Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Carrie Neighbors
Defendant [1J I Pro Se Litigant '.i'
I
'i
,':'
.F:·p
L'
?5
'~
PI; 12:0 L:
1104 Andover
Lawrence, Kansas 66049
(785) 842-2785
Plaintiff,
Defendant 1,
GUY M. NEIGHBORS
Defendant 2,
COMES NOW on this 26th day of April 2010, the Defendant [1], Carrie Neighbors,
acting as a pro se litigant is filing a Motion to Quash or Strike the Defendant [1]'s Proffer,
1). At no time was the Presiding Officer (The U.S. Attorney) at the Proffer, in which is
2). The Proffer was not recorded, in which Stephan v. State, 711, P. 2d 1156, 1159
(Alaska 1985), in which this case the statements have been colored, changed, or altered, and
therefore are inadmissible in it's entirety, and should be quashed or stricken from the record.
(Describing law enforcements fiduciary duty to preserve evidence). The Court reasoned that
electronically recording a Defendant's interrogation helps to ensure his right to a fair trial.. id. At
1159-60. And failure to due so is a violation of his / her due process. Whereby any and all
unrecorded statements presented at trial should be excluded. US. v. Merz (WL 1183771 Us.
3). Whereby the contract to proffer was violated by the government, due to fraud of the
government to manufacture witnesses and evidence, as well as, conceal evidence in this case,
without properly documenting the proffer (By audio documentation) or documenting the
evidence (through the Bates numerical system), as well as, handling the evidence (through the
proper chain of command). Whereby the contract of the Proffer was violated.
4). The Affidavit for the search warrant failed to show how the personal home of the
Defendant, that no probable cause of any criminal activity at the home abode resided, whereby
the Affidavit for the home abode was insufficient. Whereby, the contract of the Proffer was
violated under the fraudulent threat of more charges based on fruit from the forbidden tree,
5) Pursuant to Us. v. Stein, WL 1377851 (E.D. Pa. 2005) "Counsel- and clients should
keep in mind that the Plain Language Rule 410 protects only statements made to a prosecuting
attorney; a statement blurted out to an agent in the abstract leniency is not. "
6). The Defendant [1]' s proffer was based upon illegally obtained evidence, and
agreement of proffers.
THEREFORE the Defendant [1], Carrie Neighbors, acting as a pro se litigant is filing a
Motion to Quash or Strike the Defendant [1]'s Proffer, pursuant to US. v. Stein, WL 1377851
Carrie Neighbors
Defendant [1J / Pro Se Litigant
1104 Andover
Lawrence, Kansas 66049
(785) 842-2785
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned also hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing
document in the above captioned matter was deposited in the United States mail, first class
postage prepaid, addressed to:
Cheryl A Pilate
Melanie Morgan LLC
Defendant [2J counsel of record
142 Cherry
Olathe, Kansas 66061
Marietta Parker
Terra Morehead
U.S. Attorneys
500 State Ave.
Suite 360
Kansas City, KS 66101