FYI just added to FINDERS datadump

by **anotherdrew** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 8:32 pm

the Finders chapter from: Sex, Drugs, the CIA, MIND CONTROL and Your Children By A.B.H. Alexander

by **Newsmakingnews** » Sun Jan 01, 2006 9:05 pm

Hi Please tell me where the Finder's data dump is! Newsmakingnews.com is covering the Richard Hamlin trial -- jury still out, and he claims his wife's father Sid Siemer was involved with the Finders. Thank you Kate Dixon, Newsmakingnews.com katedixon@newsmakingnews.com

by **Reikimg** » Sun Jan 01, 2006 9:21 pm

its here: <a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm9">p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm9</a>

by **Dreams End** » Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:05 pm

Did that connection to the finders ever get confirmed?

by **Newsmakingnews** » Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:48 pm

Thank you. I have researched "Finders" or should I say "Funders". This is good material you and others put into this data dump. Now my small contribution.... It is an axiom in law enforcement and children are kidnapped and used, by "professionals", meaning they have been doing this for years, can do it, essentially undetected, and if found out, and often they are, they will be covered up. I figure "Finders" were, in the past, such a group of "professionals" who surfaced from under the radar. The question is, do these "professionals" still engage in this conduct? I figure, "yes". I think the term Finders is old because some of their members are dead or inoperative, apparently, but what have they metamorphesed into? Do their older, existing members still have a role, if so what? If not, who is their current leader? In the Richard Hamlin case, El Dorado County California, Mr. Hamlin was unable to provide one shred of solid evidence linking his father-in-law to the Finders, except testimony of Michael Riconosciuto. Any testimony of Michael Riconosciuto is always important, significant and is not perjury, because that is his custom and habit, well known. It appears from the Hamlin case file that the motion to admit Riconosciuoto's testimony at trial, which was heard pre-trial, was a weak motion -- supported by some anecdotes and brief investigation entries by Ted Gunderson, all attempting to place father-in-law, Finders, a Mr. Wayne Reeder, in Indio, CA along with "Finders", and link it to testimony of Susan Hamlin via her letters, which she later decried, that she was tortured there, subject to snuff film. A first declaration of Michael Riconosciuto was filed in support of this motion and it asked the judge that he be allowed to testify FURTHER to the judge to establish relevancy. The defendant's motion was so weak it was amateurish. It did not press for FURTHER testimony of Riconosciuto. Judge Eddie Keller dnied Hamlin's motion to introduce Riconosciuto's declaration and other related evidence as cited above, on the basis that it was irrevlant. My impression is that the judge let the door open (until trial) to renew a motion to include such testimony if it were proven to be relevant. In fact, renewal of such motions, based upon newly discovered evidence is typically permitted. Hamlin made not such motion. Hamlin was the horse that would not run, in regard to proving up Riconosciuto's testimony about the Finders and their relation (and Satanic Ritual Abuse practitioners) to the Hamlin case and Richard Hamlin's wife and possibly children. Later, Riconosciuto submitted his own second declaration (by sending it from his prison cell to the Judge) into the record, to attempt to show the connection between the father-in-law Siemer and the "Finders", which could uphold Hamlin's contention that his and Susan Hamlin's children were victims of the "Finders" or a Satanic influence. Richard Hamlin did not file anything in regard to Riconosciuto's second declaration. Riconosciuto's declaration may have tended tend to exonerate Hamlin, (as did his first declaration) and could have put Hamlin in the position of a father trying to protect his children rather than a man intent on battering and torturing his wife by using allegations of her and her father's participation in Satanic Ritual abuse. There appears to have been no definitive ruling on Riconosciuto's second declaration -- and his declaration was unusual in that it came from a party ostensibly unrelated to the criminal prosecution, except in the status of potential witness. The defendant, at least on the record did nothing to support the introduction of this declaration or even to acknowledge it. This declaration was never filed. The Judge did not issue any ruling regarding this paper, at least on the record excep to state in words to the effect that it would not be filed because Riconosciuton had not standing to file. It appears to this reporter than in the Hamlin case, at least, in El Dorado County, many motions were just made orally, without paper back up. Decision however are recorded on minutes and the clerks and judge are willing to supply information and details upon request. It is a very open system. The filing system and docketing are excellent, but there is a lazy lawyer thing going on where papers are not filed as much as they are in jurisdictions such as San Francisco. Without paper, there is not much of a record for appeal. So after the first motion by Hamlin to introduce testimony of Riconosciuto was denied, Riconosciuto himself, did send another paper from prison to the El Dorado clerk for filing in the Hamlin case. I have never seen that paper and have no idea what its contents is. Regarding that paper, the judge, Eddie Keller, (former US attorney, former Peace Corp, post law