Restraining Order Hearing
Talford VS Rupakus
Case 07-00432
Filed 12-4-2007--Temporary Order signed
Rupakus VS Talford
Case 07-00437
Filed 12-6-2007--Temporary Order Signed
Hearing for Injunction (s):
Date -12-17-2007
Hon. Judge Robert Wing received the 1st RO request by Talford 12-3-07 , when I went to the District Attorney Office, to the Victim Services Dept. to get assistance is completing the Required paperwork to obtain a Injunction against the Suspect that Assaulted me. The Judge wanted more than just the ER Discharge papers to be used for filing. I was told to get the DR. Report or the EMT Report for the Filing to be completed. I went to the EMT after returning home, and the Head of the Ambulance Services stated it would be completed the following morning. I did got the report the following morning, and faxed it to the Court Clerk for the Judge to complete the Temp. Order.
Commissioner Gehring was the person that signed the Temp. Order for me, even though it was the Judge that requested the information the day before hand. The Clerk called me, when the papers were signed, and I then called the DA Victim Services a second time, and Pam B. went to the Clerk and took the Filing papers to the Sheriff in the same building, for service. This was to help me, with not having to drive another 40 miles, just to move a paper from the Clerk to the Sheriff in the same building. This was completed on 12-4-07.
The Suspect then went to the Courthouse Clerk with a New and Improved Statement after speaking to the Village President and Village Clerk, as well as getting Legal Advise from the DA Office through his Attorney Loberg to change his statement to get charges against the victim of the incident. He told the Deputy on the day of the assault that he never touched the victim at all. There was only verbal conflict and the victim left. When he filed the Order against the victim, he used a 2nd written statement that he had written out, changing his story to self defense, and he admitted to striking Talford 3 times in the head, even though Talford never swung at him at any time. He then was served, and then he filed a RO against me in return. Those papers were filed on 12-6-07
Petitioner Rick A. Talford - no council -
Witnesses: Deputy Vodinelich - Dee Nazer
Respondent: Robert Rupakus - W/ Attorney Robert Loberg
Witnesses: Dick Tiffany (Tavern Owner)
Copy of the Exhibits I had for the Hearing, I had given to Attorney Loberg before the Hearing
Exhibits 1-8 given to Court Clerk by Talford before the Hearing began, to have them filed:
1- 12-2-07 written statement by Talford 1 page
2- EMT Report from 12-2-07 5 pages
3- ER Discharge papers from 12-2-07 5 pages
4- Rupakus 2nd written statement dated 12-5-07 3 pages
5- Talford vs Rupakus blog on topix.com (Unknown creator) 10 pages
6- 12-29 Verbal Request - Police Committee to meet w/ Rupakus 1 page
7- Loberg letter from “New Policy vs Talford Family” 1-9-2006 2 pages
8- Complaint on False EPD report being published 8-10-06 1 page
Commissioner Gehring stated that “She was not taking the time, to look through the papers!”
Exhibits 1-8 given to Judge during Hearing by Loberg -
During the Hearing, Loberg gave exhibits to the court, that I had not seen and she accepted them.
He took certain pages of the Blog and stated that they threatened Rupakus. None of them ever threatened any harm to be done towards anyone at any time. These where nothing but the expressed opinions of a citizen going to the Board meetings and not agreeing with the actions that the Board Members were taking, towards his family and other citizens as well. Standing up for true beliefs.
1- April 19th, 2008 Elmwood Citizen Blog posting vs Bob and Jodi creation of False Disorderly Conduct Charges through the EPD, after the County Sheriff Deputies ( 4 of them) had come to the scene and stated Talford did nothing wrong by waiting in a public lobby, for a meeting to end. Rupakus and Pulk stated that Talford made threatening hand gestures and Disrupted their meeting. Those charges where thrown out by the Judge when they came to court some 6 months after they had obtained a RO for the information they used for the Charges. The Commissioner stated that she believed Pulk, and when Pulk got in front of Judge Wing, he stated He did not believe Pulk
2- Bill, Bob and Jodi blog
3- Bob running the show blog
4- Oct. Hail Rupakus blog
5- Nov. Bob Filed RO with Jodi Pulk blog
6- Dec. Kris allegations of Rupakus assaulting a disabled citizen
7- Topix.com Maybe new board members coming
8- Topix.com those members who read this, more than just the chief case
Start of the Hearing: 11:30 am
ended : 1:30 pm
Web Information Blog referred to in Hearing:
Elmwoodcitizen.blogspot.com began by Talford Feb. 2007-
Elmwood Citizens a third location to get unofficial minutes of the Board meetings, done by a citizen that attends them. The Clerk never gives all details in a meeting, especially when Board members say or make poor comments or statements against the citizens they are elected by. The Newspaper has a story line about the meetings, but they stay on the Politically Correct side of those statements that get made.
