Part Three " The Trial vs The Liar "

Rupakus Trial Outline
May 14th, 2008 9AM
Trial by Jury (6)

District Attorney John O’boyle vs Defendant Robert Rupakus
1- Disorderly Conduct
2- Obstruction of Justice

Pre-Trial comments between DA O'boyle and Attorney Loberg:

Loberg-

1- Both cases are gong to jury
2- Motion made to deny info.
3- Talford case info. To be blocked out from this trial

O'boyle- There is no prejudice outline involved here

Loberg-

1- We had a discussion yesterday about this
2- That outcome is not pertinent
3- I want that outcome left out
4- Request Judge to point that out in trial

Judge Wing - If it is necessary at the time, it will then be decided

Loberg- The argument is that Talford brought this on himself

O'boyle- The Court already said "He was not guilty of provoking the incident"

Loberg- This is a self defense and provocation case

Judge Wing- No, Not in a case of battery, self defense is not an argument,

He would need To prove that he was in a situation of bodily harm.

This is a Forfeiture case

O'boyle- This is a case of violent misconduct, and knowingly obstructing justice

6 Person Jury brought into courtroom

Judge Wing then gave direction to the Jury on the cases being looked at, and
what their duties where.

Opening Statements-

DA O'boyle:
1- Dec. 2,2007 Incident date
2- Talford went to go to Daddy Day Care for payment
3- 2 phone calls where made between the two
4- Talford then walked past the Rupakus home and was assaulted
5- Talford called the Sheriff
6- Rupakus stated that Talford and he spoke, and Talford went away
7- The Deputy arrived and seen blood on the roadway
8- The Deputy then ended the interview early, being called away to an accident
9- 3 days later, the suspect had a new and improved statement written
10- Now claiming Talford was in his driveway, not the roadway
11 -There where injunctions filed
12- The suspect then admitted to lying to the Deputy
13- There is a lower burden of proof needed here to find him guilty
14- We have two witnesses here, the deputy, and Mr. Talford

Suspects Attorney, Loberg:
1- Needed to pull the podium out to stand by
2- Our version is diff. but, there are small distinctions
3- It was a peaceful Sunday
4- Rupakus was home with his 3 kids.
5- He recently learned how to play Texas Hold Poker at Tiffany Tavern
6- About 2 pm, Talford was out plowing
7- Talford went past Tavern, then called and spoke to Owner, and asked if Suspect was there
8- Talford then told him to tell Bob to get his ass home to his family
9- Rupakus used the star 69 option to find out who called
10- Rupakus then left a message that Talford crossed the line
11 Rupakus is on the Village Board
12- Rupakus is the Head of the Police Committee ( False)
13- He called his wife and told her to keep the kids inside and watch for Talford
14- 4:30 PM Rupakus went home
15- He then went outside to begin shoveling
16- He made a call to the Village Clerk and the Village President
17- Talford came from around the corner of the garage
18- Rupakus told Talford he needed to go home
19- Talford then seen girls and stepped in between Rupakus and his girls
20- Talford's arms where gyrating and flailing about
21- Talford had plenty of time to leave, yet stayed
22- He was like one of those bobble boxing things
23- He was hit, and he went back into his face
24- His glasses where hit, and he got right back in his face, Right back again
25- Rupakus then called the Village Clerk and Village President again
26- As a parent, it is our job to defend and protect our children when in danger
27- Rupakus was accosted
28- His story was not an obstruction of justice



Witnesses For DA
Pierce County Deputy Michael J. Vodinelich

Q- Did you have contact with Talford ?
A- Yes

Q- Where ?
A- Shaw Ave.

Q- Did you get a statement from him ?
A- Yes (FALSE- rec'd by fax later that night, after victim returned from ER)

Q- Did you take photos ?
A- Yes

Q- What was the complaint ?
A- Talford stated that Rupakus hit him

Exhibits 1 & 2 Pictures

Q- Are these photos of Mr. Talford ?
A- Yes

Q- Do they show marks on his face ?
A- Yes

Q- Did you note injuries ?
A- Yes

Q- Did you speak with Talford ?
A- Yes

Q- How Long ?
A- 1/2 hour or so

Q- When ?
A- About 6: PM (FALSE-ended at 6, started 5:23 pm)

Q- Did you speak to the suspect ?
A- Yes

Q- At his home ?
A- yes

Q- Did you tell him why you were there ?
A- Yes, I said I was investigating Talford being hit

Q- What was said ?
A- Rupakus recalled Talford coming over

Q- Are the house and garage together ?
A- No, they are separate

Q- How far is the Street from Garage ?
A- About 12 feet

Q- What was his statement then ?
A- He said that Talford came from around his garage, stating

"So you think I crossed the line, huh" He then said, Talford came up to him, and

Rupakus told him "he needed to leave". Words were said and then Talford left.

Q- Did you ask him if he any contact with Talford ?
A- Yes, he said "No contact, Only words"

Q- Did you ask him any other way if he hit Talford ?
A- Yes, I asked him directly, "Did you punch Talford", he said "NO"

Q- How many times did you ask him ?
A- 2 or 3 times, and the answer was "NO" to all of them. Rupakus then stated

that “All Talford was trying to do was get Board members in trouble."

