanavel, were also liable and responsible for all the aforesaid in that Defendants Trobridge, VanWerdt, and Knavel, were in the Board of tieeatoce or in Control of the said 9-1-] Organization, and the Monroe County Central Dispatch, that they failed to see to it that the operators on the 9-1-1 Line, in the Monroe Central Dispatch, were trained professionally, and directed as to know what to do, when receiving a call on the 9-1-1 as Plaintiff had sent in as Stated above; and had they not been negligent, they would, by following the approved standards of care, if they so trained, the said Operators, that they would have mitigated, mollified, attempted to help, in a Supportive and APP.4S APR YS~ professional manner, rather than acting unlawfully as stated above. Further, then Sheriff Trobridge, and each of the Sheriff Deputies, and Supervisors thereof, were negligent, in not having instructed the Sheriff deputies as to how to have handled the situation, without such excesSive force and permanent injury to Plaintiff and were guilty of negligence or in the alternative, intentional wrongs, by not using methods that would have been protective of said deputies and the Plaintiff, that were either known, Or should have been known, in proper law enforcement actions for the people in- volved here, 5. Defendant Michael Murphy, a Sergeant, Michigan State Police, Flatrock Post, Prose- cuting Attorney William Frey, and others of the above named Defendants, then prosecuted, and continued to prosecute Plaintiff on felony charges, assault with a dangerous weapon, contrary to Michigan Compiled Law, 750-82 APP 46 APP. 6 claiming that Plaintiff had pointed a shotgun at Deputy Bellino; and the same as to Deputy Sweat and that Plaintiff did carry and have in his possession a shotgun, contrary to Michigan Compled Law 750-82, four counts of felonies altogether, and did for some eleven months, or more, cause Plaintiff so to be prosecuted in the District Court for the County of Monroe, First Judicial District, and Plaintiff to be confined in jail all of the time. Defendants and each of them, well knew, from the tapes and electronic record- ings of the conversations of Plaintiff and from Plaintiff's actions, that he was not mentally in control of himself, so was temporarily deranged, that he was not criminally culpable nor to be blamed for his actions, nor responsible for the same, and likewise, from other sources, but Defendants either recommended or directly contributed to the further prosecution of th Plamtiff, @ wer lidle for not havi taken a proper stmd g@airst such pwseatwbn, APF 47 ‘ and have each then proximately caused him to suffer from a prosecution which never shoulda have been conducted, or continued. 6. Defendants Haraway, Townsend, Lauwer, Gruber, Horbath, Trobridge, and VanWerdt, and Kanavel, were each liable for the aforesaid libels and slanders, were published then, and have been published since, and are recorded and will be published in the future without cause or privilege and have been so published continuing in on to this year; and by reason thereof, Plaintiff is entitled to compensa- tory and punitive damages in the amount of $50,000. 7. Defendants Bellino, Townsend, Sweat, Burkey, Trobridge, were liable for the use of excessive force by Defendant Bellino in shooting and permanently injuring and damaging Plaintiff or for their intentional wrongs or by the negligence of the Sheriff Trobridge and the Sergeant Townsend, in not having effectively trained Deputy Bellino for situations suh 2 yg? Ses en@muntered. APF, 8. Plaintiff states that there were vari - ous procedures that would have enabled Deputy Bellino safely, and without permanent injury to Plaintiff, to be taken into effective custody, but that the Defendants named in this paragraph were negligent in not having trained Deputy Bellino how effectively adn safely to all concerned, to have taken Plaintiff into custody; or else, Defendant Bellino acted intentionally; and by reason of each and all Or in the alternative Plaintiff is entitled to compensatory and punitive damages, for the assault and battery upon him, in the amount of $100,000, from each of the Defendants named in this Paragraph. . 9. Further, Defendants caused to be published in the Monroe Evening News, an account of the events of April the 23rd, 1988, in form and words, with the implication, highly critical and defamatory of the plain- tiff, which were untrue, in acts of commission or in omission, and this has been published in the permanent files of the said paper, or Pe. ¥2 on in to 1990; and Defendants either author- ized or ratified or failed to point out any corrections, of the said accounts, although Defendants knew of the errors and defamatory and false statements in the said account. 