school in Chile), rejected it out of hand, stating Riconoscituo was not a party to the action and he could not file it because Riconosciuto did not have standing in effect. It was as they say "de-filed", or stricken, without being retained. Thus, there is no evidence of WHAT was stricken, unless Riconosciuto did use his typical return receipt requested method for this attempted filing. So, now there is an appealable point should Hamlin be convicted. It is likely Hamlin would be convicted on at least one count, since he tape recorded himself on Super Bowl Sunday weekend, saying "I just slapped the bitch" in the context of screaming at her in a degrading way. In his second tape recording of himself and Susan in a session the next day, he stated, words to the effect "I will kill you" regarding Susan Hamlin.) These tapes were apparently made by him to prove Susan had molested their son. The tapes did not indicate her saying this, but instead showed him engaged in what he and she called "sessions" where she would attempt to recover an memory of abuse by her father and others while Richard Hamlin encouraged her. In these two tapes, first on Super Bowl Sunday and the next, the following day, this encouragement appeared to this reader of the transcripts as "degrading" and forceful and violent to some degree. The jury now has these two tape recordings before it. At trial, Hamlin contended that these tapes were made after his wife revealed she and her familiy had molested his son, therefore Hamlin admitted he slapped her and threatened to kill her during the tape recordings but that this happened during the unimaginable distress of finding out that his son was molested. So, the point is that Riconosciuto did submit a second declaration (contents unknown) except to him, which was de-filed, and which may have been evidence that Richard and Susan and perhaps their children were connected to some type of abuse by the father-in-law in Indio and maybe connected to the "Finders". This second declaration may have reinfoced the first declaration in which Riconosciuto asked the judges to interview him for further evidence to back up the Finders and Satanic Cult and child abuse connection of Sid Siemer to his daughter and persons at Indo, California. Because Richard Hamlin did not, himself, push the first Riconosciuto declaration the first time, in a strong way to prove relevancy with back up papers, and because the Judge de-filed it the second Riconsocituot declaration, thus voiding the record for appeal, the issue of Riconosciuto as a relevant credible Brady witness will definitely remain an issue on appeal, should Hamlin be convicted of any count of battery, because that information would be relevant to Hamlin's state of mind in committing any of the charged offense. And the case is destined to be appealed most likely because Hamlin will at least be convicted for the one slap of his wife that he taped. Hamlin also had an irritating habit of firing off the guns he packed, on at least two occasions, once by hitting himself in the thigh while trying to get into a car to chase two Jehovah witness visitors of unknown origin and intentions, and once, to scare off a bunch of people in SUV's in the neighborhood, an event which he reported to the police anonymously via 9-11, after he fired the gun (into the ground or air?) and told them a gun shot was heard in the neighborhood, which caused a fleet of El Dorado Sheriff's to seach the area with floodlights. Nothing found or nothing reported anyway. So the issue of the influence and existence of the "Finders" (Satanic Ritual Abuse types), the professional kidnappers and child abusers, will remain an important issue, provided there is a vigorous appeal (who knows how vigorous?). Riconosciuoto's second declaration, has gone into a vacuum of the de-filed -- which cannot be ascertained definitively by a recordation seal affixed by the Court clerk, since apparently the judge did not allow that. However, the second declaration (especially if connected to the first factually) will remain as a possible Brady violation -- meaning if the evidence was exculpatory, it should have been heard or at least investigated or inquired into. Recall, the Scott Peterson case, where Judge Alfred DeLucchi, during trial, received some letter from someone that was potentially exculpatory, and he informed the parties in camera, and gave them time to investigate it. De Lucchi's procedure was standard and thus unlikely to become a successful point on appeal for the defendant, unless the defendant's attorney failed to investigate the letter - lead and was inadequate in that failing. That procedure per De Lucchi was not followed in the Hamlin case, as far as the record shows. Instead the second delcaraton was not filed, or de-filed or at least filed under seal. Again, oral motions were common in the Hamlin case in El Dorado County, so who knows what oral motion, if any, was made in regard to the second declaration. It is a fact that Richard Hamlin was always per his desire, was "first chair" attorney and the public defender, per Hamlin's command was in second place. Richard Hamlin, an experienced trial attorney, called the shots regarding Riconosciuto's two declarations and all motions. In fact, during the Richard Hamlin case, the defendant and the prosecutor entered into an oral stipulation to exclude all evidence regarding sex, alcohol and drugs. This was a rare and outstanding stipulation to say the least, given the facts of this case. Thank you for referencing the Finder's material. I point out that Virginia McCullough, is a reporter who has and is covering the Hamlin case extensively. Verdict may be next week. Stay tuned. Kate Dixon newsmakingnews.com