Q- Was there any witnesses ?
A- 2 children, that ended up being Rupakus girls

Q- What are their ages ?
A- I do not know, he did not allow me to speak to them.

Q- Did you press it ?
A- No, I did not think it was pertinent, and he was not going to allow it

Q- Were the red dots in the street or the roadway ?
A- The roadway

Q- Did you point that out to Rupakus ?
A- yes, and he said "Talford's boys put them there"

Q- Were the dots by the garage, or in the roadway only ?
A- only the roadway

Q- Did you take pictures ?
A- yes

Q- Where did Rupakus say the situation happened ?
A- next to the garage

Q- The first statement was that Talford approached his residence?
A- Yes

Exhibits 3-8 additional pictures of roadway blood seen

Q- Recognize these photos ?
A- Yes

Q- Are the red dots in the roadway ?
A- yes

Q- Any spots up by the garage ?
A- no

Q- Did you receive a second statement on Dec. 5th ?
A- Yes, by email

Exhibit 9 1st Written statement by Rupakus 12-2-07

Q- Rupakus stated that it was by the garage, right ?
A- yes

Q- Did you complete a report for both ?
A- Yes

Q- Rupakus first statement has No comment, about being by the garage ?
A- no

Q- It only states that he seen Talford nearing the residence ?
A- Yes

Exhibit 10 Rupakus 2nd statement written Dec. 5th

Q- There is nothing in it about Talford being by garage is there ?
A- No

Q- After talking to Rupakus, did you talk to Talford again ?
A- yes, a few days later

Q- When was your contact with Rupakus then ?
A- Dec. 5th I had voices contact with him, Dec. 12th I had return phone contact

Q- Why so long ?
A- I was out on training

Q- When did you meet then ?
A- Dec. 12th at the Sheriff Dept.

Q- Why you meet a second time ?
A- Rupakus wanted to give a second statement

Q- Why ?
A- he wanted to tell the truth

Q- Why ?
A- he said he had obtained an attorney and felt he should tell the truth

Q- Did he state anything about a filed restraining order ?
A- yes

Q- Did he state that he had been given advice prior to your contact on Dec. 2nd ?
A- he was advised by Deputy Bill Stewart before I arrived, yes

Q- Did Jodi Come up ?
A- Yes

Q- Why did he speak to those two ?
A- to get advice

Q- Did he tell you what those conversations where ?
A- no, he did not want to

Exhibit 11 2nd written statement by Suspect Rupakus dated 12-5-07

Q- Did you talk to him about the statement ?
A- yes

Q- What was changed ?
A- he admitted physical contact with Talford

Q- What and where was said ?
A- in front of the garage, and he punched Talford 3 times

Q- Where ?
A- He said it was in the driveway, Rupakus stated that Talford came from
beside the garage He stated that he went to shovel, and heard a voice
come from the garage, the Talford came at him. He then said he seen his
children coming, Talford came within 2" of face. He claimed that he
continued stating, “so you think I crossed the line” and Talford got so
close That he only push his hat off. He then said “Talford's arms where flailing,”
and his 2nd hit was to his Cheek, and mouth area. He picked up his glasses and
then he hit him a 3rd time. After the third Punch, Talford asked
"What are you doing", and then Talford went running down the road. He
added that he was told by someone, “to neutralize someone, hit them in the
nose.” He said Talford was preventing the girls from coming home.

Q- After the 3 hits, where were girls ?
A- he said only 3 feet behind them

Q- Did Talford swing at Rupakus ?
A- no

Q- Did he slap him ?
A- no

Q -Did Talford threaten him at all ?
A- no

Q- Did Talford prevent him from getting to his kids ?
A no

Q- Only claim was that Talford was standing between him and his girls ?
A- yes

Q- Did Rupakus walk away ?
A- no

Q- Did Rupakus walk to the house and tell his wife to call the police ?
A- no

Q- Why did he not allow you to speak to the kids ?
A- implications would have made his statement false, and he admitted to that

Q- Was he drinking any alcohol on that day Dec. 2nd ?
A- yes, he said he had Jack and Cokes

Q- Do you recall how many drinks it was at the poker tournament ?
A- 3 or 4 I believe he said

Q- Did you do a report on the second interview ?
A- yes

Exhibit 12 2nd interview report narrative by Deputy

Q- page 9, please took at what you reported-
A- Yes, he had 4 drinks

Exhibit 13 - Map of Elmwood, WI

Q- Why did you do this ?
A- to show where Talford may go

Q- Where did you get this ?
A- plat book

Q- This is colors coded, right ?
A- yes

Blue- Cenex,
Green- Daddy Day Care,
Yellow- Rupakus home,
Red- Talford home ( Mark for our home located on the wrong street- and wrong end of st)

Q- Did you do any follow up with Rupakus then ?
A- no

Q- Did you do any follow up with Deputy Stewart ?
A- no

Q- Did Rupakus tell you what Deputy Stewart told him ?
A- no, he did not want to

Q- Didn’t you think that he might have some pertinent info. ?
A- no

Q- Did you speak with the clerk at all ?
A- no

Q- In the 2nd interview, did you ask Rupakus what he thought the red spots where ?
A- yes, he said Blood