The Elmwood Citizen is a straight forward, “HE SAID, SHE SAID” minute to minute transcript done as best I can, with audio recordings to back up the information I type. This is the closest anyone is going to get, without having the minutes literally wrote from the audio recorded meetings themselves.
Pearlgreen.blogspot.com began April 2007 vs Talford
This site was created to “BASH the Talford Name” with false information against the Talford Family and those who Associate with them. This fast became a nasty site, making accusations about who the real parents to the kids are, to making comments about the family being imbreeders. Numerous foul and objectionable comments where turned into the Sheriff Dept. and the Elmwood Police Dept. with neither doing any research into investigations of them.
Inquisitor-theinquisitor.blogspot.com began October 2007 vs Talford
This site was created to “UN-SPIN the Talford Lies as they Put it” Tracking the Families movements and making tales about the Family being night walkers. Hundreds of nasty, foul, and implicating statements are being left on it regularly. Many threats towards the Family have been received through the site, from running one of them over and backing up, to ensure the job being done. To inviting members of the family to go into the woods during hunting season, so it could end there. Some of the nastiest comments about the family and those that deal with the family, came from the inquisitor himself, who pictures himself on the site, as a black trench coat wearing, hair halfway to the ground villain, handling weapons and terrorizing the nights.
Hate Blog Information:
Over 50 stories and over 600 hate comments left on sites against the Talford family.
Over 12 stories and 150 comments on Topix.com against the Talford family.
Contact with Village Board & Rupakus by the Talford's:
Pearlgreen.blogspot.com began April 2007 vs Talford
This site was created to “BASH the Talford Name” with false information against the Talford Family and those who Associate with them. This fast became a nasty site, making accusations about who the real parents to the kids are, to making comments about the family being imbreeders. Numerous foul and objectionable comments where turned into the Sheriff Dept. and the Elmwood Police Dept. with neither doing any research into investigations of them.
Inquisitor-theinquisitor.blogspot.com began October 2007 vs Talford
This site was created to “UN-SPIN the Talford Lies as they Put it” Tracking the Families movements and making tales about the Family being night walkers. Hundreds of nasty, foul, and implicating statements are being left on it regularly. Many threats towards the Family have been received through the site, from running one of them over and backing up, to ensure the job being done. To inviting members of the family to go into the woods during hunting season, so it could end there. Some of the nastiest comments about the family and those that deal with the family, came from the inquisitor himself, who pictures himself on the site, as a black trench coat wearing, hair halfway to the ground villain, handling weapons and terrorizing the nights.
Hate Blog Information:
Over 50 stories and over 600 hate comments left on sites against the Talford family.
Over 12 stories and 150 comments on Topix.com against the Talford family.
Contact with Village Board & Rupakus by the Talford's:
March 2004 - Village Board meeting held against the Talford family, “stating they would get rid of the
family and business with in 3 years.” This was officially recorded for the transcript minutes.
The Board members all laugh and stated “The last family they got rid of, took 5 years, so
John Marson still had about 3 to go” This was when we started attending all the meetings we could.
March 2004 - Special Police Committee meeting VS the Talford family- Lein, and Marson
Complaining about every aspect of Talford life. Head of Committee snapped at Rick when he
tried to speak up for us. He yelled “that we where lucky he was letting us talk at all,”
yet the others were all talking without any problems from him. Prejudice Act Audio Transcript available to those that request it directly from me, through a verifiable form.
September 2004 - 2nd Police committee meeting held, due to Letter of Intent by Radtke, Marson,
and Lein And their attorney from Eau Claire.
October 2004 - Another Police Committee meeting to defend against the threat of suit vs Village Statement,
“They have no basis for any claims against the Village Board”
December 2005 - Letter to Police Committee over problems we where having, requesting a meeting
1 called Rupakus and he threatened making a Policy against my family,
1 asked him what, and he replied that “They as a board needed, to make a policy on
how they would deal with my family directly.”
