[brianscharp]

So your point, Brian, is excellent, and I apologize that it took me so long to respond to it.

Thanks and no worries.

[Bob Kuczewski]

So your point, Brian, is excellent, and I apologize that it took me so long to respond to it.

Thanks and no worries.

I'm glad you've stuck around long enough since then (almost 2 years now) to get my apology ... and my thanks.   

[magentabluesky]

Ricks Post

I can't believe USHPA would let it come to this. They are clearly paying way too much for inadequate legal advice

Viewpoint discrimination testimony retaliation

42 U.S. Code § 1985 Part 2
Kinney v. Weaver, etc. . . . (Doc File Download)
Kinney v. J. B. Smith, etc. . . .

Focus on what truly matters.

[Rick Masters]

Yeah. Federal crime.
Excellent case law.
-------
42 U.S.C. § 1985(2). Under § 1985(2), it is unlawful to
conspire to deter, by force, intimidation, or threat, any
party or witness in any court of the United States from
attending such court, or from testifying to any matter
pending therein, freely, fully, and truthfully, or to
injure such party or witness in his person or property on
account of his having so attended or testified.
-------
USHPA should settle with BobK immediately.
His terms. No negotiation.
Keep this from going any farther.
It's a nuke.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Two of the three current Region 3 Directors (Ken Andrews and Dan DeWeese) were not on the USHPA Board during my expulsion proceeding, and the third (Alan Crouse) had abstained from the vote.

A few moments ago, I sent the following to all three Region 3 Directors (and to a few observers as well):

To: region3director1@ushpa.org, region3director2@ushpa.org, region3director3@ushpa.org

Region 3 Directors Andrews, Crouse, and DeWeese,

I am writing to request a reversal of USHPA's 2015 Expulsion action against me (see attached) or to confirm that it is an ongoing action of USHPA under your Directorship.

I am also writing to request a reversal of USHPA's 2016 refusal to renew the Torrey Hawks Chapter status or again to confirm that the refusal is an ongoing action of USHPA under your Directorship.

Please be advised that I will be using your response - or lack of response - to establish USHPA's ongoing retaliation against both individuals and clubs at flying sites in the United States. It is my desire that USHPA reverse both of these actions, and I request that all three Region 3 Directors (Ken, Alan, and Dan) bring the matter to the upcoming USHPA Board meeting and that you unanimously and officially request the reversal of both of these actions in your capacity as Region 3 Directors.

Sincerely,
Bob Kuczewski
Club Secretary - Torrey Hawks Hang Gliding Club
Board Member - US Hawks Hang Gliding Association
Former USHPA Member ######

cc/bcc: Observers

During my expulsion proceeding, there were a number of outstanding issues regarding whether the Torrey concessionaire had the right to remove people from the property. After 3 arrests and the City being unwilling to press charges in any of those cases, I believe that matter is no longer in dispute. Similarly, all of the other charges have been proven to be either false or within my constitutional rights (truthful testimony in court, truthful testimony to City Council, and starting a national hang gliding organization). USHPA no longer has any grounds supporting the expulsion, and they have never had any grounds for not renewing the Torrey Hawks chapter status.

The wheels of justice turn slowly, and they require continual effort to keep them in motion. But they do turn.

[eagle]

A National Organization Representing Hang Glider Pilots

~ The US Hawks ~

Eagle Stamp.jpg (90.26 KiB) Viewed 8967 times

[Bob Kuczewski]

I posted a copy of the previous letter to the Sylmar Forum with a bit of context added on Sep 22, 2017 11:59 am:

Back on topic ...

Two of the three current Region 3 Directors (Ken Andrews and Dan DeWeese) were not on the USHPA Board during my expulsion proceeding, and the third (Alan Crouse) had abstained from the vote. I believe they could (and should) stand together to reverse USHPA's ill-advised expulsion, but I seriously doubt they will.

In that kind of situation, it's often best to simply make the request and let the chips fall on those making the decisions. Earlier this morning, I sent the following message to all three Region 3 Directors:

To: region3director1@ushpa.org, region3director2@ushpa.org, region3director3@ushpa.org

Region 3 Directors Andrews, Crouse, and DeWeese,

I am writing to request a reversal of USHPA's 2015 Expulsion action against me (see attached) or to confirm that it is an ongoing action of USHPA under your Directorship.