Q- These where not something that was planted by the Talford boys ?
A- no

Q- Rupakus did claim that this was just a Talford plot ?
A- yes, he did say that

Q- Do you see the Suspect here today ?
A- yes, he sits next to Attorney Loberg


Cross Questioning by Attorney Loberg:

Q- Did you have a discussion about alcohol ?
A- yes

Q- Do you recall him stating he told the bartender to make the drinks ?
A- he said to make them weak


Exhibit 12 page 9

Q- What was his request to the bartender ?
A- to make the drinks very weak

Q- Did you indicate that you did not smell anything ?
A- yes

Q- Did you smell anything ?
A- no

Exhibit 15 Cover Sheet of Police Report

Q- This is dated Dec.3, right ?
A- yes

Q- Is that when the incident was ?
A- no, the narrative report was done that day

Q- the cover of the complaint is Battery complaint, the complaint Talford,
the suspect Rupakus
O'boyle - Objection, relevance ?
Judge Wing- Sustained

Q- The call was 4:32 pm, what time was your arrival in Elmwood ?,

What time did you get to the first Place, was it around 6 pm ?
A- yes (FALSE-5:23)

Q- You interviewed Talford and took pictures, and seen scrapes and marks that

he said he was in an altercation and been hit 3 times ?
A- yes

Q- Was that consistent with someone being hit ?
A- yes

Q- The associate reports you have, 1 is pictures, you did not mark that, but
you have them right ?
A- yes

Q- No consent form is not checked on the report, but you have one ?
A- yes

Q- What does that mean ?
A- no permission to hit him

Q- Reference of statements was not checked, but you did get one ?
A- yes

Q- When did you get written statement from Talford ?
A- one was faxed, and one was written (FALSE- only faxed statement provided)



Exhibit 16 Talford Written Statement

Q- How did you get this statement ?
A- it was faxed to the Sheriff Dept.


Exhibit 15 Medical release of records to review

Q- Miranda warning is not checked, did you give them to both ?
A- no

Q- When you interviewed Talford, what was the first thing he said ?
O'boyle- Objection, hearsay
Judge Wing- sustained

Q- What was the order of Talford's story ?
O'boyle Objection
Judge Wing - sustained





Exhibit 13 Map

Q- Is the orange dot Talford's home ?
A- yes

Q- It is the same location, one block over, right ?
A- yes (FALSE- property to the east also-not same location)

Q- Why did you make this map ?
A- to show where everything is

Q- Talford said he was going to Cenex and daddy day care ?
A- yes

Q- Is Clark to Public St. considered one city block?
A- not sure

Q- Is there several homes on the block ?
A- yes


Q- did you conclude that Talford could have went another direction ?
O'boyle - Objection
Judge Wing sustained

Q- did you review Talford's medical records? Did you confirm damage ?
O'boyle Objection
Judge Wing - Sustained


Q- Where was he when you arrived ?
A- in his house

Q- Was the driveway shoveled ?
A- appeared to be

Q- Did the blood look like it was displaced in the roadway ?
A- no

Q- When did Rupakus give you his statement ?
A- he sat and wrote it out at the table, while I stepped outside

Q- did you find anything to be untrue ?
O'boyle Objection
Judge Wing Sustained

Q- Did you tell Rupakus that you were investigating an assault or Battery case ?
A- yes, I told him I was checking on a battery

Q- Did you tell them there could be criminal charges ?
A- no

Q- Did he tell you why he wanted to give another statement ?
A- he had spoke with people and was advised to tell the truth, he wanted to
tell the truth, and he wanted to be honest

Q- Did he tell you that he wanted to set the record straight ?
A- yes

Q- Did he tell you he seen his son ?
A- yes, he said he was running away when he left the Tavern

Q- After the incident he then stated that he seen his two sons go past ?
A- yes, he also stated that he would not put it past Talford having put the
red drops on the ground

Q- Did you ever speak to the Talford boys ?
A- no

Q- You know their ages ?
A- no

Q- Talford stated that he was going to Cenex at 4:30 and daddy day care ?
A- yes

Q- So he tells you that he needed to go to Cenex for a soda after, like he does
not have it at home, like the rest of us ?
A- yes, that is what he said he was doing

Q- Did you call daddy day care ?
A- no

Q- Did you think you should call to see if he was paid ?
O'boyle Objection
Judge Wing Sustained
No further questions


2nd Witness Rick Talford (Victim of Battery Case)