January 2006 - Police Committee meeting held early against notice posting- committee created a
policy Vs Talford family, and sent it to us the following day by certified mail. Taking
our equal and fair treatment rights to Police protection, as the rest of the residents get them.
October 2006 -1 filed a list of issues for a meeting with the Police Committee, and Rupakus ignored
them Rupakus claimed he gave it to the acting Chief, and guessed he did not feel like dealing
with any of it, huh..
December 1,2006 -1 finally rec'd a formal denial for any meeting from the Village Board signed by the President
January 2007 -1 requested a simple meeting again, and Rupakus verbally denied us ever getting a meeting
March 2007 - Rupakus cut the Pride program to keep drunks out of the cars in Elmwood
April 2007 - Rupakus filed false charges using the Village Chief to re-write reports to give citations
out, that where men thrown out by the Judge, yet a RO was granted using the false reports of
his and Jodi Pulk Rupakus was the reason that Mark Fredrickson resigned his board position,
Rupakus Started the removal process against him.
August 2007 Rupakus also was the cause of the Termination of Our Chief of Police, because he did not do
as he was told by Rupakus, Rupakus law over shadowed the State and Local laws In Elmwood,
and many directives where problems for the Chief to follow, and he lost his job because of it.
November 2007 - Termination completed on the Chief of Police. Rupakus started his unlawful directives within
60 days of the New Chief taking over. These were sent to the Chief by Emails from his Polaris
Defense email account. The Chief told me about them, shortly after receiving them, because it
disturbed him, that the Head of the Police Committee was trying to tell him who he could deal
with, and where he could be? Too Much Control where it should not be.
Witness #1 Dee Nazer
Objection by Loberg- she was not present during altercation- sustained
Commissioner Gehring told her to step down-
Witness #2 Deputy Vodinelich
Loberg Objected, stating he was not present during the altercation- sustained
Commissioner did not allow his testimony at all..
Talford Testimony:
The day started out at Daddy Day Care, where I was plowing snow with a lawnmower. Rupakus came driving by, staring me down, like he usually does when he sees me. Robert Rupakus came driving by, staring at me as usual. I continued to plow snow and when I finished, I went to the Cenex for a soda, and then headed up main street towards my home. I seen the Rupakus car in front of the bar, (this is an uncommon car in the village) so when I got home, I called the bar and spoke with the bartender. I asked him if Bob Rupakus was there, and he replied yes. I then told him to give Bob a message for me, to go home and spend time with his family, instead of sitting in the bar. I then hung up the phone, and proceeded to listen to my voice messages. The phone rang, while I was listening to messages, so I did not answer it, but instead, when I got to the most recent message left, I heard Bob Rupakus on it, (I could recognize his voice) stating that I had crossed a fine line with him. He then hung up. It could have been perceived as a threat, but I took it as normal Bob mouth. I then explained my call to the bar, and his response to my wife. I then left to go snowplow for a 2nd resident in the village. About 1 1/2 hours later, I returned home, and was told by my wife, that Daddy Day Care had called the house. I figured that was to pay me for the services. I decided that I would walk down to his place and to Cenex to get another soda. I only made it 2 blocks, when I was in front of the Church, that is across the alley from the Rupakus home, I looked out at the snow hill, and seen 2 kids walking. I then seen 2 more kids sitting on a snow hill across the road from the Rupakus home. I thought nothing of them, and continued to walk. I then got in front of his place, and I seen Bob coming from his house down the sidewalk towards the street, As he got beside his car and van, he pointed to the ground behind his van, and stated "Why don't you step over here?" He continued to walk towards me as he stated that. I stopped where I was, in the street. I felt that he was trying to intimidate me. He came right up to me, as close as he could without touching me, and without a word being said, he struck me with his right fist in the side of my head, striking my ear, and knocking my hat off. I leaned over and picked up my hat, and as I faced him again, he took a 2nd swing at me with his right fist, striking me in the nose, forcing my glasses to cut my nose, as they fell off. I leaned over and picked my glasses up, and as I was standing back up, I stated to him "What the hell is wrong with you?" Now I was standing there with my glasses in one hand, and my hat in the other. Just as I finished stating that, he hit me a 3rd time with a fist in the nose a 2nd time. Now I was bleeding heavily from my nose, I turned and started walking home. When I got home, I called for my wife from the front door, and asked her to bring me a rag. She then came to the door, and seen me. She asked me what happened, and then she called 911 and reported the assault. The Deputy arrived at 5:23 pm, just about an hour after the 911 call. The EMT and Deputy was dispatched at 4:30 pm for the call. The EMT stayed with me until the Deputies arrived. The EMT had called the ER and they wanted me to come in, and I denied any transport by the Ambulance. I then spoke to the Deputies and when they went to speak to Rupakus I went into the ER. Upon returning home, I called the Deputy to find out if they had arrested him for assault, or gave him a breath test, or if they spoke with the witnesses that where out there. I did not know who they where, but knew there was 4 kids outside across the road. His answers were no to all the questions, and he stated that they where called away for an accident
Witness #1 for Loberg: Dick Tiffany (now a Village Board Member appoinbted by Bill Stewart)
Q- You remember any problems with Talford?