by **Dreams End** » Sun Jan 01, 2006 11:24 pm

thanks for that summary. I have to say that, other evidence aside, a man who would tape himself slapping his wife in an "interrogation" and then submit it for evidence (or at least make it with the intention of doing so) is not firing on all cylinders. If she had revealed the abuse before the tapes, maybe you can make a case of distress, but even then it calls into question the specifics of his allegations of a wider conspiracy. Personally, without having all the evidence, I think we should entertain the notion that Richard is mentally ill (his brother said he didn't "appear" like a madman, but that's a stereotypical idea of mental illness.). If he is suffering from paranoid delusions, then he might behave in just the ways we've seen. A fuller telling of the stories will give us a better idea of which came first, the "sessions" or the revelations by Susan of abuse. Should it be clear that the abuse revelations came, uncoerced, before the "sessions" maybe I'll change my mind. And I really am still open to that. I also had a bit of a red flag moment when Bradley related to me that Richard had told him that Susan didn't just claim a Satanic cult, but a BAVARIAN Satanic cult. Then Bradley said he told Richard, "Hey, maybe it's connected to that Illuminati stuff we read about." A bit to pat for me, and do you imagine, (if you believe, unlike me, that the Illuminati continued to exist up to the present day) that they still refer to themselves as a "Bavarian" cult? It sounded like an attempt to construct a narrative that either fit Richard's delusions or else to get off Richard off the hook. This latter, however, seems unlikely, as an "Illuminati" defense would not be expected to impress a judge or jury. Again, I'm fully open to being wrong on this...but I just think this point of view should be stated. But if I'm right, then we have the further, disturbing involvement of Ted Gunderson and Michael Riconosciuto. Especially Riconosciuto. Because, if Richard's case is simply factually false, Riconosciuto's willingness...insistence, really....on testifying should be of GREAT concern to a far wider audience than those who know about this case. Gunderson has never been on my "trust" list. Distrustful of "former" FBI/CIA types anyway, this guy went from heading a major department to being an eccentric, independent "investigator" who never seems to get very far. To be perfectly frank, I think his job (assuming that he is not simply mentallly ill...) is to get in on these cases in order to either muck them up or sculp the evidence in a way that corresponds to the needs of a disinformation campaign. One technique that he and others seem to use is to take the case FAR beyond the evidence and thereby, discredit the case. I don't even think you could call Gunderson well-meaning but incompetent, given the level of responsibility he used to have. I wonder now about Riconosciuto. If the allegations about Siemer are simply false, what on earth is he doing involved in this. And if they are true, and he has evidence, what is Hamlin up to in not pursuing it? Hamlin seems disconnected from reality at the very LEAST, when it comes to how plausible his case will sound to a jury, especially given the nature of the tapes. Regardless of the truth, surely he could see that they SOUND very much like him trying to get Susan to say things that aren't true, and abusing her in the process. They had $$$, so he can't be a terrible lawyer. I suppose there's another level of possibilities in between, such as some sort of intel game targeting Susan, Richard, or both. Personally, right now, I have to say I think that Richard is ill and that his brother has either bought into the delusions or is helping in a more cynical campaign to win some grassroots support for this "Christian" being harrassed by Satanic forces. But even THAT explanation doesn't feel quite right, because if that is their intent, it's the least likeliest avenue to freedom for Richard there could be. Richard could far more easily be declared legally insane...as the evidence and the bizarre behavior he exhibited in terms of firing guns, etc, would make that a slam dunk. A few months of involuntary commitment and I think he would have been out. The fact that he didn't go that route does suggest he might believe these stories. I apologize to Bradley, who has posted here regularly, for being so skeptical. Should any of this other evidence pan out, I'll be happy to eat crow...and I realize that people's lives are on the line. But so many little things add up to caution flags for me that I thought this line of thinking should at least be put out there. If nothing else, it will help you present this case in a way that might overcome these objections.

by **chiggerbit** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 1:39 am

I'm dying to know what Riconosciuto's declarations said.

by **Newsmakingnews** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 2:05 am