I am also writing to request a reversal of USHPA's 2016 refusal to renew the Torrey Hawks Chapter status or again to confirm that the refusal is an ongoing action of USHPA under your Directorship.

Please be advised that I will be using your response - or lack of response - to establish USHPA's ongoing retaliation against both individuals and clubs at flying sites in the United States. It is my desire that USHPA reverse both of these actions, and I request that all three Region 3 Directors (Ken, Alan, and Dan) bring the matter to the upcoming USHPA Board meeting and that you unanimously and officially request the reversal of both of these actions in your capacity as Region 3 Directors.

Sincerely,
Bob Kuczewski
Club Secretary - Torrey Hawks Hang Gliding Club
Board Member - US Hawks Hang Gliding Association
Former USHPA Member ######

cc/bcc: Observers

I hope that Ken, Alan, and Dan will recognize that USHPA has made a mistake by allowing non-flying actions to be used to restrict a pilot's ability to fly. That's a line that should not have been crossed, and I'd like to think (though I'm not very hopeful) that even my most strident critics (like Jonathan and Jim) will recognize that as a mistake.

Time will tell ...

USHPA Region 3 Director Ken Andrews replied with this post on Sep 23, 2017 1:45 pm:

In the possibility that there might be a new reader here who hasn’t made up his mind long ago, maybe it’s time to tell another side of this saga.

As we all know, USHPA made its decision to expel Bob in March of 2015. That fall, when Bob saw my name on the USHPA ballot, he pleaded his case to me, and asked that I fight for justice, or at least his version of it. A lone voice on a 25-member board obviously wouldn’t reverse such a decision, so instead, as a friend and fellow human being, I made a personal offer to Bob to help find a compromise that might allow him to regain his membership.

Such a compromise wouldn’t be easy, and would require large concessions from both parties. On Bob’s side, I asked if he would step back from his confrontational approach, with Torrey Pines, with the City of San Diego, with USHPA. In response, Bob loosed an avalanche of email and forum posts about how I was trying to tread on his rights. He also asked me "to write up - EXACTLY - and in the form of a contract” the terms and conditions of the favor I was offering. This wasn’t a promising start to finding a compromise, or for letting go of his confrontational methods.

At my first board meeting, in the Spring of 2016, I did not call upon the board to reverse its decision; that would have led to instant and certain refusal. Instead, I talked to as many board members as I could, quietly, in small groups of two and three, to gather sentiment and information. Every single time, the responses were vehement and negative. Words like “poison” and “evil incarnate” were repeated disturbingly often. Evidently, Bob had burned more bridges with each of the board members than I had imagined possible. Time may heal this, albeit slowly. There is turn-over among the board members, and old hostilities will fade if not renewed.

My offer to try to facilitate a compromise wasn’t a bluff, and it wasn’t on behalf of USHPA; it was a personal offer to help a friend. Moreover, the offer remains good, even though the offer doesn’t come with a written contract, and Bob doesn't make friendship easy. Truly, I would like to find a way for Bob to be welcomed as a USHPA member again. But a compromise is just that; if Bob will not yield, then I’m sure that USHPA will not either. If and when Bob has a change of heart, I’m here to help.

USHPA Region 3 Director Ken Andrews also sent me an email message:

Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 14:48:32 -0700

Bob,

In my role as regional director, I cannot currently support your request for reversal of the two actions, because it is not clear to me that they are in the best interests of USHPA or of its members. However, if you wish me to do so, I will look into the procedures for impartially raising the motions at the spring board meeting, and getting responses from the board.

As a friend, I beg of you not to pursue this now. I think the outcome is obvious, and it will only hurt your position further. Currently, time is in your favor. After this year’s election, there will be at least a couple new members on the board, and the hostilities of the past will be remembered less vividly. As I’ve said before, I think that compromise and reconciliation are the best path forward, though they will take time, since there is a lot of healing that must happen. While I can’t expect you to give my own advice much weight, perhaps you would be willing to listen to the advice of Joe Greblo and others who have successfully navigated the waters of hang gliding politics through the years.