A- yes, on Nov. 5* he looked into the bar at us, then left
Q- Do you remember Dec. 2nd?
A- Yes, I recognized his voice when he called, and he said to tell Bob to get his ass home to his family
Q- Did you tell him to stop threatening and harassing your patrons?
A- yeah
Cross by Talford:
Q- Was every customer in the bar that day, sitting at one table?
A- Yes
Q- So when I looked in, I was looking in the direction where everyone was?
A- yeah
Q- I did not say anything to anyone, did I?
A- No, but you looked right at us
Witness # 2 Robert Rupakus (Battery Suspect)
Q- What is the location of Talford's house to yours?
A- 2 blocks away
Q- Where do you live?
A- 109 W Winter Ave. and County RD P
Q- Is there a sidewalk?
A- No, you walk in the street
Q- How long you been on the Board?
A- 6 years
Q- You're the Head of the Police Committee?
A- Yes for 2 years now
Q- You know Talford then?
A- yes, because of the committee
Q" Why?
A- 2002 there where community issues with Talford and other Shaw Issues. The Board and
Staff members heard it the most
Q- Did you mediate for Talford?
A- I perused it
Q- Did you do this for very long?
A- Until the Issues could get on common ground, then the court issues started
Q- What is your Job?
A- Polaris Military Sales
Talford - Objection Your Honor,
Commissioner Gehring sustained
Q- Did you continue contacts with Talford then?
A- It was nothing but a hostile relationship
Q- How long did you try to hang out?
A- 6-8 months, but he was not willing to go to common ground, So I stepped away
(False, he quit, because Delorse R. threatened his removal from the Board for Associating with us)
Q- What happened then?
A- The threats towards me began. I supported Jodi this year in a May RO
Q- Did you know about the blog statements written about you?
A- Yes
Q- Did you read the blog?
A- yes
Q- How did you find out about it?
A- Polaris employee googled my name, and they came up
Exhibits 1-8 by Loberg: Talford Blogs
Q- Are you a regular customer at the bar?
A- I generally use it weekly
Q- When do you normally play these tournaments?
A- Monday and Tuesday are the games, and the Tournaments are on Saturdays
(All the talk about playing, but none was on Sunday stated)
Q- Do you remember Nov. 5th ?
A- I saw the door close- I did not see Talford
Q- so you did not have any interaction that day?
A- No
Q- Sunday December 2nd, what happened?
A- A call came to the bar, and the bartender said "It must have been Talford”
Q- Then what?
A- When I was leaving, I saw his son standing across the road at the PO.
Talford - Objection Your Honor- Relevance
Commissioner Gehring - Sustained
Q- Did you have your kids kept in the house?
A- The Wife chose to
Q- What happened when you got home then?
A- I called Bill Stewart and told him what Happened. He told me to call Jaeger the next week.
He said that if it was a concern, they could write a ticket
Q- Did you wear heavy gloves?
A- Yes, they are thick
Q- Where the kids outside when you got home then ?
A- I gave them permission for kids to go sledding after I came home.
(LIE Caught- She let them out is what he already stated once)
Q- What next?
A- I heard Rick's voice say, so I crossed the line, huh?
Q- Where were you then?
A- In the driveway where it butts to hwy P
Q- Did you turn to Rick?