Hi, I just did a response to your posting and it was completely lost when I hit “reply”, so I am trying to repeat it her carefully. YOU SAID then my RESPONSE. YOU SAID: Thanks for that summary. I have to say that, other evidence aside, a man who would tape himself slapping his wife in an "interrogation" and then submit it for evidence (or at least make it with the intention of doing so) is not firing on all cylinders. If she had revealed the abuse before the tapes, maybe you can make a case of distress, but even then it calls into question the specifics of his allegations of a wider conspiracy. RESPONSE: Hamlin did not introduce or submit the 2 tapes into evidence. The DA did. The police did a search of his house and found the tapes. Richard testified he forgot he did the second tape. Richard says Susan revealed the abuse of his son, JUST BEFORE the first tape, then he tried to tape her saying it, but she did not say that during the tape. Instead he taped himself saying degrading things to her and hitting her, saying, “I just slapped this bitch”. Susan said Richard demanded sex from her during the “Sessions”, and if she didn’t comply, then he blamed her prior abuse and asked for her memory of the abuse, and she supplied it, then he worked through it until she was able to give him what he wanted. However, Richard said he was the compassionate husband who wanted to help her overcome her terrible abuse and he stuck by her thick and thin. What were SESSIONS? At first, Susan testified she was interested in these trying to explore her “suspicions” about her father, and then as time went on the Sessions became more intense and finally more and more revelations results and per Susan, violence occurred. YOU SAID: Personally, without having all the evidence, I think we should entertain the notion that Richard is mentally ill (his brother said he didn't "appear" like a madman, but that's a stereotypical idea of mental illness.). If he is suffering from paranoid delusions, then he might behave in just the ways we've seen. A fuller telling of the stories will give us a better idea of which came first, the "sessions" or the revelations by Susan of abuse. Should it be clear that the abuse revelations came, uncoerced, before the "sessions" maybe I'll change my mind. And I really am still open to that RESPONSE: Per the testimony, Susan and Richard started the sessions soon after Susan had suspicions about her father having molested her and after she confronted him with a accusatory letter, in which he denied any abuse. The sessions then went deeper into Susan’s life. She wrote about them with lucidity, carefulness and ability. She appeared to want to know herself in the course of a mid-life crisis. This was however, the last thing which was good for Richard. Richard, although he said he wanted to help Susan, was very upset at her revelations, and immediately wanted revenge against her father, and wanted to remove these ideas from her head. Instead of consulting a psychiatrist, Richard took the role of pseudo-shrink in the sessions, which went only almost daily. Their discussions deepened. Richard and Susan looked for confirmation of her memories by calling people and looking for data. It seems Susan was very involved in the sessions until a certain point when she turned, and found them violent. It is hard to believe that Susan who testified with education, knowledge of the law, sensitivity to language, was a victim of Stockholm syndrome – at least in her second week of testimony. During her first week of testimony, she sobbed on the stand almost uncontrollably. YOU SAID: I also had a bit of a red flag moment when Bradley related to me that Richard had told him that Susan didn't just claim a Satanic cult, but a BAVARIAN Satanic cult. Then Bradley said he told Richard, "Hey, maybe it's connected to that Illuminati stuff we read about." A bit to pat for me, and do you imagine, (if you believe, unlike me, that the Illuminati continued to exist up to the present day) that they still refer to themselves as a "Bavarian" cult? It sounded like an attempt to construct a narrative that either fit Richard's delusions or else to get off Richard off the hook. This latter, however, seems unlikely, as an "Illuminati" defense would not be expected to impress a judge or jury. RESPONSE: I don’t know about Bavaria except Sid Simmer seemed to indicate somehow his ancestors were from that region. A man, last name Siemers, per my research was the top attorney for some of the Nazis at the Nuremberg trials. I did not see whole Richard Hamlin trial, but I did not hear the word Bavaria or illuminati. I heard “finders” word once. On and on and on I heard about Satanic ritual abuse, although it seemed to me the “sessions” didn’t go into much detail about rituals commonly reported to Satan types, but seemed to center on memories of sexual abuse. YOU SAID: Again, I'm fully open to being wrong on this...but I just think this point of view should be stated. But if I'm right, then we have the further, disturbing involvement of Ted Gunderson and Michael Riconosciuto. Especially Riconosciuto. Because, if Richard's case is simply factually false, Riconosciuto's willingness...insistence, really....on testifying should be of GREAT concern to a far wider audience than those who know about this case. Gunderson has never been on my "trust" list. Distrustful of "former" FBI/CIA types anyway, this guy went from heading a major department to being an eccentric, independent "investigator" who never seems to get very far. To be perfectly frank, I think his job (assuming that he is not simply mentallly ill...) is to get in on these cases in order to either muck them up or sculp the evidence in a way that corresponds to the needs of a disinformation campaign. One technique that he and others seem to use is to take the case FAR beyond the evidence and thereby, discredit the case. I don't even think you could call Gunderson well-meaning but incompetent, given the level of responsibility he used to have. RESPONSE: I agree. This Hamlin case would just be another crazy domestic violence case, if Riconosciuto had not been involved. When he is involved, a matter is of some importance given his history and potentialities. Riconosciuto is an intelligence asset who has been shelved in a cruel way, but who is still active. Gunderson after leaving FBI SAC, LA went immediately as investigator on the Jeffrey MacDonald case and discovered woman with floppy hat who allegedly worked with Satanists to kill MacDonald’s wife, children. In his book Ultimate Evil, Maury Terry does a paean to Gunderson in final chapters. Susan Hamlin said in the 1, 2 months prior to arrest, Richard had contact with 2 persons who informed him about Satanism. They were not identified. Richard says he met Gunderson, via internet search done by brother Bradley, AFTER his arrest. Question: Did Gunderson help cook up the Satanism defense for Hamlin before he was arrested? Answer. Unknown. Gunderson did however reinforce the Satanism ideas of Hamlin when virtually no one else did so. He brought in corroboration by Michael Riconosiuto via his first declaration. Gunderson regurgitated some old stuff about Indo, the Finders and a cursory report that he talked to Sid Siemer who said he did “graper” wok at Indo years ago. This stuff was put together by Hamlin into a very weak pre-trial motion to introduce Riconosciuto’s testimony at trial. That testimony could have been taken by video tape or some other manner given Riconosciuto is in prison. The motion was denied pretrial by Judge Eddie Keller (ex-US Attorney, former Peace Corp volunteer, Chile). The motion could have been renewed with new evidence. It was not. When Riconosciuto tired to file a second declaration, Hamlin did not back up that motion. Hamlin was the horse who would not run when it came to REALLY introducing evidence from Riconosciuto about Siemer and his conduct. Hamlin was full of himself and is still, heart and soul, a deputy D.A., a member of the club he thinks. Hamlin was first chair attorney and did an able job. The public defender was a better lawyer in practice. Hamlin presented what he wanted to