Gramps,
Sorry to bother you again, but I'd like to give you some information so you can correct the record. I'm not sure why you feel the need to background check people of different opinion when you won't even give a name, but its ok since I have nothing to hide. I would like to ensure that you have the facts though:
--I am not a Lab Technician, the majority of my time is not spent doing lab work.
--I do not "calculate blood alcohol levels." I'm not even sure what that means.
--I maintain a breath alcohol program that covers 2 counties and includes almost 200 breath alcohol instruments and over 3,000 police officers.
--I respond to homicide crime scenes and work homicide cases.
--I'm in training to work rape/sexual assault cases.
--I testify as an expert witness in court---alot.
--I'm trained and qualified to work narcotics cases, but am currently not assigned to that section.
So you've, yet again, misrepresented the truth to your followers. You've taken a small fact kernal that you dug up somewhere (calculates blood alcohol levels.) and extrapolated it out that I'm a lab technician and that "Its important to understand the meaning of the word Criminalist." To all of you who follow Gramps, this is what he does. Can't you see that? I don't want any more hostilities but I don't understand why you feel the need to attack my job or me personally. All I'm doing is putting forth ideas that don't agree with yours. Like you always say, "stick to the issues." My job has nothing to do with this Did my name in the Press Enterprise upset you that much? I'm sure that Julie Farren would be glad to interview you if you'ld come forward. Please correct the record of my job duties.
Thanks, Brian
Grand PaTerrace
Sure, but you can't say the Yes represent support either. (related to Jacobsen saying 400 returned Votes Yes for Town Center out of a mailing of 4000)
It is kind of like giving a DUI test to some one 12 hours after a car accident, while they were not in custody. How would you know if they just drank or had not had something to drink for the 12 hours, or if they had smoked, or taken some other substance that may affect the calculations? IF there were a Place to say no, more No People May have returned the Mailers, so the Mailer was flawed and can not be used to indicate "More Support". It is just bad math used to tell a false story, or try to.
Gramps wrote to Brian:
I will post your request along with this article... and let the reader know that the reason I tried to clarify your job description is that saying you are A Criminalist suggests you have actually spent some PROFESSIONAL time investigating the City Council an City Manager. When you are not an Forensics Accountant, nor have you even bothered to find out what where the money came from to pay for the City Manager's Car. We as citizens do not have to prove a crime, we have to raise the issue and they have to satisfy the critics, by providing documents, records, open meetings, and so forth. We do not have the power of a court order, or a police force.
If you had said, Hi I am Brian Citizen... I would not have investigated you. However, your wife working for the city is cogent don't you think...?
Why are you so bothered by the clarification when you are so sure the GrandTerraceNews is only read by a small group of people?
If I were your employer, and indirectly I am, I am concerned you don't know what blood alcohol levels are, when you testified to tests results in court on the issue.
You are also Selling T-Shirts from your home, do you have a Resale Permit, and a business license for the City of Grand Terrace? Did you get approval from The Foundation of Grand Terrace to use their name as linkage to support your Political Views? Are the readers to assume the Foundation of Grand Terrace approves or supports your views? ( I happen to know some members don't support the views that there is nothing wrong at city hall.) I'll let the readers determine my motives, and yours. I gain nothing, my name is not known, I sell nothing, not even add space on the blog.
My motive is better government for Grand Terrace, yours well, that is still being evaluated and demonstrated by your actions and writing.
Gramps,
Support Data:
SIGNONSANDIEGO NEWS SERVICES
3:36 p.m. March 2, 2006
RIVERSIDE – A 30-year-old Moreno Valley man with a history of drunken driving convictions was ordered Thursday to stand trial on murder and other charges in connection with a hit-and-run crash that killed three people.
After a three-hour preliminary hearing, Riverside Superior Court Judge Dennis A. McConaghy ruled there was enough evidence to hold Efrain Rodriguez to answer to three counts each of murder and vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, with prior offenses, and hit-and-run driving causing death.
He is being held in lieu of $1 million bail and is due back in court March 16 for arraignment.
The charges stem from a Nov. 5 collision on Highway 60 that killed Sheila Finney, 45, her son Keith, 13, and her 13-year-old nephew Roderick Buckner, all of Moreno Valley.
Finney's husband, Nathaniel Finney Jr., 47, survived the crash. He was driving the family home from a trip to the Los Angeles County Museum of Art when the collision occurred.
Rodriguez was arrested 12 hours after the crash.
Brian Reinarz, a criminalist for the state Department of Justice, testified that he analyzed blood samples taken from Rodriguez after he was arrested, showing an alcohol content of .05, below the legal limit of .08.
Deputy District Attorney Jeanne Roy asked Reinarz to calculate the defendant's blood-alcohol level at the time of the crash, based on the sample he was given. Reinarz said it would have been .29 – more than three times the legal limit.
California Highway Patrol investigator Michael Ritter testified that he did not conduct a field sobriety test because too much time had elapsed since the crash.
Defense attorney Robert Corrado sought dismissal of the drunken driving and manslaughter counts. He argued that DUI had not been proven since Reinarz analyzed blood 12 hours after the accident, and no field sobriety test was done.