A- Yes, he was on my property
(False- I never left the street, I was in the south driving lane)
Q- Was he on the street?
A- He was on the edge of the driveway, he was on the concrete
Q- Was your driveway shoveled then?
A- Only a path from the Street to the Garage
Q- What did you say?
A- I walked up to him, and when I was a foot away, “I told him he needed to go away”
Q- Did you see you girls?
A- I seen the kids coming home, he stepped between me and them.
Q- So what did you do then?
A- I pushed his head and knocked his hat off, he picked it up, and jumped right back at me with in 1"
(FALSE- he swung from the side at me, hitting my ear, and knocking my hat off)
Q- What did he do?
A- His arms where flailing and he moved his arms a lot
Q- What did you do?
A- He came right back at me, I thought he was going to hit me, so I threw a punch from the side of his
Nose, and knocked his glasses off
(I did not come at him, I simply stood back up, facing back to him, I was hit again)
Q- Where were the girls now?
A- They were stuck on the other side
Q- So what happened then?
A- He came right back at me, My Pop told me, to end a fight, you punch them in the nose
(I picked up my glasses and said “what the hell is wrong with you”, I faced back to him, he hit me the 3rd time)
Q- What did you do then?
A- I threw another side punch
Q- When you first came face to face, did you stop?
A- I did not move, I did not pivot my feet or Lunge
Q- After 3rd hit, what did you do?
A- He took a step back, a couple seconds went by, and he said "What's wrong with you?"
He stated that twice
(False-1 said it one time)
Q- Do you outweigh Talford?
A- By at least 100 pounds, I did not use full power of my body.
Q- You indicated that you had a co-worker at work Google your name and find the blogs?
A- Yes
Q- Have you ever physically threatened Talford?
A- No, I changed my route going to school
Q- When
A- A little longer than Jodi Pulk has
Q- Did you know that Talford is so called Disabled?
A- He refused to divulge that information
Loberg- So there is a pattern of contact since May RO, the Nov. 5th Issue, and the Dec. 2nd issue
are the reasons we are requesting the order be placed against Talford.
Q- Did you invite Talford onto your property?
A- NO
Q- Did you see him often?
A- Yes, he is known to walk a lot
Q- Has he ever stopped before?
A- No
(False- we have stopped by now and then outside visits)
Q- Are you apposed to a Order being placed against you?
A- Yes
Q- You feel your actions were justifiable for self defense?
A- Yes
(False- He was never threatened bodily or verbally)
Q- Are you ashamed mat your kids seen you do that?
A- Yes
Q- Is the Route past Talford's house the shortest to the school?
A- Yes
(False- the street he lives on, has the school doors on it)
Q- When did you change that?
A- 2 years ago
Q- So Talford is active in the meetings?
A- He is at every Committee and Board Meeting (False- not all committee meetings attended)
Q- What does he do at the meetings?
A- He always has comments, or legal threats or any other verbal threats
Q- Where did all this happen then?
A- In the driveway
Q- Where did Talford come from?
A- He came from around the corner of the garage
(I would have been in the alley then, I never left the roadway P)
Loberg- In closing, I can say that Talford was trespassing..
Talford - Objection Your Honor, that was never stated before now
Loberg- "If this person speaks again I want him removed from the courtroom," If he can't act civil in here or in public. His words are a verbal assault, "This is a man who has mental disabilities." He was looking to create a incident. He admitted that the call would displeasure Rupakus. That was Dick Tiffany Testimony, the bar owner said it was Talford, or he felt strongly that it was. "Talford's written statement is sort of Bravado," this big fellow did not knock me over. I took shots over and over (all an assumption of Loberg's)
In the Blog' he talks about Rupakus and Jodi P. being associates.
Talford claims that Rupakus made a false report, (He did, and the citations were thrown out by the Judge)
# 2, Bill, Bob, and Jodi are the problem.
# 3, Rupakus is running the show and the game.
# 4 The Oct. blog on Hail Rupakus.
# 5 The RO - Nov. Blog and May 2, incident. The RO Bob did not take the action, Jodi Did.
# 6 Are the allegations of assault on a disabled citizen.
# 7 is the Topix.com when all is said, there might be new board members and we may have new members.
# 8 Topix.com those members that read these blogs and read the issues, and more than just the chief.
Talford states that all the hate in the world will not make him stop what he is doing. Tiffany went outside to interact with Talford. Talford is uncivil and ill mannered behavior all the time. The defense issue is what this is.