Explained I had knowledge of Rupakus by the Village and I have been at his home
doing things Personal as well. The day in question, I seen Rupakus drive past me,
while I was plowing snow for Daddy Day Care. He gave me his usual stare, as he
went by. I completed the snow work, and went to the Cenex station to get a soda.
I left there and headed home down Main Street, and I seen the Rupakus vehicle
sitting in front of the bar. When I got home, I made a phone call to the bar,
speaking to the bartender -owner, I asked him to give a message to Rupakus,
stating to “go home and spend time with his family, instead of sitting in the bar.”
I was listening to messages on our answering service and the last message was from
Rupakus telling me that “I had crossed the line.” I then told the wife, and left to
go plow snow for another citizen. I got home about 2 hrs later and was told by my
Wife that Daddy Day Care had called, so I decided to go to Daddy Day Care and then
stop at Cenex for another soda. I left and got two blocks when Rupakus came out
from beside his vehicles, pointing to the ground behind the van, and stated “why
don't you step over here,” and he continued to come right to me, in the street. He got
as close to me as he could without touching me, and without anything being said,
he hit me in the side of my head and ear, knocking my hat off my head. I leaned over
and picked up the hat, and upon looking back at him, he hit me a second time,
hitting my glasses and cutting my nose with them, as they fell off my face.
I leaned over and picked them up, stating "What the hell is wrong with you,"
and as I looked back at him, he hit me a third time, in the nose. I was
bleeding heavily from the second hit to the nose, so I returned back to home,
and opened the door telling my Wife to come to me, and bring a rag with her,
she did, she asked what happened and then she called the 911 number. The EMT'
were the first to arrive. They stayed until the Deputies arrived at 5:23 pm.
They made contact to the ER, and requested to take me in, I went to the ER
myself after the deputies left, to go speak to the suspect. When I returned
home from the ER, I then called the Sheriff Dept. requesting the Deputy call.
He did, and we spoke over the ER discharge paper and I faxed them, with my
statement. He stated that he did not arrest him, nor did he speak to the witnesses,
they were Rupakus kids. He did not give a breath test either.
Note- Attorney Loberg kept trying to speak over me, and the Judge jumped him for it,
telling him that he was not going to continue doing that.

I was off the stand and the Judge put us into a break-10:40 am
Note- Loberg was now whispering to the court clerk for what reason, is unknown.
Note- Judge noted the Exhibits that have been entered-1-8,10,11,13 Rec'd

Suspect - Robert Rupakus then put on the stand-
questioned by Loberg
Sworn in -name and age
Personal information- wife and kids (stating their ages for the 4 of them)

Q- Where do you work ?
A- Employed - Polaris Defense Products

Q- Have you received any awards ?
A- Yes, the highest proficiency Rating by any employee with the company in 2007
(this means what?)

Q- You have known Talford through the Village Board ?
A- yes, he is anti-government

Q- You have not been social with him ?
A- no (false-has had us over to his home, he invited)

Q- In the past have you mediated issues with Talford ?
A- yes, I volunteered, there where several tickets
O'boyle -Objection I move to strike that
Judge Wing sustained

Q- How have you tried to mediate ?
A- there where RO with the school, Kraemer quarry, and the clerk
O’boyle Objection
Judge Wing - sustained

Q- After the third order, did you change routine ?
A- yes, I determined not to mediate anymore

Q- You take your kids to school ?
A- yes

Q- Did you have to change anything for that ?
A- I avoid his residence (Note-school is on the street he lives-Rupakus)

Q- So Dec. 2 it was a heavy snowy day, and you had signed up for Texas hold em?
A- yes

Q- You ever play it before ?
A- yes, I played when I was in the army

Q- Is the yellow dot your home on the map ?
A- yes, it sits more on the corner

Q- What route did you take then ?
A- I went left on Public, Left on 72, left on Main and parked in front of the bar

Q- Did this route take you past Daddy Day Care ?
A- yes

Q- Did you see Talford there ?
A- no

Q- Did you know he plowed snow there ?
A- no

Q- Did you think you would see him ?
A- no

Q- What time did you arrive at the bar ?
A- 12:45 pm

Q- Did the bartender tell you that you had a call ?
A- he said he thought it was Talford

Q- Did you call him back ?
A- I called and said that as a village board member, he crossed the line, then
I called home and told my wife to watch for Talford

Q- Did you have any other run-ins with Talford ?
A- about two weeks prior, he looked into the bar, right at me, then left.

Q- Then what happened ?
A- I left the bar, seen his boy by the post office. I went up main street,
to Wilson then home. I felt that Talford had me staked out! When I arrived home,
the wife had allowed the girls to go sledding across the street. I discussed
issues with wife.

Q- Then what did you do ?
A- I called Deputy Stewart about the threatening call, then I called the Village
Clerk to let her know. I changed clothes into winter gear to go out and shovel

Q- Where was your shovel ?
A- outside the door

Q- Did you pick it up ?
A- no

Q- What time was it ?
A- it was dusk (It was 4:15-4:30 still daylight)

Q- Did you recognize Talford and his voice?
A- yes

Exhibits 19-25 Pictures Rupakus took for Trial

Note- I was never allowed to state anything about those pictures,
they were brought out only for Rupakus

1- View from Rupakus doorway to County Rd P, showing 2 cars on pad
Q- Where was Talford in the picture ?
A- points to within a foot of building

2- View from Church Parking to the side of Rupakus home
Q- Where was he in this picture ?
A- again pointed to next to the garage

Q- Was Talford moving or standing still when he stated crossing the line?
A- he was standing still

Q- Where was he ?
A- in the driveway

Q- Where were you ?
A- walking on the wooden path

Q- What did you do ?
A- I told him he had to leave

Exhibit 20 - repeat picture
Exhibit 21 - looking down Public (S)

Q- Again, where was Talford ?
A- up next to garage

Exhibit 22-23 again repeat pictures
Exhibit 24 picture with view to sledding hill

Q- What happened after the statement was made ?
A- I told him he needed to leave, then he said what are you going to do, I told him to leave

Q- Where was Talford ?
A- he was walking north, and I stopped in the middle of the driveway, there was a few
exchanges and I told him he needed to leave, at the same time, I seen the girls
coming from the sled hill.