-Ken

I followed up with this somewhat long reply post to the Sylmar Forum on Sep 23, 2017 2:57 pm

Ken,

USHPA's letter was clear in spelling out the reasons for my expulsion. They included:

- Starting a new hang gliding association.
- Testifying in a court of law (where USHPA disagreed).
- Exercising my First Amendment Rights to the San Diego City Council.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

If you take away all of USHPA's expulsion charges that were based on those 3 items, all you'll have left are some pitiful hearsay lies that didn't stand up in court.

You speak of "compromise" in very general terms, and it all sounds so nice. But let me quote Doug from earlier in this topic:

What exactly is he supposed to change?
his tone? his religion?

You know very well that I asked you to spell out the conditions of your "compromise" because I knew that neither you nor USHPA would be willing to make these statements clear:

- Bob can be a USHPA member if he won't testify in court.
- Bob can be a USHPA member if he won't speak to his City Council.
- Bob can be a USHPA member if he doesn't criticize USHPA.
- Bob can be a USHPA member if he resigns from the US Hawks.

You won't make those conditions clear, yet those are exactly the conditions that you (or USHPA) want me to abide by. I will not.

My letter to you was clear. I will not beg, and I will not compromise my Constitutional rights in order to be a member of USHPA. I sought either a reversal of the expulsion/rejection or a confirmation that the expulsion/rejection was still being enforced under your Directorship. Your replies (here and by email) confirm the latter. That's all I needed (thank you), and the rest of this post is mostly an academic exercise in responding to your own comments.


Regarding the rest of your post (and your email letter attached below)...

First of all, your "reading of the tea leaves of the other Directors" is based on purported "facts" that have either changed or been proven to be false.

For example, at the time of my expulsion, potential trespassing charges were still pending. They have all been dropped since then. The City of San Diego had a year to bring actual charges (up to August of 2016), and they didn't, so any of your discussions with the Board in 2015 and the first half of 2016 (within the City's one year limit) are moot. The facts were not yet settled at that time. But the facts are settled now. No charges were ever filed against me, and I've been able to go to the Torrey Pines Gliderport freely since August of 2015 (there are plenty of pictures and witnesses to prove it). I just can't fly there because of USHPA's expulsion.

Back to your letter(s), I have to say that I am somewhat appalled that your approach as a Regional Director is to cower behind "group think" for your opinions and your actions. You weren't elected to be a carbon copy of the other Board Members. You were elected because you are a unique individual with intelligence and hopefully some degree of courage in the board room. Yet you've been cowed into thinking that you can't speak out because it might offend some other Director(s), and/or they won't agree with you? Are you afraid they'll retaliate and not honor your next request to give Jonathan Dietch some meaningless ego-stroking award because you spoke your mind about Bob Kuczewski's unjust expulsion? Is that what USHPA's Board has become?

That's not leadership. Leadership isn't taking people where they'd go on their own anyway. Leadership is having the courage to bring people to where they should go - even when they don't know it (or want it) themselves.

Case in point: I was on that same Board for a few months less time than you have been, and I - as unpopular as I was - got the Board to pass the resolution that I wanted (increasing the number of HG/PG representatives on the Torrey Pines Soaring Council). I didn't get that passed by sitting in the corner trying not to offend anyone. I got that passed because it was the right thing to do and because I argued the case strongly and publicly - both on-line and before the Board. That's what Directors should do. The current "go along to get along" USHPA board culture is a big part of what's killing USHPA (it's also what's killing this country, but that's another story).

Ken, I have not been able to fly at Torrey Pines since November of 2014. That will be three years very soon. I am over 60 years old, and if you've looked around at Sylmar, you know that the years don't get better. There are a number of rotten people in USHPA who will have this injustice forever attached to their names. You are rising in those ranks. An injustice is an injustice, and I am appalled that you would advise me (in your email letter) to "wait it out" as if somehow time will make it better. It's just the opposite. Every passing day that I cannot fly at Torrey or Sylmar or Crestline or Funston or Point of the Mountain only compounds the injustice. Those are days and flights that I will never get back. You're smart enough (and old enough) to know that.

You said (in your email letter) that you couldn't support my request for reversal because that may not be "in the best interests of USHPA or of its members". Have you asked the members? Have you asked them if they think it's worth it for USHPA to lose credibility in Los Angeles County (just the beginning) in order to punish Bob Kuczewski? Have you asked the members if it's worth all the money you've wasted on lawyers just to keep Bob Kuczewski from flying? Have you even asked the members if they think that Bob Kuczewski should be kept from flying at all?