10. Defendant Prosecuting Attorney William Frey, and Michigan State Trooper Michael Murphy, denied Constitutional Rights of the Plaintiff when, within one hour after he had been operated, at the hospital in Ann Arbor, each questioned him, about what had transpired and happened. ll. Defendants Frey, Murphy, and the other defendants herein, prosecuted, and continued to prosecute, without cause, but from malice, Plaintiff, so that he was kept in jail, until on or about March the 17th, 1989, although each knew, and should have known, had each exercised ordinary care, that Plaintiff was not guilty of the four counts with which he was charged of Felonies. Defendant Frey, during the course of his being held in jail, offered to dismiss some APP. SO or all of the charges if Plaintiff would sign a Civil release in favor of the Defendants herein, or portions of them. In so doing, Defendant Frey and Defendant Murphy violat- ed the proper standards of those in their position and proximately caused the Plain- tiff to have to stay in jail much longer than called for properly, by the law and proper law enforcement. Further, Defendant Frey and Defendant Murphy, worked to cause a-cover-up of exactly what had happened by each person involved, causing discredit upon the Plaintiff, and probably unjustifi- ably, unjustly, ypon some of the others involved, leading to Plaintiff's arrest. Defendant Frey and Defendant Murphy approxi- mately caused a delay in the release of Plaintiff without cause or legal justification thereby denied Plaintiff's basic rights, guaranteed by the Law, and the Constitutions of the United States of American, and of Michigan. 12. Plaintiff in March, 1989, and AOP, S/ before was under great mental stress and other mental problems, and Defendant Frey, knwoing that Plaintiff would be acquitted and found not guilty, and that Plaintiff was under duress and direly wanted to be released, just before the scheduled Trial, offered to release Plaintiff if Plaintiff would plead No Contest to a misdemeanor; and also Defen- dant Frey, and those Defendants participating in that offer, then and for a long time prior thereto, knew that Plaintiff was not guilty, ang Plaintiff under great duress did so plead, and was released, but did not agree to Defendant Frey's requests to release Defen- dants, and Plaintiff so pleaded on the ground that he could and would sue Defendants. 13. Wherefore, Plaintiff Mark E. Vreeland prays that he may have and recover judgment against each and all of the Defendants, for $50,000, as to each, or more, as herein before stated, and for the recovery of his court costs and attorney fees herein; and prays for Judgmep tg aginst Defendants Townsend, Hardaway, Horvath, Lauwer, Gruber, Sweat, Burkey, Bellino, Trobridge, also Monroe County Sheriff, Monroe County Central Dispatch, 9-1-1 Agency or Organization, Carl VanWerdt, Kanevel, Murphy, Frey and Office of the County Prosecutor. Plaintiff Mark E. Vreeland by: (S) John G. Rust Jonn G. Rust, His Attorney 833 Security Building Toledo, Ohio 43604 (419) 243-9191 JURY DEMAND ENDORSED HEREON Plaintiff demands trial by jury of all the issues herein. Mark E. Vreeland, by: ; (S) John G. Rust John G. Rust APR S24 APP. S2A MICHIGAN STATUTES ANNOTATED, SECTION 14.800. - SHERIFF'S DUTY TO TAKE A MENTALLY ILL PERSON TO HOSPITAL "§14.800(427) Pleas officer observing personal conduct; custody and transportation to hospital or notification of community mental health emergency service unit; procedure; application for hospitalization.) Sec. 427. (1) If a peace officer observes an individual conducting himself (or herself) in a amnner which causes the peace officer to reasonably believe that the individual is a person requiring treatment as defined in section 401, the peace officer may take the individual into protective custody and transport (the individual) to a hospital for examination pursuant to section 429 (or may notify the community mental health emer- gency service unit for the purpose of request- ing mental health intervention services. If notified, the community mental health emergery service unit shall provide those mental health intervention services which it considers appropriate unless the individual declines the services. If the individual declines the services, the peace officer shall immediately transport the individual to a hospital. These services may be provided at a site mutually agreed upon by the peace officer and the community mental health emergency service or at the site of the community mental health emergency service unit. In the course of providing services, the community mental health emergency service unit may provide advice and consultation to the peace officer which may include a recommendation to transport the individual to a hospital for examination pur- Suant to section 429, or to release the individual from rpotective custody. However, the peace officer is not constrained from exercising his or her reasonable judgment. If