Loberg- Commissioner Gehring, I do not want you to look at this case like a domestic and put an order
going both ways. There should only be one against Talford
Commissioner Gehring- Ruling - Injunction both ways for 4 years.
Talford enticed the incident with writing his blogs, so that is good for an order
Rupakus admits to hitting Talford, and I do not condone that type of behavior. “You cannot just go around
hitting people,” she stated to him
Both these two need to stay away from each other.
Commissioner Gehring then jumped on Loberg for trying to leave with all 8 exhibits.
“You can't just walk away with them, she said.”
Contacts During Restraining .Order. Case:
12-21-07 Loberg request for case 07-00432 vs Rupakus be dropped for the following reasons:
1- Uncontested that there were several contacts.
(Only stated 2 dates, and one was simply looking into the bar and saying nothing)
2- Defendant . Did not deny blocking narrow path,
(False-yes, I said I stayed in the road
3- Defendant. Did not deny stating the comments,
(False -yes I did deny stating all of it)
4- Petitioner of case 07-437. Did not deny hitting Talford
(False - He lied 3 times to the cop)
5- Petitioner. Felt he was under attack,
(was never even swung at though)
6- Petitioner. Changed route for the last 2 years
7- Petitioner. Had reasonable fear, and perceived the trespassing as a threat
(False- I never stepped off roadway)
8- Defendant. Has been shadowing, Petitioner &. Blocked the walkway for the girls.
(False- I never looked at girls)
9- Respondent, testimony believable If he would have used his power, the
Petitioner. Would have been seriously injured.
10- Closing argument- He is a Polaris Defense Employee and this could have Repercussions.
His customers are in defense, and he considered this to be proper Course of action.
Proper action would be to dismiss this all together.
11- The court did not state that the Respondent, acted in “Self defense”
12- The same request again to dismiss the order against Rupakus. “Request order Reversal”
12-24-07 Talford reply to Loberg's request "Response to motion for reconsideration"
The request by Robert Loberg is no more than an attempt to waste the Courts time. The defendant verified more than once that he in deed, did strike me in the head three times, in which I have filed the Restraining Order for that reason. He also testified that I never attempted to strike him, nor did I ever touch him hi any way. To go through the Attorneys letter of reasoning, I am disputing much of what he states as his facts.
1. There have not been several incidents with Robert Rupakus and I, unless you count the items that are in the packet of exhibits that I filed as the petitioner for the hearing, The blog I write is for the Village Board following that I do, and report to the citizens! This has never been used to threaten harm in any way to anyone. That was testified to in the hearing. The Tavern is being used to try and state I was threatening him, yet all I did was look into the bar, stating absolutely nothing to anyone, then closed the door and left, Never entering the bar completely at any time, the owner threw me out, one year prior for coming in and telling him good luck in the April election, he has treated me poorly since,. The contact on Dec. 2,2007 was not intended to be a threat to his family at any time, but the false assumption he had, made it that way. It was a political statement from me to him, as runners for the Board position. Since the termination of our police chief started in Elmwood, the beginning of October, he has been seen at the bar a considerable amount of time, and the view of this by many people in the community, is that the board is processing information in the bars, which is not correct in any manner. That is why I have been paying attention, and only when I am out and about. I have never went looking for Robert Rupakus for any reason, especially to harass him. I was never allowed to tell the past history between Robert Rupakus, yet he was allowed to hi the hearing
.
2. Yes I did deny blocking any path made by Rupakus. I was standing at least 1-2 feet in the southbound lane of County Road P (Public Ave.) when this incident occurred. I never at any time, stepped onto his property, yet his first words to me, where, "why don't you step over here?" I at no tune, ever looked behind me, at his kids. I did not know they where anywhere close to me. I seen two older kids sitting on the hillside across the street from his home, and a couple younger kids walking from the sliding hill. I only paid attention to Robert Rupakus in front of me, and after each hit, I looked directly back at him, and after the third hit, I left southbound towards my home, never making any verbal remarks to his kids or even making eye contact at any time.
3. At no time did I make any statements about crossing the line to him, he stated "step over here to me," (which I felt was asking me to step onto his property so he could become physical against me, I did not. I stayed where I was at, hi the street as he continued towards me) then proceeded to get face to face with me, then started striking me, without any words being stated, either way, until I asked him, what the hell he was thinking after the second hit knocked my glasses off.