present and only that, confident of his abilities. Time will tell. When Gunderson told the Mountain Democrat local news that he saw “pennies” in court indicating Satan’s presence, Hamlin terminated his services at investigator on his case. So Gunderson went in and helped Hamlin a true believer in the Satanism defense at a critical movement, after his arrest, even though that true believer stuff would not hold up in court without very hard evidence. YOU SAID: I wonder now about Riconosciuto. If the allegations about Siemer are simply false, what on earth is he doing involved in this. And if they are true, and he has evidence, what is Hamlin up to in not pursuing it? Hamlin seems disconnected from reality at the very LEAST, when it comes to how plausible his case will sound to a jury, especially given the nature of the tapes. Regardless of the truth, surely he could see that they SOUND very much like him trying to get Susan to say things that aren't true, and abusing her in the process. They had $$$, so he can't be a terrible lawyer. RESPONSE: Riconosciuto has never been prosecuted for perjury. I repeat. Riconoscuito has never been prosecuted for perjury. Hamlin was the horse that did not run in regard to introducing any evidence Riconosciuto may have had. After Richard walked Susan into the police station and had her prepped to say she molested her own children, which she then told the police, Susan was facing life in prison for molestation. Within 24 to 48 hours she retracted that confession and said Richard beat her into making the confession. Susan saved herself from life in prison. Richard wanted Sid Siemer and Susan in prison for life. They turned the tables on him. YOU SAID: I suppose there's another level of possibilities in between, such as some sort of intel game targeting Susan, Richard, or both. RESPONSE: More like a money game. Richard gave up 600 K per year law practice defending massage parlor guys throughout the state of California. He testified he gave it up to spend most of his time at home with Susan (moved his office into his home) and to do Sessions with her. Richard drove himself, a 1 million dollar El Dorado Hills home, and law practice into planned bankruptcy which was to occur just after his arrest. He did so despite having 4 children to support. It makes no sense. Richard Hamlin could have sought a divorce or separation. He did not file the papers. Neither did she. Now, however, after the arrest they are divorced. Richard walked Susan into the police station and she “confessed” to having molested her own children and supplied some of the details about her father and Indo. They left the station and Richard believed she would be arrested soon for serious charges. He would have retained custody of the children and would have called the shots in any divorce case if she were charged and then imprisoned. Instead Richard, to his complete shock, was arrest for domestic violence against her. She changed her story. I watched the trial and I did not believe that Susan Hamlin molested her own children. I do think she is smarter than Richard and was manipulative. I think she had a serious issue with her father. I think her husband was the last person who could deal with any serious problem his wife had. I think he took great stock in his prior role as a deputy D.A. and as a successful attorney and actually believed the authorities would go his way and arrest her and probably Sid Siemer too. Prior to his arrest, Richard had made reports to the U.S. attorney in Sacramento and to law enforcement in Fresno. Apparently they did not respond. But Richard did not get the picture. I did not see any evidence that the police or law enforcement ever investigated Sid Siemer at all regarding allegations of child abuse against Richard Hamlin’s children. So the question of Sid Siemer’s involvement in child molest, the Finders, Satanic Ritual abuse is an open question. Sid Siemer could not be located to be served with a subpoena to appear at trial. He left Fresno some months ago. About two years ago he had a brain operation. He is about 71-year-oid, a doctor of agricultural sciences. As far as an intel game, D.A. Gary Lacy made this crazy domestic violence case into a huge case by charging “torture” which carries a life term. Once he did this, as they say, “all’s fair in war.” Someone, if not Lacy, escalated this case into a life or death matter for Richard Hamlin. Susan Hamlin and Sid Siemer escaped all responsibility for anything. YOU SAID: Personally, right now, I have to say I think that Richard is ill and that his brother has either bought into the delusions or is helping in a more cynical campaign to win some grassroots support for this "Christian" being harassed by Satanic forces. But even THAT explanation doesn't feel quite right, because if that is their intent, it's the least likeliest avenue to freedom for Richard there could be. Richard could far more easily be declared legally insane...as the evidence and the bizarre behavior he exhibited in terms of firing guns, etc, would make that a slam dunk. A few months of involuntary commitment and I think he would have been out. The fact that he didn't go that route does suggest he might believe these stories. RESPONSE: I did not see any evidence presented that Richard Hamlin has a mental illness. I, however, have zero professional experience and education in the matter. Early on, the D.A moved to have a doctor examine him for a delusional belief system regarding Satan. Richard protested the motion vigorously and it was denied. Richard had an irritating habit of packing guns and firing off guns – he shot himself in the thigh while pursuing some Jehovah witness ladies who came to his door, who he thought Siemer sent to him. He also shot a gun into the ground (or air?) one night because 5 or 6 SUV type vehicles were around the neighborhood and he chased them and fired the gun. The he called 9/11 anonymously and said a gun had been fired. El Dorado Sheriffs responded in force with floodlights. Nothing found. In El Dorado County, apparently “everyone packs”, so Richard’s ineptitude with guns may not be fatal to his defense. Richard is a true believer in the Satanic aspects of the case. He believes in the end Siemer was out to kill him. And why not believe that? He had accused Siemer of terrible crimes, true or false? which could motivate any human being to want to retaliate by killing him. YOU SAID: I apologize to Bradley, who has posted here regularly, for being so skeptical. Should any of this other evidence pan out, I'll be happy to eat crow...and I realize that people's lives are on the line. But so many little things add up to caution flags for me that I thought this line of thinking should at least be put out there. If nothing else, it will help you present this case in a way that might overcome these objections RESPONSE: I met Bradley who appears fair, sound minded and who wants to save his brother. Bradley is a husband and father and a writer. I only talked to Richard Hamlin about 30 minutes in the jail, and he had little to say to me, I think, in part, because I am not a fundamentalist Christian. Bradley, on the other, hand was open-minded with me. Hopefully, Richard will not be found guilty of anything more than a couple of domestic violence counts, and reckless endangerment of minors and unlawful discharge of a gun. I think the jury will hang on most of the 18 counts including the torture count. Then Richard will almost get out with time-served. So many judges, prosecutors, attorneys, professionals and others have survived first-time domestic violence charges and have been subject to deferred judgments, suspended sentences, probation with anger management and rehabilitation back to work in their professions and jobs. Why is Richard Hamlin being treated differently? I think it goes back to the fact that almost everyone in the case, except his brother, are involved in keeping Sid Siemer and his progeny’s reputations in tact, and that requires shutting down Richard for as along as possible. It appears the game is Richard vs. Sid and the authorities want Sid to win. Stay turned. Kate Dixon Newsmakingnews.com