a peace officer determines that an indivi- AFR SS ndividual. Immunity 1al shall be released from protectwe cutd s a result of consultation with a ommwmity tal health emergency service unit, the munity mental health emergency service t shall assure provision of follow-tw inseling and diagnostic and referral rvices as needed, unless the individual lines the services. JPon arrival at the hospital, the peace officer smll e&xeute application for hospitalization of the from financial regspomibilit.) not befiancialy 2) A peace officer shall responsible for the cost of care of an in- dividual for whom a peace officer has executed application under subsection (1).) Notification of results of hospital ‘Xamination to community mental health senke unit.) ((3) A hospital receiving an indivi- lual pursuant to subsection (10 who has been seen by a community mental health emergermry service unit shall notify that unit of tk results of an examination of that individual conducted by the hospital.) (MCL §330.1427) 1978, AS amended by Pub Acts January History. No. 598, imd eff 4,1979." TITLE 28, SECTION 1367 SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTION §1367. Supplemental jurisdiction ) Except as provided in subsections (b) and c) or as expressly provided otherwise by Fed- eral statute, in any civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction, the district courts shall have supplemental jurisdiction over all other claims that are so related to claims in the action within such original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case of controversy under Article III of the United States Constitution. Such supplemental jurisdiction shall include claims that involve the joinder or interven- tim of additional parties. b) In any civil action of which the dis- trict courts have original jurisdiction founded solely on section 1332 of this title, the district courts shall not have supple- ental jurisdiction under subsection (a) over claims by plaintiffs against persons made parties under Rule 14, 19, 20, or 24 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or over laims by persons proposed to be joined as l\intiffs under Rule 19 of such rules or eking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 4 of such rules, whea exercising supplemental irisdiction over such claims would be incon- istent with the jurisdictional requirements section 1332 c) The district courts may decline to xercise supplemental jurisdiction over a - laim under subsection (a) i (1) the claim raises a novel or complex 1ssue of State law, (2) the claim substantially pre- dominates over the claim or claims over which the district court has Original jurisdiction, (3) the district court has dismissed al] Claims over which it has Original] Jurisdiction, or (4) in exceptional circumstances, there are other compelling reasons for de- Clining jurisdiction. d) The period of limitations for any claim isserted under subsection (a), and for any ther claim in the same action that is vol- intarily dismissed at the same time as or itter the dismissal of the claim under sub- section (a), shall be tolled while the claim 1s pending and for a period of 30 days after Ape. 5¢é t (Added States. he United otat 3Sion of the r posses: 911 PHONE CALL OF MARK VREELAND PPERATOR: CENTRAL DISPATCH, OPERATOR 24. VREELAND: HELLO, OPERATOR? je sV/ « MA MO 4 MO: A 4\/ o THIS IS THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. CAN I HELP YOU? WHO AM I SPEAKING TO? OPERATOR 24. DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM? NO. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A REPORTING. OK. MY NAME IS MARK EDWARD VREELAND. WHAT'S THE PROBLEM? SIR, I BELIEVE I'M POSSESSED. OK. DO YOU WANT TO HOLD ON? YES, CAN I HELP YOU? SERGEANT TOWNSEND. YES SIR. I'M NOT GOING TO BE ON THE LINE VERY LONG, U CAN'T UNDERSTAND YOU. I'M A LITTLE NERVOUS. WHAT ARE YOU NERVOUS ABOUT SIR? WHAT? WHAT ARE YOU NERVOUSE ABOUT? APR S App. 58 op) ~ ee I'M JUST GOING TO LET YOU KNOW, I... PARDON ME? I FEEL A FORCE COMING IN. OH, YOU DO? IT'S COMING IN FROM, FROM, UH... UFO? NO, FAR AWAY HOW FAR AWAY? FAR AWAY. JUPITER, MARS, UH, VENUS? FAR AWAY. FURTHER THAN THAT? YES. MARS IS WAY OUT THERE. MY NAME IS MARK EDWARD VREELAND. MY SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER IS 381-72-7986. UH-HUH. I FEEL SOMETHING THAT IT'S UNUSUAL. SPELL YOUR LAST NAME, V-R-E-E-L-A-N-D OK. WELL WHAT DO YOU MEAN? WHAT DO YOU FEEL, MARK? (HEAVY BREATHING) HELLO? I'M STILL HERE. PARDON ME? APP. SF APP. 59 V: ep) WY V3: WM I'M STILL HERE. WHAT KIND OF SENSATION ARE YOU GETTING? I'M PERFECTLY SOBER RIGHT NOW, OFFICER. I BELIEVE YOU. HOW OLD ARE YOU? I AM 23 YEARS OLD. WHAT;S YOUR DATE OF BIRTH? 2/17/1964. 