Wait, I know the party line ... "We can't allow Bob Kuczewski to say he's a member of USHPA". But you know that Frank Colver debunked that long ago when he wrote to USHPA suggesting an insurance-only membership option. USHPA turned that down because it wasn't about membership at all. It was about retaliation. Come to think of it, Frank was also planning a large donation to USHPA's RRG fund, but he could not do so with a clear conscience while USHPA was still retaliating against me. USHPA never got that donation. I also know of other members who've refused to renew their membership based on this ongoing injustice. Such a mess of ill will for pure retaliation.

So Ken, when you speak about the "best interests of USHPA or of its members", have you asked the members (aside from a few of the clowns) how much of their money they want to spend each year (in legal fees, lost donations, and lost memberships) just to be sure that Bob Kuczewski can't fly at Sylmar and Torrey and Crestline? How much of their money do you think USHPA has spent so far?

Now let me get to your email message from earlier today:

Bob,

In my role as regional director, I cannot currently support your request for reversal of the two actions, because it is not clear to me that they are in the best interests of USHPA or of its members. However, if you wish me to do so, I will look into the procedures for impartially raising the motions at the spring board meeting, and getting responses from the board.

As a friend, I beg of you not to pursue this now. I think the outcome is obvious, and it will only hurt your position further. Currently, time is in your favor. After this year’s election, there will be at least a couple new members on the board, and the hostilities of the past will be remembered less vividly. As I’ve said before, I think that compromise and reconciliation are the best path forward, though they will take time, since there is a lot of healing that must happen. While I can’t expect you to give my own advice much weight, perhaps you would be willing to listen to the advice of Joe Greblo and others who have successfully navigated the waters of hang gliding politics through the years.

-Ken

Ken, the outcome may be obvious to you, but that's not what matters. What matters is making the outcome obvious to everyone else. Make the motion in October, and request a roll call vote. Make the case that USHPA's retaliation is hurting USHPA's image and risking the loss of more flying sites. Bring up Dockweiler and the County of Los Angeles. Bring up all the dropped charges. Make the case that USHPA should not be retaliating for any kind of testimony ... anywhere. Make the case that our ability to fly should ONLY be based on our flying and not on our testimony (or tone or religion - thanks again Doug). Then call the roll and have them put their names to it. That's how I passed the Balanced Soaring Council motion in 2010. If someone as hated as I supposedly am can do it, then it should be a breeze for a nice likable fellow like you Ken.

Since you've mentioned Joe Greblo, I'll address your comments (please don't take too much offense Joe). Joe Greblo never thought I'd pass the Balanced Soaring Council motion in 2010, but I did. I would have had it carried out if it weren't for the recall election. No one's going to recall you Ken. Joe Greblo also thought Los Angeles County would NEVER approve hang gliding at Dockweiler without USHPA (I wasn't too sure myself). But we got that passed as well (Thanks again to Los Angeles County). Finally, there was a time when it was common knowledge that "if man were meant to fly, he'd have wings". What happened to that one? In all cases, it took people daring enough to try - to make all of those things happen. What makes you think the USHPA Board situation is any different? Leadership sometimes means drawing a hard line and standing behind it. You do that not because it's popular or because Joe Greblo says it will work. You do it because it's the right thing to do. That's on you, not Joe Greblo.

Most importantly, if I were your Director Ken, you know very well that I would not rest until you got justice. That's what I did for David Beardslee, and he's flying at Torrey to this very day - to this day. I would use social media. I would introduce motions that made your case so they'd end up in the USHPA Board's minutes. I would do everything I could to be sure that you were treated fairly. It wouldn't matter to me what any of the other Directors thought, and I would have done that for anyone in my Region - friend or foe. The Torrey folks were terrified that I would retaliate against them when I became Director. They were terrified because they expected me to do what they would do. I did not. I never revoked a single rating, and I even renewed their ratings when asked. I did everything by the book, and I was fair to all - even in reporting what would foreshadow the Hamby case. You know that I would not have stood to have anyone kicked out of USHPA just because USHPA's lawyer couldn't win a case where they testified. Am I wrong for expecting that of you, Ken?