Q- What did Talford do ?
A- he had his hands in his pockets, then he started waiving them, agitated and flailing

Q- What did you do ?
A- I repeated that he needed to leave

Q- Where were the girls then ?
A- at the double yellow line, and he looked at them, and so I pushed him, in his head.

my right hand to the side of his face, knocking his hat off

Q-then what ?
A- he jumped back within 2 " of my face

Q- What kind of hat was he wearing ?
A- it was a stocking hat (FALSE-Baseball Cap)


Q- Then what did you do?
A- I used my fist and swung at him, I felt he was animated and flailing, and
could have Something in his pockets. (1st time this came up)
The second time was intensified. He was face to face with me.
I hit his glasses off, and he retrieved them. I am literally
twice his size, and he jumped right back in my face, and the kids where
less than 5 feet from him.
My dad always told me “hit someone in the nose to neutralize someone.”

Exhibit -- Gloves he was wearing on Dec. 2
Note- Rupakus put the gloves on, and showed die courtroom.
(This was done for absolutely no reason- he did not do any testimony over them)

Q- How much time went by from the time you first seen Talford to him leaving ?
A- 30-45 seconds

Q- Did you try to leave ?
A- repeatedly

Q- Did you move your body ?
A- I stayed planted all the time

Q- So you pushed him once, and punched him twice ?
A- the first one was just my arm strength, because he was so close, I could not put force in the hit

Q- After hits, did you see blood ?
A- no, he seen blood, and asked what was wrong with me, like he was surprised,
he then left. After he left, I squatted down, and explained to the girls what
they had seen.

Q- What did you then do ?
A- I told my wife I was shaken up., then I called Bill and Jodi again

Q- What was your mood ?
A- I was shaken, I was worried about what could happen

Q- Have you fought before ?
A- last fight about 20 years ago, someone grabbed my wife's butt, so I wrestled around with them

Q- Was this the shortest route Talford could take ?
A- no

Q- What then ?
A- I spoke to Clerk and Stewart, and I was shocked and jittery. I went out to finish shoveling

Q- Had you gone inside before Deputy arrived ?
A- no

Q- Did Deputy tell you he was investigating an assault ?
A- repeat

Q- Did the Deputy ask you if you assaulted Rick ?
A- yes, I told him that I did not assault him, I was defending myself, and my wife.

Q- Did you assault Talford ?
A- no

Q- Why did you not tell the Deputy ?
A- because I was nervous. The innocent people get in trouble

Q- Did you give the Deputy a written statement then right away ?
A- yes, he went outside, while I finished it

Q- What then ?
A- he came in, and said there was a lot of blood out there

Q- Did you deny it was blood ?
A- no

Q- Did you recall him stating it was a bunch of blood ?
A- it was not like it was pouring, and within 10-15 minutes, his kids came by,
I would not put it past them, to plant the blood or red substance

Q- When did you call the Deputy ?
A- I called him and left a message on the 3rd
We then met that same night at the Methodist church (direct lie, met on 12-12-07 at the Sheriff bldg)

Q- Was the meeting recorded ?
A- no

Q- Have you ever been given a copy of the report ?
A- no

Q- Did you tell the Deputy why you wanted a second interview ?
A- I had contact with DA, and Loberg then told him to change statement to get
charges on Talford He was paraphrasing what I was saying. (Deputy)

Q- How long was that interview ?
A- 30-45 minutes

Q- Why did you not allow kids to be spoken to ?
A- I did not want them to get involved, that is exactly what Talford is trying to do.


Cross Questioning by DA O'boyle:


Q- Did you review Deputy Report ?
A- no

Q- There really is no reason the Deputy had to give you a copy of his report to ok it, right ?
A- right, I did not believe I was lying to the Deputy

Exhibit 10 Rupakus first written statement

Q- You stated that he walked past your house, not by your garage, didn't you ?
A- yes

Q- There was nothing about having any contact, right ?
A- right

Q- Nothing said about blood ?
A- no

Q- Nothing about assault ?
A- no

Q- Nothing about fear ?
A- no

Q- Nothing about protecting your family?
A- no

Q- You’re stating that you never admitted lying to the deputy ?
A- I do not remember

Q- You stated that you dialed star 69, then ten a message, then called Stewart
after going home and after finishing cards approx. 2 hrs later ?
A- yes

Q- Why did you call Stewart ?
A- because of the threatening call

Q- Are you the head of the PD ?
A- yes

Q- Did you call the PD ?
A- no

Q- Did you call the Sheriff Dept. ?
A- no

Q- So why did you call Stewart ?
A- because I do not know the ordinances, I called him as a Deputy, and he
advised me to Call the EPD (proof that Stewart knew the truth right then,
but never told anyone the truth either)