2/17/64? YES, THAT'S CORRECT. WHERE WERE BORN AT,MARK? WYANDOTT, MICHIGAN. OK, WHERE DO YOU LIVE? MONROE, MICHIGAN. WHERE ABOUT? MONROE, MICHIGAN. AT? YEAH, I KNOW YOU LIVE IN MONROE. WHERE / I DON'T KNOW. DO YOU GOT ANY IDEA? DO YOU LIVE IN AN APARTMENT COMPLEX? I'M SORRY. I WON'T TELL YOU. I WILL TELL YOU THIS, THAT THERE'S SOMETHING THERE... THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE OUT THERE. LIKE WHAT? I DON'T KNOW. WHAT ARE YOU NAT bp _:" (HEAVY Ww >t BREATHING) ...MARK?... (HEAVY BREATHING)... MARK, WHAT ARE YOU WATCHING ON TV? YOU KNOW WHAT I'M WATCHING ON T.V. NO MARK, WHAT? ARE YOU A WEREWOLD? I'M WATCHING THE...UNAUDIBLE. YOU WHAT? (GROWLING, HEAVY BRETHING) UNAUDIBLE...YOU'RE FLIPPING OUT RIGHT? THE EGYPTIANS. WHAT ARE YOU GROWLING FOR? I'M SORRY. YEAH. PELASE RECORD WHAT I AM SAYING. EATING EGYPTIANS? I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA LET IT GO, OK? THE PHAROAHS? NO, I KNOW THIS, I KNOW YOU ARE RECORD- ING EVERYTHING I TELL YOU. PLEASE RECORD EVERYTHING. (HEAVY BREATHING) UNAUDIBLE. tke kkk keke keke keae*K (HEAVY BREATHING IF YOU'RE WONDERING, I'M IN VIET NAM. UNAUDIBLE. keke kkkkekkkekeEeEKK WOMAN OPERATOR: CENTRAL DISPATCH. . (HEAVY BREATHING)...OK, IF THIS IS THE (QAZY GUY THAT JUST CALLED US SAYING YOU'RE APR 6] POSSESSED, DON'T CALL US BACK ANYMORE. THERE IS NOTHING WE CAN DO TO HELP YOU. kKkKeKKKKKKEKK WO: V: WO: V: WO: V: WO: Ve: WO: CENTRAL DISPATCH. YOU WILL RECORD. WE ARE RECORDING IT. RECORD. OK, WHAT DO YOU WANT US TQ DO? I'M GONNA LET IT GO. SO, LET IT GO. RECORD. GO RIGHT AHEAD. KkKKKKKKKKSK WO: V: WO: WO: WO: CENTRAL DISPATCH. YES, I WANT TO REVEAL MYSELF. YOU'RE GOING TO REVEAL YOURSELF. YES. TO WHOM? IS THIS THE GUY THAT'S JUST BEEN CALLING HERE? MY NAME IS MARK EDWARD VREELAND. OK. SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER 381-72-7986. OK. WHAT' YOUR DATE OF BIRTH? JUNE 17TH, 1964. OK. DO WE HAVE A WARRANT FOR YOU OR SOMETHING? APP. 62 APP 6x NO. PLEASE MAM, THIS IS AN EMERGENCY. OK. WHAT'S THE EMERGENCY? YOU'RE THE ONE CALLING HERE BREATHING ON THE PHONE? PLEASE. WHAT DO YOU WANT? THIS IS NOT ME. PLEASE. OH, THIS IS THE WEREWOLF THAT'S INSIDE YOU THAT'S BREATHING ON THE PHONE. NO. THERE AIN'T NO SUCH THING. OK. WELL YOU'RE THE ONE WHO'S CALLING HERE TALKING ALL THIS OFF THE WALL STUFF. THIS BETTER BE AN EMERGENCY. PLEASE LISTEN. OK. I'M LISTENING...GO AHEAD. (HEAVY BREATHING) IF YOU ARE NOT GOING TO SAY ANYTHING, I AM GOING TO HANG UP. OK. BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE TIME. IF YOU WANT TO TALK, I'LL LISTEN, BUT I DON'T HAVE TIME TO LISTEN TO YOU BREATHE ON THE PHONE. SO YOU DECIDE. WHO AM I SPEAKING TO? PARDON? WHO AM I SPEAKING TO? OPERATOR 6. WHO IS THIS? OPERATOR 6. WHO IS OPERATOR 6? APH &3 THAT'S ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW. V: 666.... (LAUGHTER) WO; SIR, CAN I HELP YOU? V: 666.... KKKKKKKKK:K WO: MR. VREELAND, STOP CALLING HERE. OK. STOP CALLING HERE. V: (GROWLING) kk KKK KKK V: I'M GOING TO KILL My MOTHER. WO: WHERE ARE You CALLING FROM? Ve I'M GOING TO KILL my MOTHER. WO: YOU KNOW WHAT? YOU'RE SICK. YOU ARE SICK AND DISGUSTING. V: I KNOW I AM, WO: YOU ARE SICK BASTARD. STOP CALLING HERE. kKkkKKkkK kkk LOTS OF BACKGROUND NOISE LONG TONE WO: IS THIS THE GUY THAT IS GOING TO KILL HIS MOTHER? Vs: YES. WO: IF WE FIND ouT WHERE YOU ARE, YOU'RE GOING TO JAIL. CONTINUOUS LONG TONE AND HEAVY BREATHING. UNAUDIBLE WORDS. "KK kKkkkkKE MALE OPERATOR: CENTRAL DISPATCH Vv; WHAT ARE YOU WATCHING ON T.V.? APRE 'MO: HEY, I DON'T KNOW. WHAT ARE YOu WATCHING? I DON'T KNOW. WHAT ARE You WATCHING? MO: WHO IS THIS? WHO IS THIS. MO: WHO IS THIS? 'v: I DON"? KNOW. tkkkkkkkxzek ag WO: MR. VREELAND? IF YOU DON'T TELL US, YOU ARE, DON'T EVEN BOTHER CALLING BACK DOWN HERE. SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. V: WHAT? WON'T WO: WHY DON'T YOU KILL YOURSELF? THEN WE / HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT YOU ANYMORE. kkkkkkkkkek WO: CENTRAL DISPATCH. YES. YES. kkk kk RK KKK OPERATOR CALLED INFORMATION §- RECORDS DEPARTMENT. WO: ARE YOU BUSY? I: NO. WHAT DO YOU NEED? FIND 4O: OK. DO ME A FAVOR. SEE IF You CAN / A CURRENT ADDRESS ON A GUY NAMED MARK EDWARD VREELAND. V-R-E-E-L-A-N-D. 6/17/64. I; OK. "O: THANKS BYE. > SERGEANT TOWNSEND...HELLO?'' "HELLO? PPRES V: UNAUDIBLE. PARDON? I'M LISTENING. LISTENING TO WHAT? LISTENING TO YOU. KEKKKKKKEKSK WO: Is WO: 2 WO: L3 WO: Is: WO: CENTRAL DISPATCH. UNAUDIBLE. YES. VREELAND? YES. 266 HURD. 266 EAST HURD ROAD. IT DOESN'T SAY. IT'S PROBABLY EAST. I FIGURED THAT IT WAS BY WINCHESTER. OK. DID HE HAVE, UH, WHEN WAS THIS ADDRESS ON EAST HURD ROAD MOST CURRENT? HE SAID IT WAS 4/16, BUT..UNAUDIBLE. OF THIS MONTH. YES. FOR WHAT UNAUDIBLE..WHILE INTOXICATED. OK. THIS FOOL IS CALLING ON TH PHQNE APP.46 £No 267) DRIVING US NUTS. OK. UH. HOW BIG ISH? I UH...ABOUT 155 POUNDS, 5'10". WO: OH AND ALSO, YOU KNOW WHEN YOU GAVE ME THAT INFORMATION ON LARRY SMITH AND JODI RAMSEY? WHATEVER..UM..I'VE BEEN IN --»-UNAUDIBLE..WITH THOSE. I: UMMM, WO: OH DID THEY? GREAT. THANKS. BYE. kKhk