4. The defendant clearly stated in the testimony that he swung his arm hitting me. That is not pushing. The EMT and ER reports show and verify how my ear was swollen. This would not happen from a simple push.
5. We never got within 2 inches of each other after the first swing. I looked at him, after picking up my hat, and he swung just that quickly, there was no getting within 2 inches. Self defense would mean that I was swinging at him, or hat struck out at him, and in the hearing the defendant clearly stated that I never swung at him, nor did I ever touch him. Again I never turned my attention to any kids that may have been around. I was looking at Rupakus,
6. The defendant states that he has stayed away from my premises for over two years, yet was just at our home on Oct.30th for Halloween. He has came to our home regularly for that night. He also claimed the shortest route for him was Shaw Ave. to get to the school, yet he lives next to Wilson Ave. which the school building entrance is on the same Street Wilson Ave. is a direct walk for nun, yet he claims he needs to come two blocks over to Shaw for his straightest route. This was testified to in the hearing. As far as not making any comments in the Board meetings, that is false. I have filed Police Reports against Robert Rupakus for Slander in open board meetings. He has on a number of incidents, publicly slandered me and my family hi the board meetings, (and this is all oh Taped audio cassettes if needed for proof.) At no time did the defendant ever make the statements that I needed to leave, he was forcefully trying to state that. All I did was pick up my hat, and get hit again, then I picked up my glasses and got another hit to the face. This was an attack period.
7. He states that my stopping on the street by his home, after he started a conversation to me, was threatening to him, yet I never touched him, nor did I ever swing at him was his testimony. "Displeasure" does not give anyone the right to assault another person.
8. (a.) shadowing the respondent was never done. I eye witnessed this and made a political comment towards him, and he responded by assaulting me. His where about's were only stated on the blog over one weekend, and it has never been on any regular basis, in order to suggest harassment. One time,
(b) I made the call, as a political reason, not in any manner to threaten harm to anyone, ever, again, this only happened one time in the 6 years of knowing each other, and being on opposite sides of the table on the issues in our community,
(c) I never went to the respondent home to make any contact. I was oh my way from my home to a residents home where I plowed snow earlier in the day, and then to the local station. I was simply walking past his home, as I have hundreds of times since our knowing each other. The making contact with the Village Clerk and Village President proves that he makes everything a village issue. This has been denied by the Village President, yet Rupakus continues to contact them with every issue he has about me.
(d) this is false allegation. I never was on his property. I never came around his garage. (I would have had to be in the alley for that to happen. I was walking on the street, from South to North.)
(e) no children where involved at any time. This again is false. The Police tried to speak to the children, and Rupakus refused to allow them to. (this shows more intent to lie)
(f) the statements being made by Attorney Loberg are false. There was no push at any time, there was only swinging fists at my head. The defendant stated in his testimony that I never swung at him, nor did I ever touch him. This is the only factual information and he continues to keep that information out of his request
There was only one time that we where within inches of each other, and that was when he walked up to me in the street, and got nose to nose (intimidating act) then he swung at me, taking my hat off. I picked my hat up, looked back to him, and the second swing then was thrown hitting my glasses of my face and cutting my nose. I picked them up, and looked back at him, stating "What the hell are you thinking" and he swung a third time, hitting me in the nose again. I had my glasses in one hand, and my hat in the other, yet he claims I jumped into his face. This was false from the start.
9. Attorney Loberg likes to point out that this guy could have done much more damage to me. I wonder if that is why I was assaulted. He was told by the Attorney he could keep him out of trouble if he did. Loberg labeled me as a mental case, and a threat to society in his final statement, and even tried to have me thrown out of the courtroom for one objection I made, It disrupted him, and he lost his train of thought.