by **Newsmakingnews** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 2:08 am

Hi The first declaratino of Michael Riconosciuto which was filed in the Hamlin case is posted at Newsmakingnews.com in full in the context of Virgina McCullough's articles. His second declaration would be posted immediately if he would provide and or verify it. I expect eventually the Court of Appeals will review it. Kate Dixon Newsmakingnews.com

by **chiggerbit** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 2:39 am

Is the over-charging by the DA possibly some unrelated dynamic, say professional competetiveness, too much testosterone, bad blood not related to this case? As for the mental illness aspect, I would think it possible that many with personality disorders would be able to function without a lot of notice, except to family and co-workers. Narcissistic personality disorder comes to mind. Shoot, some of them even get elected President.

by **chiggerbit** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 3:14 am

Sound familiar? These letters might trigger, btw. <a href="http://www.newsmakingnews.com/vm,hamlin,susansword,3,10,05.htm">www.newsmakingnews.com/vm...,10,05.htm</a> clip <blockquote>Quote:<hr>To her father, Dr. Sid Siemer she wrote the following letter on April 22, 2003: Dear Dad, This is a letter that I never thought I would choose to write. But, lately, (the past 3-4 years) I have been struggling with behaviors and moods that I can't explain. I have suffered from severe depression, thoughts of suicide, self esteem problems, marital problems, problems socializing; in all settings, including the work environment, etc. I have gone back and forth between concern for, or more accurately, fear of, your feelings in reading this letter and concern for my well being if I did not write, and send, this letter. At this point, obviously, I have concluded that my need to write this letter has sufficient value. I have not yet, as I sit here writing, determined the value of my need to send it. (If you are reading this now, then I guess, not only do I have a need to verbalize my thoughts, but I also have a need for you to hear them. Any need I have for a response from you is a separate issue that I have not gotten to at this point.) I have so many gaps in my memory of growing up -- I have always wondered why. Terri has similar gaps. Layne recounts memories that are so foreign to me that I think he lived in another house. I have lived my life not ever letting others see the "real" me. I know that everyone does this to a certain extent. But I have always expended so much energy projecting an image of someone who is "acceptable"..... always feeling that I had to hide something. While I expended such energy to keep others from finding out what was inside me -- it really wasn't hard to keep it hidden, since I had no idea what it was that I was hiding...........<hr></blockquote> She ends the letter with: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>But in my pain as an adult, I have to ask the questions -- did you sexually molest me as a child?? Is that why I have so few memories of growing up? I know that must a horribly painful question to be asked. But it is just as painful, if not more so, to be asking it. As I said earlier, I feel no anger at all, only extreme pain and a desperate need for healing. If you can help me heal, as your baby still, won't you please answer my questions with loving honesty? I am a wreck and, at this point, just trying to survive. Your baby, Susan<hr></blockquote> Compare that with the second letter. It looks like it was written by someone else....possibly her husband? The tone certainly soulnds like he could have had a hand in it. But there is so much detail in it, that I have to wonder. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>On August 10, 2003 Susan Hamlin wrote another letter to her father. This letter contained an entirely different tone; it is a missive filled with a cold, controlled anger and "Dad" is now Sid. August 10, 2003 Sid, Since we just found your motion for a restraining order in the bushes when we got home last night, it prompted me to re-read the letter I wrote you in April? which, I might add, you so ?lovingly? attached as an exhibit to be included as a public record. After reading it, it dawned on me that, what was glaringly obvious to all but you, had been omitted. In all fairness to you, I feel compelled to clarify this written record that you are so meticulously compiling. You truly thought that you had me willingly in your web? that I knowingly chose to participate in your repulsively deviant little ?games? of torture and control. I just couldn't let the record stand if there was any possibility of confusion on this issue. So? to be very clear? YOU NEVER HAD ME. That my body was forced to participate, from my very beginning, and continuing on until April of this year, in acts so unbearable that, in order to survive (quite literally) things that were so against nature, my mind had to immediately delete all traces of each event that it sorted into this category. As supremely intelligent as you think you are, your plan had a fatal flaw? you either had no knowledge of ?repressed memories?, or, more likely, you were aware of such a? theory? and decided that? it was all a bunch of ? hog-wash??. The latter sounds like you doesn't it? Well? here is a news flash for you, the fact that Sid Siemer doesn't believe in something does not mean that it doesn't exist in reality. The first clue you had was in your kitchen when I mentioned that I had so many gaps in my memories of childhood. We were specifically talking about when we lived on Colonial? I was in junior