Your second paragraph started off "As a friend", but I cannot understand a friendship where a "friend" would sit by and allow an injustice to continue for 2 or 3 years to another "friend". I guess I'm a different kind of friend than you are Ken.

This is a long message, and I'm sure the "ADD" crowd will have great fun mocking it. But let me conclude it with the operative part. I've asked you to bring the matter of my expulsion and the Torrey Hawks refused renewal before the Board this October. I've asked you to make the case, and make a motion, and request a roll call vote. Whatever you do will reflect on you. Whatever the Board does will reflect on them. That's as it should be. All I can do is be sure that everyone knows about it.

Thanks for your time, and I hope you enjoyed Larry's Birthday party today.

Happy 75th Larry!!

At this time, there has been no response, and I have not yet formally replied to the email message from Ken.

[Bob Kuczewski]

I just sent my formal reply to Ken's earlier email message (above). Here it is:

Region 3 Directors Andrews, Crouse, and DeWeese,

I've read Ken's response below, and I will point out that his argument against reversing USHPA's expulsion and reversing USHPA's failure to renew the Torrey Hawks Chapter is based purely on retaliation and retribution. Ken uses words like "hostilities" and "healing". Those words have no place in any organization that claims to be "self regulating" the aviation sports of hang gliding and paragliding.

Ken's letter also makes it clear that my inability to fly depends on the personal grudges of the Board (some of whom may not be on the Board next spring). Again, there should be no place in aviation for such personal retribution. We should be able to fly based on our flying records alone without regard to any political positions or commentary that we've offered ... in any venue.

As you may know, I've recently brought USHPA's full expulsion letter to the County of Los Angeles as proof that my expulsion from USHPA was based on retaliation for my testimony in court, my testimony to the San Diego City Council, and my creation of a hang gliding organization to compete with USHPA. I believe the County of Los Angeles legal department reviewed that document carefully and concluded that they could not allow citizens to be barred from recreational hang gliding for those charges. They subsequently enacted a new policy allowing non-USHPA members to fly at that site when the business is not operating. They made it clear that the operating hours limitation was needed because they could not impose on the existing contract. I have reason to believe that limitation will be mitigated when a new contract is negotiated in the future.

My point about Dockweiler is that USHPA's unjust expulsion in my case has exposed USHPA as a vindictive, retaliatory, and abusive organization. This is also reflected in Ken's own letter which cites personal animosity as the primary reason why he feels he can not reverse my expulsion or restore the Torrey Hawks Chapter. These are qualities which local governments will find unacceptable in any organization that controls access (either directly or indirectly) to public land. I believe many private land owners will feel the same.

Furthermore, you'll notice that Ken was not able to provide any material facts sustaining either my expulsion or USHPA's failure to renew the Torrey Hawks. It was all about politics. This is again a further justification to any government or private land owner that USHPA cannot be allowed to control who can use their land.

Ken did cite his obligation to the "best interests of USHPA or of its members". That phrase implies a balance. As Directors of a Corporation, it's important to ask yourselves what exactly has been gained by USHPA's expulsion and what has been lost. Since the safety of my flying has never been in question, it seems that the only thing gained is retaliation. But the losses are considerable.

For example, USHPA's position in any court case is damaged by the provable charge that they retaliate for testimony in court. Very few judges or juries will be sympathetic to that kind of witness tampering. Another example is USHPA's position with local governments. USHPA's long list of charges related to my City Council testimony is evidence that USHPA retaliates against citizens who exercise their first amendment right to petition their government for grievances. Yet another example is the good will and trust of the pilot community. I know of several pilots who've either resigned from USHPA or changed their plans to donate to USHPA's RRG effort explicitly due to this expulsion.

So even if you completely ignore the fact that USHPA has unjustly retaliated against a pilot, and even if you focus solely on "what's best for USHPA", you'll find overwhelming evidence that these actions have not been in USHPA's best interests and you are thereby obligated (as Directors) to reverse them.

Having said all of that, I am not at all optimistic that the three of you will stand together (or stand at all) against this ongoing injustice. I can already see Ken hiding behind the excuse that the Board wouldn't go along with it ... so he won't try.