kk kk kK V: HELLO. WO: I KNOW WHERE YOU LIVE AND I'M GOING TO SEND A CAR THERE TO ARREST YOU. V: WHERE DO I STAY AT? WO: I'M NOT GOING TO TELL YOU BECAUSE THEN YOU'LL LEAVE. NOW, I KNOW WHERE YOU LIVE AND I KNOW YOU"VE JUST BEEN ING ARRESTED A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO FOR CREAT-/ A DISTURBANCE WHILE YOU WERE DRUNK, LIKE YOU'RE DOING RIGHT NOW. V: SO WHAT. WO: SO WHAT, NOTHING. YOU GOING TO JAIL You ASSHOLE. V: SUCK MY DICK. WO: NO, YOU SUCK IT YOURSELF, YOU PRICK. kkk kk kk kkk WO: CENTRAL DISPATCH... V; FUCK YOU, Kak Keak Kk Keka APP, 68 CENTRAL DISPATCH. I SAID... YOU'D WATCH ME BURN IN HELL FOR 365.0. HEY, YOU KNOW WHAT? YOU JUST KEEP ENJOY- ING THE SOUNDM BUDDY, BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO BE IN JAIL BEFORE 3:00. kkk kK KKKRKK SERGEANT TOWNSEND HERE. I'M GOING TO BURN IN HELL FOR 365 DAYS. FOR I KNOW YOU WILL. AND YOU'LL BE IN JAIL/ 365 DAYS. (VREELAND TALKING IN BACK- GROUND, UNAUDIBLE) YOU ARE GOING TO BE IN JAIL FOR 365 DAYS, DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT. BUT...UNAUDIBLE. LONGER THAN THAT. THEN DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT. kak kKkKKKEKK LONG TONE. WO: HEY, YOU BETTER BRING A TOOTHBRUSH BECAUSE YOU ARE GOING TO JAIL. Vs UNAUDIBLE. kKkkkkkKkKKE CONTINUOUS LONG TONE. TALKING IN BACKGROUND. V: FUCK YOU. DO YOU WANT ME OR WHAT? HEY ARE YOUA SPACE CADE BY CHANCE? SUCK MY DICK. HEY, YOU DON'T HAVE ONE BUDDY. IF YOU HAD A DICK, YOU'D BE DOWN HERE TO TALK TO ME. AFF. oc? APP 69 MO: V: FUCK YOU. YOU'RE A PUSSY, WHY DON'T YOU FICKIN! COME AND GET LAUGHTER IN BACKGROUND. * kk Kk ek kek V: (HEAVY BREATHING & STRANGE NOISES) DO YOU BELIEVE IN GOD, DON'T you? DO YOU WORSHIP HIM? MO: ARE You REALLY A NUT? V: I'VE GOT on THE MO: I'VE META LOT OF NUTS, BUT YOU'RE FIRST ONE THAT BELIEVES IN GOD. V: OH. UNAUDIBLE...BELIEVE IN GOD? MO: YEAH, MOST OF THEM ARE ATHEISTS. V: OH. YOU BELIEVE IN GOD. MO: YEAH, V: HEY. MO: DO you BELIEVE IN THE ORIGINATION IF DARWIN'S THEORY, UH, EVOLUTION OF LO CHIMPANZEES INTO MAN? VREELAND, YOU LIKE A CHIMPANZEE, V: I TELL You WHAT... Kk KKK KKK WO: CENTRAL DISPATCH, P; HELLO. WO: HI. I NEED YOU TO DO ME A FAVOR, P: WHAT KIND OF FAVOR? WO: WE G K OTY SOME FOOL Op Jo PSSTARD ON TH Oo WO: WO: PHONE WHO HAS BEEN DRIVING US CRAZY. OH YEAH? I NEED YOU TO GO OUT TO THE HOUSE AND SEE IF YOU CAN TALK HIM INTO SLUGGING YA, SO YOU CAN BRING HIM INTO JAIL. OH YEAH? HE LIVES AT 266 E. HURD ROAD. OK. HIS NAME IS MARK EDWARD VREELAND. HEY, I THINK I KNOW HIM. HE JUST GOT ARRESTED 3 OR 4 DAYS AGO FOR CREATING A DISTURBANCE IN THE CITY. MARK WHAT? MARK EDWARD VRELAND. 6/17 of 64. 266 E. HURD ROAD IS WHERE BILL YOUNGBLOOD IF YOU KNOW HIM. LIVES/ YEAH, I KNOW BILL. OK. BECAUSE I KNOW THIS GUY IS CRAZY TOO. HE'S TALKING ABOUT KILLING HIS MOTHERAND ROTTING IN HELL AND SUCK MY DICK AND YOU'RE A PUSSY AND DAT, DAT, DAT, DAT AND ALL THIS STUFF. HE'S DRIVING US NUTS. VREELAND? YES. HOW DO YOU SPELL THE LAST NAME? V-E, OH EXCUSE ME. V-R-E-E-L-A-N-D SO WHAT'S THE COMPLAINT? HE'S DRIVING US CRAZY. (LAUGHTER) APP +14 HE JUST KEEPS CALLING THEN? YEAH, CAN'T YOU, UM, UM, IF YOU KNOW, I'LL BE THE COMPLAINTIFF FOR HARASSING PHONE CALLS OR SOMETHING. TOWNEY SAYS HE THINKS YOU CAN DO THAT. OH YEAH. Lt*S » UNAUDIBLE, OR SOME- THING LIKE THAT YEAH, MISUSE OF A COMMUNICATION DEVICE. YEA. THAT'S WHAT IT IS. IT'S A MISDEMEANOR. HE'S DRIVING US NUTS. I'VE GOT HIM TRACKED ON THE PHONE RIGHT NOW, SO IF YOU LOOK THROUGH THE WINDOWS AND YOU SEE HIM ON THE PHONE, THEN YOU KNOW YOU GOT THE RIGHT HOUSE CAUSE IT'S HIM. OH. I SAID I KNOW WHERE YOU LIVE AND I SAID YOU BETTER BRING A TOOTHBRUSH AND SOME SOAP ON A ROPE BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO BE IN JAIL BEFORE 3:00. DID YOU? YEAH. (LAUGHTER)...SO HOPEFULLY... SO HOW MANY TIMES HAS HE CALLED YOU? OH, PROBABLY ABOUT 20 TIMES WITHIN THE PAST HALF OF AN HOUR. WE GOT HIM TRAPPED, UH, LET ME SEE IF HE'S STILL ON THE PHONE...HE'S GONE NOW. HE HUNG UP, BUT HE'LL BE CALLING BACK IN A MINUTE. HMMM. OK. WE'LL GO OUT THERE AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO. OK. THANK YOU. APE APP. 1d P: WO: BYE. BYE. kkk KK kKkKK WO: V: WO: V: CENTRAL DISPATCH. OPERATOR 6. I THINK ISRAEL IS MANIPULATING WARHEADS. DON'T YOU? I THINK SO TOO. YOU'RE GONNE BE MINE PRETTY SOON. YEAH, IT'S JUST A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE YOU'RE GOING TO BE MINE BUDDY. MATTER OF TIME. YOU'RE RIGHT. YEAH, IT'S A MATTER OF TIME FOR YOU AND YOU BETTER BRING SOME SOAP ON A ROPE WITH A TOOTHBRUSH, BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO JAIL. I'LL BURN IN YOUR HELL AS LONG AS I CAN. HEY THAT'S ALL RIGHT. I'LL PROBABLY SEE YOU DOWN THERE. YOU NEVER KNOW. IT'S AN ILLUSION. WHEN IT'S ALL... UNAUDIBLE...YOU WILL BELONG TO MY WORLD. I'M..UNAUDIBLE..FOR YOU. kKkkkkkke MO: UNAUDIBLE. ISRAEL'S MANIPULATING WARHEADS. HEY, WHY DON'T YOU