Q- Why did you call the village clerk?
A- for advise

Q- Did you call her to see if there was an ordinance ?
A- not really

Q- Did you call her and ask her ?
A- to a degree

Q- How much time after the phone calls, did you go down the path ?
A- 20-30 minutes

Q- I heard no testimony about the call to keep the kids inside and lock the doors, did I
A- The wife decided to let them out

Q- They where outside when you got home then ?
A- yes

Q- Did you walk toward Talford ?
A- we met in the driveway

Q- Did you gather up your kids ?
A- no

Q- Did you tell your wife to call the cops ?
A- no

Q- so you did not gather the kids up, or tell the wife to call the cops ?
A- no

Q- You felt that Talford might have weapons in his pockets, yet you did not go to the kids ?
A- no

Q- Did you ever tell the Deputy that Talford had a plot against the Village Board members ?
A- don't remember

Q- Did Talford ever hit you ?
A- no

Q- Did he swing at you ?
A- I would not let him to make contact with me

Q- You couldn’t let that happen now, could you ?
A- No

Q- Has Talford ever threatened you physically?
A- no

Q- There where never any threats to your kids ?
A- no

Q- Did you see your kids across the street ?
A- yes

Q- Where were they ?
A- I think he heard them walking, and turned to them

Q- Did you go to your girls ?
A- no

Q- Did you walk around Talford to go to your kids ?
A- no

Q- Your second interview, explain your contact with Deputy Stewart
A- I was following his recommendations

Q- Did you tell the Deputy all the details of your conversation with Stewart ?
A- no

Q- Why ?
A- because the Deputy seemed to be more worried about Stewart’s involvement

Q- So Talford never took a swing at you ?
A- I would not let him hit me

Q- So in the Village Politics ,Talford is very Active ?
A- yes

Q- Have you read his blog ?
A- yes

Q- So he has continued to be active then ?
A- not anymore

Q- So being very active, makes him disliked by the village board ?
A- yes, he distracts the order

Q- Between Dec. 2 and Dec. 5, did you have contact with the Village Clerk and Village President ?
A- no (Lie, he already admitted to speaking to them twice on 12-2-07)

Q- You state that Talford has continued to threaten and harm you since before or after April 2002 ?
A- after

Q- Exhibit. 11 was used for any other reason then ?
A- no, I do not recall anything else, or Yes, I filed a RO vs Talford

Q- You only used the second statement, not the first one for that, correct ?
A- yes

Q- So you did not have contact with the clerk or president then ?
A- no (already testified that he did talk with both, twice- LIE)




Cross Question by Loberg:

Q- Why did you call Jodi Pulk ?
A- she has the knowledge of the ordinances

Q- Did Talford threaten the kids ?
A- I thought he was at the time

Q- You see the blog information before Dec. 2nd ?
A- yes

Jurors where then excused for a break
Discussion in the courtroom-

Loberg wants self-defense
O'boyle stated that Rupakus gave the testimony that he was the aggressor
Loberg- Officers investigation was not impeded

Exhibits being rec'd
8 pictures given by Prosecuting Attorney- Taken by Deputy 12-2-07
Rupakus 1st Statement written 12-2-07 and 2nd written statements dated 12-5-07
Map of Elmwood (False marking of Talford's Home on Map Noted)
4 Loberg pictures - Taken by Robert Rupakus of his driveway - (Unknown dates of pictures)

Jury went to Break at 12:10 PM

12:30 PM- Judges directions to the Court Jury for deliberation-
1- each charge must be considered by itself

2- 5 out of 6 jurors must agree for a conviction






Closing Statements O'boyle:
Listening to Rupakus, you can tell he is an intelligent person, His arrogance has really shown through, as he slipped out additional information every chance he got, to paint Talford as a bad life. He did not define it as an assault, he did not think he was lying. You must look at who is credible, by looking at the demeanor on the stand. Believability is also important, Do you really believe his answers he told you here today? He outright lied to the Deputy . He was asked several times if lie hit Talford, with every answer being “No“. You have seen the pictures with the blood, but Rupakus states that Talford's kids planted that. He would not allow the Deputy to speak to the kids. Then he came up with the New and Improved Statement that is Bashing Talford. Rupakus admitted to lying and not allowing the Deputy to speak to the witnesses. His first statement never said anything about calling home to wife, but stated that Talford's kid was looking at him. There is No Conspiracy here. He claims that he came out, and Talford was passing his house, not popping up from behind the garage. There is a lot of missing stuff in 1st statement. Do you trust Rupakus? There was a lot of calls going around, that don‘t make any sense. .

