June 23, 2016
Mr. Ryan Wood
3800 American Blvd. West
Bloomington, MN 55431
Re: Your legal representation of John W. Sawyer IV.
I am the father of John W. Sawyer IV (hereinafter, 'John'), whom you represent in a misdemeanor case in Hennipen County. These are the facts according to John:
In 2014, John was attempting to eke out a living by distributing handbills during the day that he attached to the doors of private residences. After noting that there was not a "No Trespassing" sign posted anywhere on the premises, John attached a handbill to the door at the home of one Timothy L. Johnson, 7134 Knox Ave. South, Richfield, MN (about 1 mile from your office, I believe), Mr. Johnson, alcohol on his breath, opened the door and started yelling at John. Whereupon, in fear of bodily harm, John retreated to his car, while the elderly Mr. Johnson (hereinafter, 'complainant') continued to berate him. Sometime thereafter, a friend of complainant's, one Michael Hanson, of 6945 Knox Ave S. joined in the pursuit, and fearing for his life, John drove away.
Promptly thereafter, John was pulled over by the police; yanked from his car and slammed up against it and searched. After a brief discussion, wherein, I believe, the police officers claimed that complainants had averred that John had entered either his garage or backyard areas, John was released with no complaint or charges made -I guess intimidation did it for the police that day. Mr. Johnson and Mr. Hanson were retired police officers.
In or about December, 2015, John drove by the complainant's house and shouted at the ex-police officer. On Christmas Eve, after returning home from church services, John was arrested and held without bond, at the Hennipen County Jail. through Christmas - for four days - a period of time, according to my calculations, that far exceeded Minnesota Statutes Sunday and Holiday rules, notwithstanding (no need to correct me), while his ailing cat was locked in his apartment and his Christmas turkey rotted.
John does not recall having ever received a copy of the complaint or charges against him. I believe the charge is "Stalking," and after several court appearances, some have suggested he plead to "Harassment." I shall address those charges pursuant to Minnesota Statutes here (redacted for brevity):
I. (emphasis added)
For the purposes of this section, the following terms have the meanings given them in this subdivision.
(1) a single incident of physical or sexual assault or repeated incidents of intrusive or unwanted acts, words, or gestures that have a substantial adverse effect or are intended to have a substantial adverse effect on the safety, security, or privacy of another, regardless of the relationship between the actor and the intended target;
(3) a pattern of attending public events after being notified that the actor's presence at the event is harassing to another.NA
(b) "Respondent" includes any adults or juveniles alleged to have engaged in harassment or organizations alleged to have sponsored or promoted harassment. NA
(1) marching, standing, or patrolling by one or more persons directed solely at a particular residential building in a manner that adversely affects the safety, security, or privacy of an occupant of the building; or NA
A. "physical or sexual assault" was not a factor - not in dispute. B.In no way would John's actions "have a substantial adverse effect on the safety, security, or privacy of . . . . . two burley ex-police officers (probably armed); especially when John never even exited his car and remained on the public street . C.The circumstances do not meet the minimum requirement for "Harassment" and therefore is entirely without merit and should be dismissed as a matter of Law.
II. (emphasis added)
609.749 STALKING; PENALTIES.
As used in this section, "stalking" means to engage in conduct which the actor knows or has reason to know would cause the victim under the circumstances to feel frightened, threatened, oppressed, persecuted, or intimidated, and causes this reaction on the part of the victim . . . . . . . . .
B. The circumstances do not meet the minimum requirement for "Stalking" and therefore is entirely without merit and should be dismissed as a matter of Law.
Since leaving home at 21, John has devoted himself to being self-sufficient. He will take any job, however menial, so that he never has to go on welfare. In handing out fliers, her was just doing his job. That two asshole retired police officers decided to take whatever their personal hangups are out on John is unconscionable. While it showed bad judgment on his part to go by the ex-officer's home and yell at him, this is still a free country and we still have a 1st Amendment that allows free speech, and a 4th, 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendments that guarantee John freedoms and due process that your local police seem to have forgotten.
John assures me he has demanded a jury trial.
John has attempted to file assault charges against Hanson and Johnson, and the police have kept him waiting for hours - because they can.
Have you taken depositions yet? I would like to be present.
Has anyone filed a Motion to Dismiss? And may I have a copy ?
John W. Sawyer III
Conservative Candidate for Congress