BITE MY ASS AND GET OFF THE PHONE. APR 8 Are 73 MO: MO: AND YOU CAN'T DO NOTHING ABOUT IT. YOU ARE A SICK SUCKER, BUDDY. YOU KNOW WE HAVE POLICE WORK TO DO. HEY...YUWWJS! LAY THERE. HEY, YOU CAN JUST SIT THERE AND DRINK YOUR JUICE OR SMOKE YOUR POT OR SNIFF YOUR CRACK, BUT WE CAN'T DO THAT, OK? IN HELL FROM THE DEVILS. (MISSLE NOISES) ISRAEL (MISSLE NOISES). ILITOLA KUMANY IS GOING TO GET YOU, TOO, BUDDY. KKEKKKKEK WO: V: WO: CENTRLA DISPATCH. YES, SO ARE YOU GOING TO HELP MY MOTHER? ARE YOU GOING TO HELP YOURSELF? YOU'RE THE ONE THAT NEEDS HELP. I'M ASKING YOU A QUESTION. ARE YOU GOING TO HELP MY MOTHER? YEAH, WHERE IS YOUR MOM? IN THE TRAILER COURT. SHE LIVES IN THE TRAILER PARK? WHAT'S THE ADDRESS WHERE SHE IS? 775 E. OUTER DRIVE. 775? IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? MR, VREELAND? YOU KNOW WHERE SHE'S AT. NO, I DON'T KNOW WHERE SHE IS. WHERE ARE YOU CALLING FROM? AVPI4 App. 74 ARE YOU GOING TO HELP HER? YEAH, WHAT DO you WANT ME TO DO? PROTECT HER FROM. .UNAUDIBLE. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PROTECT HER FROM, UM, UNAUDIBLE..FROM YOU. I DON'T KNOW. you GUYS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PROTECT HER FROM EVIL. NO. YOU'RE THE ONE THAT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE EVIL. NO. I'M NOT EVIL. I BELIEVE IN GOD, DON'T I? ; I DON'T KNOW WHAT you BELIEVE IN. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO. PARDON? ARE YOU GOING TO PROTECT HER FROM EVIL? YES, WE WILL. HOW? I'LL SEND A PATROL CAR OVER THERE WITH A CROSS AND SOME GARLIC AND THEY'LL KEEP THE EVIL AWAY FROM HER. I WANT TO FUCK YOU IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD. YOU DO? YEAH. APP. 75 APP. 75° YOU SOUND LIKE YOU LIKE TO SLEEP WITH OTHER MEN. BUT IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE, YOU'RE GOING TO GET YOUR OPPORTUNITY ‘CAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO BE IN JAIL BEFORE LONG, BECAUSE I GOT A CAR ON THE WAY TO YOUR HOUSE NOW. OH, BUT YOU SAID THAT SO LONG AGO. NO. IT WASN'T SO LONG AGO. I TOLD YOU THAT ABOUT ]5 MINUTES AGO. I HAVEN'T FORGOTTEN ABOUT YOU. DON'T WORRY. ARE YOU GOING TO PROTECT MY MOTHER FROM EVIL? YEAH. WE'RE GOING TO PROTECTHER FROM YOU ‘CAUSE YOU'RE THE ONE THAT'S SICK. I KNOW. AIN'T THAT FUNNY? WHERE'S YOUR FATHER? IS HE STILL ALIVE? SO, ARE YOU GOING TO PROTECT MY MOTHER FROM EVIL? I'M SURPRISED YOUR MOTHER IS STILL ALIVE. I'M SURPRISED SHE HASN'T KILLED HERSELF WITH A SON LIKE YOU. Vs HMMMMM. kkkk kkk MO: CENTRAL DISPATCH. V: ARE YOU GOING TO PROTECT MY MOTHER? = “2 *“fET ME GQ I'LL BE ALLRIGHT IN HE Mice A PP. 76 OK. GOOD. TAKE 3 ASPIRINS AND GO TO BED, SIR. NO. JUST LET ME GO. OK BYE. NO. YOU LIVE ON HURD ROAD. NO. ARE YOU GOING TO PROTECT MY MOTHER FROM EVIL? OH YEAH. I'LL BE RIGHT OVER THERE. WHERE DOES SHE LIVE? FUCK YOU. YOU SON OF A BITCH. UNAUDIBLE. FUCK ME? YOU CAN'T FUCK ME. I'M A MALE. I WANT TO FUCK YOU ANYWAYS. OH DO YOU REALLY? IN YOUR MOUTH. DO YOU REALLY? I WANT TO SEE YOU..UNAUDIBLE. HEY, I GET OFF AT 7:00. MEET ME IN FRON' OF THE JAIL. CRACK AND AIDS IS WINNING. MEET ME IN FRONT OF THE JAIL AT 7:00. OH YOU REALLY DO WANT TO FUCK ME THEN? FIVE FOOT 10, 180 LBS., I DRIVE A BLACK MONTE CARLO. APR11 Afr. 77 MO: THAT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME. LOOK, I JUST THOUGHT I'D TALK TO YA. IF YOU WANT TO GET INTO My PANTS, THEN MEET ME, I'D LOVE TO KILL YOU. KILL ME?..UNAUDIBLE.. NAW, I'D RATHER KILL YOU. OH, COME ON. YES, I JUST LOVE TO KILL. WELL COME ON DOWN AND SEE ME TOMORROW MORNING. I GET OFF AT 7:00. NAW. YOU WANT TOKILL ME, COME MY WAY. YOU COME MY WAY. NO. NO. COME SEE ME . HEAD NORTH. NORTH IS GOD'S WAY, AIN'T IT? YEAH. HEAD WAY, OK THEN. THE PHAROAH'S OF EGYPT ALWAYS HEADED NORTH. SO I'LL SEE YA, OF COURSE THEY DID. OF COURSE... UNAUDIBLE. YOU'VE HEARD OF TUT, THE BOY KING? THE GUY DIED AT 19. APP. 18 APA 18 V: UM-HMM, KKK KKKKK MO: CENTRAL DISPATCH. WHO AM I TALKING TO? WHO IS THIS? NO. WHO AM I TALKING TO? THIS IS OPERATOR 24. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S YOUR NAME. THIS IS OPERATOR 24, WHO IS THIS. NO, WHAT'S YOUR NAME? kKkKKKKkKKK MISSLES BOMBING SOUNDS FIRST PART WAS UNAUDIBLE. V: MO: V: MO: I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH VIOLENCE. UNAUDIBLE. I'M FROM IRELAND. ARE YOU GOING TO FOLLOW THE NORTH STAR? YOU GOT IT. TELL ME WHERE TO FOLLOW AND I'LL MEET YOu THERE. HURD ROAD, 266? YES, EXACTLY, OK. I'LL SEE YA TOMORROW MORNING. APP.14 APP. 79 NO. TONIGHT. I'M WORKING, THAT'S YOUR JOB. I KNOW, BUT I'LL SEE YOU IN JAIL. ARE YOU GOING TO PROTECT MY MOTHER? WHAT'S HER ADDRESS...WHAT'S HER ADDRESS? HELLO? WHAT'S HER ADDRESS? 666 HADES. 