What Jhon Golder told officers as they forcibly handcuffed him last Thursday in the midst of a peaceful interview with me is supported by the court records. I returned to the courthouse today and checked both the civil and criminal records, getting copies of both.

On November 18, 2002, Dick Wilson in an ex parte hearing (that is, a hearing with Golder not present) got his extraordinary injunction that temporarily banned Golder from ALL CITY OFFICES pending trial. That order was supplanted by a stipulation in the court of Robert Atack on February 26, 2003.

That stipulation provided Golder stay away from a more limited number of city offices including the Parks and Recreation office, that he be allowed to go to City Council meetings and meet with City Council members, and that he be allowed to make up to 5 written requests per month to the City Manager for information.

This order expired on August 25, 2003. Skeptics should check out CV # 145048 (the Atack stipulation).

In response to Golder's conviction on the "resisting arrest" charge (leveled by Officer Eric Seiley in the case of the dog at Its Beach), he received a conditional sentence and probation which required he make no oral or verbal contact with the City Manager except in writing. It said absolutely nothing banning him from city offices.

Golder was falsely arrested while peacefully researching documents. Police refused to listen to his documentation or to take him immediately before a magistrate, though the courts were open.

Parks and Recreation staffer Steve Hammack has still failed to provide, though requested to do so, access fo the 2004 Lighthouse Field file.

Note the intensity of the hatred and fear directed against Golder by "doubtful" above. This kind of bigotry is the driving fuel that sent Golder to jail last Thursday and has essentially derailed his public service for the homeless regarding recovery of vehicles and the Lighthouse Field situation.

The SCPD, the Parks and Recreation Department, and "Doubtful" all owe Golder an apology. It will probably require a lawsuit involving real financial loss to make sure this does not happen to the next person they dislike.