First of all, that's a terrible reason to fail to do anything. At the 2010 Board meeting, there was very little expectation that I would pass my "Balanced Soaring Council Motion". But I put it before the Board for a vote and I argued the case. It passed. And if it didn't pass, I'd have called for a roll call vote to make those Directors accountable (see Robert's Rules of Order). If I could do that single-handedly, I am certain that all 3 Region 3 Directors standing together would have no problem. This is especially true since USHPA has a long precedent of leaving regional matters to the Directors ... in that region.

Second, leadership isn't about "reading the tea leaves" of the Board and trying to do what you think will pass. If that's all that you do on the Board, then you might as well not go. The USHPA members don't need to be spending money sending you to a meeting where you're just going to affirm what would have happened anyway without you even being there.

Finally, it's important to remember that you are not responsible for what the Board does or what the Board fails to do. But you are 100% responsible for what you do. Hiding behind predictions that the Board wouldn't go along with something is no excuse for you to not do the right thing anyway. Put yourself on record. Make a motion that the expulsion be reversed and that the Torrey Hawks Chapter be renewed. Make the case that I've made in this letter. Then request a roll-call vote and let the chips fall where they may. If you do that, then the responsibility for any ongoing injustice will rest squarely on those voting against it. But as it stands now, the responsibility for this injustice rests squarely on each of you for not even bringing it forward.

As I wrote in my original letter, I am writing to request a reversal of USHPA's 2015 Expulsion action against me, and a reversal of USHPA's 2016 refusal to renew the Torrey Hawks Chapter status. I am requesting that the matter be introduced as a motion in the proper Committee meetings AND at the full Board meeting. I am requesting that this be done at the October 2017 meeting, and that you present the arguments I've given or invite me to present them myself in person. I request that you move for a roll call vote to put all Directors on record in these matters.

Sincerely,
Bob Kuczewski
858-204-7499

Read more at:
http://ushawks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1787&start=210#p21103
http://www.shga.com/forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=5182&start=88

cc/bcc Friends and Observers

[Bob Kuczewski]

More activity from the Sylmar Forum ...

In this response, Ken pretty much admits that the expulsion was unjust. Ken poses the false dichotomy that pilots have to somehow choose between flying and justice. I'm really surprised to see him plant his foot so squarely in his mouth. Maybe that's why he doesn't post very often. Here's what he wrote on the Sylmar forum (note that I believe this was posted while I was composing my email message above):

Bob,

To summarize, perhaps this whole discussion depends on whether your priority is to fly, or that elusive thing called justice. If it were to fly, then maybe I could help. But it’s evident that the fight for justice is even more important to you, and so I’ll have leave that to you, Doug Martens, Joe Faust, and Frank Colver.

I suppose that shows I’m more pragmatist and less idealist than you are; so be it. Now I’ll try to leave this discussion to Doug, whose posts are no less productive, and certainly less repetitive.

It was pretty easy to reply to that:

Ken,

You've presented what's known as a "false dichotomy" (see Wikipedia). Hang gliding pilots should not have to prioritize whether they want to fly or whether they want justice. They should be able to have both. To the degree that your quote is an admission that USHPA forces pilots to choose between flying and justice, I again have to thank you for additional ammunition to free sites from USHPA's grip. Thanks!

I've sent you a formal email response to your own earlier email message and it's also posted on the US Hawks Forum. I think it's a better written version of what I've posted above. It includes some tangible reasons why USHPA's expulsion of myself and the Torrey Hawks is not in USHPA's best interests. To the degree you find that to be true, you are in violation of the role you've cited as a Regional Director.

I think I've been pretty clear about the costs to USHPA of my expulsion and of USHPA's failure to renew the Torrey Hawks (legal costs, loss of credibility at Dockweiler, loss of credibility at future TBD sites, loss of credibility in future lawsuits, loss of Frank's offer of a sizeable donation, loss of several pilot memberships not renewed, loss of good will by many pilots). What can you cite as the benefits to USHPA members of those actions?

Go ahead, be pragmatic if you like.

Thanks in advance,
Bob

Let's see what happens next ...

[Bob Kuczewski]

It has recently come to my attention that someone has been spreading the rumor that I went looking for a case to testify against the Torrey concession and USHPA.

That's not true at all. I had NOT been looking for any case, and I didn't know anything about it when I was contacted by Shannon Hamby's lawyers in September of 2012.

Here's the original email message from one of Shannon's lawyers soliciting me as an expert witness in the case.