high and high school. You got such an odd look on your face. You were studying my expression to see if I was just stupid, or if I was doing a really good job of playing along with? the secret?. I was really convincing, wasn't I? You were worried for only a second though, and recovered very well with your comment about Mom's ?multiple? suicide attempts during that period in my life. Of course I would want to put those little unpleasantness out of my mind, you told me. The problem is that the version of the family myth that I was told was limited to only one such attempt? and, now even that is in question since I have recently learned that, upon her release from the hospital a day or two later, she went to the YWCA ?a shelter for abused women, where she stayed for approx...2 weeks. And all the while I kept remembering more and more.... And did I tell you how glad I am that you have been so predictable. That you would take this private little matter to court gives me the opportunity I have wanted. In court, when you are asked questions, there will be a judge presiding to see to it that you answer. Oh, did your lawyers tell you that the judge has power over even YOU. The judge, of course, does expect you to tell the truth. Can you lie convincingly to an adult? How about to an adult with power over you? In any event, I expect nothing from the noise that will come out of your mouth. I do, however, look forward to watching you try to control yourself when Rick cross-examines you. I think I'll bring my camera. Your choice of forums for our first opportunity to discuss this? secret? matter is very PUBLIC. Since this is your motion, you are obviously not concerned about publicity. I welcome it. Newspapers, TV and radio could find this to be quite a human interest story. Just wanted to thank you in advance in case I forget to in court. I am, however, wondering what has suddenly changed to make exposure of your ugly secret no longer life ending. Or is it that you think if you tell the story first, control remains yours since you can decided which version to tell. Convincing the court that one person is crazy is not impossible, however, it is also not easy. Convincing the court that all the witnesses are crazy is ridiculous. So, I'm looking forward to a good show. What do you think people will think of you when they learn what you did to me to make sure I never told anyone that you raped me repeatedly throughout my childhood? The acts of rape were horrific, but you were able to trump even that. Your acts of cruelty and torture were effective control tactics with me, the cornerstone of which was to teach me [my place]. That, I did learn. I had the same value to you as did any other animal, no more, and no less. Animals are kept around only so long as they continue to please the master. But because this animal can speak, unpredictability exists? you can never really be sure what they might just ?blurt out?. Control is what defines master, and control cannot exist where there is unpredictability. You used a demonstration to accomplish this. My puppy that I so loved was the subject of your demonstration on that day? do you remember? While holding her over the bathtub by the scruff of her neck, you took your jagged edged fishing knife from its leather case and sliced open her abdomen allowing her insides to run out into the tub. I got it. I understood that lesson and acted very predictably for a couple of years. It is hard for me to believe that I would have ever needed to be reminded of this lesson. Unfortunately, with my limited life experience at age 7, I didn't know that I was telling? the secret? when I complained of severe pain during urination. Going [potty] wasn't the secret. Of course, what I couldn't know was that painful urination resulting from forced intercourse did expose the secret. This demonstration was more personally tailored. You tied me, naked and in a spread eagle position, on top of the table in the Adams St. house and, with your fishing knife, threatened to cut me as you had my puppy when we lived in Richmond. It is no wonder to me anymore that I submitted to your control. It also now makes sense that I remained under your control well after becoming an adult since you never released me from your hold (i.e. the childhood lessons remained controlling). My survival of my past, however, is due to a coping mechanism which spared my child mind from remembering trauma which would have been too great to bare. This served as a life preserver which, thankfully, kept me afloat until I was strong enough to deal with the memories. I was sent a rescuer - Rick. Rick is my hero. Contrary to the propaganda that you have spread all these years, Rick is a good man. He has endured a lot as a result of your actions over the years, directly and indirectly as your distorted teachings come to him through me. I found myself acting on auto-pilot in ways that I was committed to changing, and I didn't know why. Until I remembered the distorted lessons that you taught me, I could not release myself from their controlling effect on my life. It makes me retch to think that you actually believed that I would ever choose you. You have robbed me of my childhood, my innocence, my trust, my history, and more. But it stops now. You will not take anything more from me. My present and my future are mine.<hr></blockquote> I'm confused. Is Susan now saying that her father did NOT sexually abuse her? Has there been any indication that Susan is DID? Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=chiggerbit@rigorousintuition>chiggerbit</A> at: 1/2/06 1:14 am

by **Newsmakingnews** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 3:45 am