The Deputy did not make contact with the Stewart, and he should have. Rupakus gave a second New and Improved statement that was used the very same day, to file for a Restraining Order , He LIED. Do you believe that he really felt his kids where in harm? He never took kids inside. He never called the Police. This was two hours later, and after the phone calls, this was not in the driveway, but in the roadway. Talford's statements Never Changed and he stayed Constant with all his Testimony,. The Small Town Politics are the under current of this case, and Talford is not well liked, because of it. Rupakus seen Talford, he was Drinking that day, he Lost Control and Hit Talford- remember he Admitted Lying



Loberg's Closing Statement;

Usually I don't say this, but I am offended by DA remarks. Talford over answered simple questions. Do you trust what Talford says here? Rupakus never denied blood being in the street. Rupakus said he did not want the kids involved in the village board issues. DA states No testimony on call home, sorry, that is my fault, I missed it, then he added he called the wife. He is trying to twist statements on when the calls where made, and spin on the facts being made. All the County towns are small. This does not happen anywhere. Talford has some kind of paranoia, stating he does not back down. He had stopped and made eye to eye contact at the bar. He has regular contact with him as a Village Board Member. He spoke of 3 RO, and that made him change his travel pattern. 2 years he has done that. Rupakus stays away from Talford. Talford then sees Rupakus and with his paranoia, he says that fighting words. Rupakus denies even seeing him. Talford is the one that went home and made he call. Talford said he felt it would make Rupakus displeased about it. He tells him to get his ass home to his family. I have been all around the County. On Dec. 2nd, Talford gets thirsty and Cenex being right next door to Daddy Day Care.
He does not have drink at home, like you do.(pointing to the jury members) He says he was going to both, do you believe Talford?, he is not believable. Then Loberg points at the map, trying to manipulate their minds, pushing the false info. On the map, (location of our home, on the wrong street, and wrong end of block) as true. Then he adds how the kids so happen to be by later. It is a huge coincidence that Talford came walking by when Rupakus came out to shovel.(yet never touched the shovel, just outside the door) Talford was where he wanted to be. Talford states that he never said anything. Rupakus did not know that Talford was even out there. He just wanted to be left alone. He pleaded for Talford to leave. Put yourself in his shoes, did he have the right to fear? Talford's arms where flailing and aggravated. Talford says he took shots at me, acting with a sort of bravado. He couldn't knock me down. He did not walk away. Rupakus felt he was under attack, and acted accordingly. With respect to Deputy, Exhibit 10 has no lies in it. The cover sheet listed battery, and that was over assumed. The heat of the moment, I likened what happened. He was asked if he assaulted Talford, he did not think so. He did not feel his report was obstructing. Talford stated he took a normal route, no one talks like that. What are the motives here. The Deputy did not have the right time, he did not know. His first report was 6 pages, his second one was 10 pages. The Deputy then felt he had been lied to. Take into account that disorderly conduct is a offense against public decency. The big picture is that Rupakus is innocent. Talford is like Chester the cat, he has got what he wanted.



O'boyle second closing:
You have to like Loberg's analogy, it is really cute.

His semantics of the word assault, he said “No” Three Times.

Punching someone is Pretty Damn Clear.
You should always tell the truth right away.

What reasonable person. does not tell the truth right away?

You do not trust the one that calls the village clerk, the
village president, and an attorney before telling the truth.

He tried to use the false mark on the map as well again, if there is one block difference in it,
who cares, The Deputy asked him directly, did you lie to me, and he said yes.
Why would he not allow the kids to speak to the Deputy?
The whole self-defense is a stack of playing cards.

You are really being asked to believe a LIAR .

Believe me know, Believability and credibility must be paid attention to.



Juror sworn in:
Exhibits 1-25 being entered

Note- O'boyle was giving Loberg hell for his antics during the trial.
Was not real loud, but it had to do with police report info.

Jury found Rupakus Guilty of Obstruction ( A Proven LIAR)

Note- Very same day, I rec'd a threatening email, stating to
"get out of town quietly, or have the attacks resume against my family".

Note- During the Trial, Rupakus openly lied again to the Jury, stating that he was still the

Head of the Police Committee of Elmwood.

This was a direct lie- he was removed from the Police Committee all together,
so he is far from the Head of it This information was provided by the Village
Board on May 12,2008. Just 2 days prior to the Trial.



Admitted statements, and Claimed statements

Deputy Vodinelich on the Stand
Admitted:
- 1st and 2nd written statement stated nothing about Talford being by the garage
- Getting advise from the Clerk and Deputy the same day
- He wanted 2nd interview, to tell the truth
- Hitting Talford three times
- Each hit explained
- Being told how to neutralize someone, by hitting them in the nose
- Talford never swung at him
- Talford never slapped at him
- He never threatened him at all
- He never stopped him from going to the girls
- He never walked away
- He never told Wife to call the cops
- Kids would have implicated him as telling lies
- He was drinking and had 4 mixed drinks that day
- Using the advise he rec’d from the Deputy
- The 2nd statement was due to being told to tell the truth Claims:
- This is just a Talford plot
- Boy was watching him
- Kids planted red substance to look like blood on the ground