666 WHAT? 666 HADES. WHERE'S HADES AT? fuck you. YOU'D LIKE TO. I'D LOVE TO. IS THAT YOUR FACE OR DID YOUR PANTS DROP, BUDDY? GO TO BED. kKkkek kk kk UNAUDIBLE HE LIVES AT 266 E. HURD ROAD. NO. I DON'T KNOW HIM. 266 E HURD ee BLOOD YEAH, YOU KNOW THAT'S WHERE BILL YOUNG-/ LIVES OR THAT'S WHERE HE USED TO LIVE. YEAH. APP. gO APP 80 WO: WO: WO: WO: THE THAT LITTLE PRICK'S BEEN CALLING US ON / PHONE FOR HOURS. FOR WHAT? DRIVING US NUTS. 50 I SENT SCHAEFER AND WEIMAN OVER THERE. I WANT THEM TO ARREST HIM OR SOMETHING. CENTRAL TO 33 NEWPORT. YOU GOT A RESCUE CALL. VICTIM OF AN ASSAULT. 8345 NORTH DIXIE. 8-3-4-5 NORTH DIXIE. J]/2 MIL NORTH OF SCHWAN CREEK ROAD. THEY WERE GOING TO WRITE A COMPLAINT ASKING ME TO COMBAIN ABOUT A MISUES OF A COMMUNICATIONS DE- VICE. THEN THEY HAD TO GO TO A CALL ON NORTH DIXIE, SO WE HAD TO.CALL OFF THAT ONE, BUT I WAS THINKING IF THEY GO OVER THERE AND MAYBE THAT GUY WOULD TAKE A SWING AT THEM OR SOMETHING, THEY COULD BRING HIM IN. WHAT WAS HE DOING WHEN HE CALLED? HE'S TALKING ABOUT HE'S GOING TO KILLUS AND HE'S A WEREWOLF AND HE'S POSSESSED. AND, AND... I DON'T WANT TO GO OVER THERE, THEN. NO, I DON'T WANT you TO GO 'CAUSE YOU'RE BY YOURSELF. I'M JuSsT WONDERING IF you KNEW HIM OR NOT. WE DON'T NEED ANYMORE WIERDOS. NO. NO. NO. I CAN GO SPOTLIGHT HIS HOUSE IF You WANT. OR MAYBE YOU CAN GET VANDER- COOK, APF $I APP. &| WO: OK. I'LL TELL HIM WE'RE GOING TO SEND DEPUTY VANDERCOOK OVER THERE IF HE CALLS BACK. UM, HE'S GOING TO KILL US. TOWNEY TOLD HIM TO MEET HIM HERE IN FROM OF THE JAIL AT 7:00 WHEN HE GETS OFF WORK. E's OH YEAH? WO: LIKE A DUMMY. Ps UNAUDIBLE..HIS CAR OR SOMETHING. WO: I DON'T KNOW. THE GUY IS GOOFY., Ps I'LL RIDE BY THERE A FEW TIMES. WO: OK. THANKS. oe BYE. WO: BYE. KkKKkKKK: W: RECORDS. M: HEY. WO: YEAH, M: ON THAT VREELAND THAT YOU LOOKED AT. W: UH-HMM, M: IS THERE A TELEPHONE NUMBER THERE? W: I CAN PULL THE FILE AND CALL YOU RIGHT BACK. kkkkkkke VREELAND BREATHING HEAVY. APP.82 APP. 82 YOU START WALKING, OK? WE'LL CATCH YOU LATER. OH MY GOD, IT"S NICE. OK...HAVE A GOOD TIME. kKkKKKKKKK WO: WHAT MOVIE ARE WATCHING? V: THE BOOK OF LIFE. THE BOOK OF LIFE? YEAH. OH, I'M SURPRISED YOU'RE NOT WATCHING THE THREE FACES OF DEATH OR SOMETHING. I'M TELLING YOU RIGHT NOW... YEAH, YOU'RE TELLING ME. YOU'VE BEEN TELLING ME FOR THE PAST 20 MINUTES, YOU'RE GOING TO KILL YOUR MOTHER. I KNOW. NO. KILL ME. WELL, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO OBLIGE YOU. I WANT TO MAKE YOU...UNAUDIBLE. YOU ARE GOING TO DO WHAT? (GROANING) I DON'T LIKE IT...I DON'T LIKE IT...I DON'T LIKE IT...FUCK YOU... (HEAVY BREATHING) ...UH... WHAT? WELL, IT'S AFTER MIDNIGHT APP. &5 APR 8&3 WO: WO: V; UH-HUH. I'M GONNA BE WALKING. ..UNAUDIBLE. YEAH. YOU'RE GONNA GO. WHAT'S YOUR MOTHER'S ADDRESS? 775 E.OUTER DR“VE? IS THAT WHAT YOUSAID? SHOULDN'T 17 BE FOUR DIGITS ON E. OUTER DRIVE? UNAUDIBLE. KKKKKKKK V: WO: WO: HELLO, I'M GOING TO BE STRAIGHT UP WITH YOU. ALL RIGHT? UM... I DON'T KNOW IF I'M LOSING MY FUCKING MIND. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK'S HAPPENING WITH ME ANYMORE. BUT, UH... GO AHEAD. IT FEELS LIKE THIS EVIL FORCE IS COMING, I DON'T KNOW WHERE IN THE FUCK THIS THING IS, UH.. I JUST KNOW THERE'S SOMETHING UH..DRIVING ME TO, UH...KILL MY OWN MOTHER. OK. AND WHAT DO YOU WANT THE POLICE TO DO ABOUT IT? MY MOTHER HAS ALWAYS... MY MOTHER HAS BEEN GOOD. UH-HMM. WELL YOU WERE THE ONE WHO WAS TALKING ABOUT KILLING HER. BUT I'M GONNA KILL AND THERE'S NO.. I'M GONNA...I'11 PULL A GUN ON ANYBODY ¢ I'LL KILL. OK. WHERE DO YOU LIVE? APP. BY FUCK YOU. AFP. 84 WO: WO: WE11, YOU'RE THE ONE WHO CALLED HERE. YOU'RE THE ONE WHO KEEPS CALLING HERE. I'M GOING TO BE CARRYING A GUN. AND YOU'RE LEAVING YOUR HOUSE, WALKING, TO GO OVER TO YOUR MOTHER'S HOUSE TO KILL HERE, RIGHT? YOU CAN'T STOP ME. I'M NOT GOING TO TRY TO STOP YOU. I COULD CARE LESS. WE'LL STOP YOU, DON'T WORRY ABOUT THAT. I KNOW. YOU'RE. I'M CARRYING A GUN. OK. WHAT KIND OF GUN? 49 CALIBER. A WHAT KIND?...HELLO?...(GROANING BY VREELAND) ...WHERE DI YOU GO TO SCHOOL? -MARK?...MARK. I'M COMING...OHHHHH...I'M COMING...I DON'T CARE IF YOU KILL ME. PLEASE KILL ME...WHO AM I TALKING TO? MARK, 7 -MARK, WHO AM I TALKING TO? WHERE DID YOU GO TO SCHOOL? HELLO? ...MUMBLING AND UNAUDIBLE. WHERE DIDYOU GO TO SPP e - APP. 85 V: (MOANDING AND UNAUDIBLE) I CAN SEE THE BLUE...I CAN SEE Aas YOU CAN SEE THE BLUE WHAT? THE BLUES... THE BLUE WHAT? I CAN SEE IT, YOU CAN SEE THE BLUE WHAT? WOMAN'S VOICE: MARK, WHERE DI you GO TO SCHOOL? iT*’S REAL... WO: WHAT KIND OF BLUE CAN YOU SEE? I DON'T FUCKIN' BELIEVE IT'S REAL. WO: WHAT KIND OF BLUE CAN YOU SEE? I DON'T FUCKIN’ BELIEVE IT'S REAL. YOU BETTER GOD DAMN BELIEVE IT'S REAL. WO: MARK? (GROANING)...I CAN SEE IT COMING. I CAN SEE THE BLUE. WO: MARK... WHO AM I TALKING TO? WO: MY NAME IS FAYE. WHAT SCHOOL DID you GO TO? I CAN'T SEE THE BLUE ANYMORE. BUT IT'S REAL. I"LL TELL YOU ONE THING. it's RAVE LEBY GEE Ry TO FAX - ARIAL THAR A,, ao Wis. APF. 86 ee OLD WO: HEY MARK, V: I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT Is. OLD WO: MARK? V: I CAN'T STOP...I'M COMING...I CAN'T stop IT. IT'S NOTHING MAN CAN