Hi I don't know who you are saying had what specific mental illness or personality disorder -- Susan, Richard, both? As for the DA overcharging the case, and overcharging is the norm this days in most counties, D.A. Lacey is taking a risk. If he fails to obtain a conviction for torture, he will have suffered some professional defeat in El Dorado County, given that the word torture is mentioned all the time in the press, media and at trial, and depiciing Richard Hamlin as a torturer is DA Lacy's goal. I don't know how to comment about mental illness among the parties in the case. I am not a professional in that subject matter, and I didn't hear enough testimony about it from professionals to evaluate it. Also drugs, sex and alcohol as topics of testimony were ruled out per an oral stipulation of prosecution and defense in the Hamlin case. So the old defense, "I was drunk as a skunk, high as a kite and crazy and loon and lost control" wasn't used. I understand that defense is used a lot in domestic violence cases, especially first offender cases. You quote a letter written by Susan Hamlin. She testified Richard pushed her to write the last paragraph of that letter which was somewhat confrontational with her father to say the least, but that she, herself, thought up and wrote the rest of the letter. After this letter, Susan began to say her letters, writing, diaries -- extensive -- were written most of the time under duress by Richard as a result of "sessions". Kate Dixon Newsmakingnews.com

by **chiggerbit** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 4:04 am

Sorry, I edited before I saw your reply. I was referring to Richard when I mentioned possible personality disorders not always being obvious, but I would certainly not rule out mental health issues with Susan, either, beyond depression, that is. Although, Richard would have had to have been quite a creative writer to have come up with all that detail. But the tone of the second letter certainly smacks of his animosity. And my comment "Sound familiar?" was aimed at the board in general, not to you, specifically, Kate. Memory gaps are a frequent topic of discussion around here. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=chiggerbit@rigorousintuition>chiggerbit</A> at: 1/2/06 1:08 am

by ir » Mon Jan 02, 2006 4:40 am

volunteers for such mentally-hazardous duty are practically nonexistent, people have to be deceived as to the true purpose of the experiment in order to gain their cooperation. Failing this, they may be simply abducted off the street, to be used and sometimes discarded. --- My experience - (in Israel), you can get parents' consent by a mixture of deception with bribe (detecting potentially bad parents, and there are quite a few around), namely, one supplies the necessary rationalization for the already abusive/neglecting parent. the deception could be with regards to the "end" of the deal. namely, my mother could be told that this is a "loan" for say 20 years and then they'll "rehab" the child and bring it back to form, so to speak. The deception could also be with regards to the promises made to the abusive "selling" parent with regards to her own fate. of course, at the end of the day they'll knock out that parent as well, just for the sake of securing confidentiality. its a pact with the devil, and if coated in the right words, can succeed with parents who lack normal instincts or who are DID. -- As for Sid Seimer, I tried to look up reference to Israel, but his name is not to be found here. that's because many of those types have had at least business contacts here. I have also noticed a large number of weird things among familities of agriculture professors in my hometown (we had a large Faculty of Agriculture in town). I think that around the early 70's when bio warfare became crucial many of those professors were sucked into the twilight zone of espionage and military research. Naturally, this made tham close and accessible to various programs that required children for experiments. Thing is, once a person becomes involved professionaly with one of the programs (say, PROMIS or Biowarfare etc.), their children are at risk and become "one of the accessible assets". -- We have seen from documented stuff (MKultra) that many of the staffers were also victims (can't remember the name of the scientist who jumped off a building after being unwittingly administered LSD by his colleagues, he was a military chemist and the investigation of his death prompted the scandal). therefore, people like Seimer are both perps AND victims in most cases, and so their response should not be taken at face value. they are in distress, usually those people have a strong need, psychological need (especially as they grow old) to trust the system and justify their decision to join those allignments. they did it as "patriots" under a call for duty, and they found out, that the system is not so nice, and it actually doesn't care that much if they are dead or their children are guinea pigs. At that stage they have too much at stake, and their kids start waking up and blaming THEM. What will they do ? they'll find a Boogie man and shift the blames (a relative, a husband or the child itself being "ill" etc.). There are few who are consciously evil. Siemer is also fed by his colleagues and they have this "support group" sort of, of ol' timers who have been in the same situation and encourage them to maintain denial. There is really not much incentive to become fully aware... --

by **anotherdrew** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 5:32 am

My guess is in a few years at most, maybe sooner, Hamlin will be a poster child for debunking RA claims. He'll be on talk shows crying about how he read all this stuff on the internet and it made him go crazy and believe all this non-sense stuff about his wife. The whole thing will be used as a warning to americans of what happens when you believe all the crazy claims to be found on the internet. Perhaps there'll be lots of psycobabble jargon about co-dependency and maybe he'll even get back with the wife at some point. "drugs, sex and alcohol as topics of testimony were ruled out" - because this is meant to become a cautionary tale about Internet Induced Paranoia Syndrome, or whatever cute name will be brought forward. This whole thing is looking more and more like a made for TV movie to me. I wonder who's directing? Anyway that's my guess on how this will play out. (would be nice to get to the truth, but I suspect that will be the last thing that will ever happen) Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=anotherdrew>anotherdrew</A> at: 1/2/06 2:36 am

FYI just added to FINDERS datadump

FYI just added to FINDERS datadump

Finder's data dump

Re: Finder's data dump

Re: Finder's data dump

finder's data dump

Re: finder's data dump

Re: finder's data dump

HAMLIN trial

Riconsciuto's declarations in Hamlin case

Re: HAMLIN trial

Re: HAMLIN trial

Hamlin case -- illness

Re: Hamlin case -- illness

alexander chapter on CIA-Finders

hamlin trial prediction

Who is online