He became very abusive after that, verbally. And he showed how aggressive he could get in just a second that it took. I told the truth about the incident, and he tries to make more of a story out of it. It did not knock me to the ground, does not mean that it was ok for him to do
10. The attempt to continually push that Rupakus works for Polaris is nothing but a ploy, to get the Court to believe he would not do anything wrong. He falsely uses the Polaris name in the Village Elections also. Listing himself as Polaris Bob. This is no} proper to be done either, but he feels because he works for the company, he can claim their name too. The fact is still the same, Mr. Rupakus should have controlled his temper and not assaulted someone while they where walking past his home. Liking or disliking cases is being brought up by Attorney Loberg inappropriately also, he is trying to give
Rupakus the ok for what he did, by trying to prove that I have done so many things wrong. It is also the Courts rights and knowledge that I have never one time, violated any order that they have placed, even though I have felt they have placed these orders wrongfully against me, I still did nothing to further case trouble. Many of the citizens agree with me, that if you are a member of the board, then you are 24 hrs a day, 7 days a week as long as you are in the village. These things have been reported simply for political reasons concerning the village board. He (Rupakus) was the filing official to get rid of our Chief Of Police and the Tavern owner has publicly stated that "Elmwood should not have any cops, they are nothing but trouble." This creates the animosity to the to the courts. Attorney Loberg continues to manipulate the truth and the words used to create a case, where there is not one.
11. Attorney Loberg again restates information that was written already. no further reply.
12.1 would ask that the Court look at this case, and take the order placed against Rick Talford off, being that a poor political decision that was never intended in being any form of threat or harassment to his family was done. I have been very much involved with the Village Board for 5-6 years, and there has been continued attempt to remove those rights by the same individuals, including Robert Loberg. My actions have only been controlled by trying to keep the Community informed on those who have been controlling the safety part of our community. We have not had any Police Protection since the termination of our Chief and the information being provided to the community has not been all that truthful. I never asked to be assaulted for my opinion. I never thought my opinions where considered to be threats in any manner. I have never been contacted by anyone, stating that anything I wrote was perceived that way. I have had many threats myself, and know exactly what threats are, and I have not done that to anyone. I at no time have ever stated I entered his property, and I did not on Dec. 2nd, 2007 in which the incident happened in the street. The front of the Rupakus home is on Winter Ave. This happened on Public.
I was told by Rupakus to step onto his property, but never did. I have been told the order placed against me, was probably for my own safety. I ask that it be taken off though. I may not have made a good call, but I did not start any physical altercations by any actions I made. I never made any comments, or blocked any children's path either, and I want the court to be sure of that. This attempt by Loberg is nothing but an attempt to make his Client feel it is ok for him to go around and assault and then lie to the Police, when he represents the Head of our Police Committee in our Village. This proves that he should have more common sense against throwing his fists at others he does not like. I do feel that he seems to be above the law, because of his position and who he knows. He made two calls each to the Village Clerk and the Village President, also a County Officer and decided there was not enough to be concerned over, to just wait for Robbie Jaeger to write out citations for them the following week, yet the 911 was used by us to get help after the assault. There has been threats towards anyone that signs my nomination papers made online, the threats where placed online the same day as this request was written by Loberg. The proper authorities have been contacted on that as well.
Dated: December 24,2007
Rick A. Talford
123 W Shaw Ave.
Elmwood, WI 54740
(715)639-2313
fax-2314
12-28-07 Loberg's reply to my response - stated "second opinion is often the best" applies here
“Talford recites and relies on facts not the evidence”
(Nice statement to Piss off the Commissioner)
1-3-08 Commissioner Gehring Denied reconsideration request by Loberg
"I believe both injunctions should stand"
1-7-08 Talford request to amend order, with correct info. From request of order. I started receiving threats via
websites, to stay away from the Board meeting or face going to Jail. No Court Order stated this, and
I called the DA Victim Services and she told me twice “They cannot do that, it must be court ordered”
"Talford can attend meetings as general audience" was in the request, by the Petitioner of Case 07-437
but never Transferred by the Commissioner from the request order, to the final order.
1-9-08 Loberg reply to “Amendment. Request“- strongly apposes my request- stating Sheriff and DA Agree
to his idea. It is all speculation to if he will win in election
1-11-08 Commissioner Gehring denies making any changes, period "This was after the court Made a decision on the plaintiff request, “Injunction stays as written.” Every bit against Her statements that everyone has the
right to attend open meetings. “Now she is changing her mind from what she said, just 6 months
prior, everyone has the right to be involved in their local government, and I will not take that away
from anyone” This statement is in the Transcripts of the May 2007 Jodi Pulk Order that was rec’d by
fraudulent and falsified information. Appeal for that Order was filed and denied without anyone
investigating the false information being used.