COMPREHEND, ITS UH..:IT'S REAL. ..UNAUDIBLE. OLD WO: MARK... (VREELAND GROANING AND HUNG UP) kkk kkkkK: WO: CENTRAL 5 and Ya M: YES. WO: OK, UH, DID YOU pO THE THING WITH THE LIGHTS LIKE WE DISCUSSED oN THE PHONE? (THE REST WAS UNAUDIBLE BECAUSE OF OTHER TALKING) kkk K KKK WO: CENTRAL DISPATCH. MAN: YES, I WAS WONDERING, COULD YOU SEND A SHERIFF'S CAR OUT HER TO 266 E. HURD ROAD? WO: OK. WHAT'S THE PROBLEM? M: OK. MARK VREELAND HAS BEEN STAYING WITH US. OK? AND HE'S BEEN DRINKING AND HE SAYS I LOVE YOU BILL, I LOVE You LINDA, MY DAUGHTER-IN-LAW, HERE. I DON'T KNOW HE GOT A HOLD OF ONE OF My GUNS OR WHAT, BUT I WANT HIM PICKED UP. WO: OK. HE'S BEEN CALLING US ALL NIGHT LONG. HAVE YOU BEEN THERE? YOU'VE BEEN SLEEP- IivG OR WHAT? ry PP. 8-1 APP. 81] WO: I'VE BEEN SLEEPING, OK. HE'S BEEN CALLING US FOR THE PAST Z¥.G HOURS. HOW COME? WELLL, I DON'T KNOW. PROBABLY BECAUSE HE'S CRAZY. YEAH. UM. +. BECAUSES HE'S BEEN THREATENING TO KILL HIS MOTHER AND I'M NOT GOING TO BE BOTHERED WITH HIM. MY LITTLE GRANDSON JUST GOT HIT BY A CAR AND I DON'T NEED THIS SHIT. NO. OR WHERE DOES THIS GUY'S MOTHER LIVE, DO YOU KNOW? WILLAVENE TRAILER PARK. OK. HE TOLD ME THAT SHE LIVED AT 775 E. OUTER DRIVE, BUT THAT'S NOT A GOOD ADDRESS. WELL, I THINK IT'S 10 SOMETHING...IT'S ---UH, OUTER DRIVE. _AS YOU GO INTO WILLAVENE TRAILER PARK, TURN LEFT AND TAKE THE FIRST LITTLE CURVE RIGHT THERE. SHE'S GOT A BLUE AND WHITE TRAILER. IT'S GOT AN EAGLE ON THE FRONT OF IT. NOW HE WAS IN TROUBLE HERE A WHILE BACK, YOU GUYS ARRESTED HIM OUT THERE. YEAH, I KNOW. HE JUST GOT ARRESTED A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO. WHAT'S THE LADY'S NAME? FLORENCE. AeR £8 APR 68 WO: FLORENCE VREELAND? M: RIGHT. BUT, I DON'T KNOW, MAM. I JUST GOT UP OUT OF BED. HE WOKE US UP... BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN AT THE HOSPITAL EVER SINCE MY LITTLE GRANDSON GOT HIT. WO: OK. DO YOU KNOW WHICH DIRECTION HE TOOK OFF WALKING ON YOUR STREET, SIR? M: I DON'T KNOW. WO: OK. WHAT'S YOUR TELEPHONE ‘NUMBER. M: 241-004 (THAT IS WHAT IS SAID) WO: OK, M: BECAUSE I'M NOT EVEN SURE A MAN LIKE UNAUDIBLE TOOK A GUN OUT OF THE HOUSE. BACKGROUND NOISE...A MAN PULLED A GUN AND WE SHOT HIM... WO: OH MY G...OK, UH...THANKS...WE GOT HIM... WE JUST FOUND HIM. THANK YOU...BYE-BYE. kKkkkkkkk THE UNIT WITH THE SUBJECT, IDENTIFY BY CAR NUMBER. CAR OFFICER: 7 WO: UNAUDIBLE, RETAIN YOUR LOCATION. CO: NO PROBLEM WO: OK. START UP THAT WA. HOT, ¢ MONROE rae BEEN DERLINGOWIAA HA REPT OMe, Ns A OACH WITH CAUTION. ; R 4 VISED. THE COUNTY AND’'S TRAFFIC ONLY, EXCEPT FO A P?P.89 WO: WO: WO: ----25 CAR BEHIND US, A TWO MAN UNIT. CENTRAL 25, B-BOYS. GO AHEAD, OK. I NEED YOUR ASSISTANCE. ..UNAUDIBLE ---SINGLE MAN; MENTAL SUBJECT WITH A SHOT GUN, NORTH MONROE AND HURD. CLEAR. 5127, SECURITY STATUS. HE'S OFF A WAYS DOWN THE ROAD. OK? OK. I'VE GOT 2 OTHER UNITS ENROUTE. JUST KEEP US ADVISED. 7? TO CENTRAL. HE CAME ACROSS THE ROAD. HE'S...UH...WALKING TOWARDS MY CAR, 59110. YOUR LOCATION. CENTRAL 25 B-BOYS. YOUR LOCATION PLEASE. COMING UP ON THE 75 SANDY CREEK. 9127 SECURITY. UNAUDIBLE. OK. I GOT A SINGLE MAN UNIT THERE NOW. HE SAID THE SUBJECT WAS APPROACHING HIS CAR WITH A WEAPON. OK. FOR THE UNITS RESPONDING TO THIS, I CANNOT STRESS, WE HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH THIS GUY ON THE PHONE ALL NIGHT LONG. PLEASE APPROACH WITH CAUTION. HE SAID HE WOULD NOT HESITATE TO KILL. CENTRAL 5127 SECURITY STATUS. EXACT LOCATION, APP.A5 Ape. 90 WO: ) Wo: WO: OK. I LAST HAD HIM AT NORTH MONROE AND HURD. HE SAID HE WAS APPROACHING THE CAR WITH THE WEAPONG. CENTRAL 5127. OK. APPARENTLY HIS WEAPON IS POSSIBLY A 20 GAGE SHOTGUN. WE GOT HIM IN SITE. WE'RE APPROACHING HIM NOW. OK. VERY GOOD. CENTRAL FROM 25 B. TO KEEP YOU UP-TO-DATE. SUBJECT IS STANDING WITH THE SHOTGUN. WE'RE TRYING TO ORDER IT OUT OF HIS HAND. HE'S DRINKING BEER OR SOMETHING. HE'S NOT LISTENING TO US. OK. YOU...UNAUDIBLE. I'LL BE THERE SHORTLY. OK ll. PAUSE. 5110? GET AN AMBULANCE OUT HERE. OK..-CENTRAL 517. AND 7 START UP THAT WAY. IS THERE A PROBLEM? 5110. WE DON'T NEED ANYMORE ASSISTANCE. WE NEED AN AMBULANCE. | OK. WE'VE GOT AN AMBULANCE ENROUTE. 5}7. DISREGARD. WE GOT AN AMBULANCE ENROUFE. APP. Fy UNAUDIBLE. as 8, UNAUDIBLE Sy GET A HOLD OF SOME KIND OF COMMAND OFFICER TO RESPOND OUT HERE. GO AHEAD. OK. YOUR AMBULANCE IS RESPONDING FROM MERCY. THE OTHER SHERIFF IS ENROUTE, WOULD YOU LIKE A RESCU SQUAD? THE AMBULANCE SHOULE BE OK. UNAUDIBLE...I'M BRINGING DRIVER 27 INTO THE OFFICE. WAIT THERE. OK. CENTRAL 25 B-BOYS. CENTRAL 25 B. WE WILL BE BRING IN 1511'S PRISONER. OK. THANK YOU. UNAUDIBLE THROUGH TONE. Ge CENTRAL DISPATCH. hd» CHECK WITH COMMAN, BUT j BELIEVE YOU'RE GONNA NEED. .UNAUDIBLE..TO HANDLE THIS PROPERLY. YEAH, WE'LL TRY TO GET IT TAKEN CARE OF. ( -ND OF TAPE) AFP 72 --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386004_0742%3A2. Public record. Not legal advice.