Robert Franco Makes Fool of Wayne Forrest

FRANCO GETS WHAT HE WANTS < THEN BOASTS HE'S UNTOUCHABLE

Dear Detective Sergeant Fodor,

I left several messages for you on your (908) 575 3419 phone number.
There are a more issues pending than the emergent issues that I initially came to
you with, early on.

When I first spoke to you with my friend Andrew Zimbler, I played an audio tape for you
containing a conversation between Norman Tauger and Robert A. Franco. Upon your
hearing this tape you instructed me to go to the Bridgewater Police Department to file a complaint
which you labeled a "terrorist threat". Which I did. From that point on, I have had a difficult time deciphering a threat,
from a terrorist threat, to veiled threat.

What I do know is, what I experience with my own two eyes:

A. I am receiving a type of threat through Norman Tauger concerning what Mr. Franco is capable of doing.
B. Noman had attepmpted to list his home in Boonton but Robert Franco was so threatening to the realtors,
they left in fear. Norman has promised to pay me the money that was stolen from me upon the sale of the house
but because of the wielding power from Mr. Franco and the comfort in his mind that he can control law enforcement,
he feels that he can intimidate and control the deceptive atmosphere.
C. I filed an Ethics Complaint against Robert Franco and the complaint is being stayed upon the finding of your
criminal investigation, leaving an errant attorney to continue to allegedly extort, threaten and prey on the vulnerable.

On another note, I have become aware of some questionable activities in Somerset County which I have witness from the
victim. The party is Talia Ray. I know that many complaints have been brought to your attention concerning
the Somerset County Courthouse and certain questionable activities perpetrated by Judges.
Whereas, I do respect your decision and accept your investigative ability, I understand that you do not have the final
decision in your pursuit of a criminal case. In regard to my claims about the former judge, Frank Gasiowaski, there is no
question in my mind that there was improper, extreme bias and inappropriate activity in the Case along with extortive
activity with the Sheriff's Department, Officer DeGuillio.

My two issues are filed presently at the back of my desk, regarding the Gasiorwarski and Franco matter, but the issue of Talia Ray
is at the forefront of my desk, my mind and my day.
The two daughter's of Larry Ray are victims of an evil, vengeful plan. If I were not living it now and had not witnessed
and been victimized myself from judicial corruption, I would believe I was reading a sick and perverted novel.

Instead of hedging, I will be direct, what will happen to Talia and Ava Ray, will this obscene negligence and horror continue?
Is someone at your office taking action to protect these two minors and amputate them from the control of the court? They want
to be with their father Larry Ray.

Respectfully, I await your kind response.

Cindy Feiler-Jampel


RPC 8.3 Reporting Professional Misconduct

(a) A lawyer having knowledge that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, shall inform the appropriate professional authority.

(b) A lawyer having knowledge that a judge has committed a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct that raises a substantial question as to the judge's fitness for office shall inform the appropriate authority.

(c) This RPC does not require disclosure of information otherwise protected by RPC 1.6.

(d) Paragraph (a) of this Rule shall not apply to knowledge obtained as a result of participation in a Lawyers Assistance Program established by the Supreme Court and administered by the New Jersey State Bar Association, except as follows:

(i) if the effect of discovered ethics infractions on the practice of an impaired attorney is irremediable or poses a substantial and imminent threat to the interests of clients, then attorney volunteers, peer counselors, or program staff have a duty to disclose the infractions to the disciplinary authorities, and attorney volunteers have the obligation to apply immediately for the appointment of a conservator, who also has the obligation to report ethics infractions to disciplinary authorities, and

(ii) attorney volunteers or peer counselors assisting the impaired attorney in conjunction with is or her practice have the same responsibility as any other lawyer to deal candidly with clients, but that resonsibility does not include the duty to disclose voluntarily, without inquiry by the client, information of past violations that did not or do not pose a serious danger to clients.