Robert Rupakus on the Stand Admitted:
- He quit mediated contacts himself without saying anything to anyone.
- Bartender stated it was Talford
- Calling Talford’s home and leaving a message that he crossed the line
- Calling Clerk and Village President/ Deputy the same day
- Never touching the shovel, that was right next to the door
- Contact with Talford, 1st push, then hit, then hit
- Using fist on first swing, but also said it was a push
- Using fist to hit Talford, hitting his glasses and cutting his nose
- He is twice the size of the victim, also that he was taught how to neutralize someone
- total time from seeing Talford to him leaving was 30-45 seconds
- He had a second round of calls to the Clerk and Deputy, getting advise before the Deputy

arrived to question him
- Not telling the truth, due to being nervous, and believing that the innocent people get in trouble
- He seen blood after the second hit, yet claimed the boys planted that on the ground
- Being told by Loberg, that DA said to change statement to get charges against Talford
- Not allowing the kids to talk to the Deputy
- Talford walked past the house in 1st statement
- No contact was stated
- Nothing about blood
- Nothing about assault
- Nothing about fear
- Nothing about protecting family
- Not calling the PD as he was advised
- Not calling the Sheriff Dept.
- Calling Stewart as a Deputy
- Calling Jodi, Clerk to get Ordinance Information
- Did not gather up girls
- Not telling wife to call the police
- Talford had weapons, yet he did not go to kids
- Talford never hit him
- Talford never swung at him, he stated he would never allow that to happen
- No physical contact was ever made
- No threats to the kids
- Not going to the girls, though he felt fear
- Not trying to walk around Talford to get to the girls
- To following Stewarts advise, but refusing to state what that was
- Talford is active with the Village Board
- Reading Talford blog
- Board dislikes Talford because of his involvement, he distracts order
- Using 2nd written statement for RO filed also
- Not using the 1st written statement for the RO Filed

Claims by Rupakus:
- Talford is Anti-Government
- Never social with Talford
- He did not see Talford
- Boy watching him from the Post Office
- Boy was staking him out, then ran home to tell dad
- Incident was at Dusk
- Talford 1 foot within the garage, then it was next to garage, then it went to the driveway, then it was

closer to the roadway, then he finally said it was more in the middle of the driveway
- Talford had weapons in his pockets (new information again-this never came up before this trial)
- Talford had agitated and flailing arms (Loberg statement used many times before in court)
- Talford was now animated and flailing
- He was protecting himself and his wife (not the kids now)
- Deputy was paraphrasing what he stated
- That is what Talford wants, bringing the family into it
- Did not lie to the Deputy
- Head of Elmwood Police Committee
- Did not remember stating that Talford had a plot to get Board Members in trouble
- Talford heard girls walking and turned towards them

Closing Statements

DA O’boyle: Admitted:
- He outright lied to the Deputy
- He was asked several times if he hit Talford
- Not allowing the Deputy to speak to the kids, witnesses
- Using a new and improved statement to Bash Talford and file the RO as well
- Lying to the Deputy
- Majority of information was not in 1st statement
- Never took girls inside
- Never called the police
- Talford is disliked by the Village Board, due to his involvement
- He was drinking that day
- most importantly, he admitted lying

Claims by Rupakus:
- He did not define it as assault
- He did not think he was lying
- Boys planted blood
- Boys staring at him
- Talford came popping out from beside the garage
- He felt Talford put kids in harm
- This was in the driveway, not the roadway

DA Personally noticed:
- Arrogance every chance he had to paint Talford as a bad life
- New and Improved statement to Bash Talford
- There is no conspiracy here
- A lot of information missing from the 1st statement
- A lot of calls being made, but not to the right people
- He lied
- Talford’s statement stayed constant in all his testimony
- Small Town Politics are the under current of this case, Talford is not well liked for that
- He seen Talford and lost control and hit him

Loberg:
Admitted:
- He did not want his kids involved in Village Matters
- Stated incorrect information about testimony
- Regular contact between them , due to village board

Claims by Rupakus:
- Talford over answered simple questions (yet Judge jumped him, for not allowing
me to finish what I was stating, he kept trying to talk over me, and the Judge put a
stop to it, with a warning to Loberg)
- O’boyle trying to twist and spin what is being stated
- Talford has paranoia
- Talford sees Rupakus with his paranoia
- Talford goes to get soda, like he does not have any at home, like you do (jury)
- Talford lives one block over in the same location (False)
- Talford being there was a huge coincidence
- Talford’s arms flailing and aggravated
- Talford using Bravado
- Exhibit 10 has no lies
- Report was not Obstruction
- Rupakus is innocent
- Talford is like the Chester cat, he got just what he wanted
- Talford stated he went his normal route- no one ever says that

Claims VS Deputy by Loberg:
- Deputies report was not accurate
- He did not know the right time he arrived
- Cover Sheet of Report already assumed Talford the Victim and Rupakus the Suspect
- Report went from 6 pages, then added 10 more pages
- Deputy only felt like he was lied to
_ Deputy did not mark information in the report, and he should have

O’boyle Rebuttal to Closing Statement by Loberg:
- Analogy by Loberg real cute
- Semantics over the word assault
- Rupakus denied hitting Talford in three different questions
- Hitting someone is pretty damn clear
- What reasonable person does not tell the truth right away?
- You do not trust someone that has to call the Clerk, the Village president
and an attorney before he tells the truth
- Loberg tried using false marks on the map again to manipulate the facts
- Rupakus admitted lying to the Deputy
- Self Defense is not believable
- Rupakus is a Liar - END RESULT