Cynthia Feiler-Jampel
3308 French Drive
Bridgewater, New Jersey 08807
Phone: (908) 393 9353
synjam@mac.com

Somerset County Prosecutor’s Officer
40 North Bridge Street
P.O. Box 3000
Somerville, New Jersey 08876

April 30, 2007


Re: Somerset County Prosecutor’s Office Case File #0609-2031
(Robert and Randi Franco)


Dear Mr. Forrest and
Sergeant Detective Fodor,

I received your letter dated April 26, 2007, much to my discouragement and loss of faith, I understand that your Assistant Prosecutor did not find a criminal prosecution to be warranted concerning the alleged theft by Mr. and Mrs. Franco. I attempted to find out who the Assistant Prosecutor is, who made that determination and had there been an investigation. I believe there was not, since Norman Tauger, Larry Goldspiel nor I, were called in to the victims / witness advocacy. The letter I received is nothing more than a form letter, I received the same one concerning Judge Gasiorwaski another individual who managed to allegedly steal money from me through the guise of another attorney.

YOUR OFFICE HAS DENIED MY DUE PROCESS OF LAW



I am taking notice and I am aggrieved that you and your office have violated: TITLE 18
4. Misprision of felony
Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

In the late afternoon of April 30, I called the Prosecutor’s Office to find out who the Assistant Prosecutor was, but Sam, the person looking for the name, couldn’t even find the file/ name ”Robert Franco” listed. She asked me if it was a new claim or a juvenile matter. Was there an investigation?

I find it unfathomable that after the clear evidence of the person who directed the check to me, he giving a recorded statement saying that the check was meant for me and then changed to Randy Franco albeit she spells her name Randi ,along with the statement from Norman Tauter stating that Robert Franco set him up to cash the check and then my testimony along with an audio tape of Robert Franco himself addressing the change of the check to Randi, and finally Sergeant Fodor sending me to the Bridgewater P.D. to complain about Mr. Franco, stating a terrorist threat, resulting in the ultimate, the Assistant Prosecutor doesn’t think this rises to a crime, my understanding is diametrically opposing. Why did Sergeant Fodor waste the time of the Bridgewater P.D. if he felt there was no concern ? I think that is a crime in itself.



Wasting police time - section 5(2) Criminal Law Act 1967
(Archbold 28-224)
The offence of wasting police time is committed when a person
-1. causes any wasteful employment of the police by
-1. knowingly making to any person a false report orally or in writing tending to:
-1. show that an offence has been committed; or,
-1. give rise to apprehension for the safety of any persons or property; or,
-1. show that he has information material to any police inquiry.
It is a summary only offence carrying a maximum penalty of six months' imprisonment and/or a level 4 fine.
Proceedings may only be instituted by or with the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions: s.5(3). Consent may be granted after charge but must be before a plea of guilty is entered or summary trial. Consent must be obtained before proceedings are started by way of summons.
Examples of the type of conduct appropriate for a charge of wasting police time include:
-1. false reports that a crime has been committed, which initiates a police investigation;
-1. the giving of false information to the police during the course of an existing investigation.
The public interest will favour a prosecution in any one of the following circumstances:-
-1. police resources have been diverted for a significant period (for example 10 hours);
-1. a substantial cost is incurred, for example a police helicopter is used or an expensive scientific examination undertaken;
-1. when the false report is particularly grave or malicious;
-1. considerable distress is caused to a person by the report;
-1. the accused knew, or ought to have known, that police resources were under particular strain or diverted from a particularly serious inquiry;
-1. there is significant premeditation in the making of the report;
-1. the report is persisted in, particularly in the face of challenge.
There are statutory offences which involve wasting police time and which should be used instead of section 5(2) when there is sufficient evidence. For example:-
-1. perpetrating a bomb hoax - s51(2) Criminal Law Act 1977;
-1. false alarms of fire - s.49 Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004;
-1. fraudulent insurance claims based on false reports of crime - deception.
There is an overlap between the offence of wasting police time and other, more serious offences. Regard must be had to the factors outlined in General Charging Principles, above in this chapter and Charging Practice for Public Justice Offences, above in this chapter, which help to identify conduct too serious to charge as wasting police time, when consideration should be given to a charge of perverting the course of justice


What rises to the level of a crime in Somerset
County?

I find it very questionable that several weeks prior to receiving Detective Fodor’s letter, Mr. Franco had been telling people he wasn’t even investigated. Why did he know this before I was notified? I am the complainant.

Unless there is a reversal of your initial decision, I feel that his matter should be brought into the public domain by what ever legitimate means there are available. As this is a matter of general domain/ public interest.

Please answer my requests for resolution.

Cordially,


Cynthia Feiler-Jampel


http://truthwins.info/