“There is no proof of a DUI,” Corrado argued. “There is no proof of gross negligence.”
Rodriguez contends he drank three beers about three hours before the accident.
The defendant has three drunken driving convictions dating to 1997. He was convicted twice of driving under the influence of alcohol in Riverside County and once in San Bernardino County.
He has three other traffic violations on his record, including one conviction for driving in excess of 100 mph, according to court documents.
From the OFFICIAL City Redevelopment Meeting Minutes:
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13, 2006
Brian Reinarz, 13909 Vivienda Court, stated that he has been listening and reading about the Town Square Project for quite some time. He has read accusations of conspiracy that involved the City Council, the City Manager, Jacobsen Family Holdings,LLC and some people would have him believe that all three bodies are conspiring to destroy our way of life. He indicated that he works in a crime lab so the first question he asks when faced with any issue is why. Why would City leaders propose and support a project that would significantly damage our City.
The only conclusion he can come to is they would not. To hear one vocal opposition group talk, everything that the City does is evil and has malice. He doesn’t feel that this is a productive discourse and he feels that it is flat out not true. If you disagree with an issue or a position that is one thing but the baseless allegations and scare tactics such as hords of teenagers rampaging through town destroying everything that they can affects the credibility of the accuser.
He feels that he speaks for the majority out there that doesn’t have time to come to the meetings. He lives in Grand Terrace and his daughter goes to school here and plays soccer here and the residents that he has discussed this project with over the last year or so are firmly for the project and virtually all are in favor of Jacobsen completing the project.
He stated that it is easy to say that there is a conspiracy when things don’t go your way but doesn’t feel that does anything to further intelligent debate no matter what the issue is or who you are debating with. He sees good people working hard to make out City a better place to live.
I think Council has shown that they are really looking out for everyone in the City. He feels that once everyone cools off they will realize eventually that this project is good for the City and the Council will make the decision that is best for the City as a whole.
From Your OWN Web Page:
From your own web site:
Brian Reinarz
I'm a political junkie who loves my family, my job, and living in Grand Terrace.
Contact
Email Address: Email Me
Website:
PGP Key
One-Line Bio
I'm a political junkie who loves my family, my job, and living in Grand Terrace.
Biography
My name is Brian Reinarz and I am the youngest of 14 children.
I was born and raised in Northern Minnesota until I left to join the United States Air Force at age 18.
I spent 9 years as an Active Duty Air Force Security Policeman and 12 years as an Air Force Reserve Medic, for a total of 21 years of military service.
I've earned a Bachelor of Science Degree in Biology from the University of California, Riverside, and a Master of Science Degree in Criminalistics from California State University, Los Angeles.
I am currently employed as a Criminalist for the California Department of Justice's Riverside Crime Laboratory.
I am married and have one child, a daughter.
We've lived in Grand Terrace since September of 2001, we love it here, and never intend to leave.
I've always been interested in politics, national and local, and hope to become involved on a local level.
Gramps Says: YOU provide the above... Detail...
Perhaps you should investigate where the cars that were purchased for Tom Schwab are, and Where the money came from to pay for them...
Explain how the use of RDA funds marked for Low and Moderate Income housing should be spent on a Car for the use of the City Manger, and when that car is replaced every 5 years it just evaporates...
The state auditor found this to be a miss use of funds. Justify your support for that single issue.
You said there was no basis for the law suit. A judge found a basis to reverse the Senior Villas.
You say you looked at the documents regarding the house purchase. explain how the house sale from the VA to a Private Individual was ok, then to flip it to the RDA, and then the RDA to the City and the City to the City Manager, without any public notice during the process? That is not legal as noted in the Audit of the RDA...
Just because an arrest and a trial did not happen as a result of the audit, does not make it a leagal act, nor does it make it a right, or ethical act. This is for the city and the city manager to prove, not the citizen. Failure to prove these things the Council Members not holding Mr. Schwab in account, perpetuate the same actions over and over.
If any one has hurt your reputation, YOU have done it to yourself.
Untill then, it is reasonable to investigate the representation of authority or proffessional capacity when you express your "FINDINGS". You made You and Your credibility an issue by your words, and actions.
Angery, no, I am not angery. I am determined not to let smoke and mirrors miss direct the purpose of finding the truth of what is happening in the City Hall. When some one uses their proffession or educational elitist attitude to say, believe me... against the evidence, that I have to consider an act of diversion. I then look for motive, associations, and question the source of the statement. Angery, no... I am not angery.
Brian then Emailed:
You are correct, the article does suggest some connection, but I had nothing to do with that. I presented myself as a citizen and she made that connection, which I intend to talk to her about. I know what "blood alcohol levels" are, I just don't "calculate them. We have instrumentation to do that.
Yet someone else added:
He did not disclose to the reporter his wife worked for the City and he contacted her. If he does homicides like he does the City the murders have nothing to worry about. Would he be an expert witness with three months training like he has become of the City after attending meeting for only three months.
Gramps concludes, in his FINAL email he did say he PRESENTED himself as a Citizen... I suppose that means HE called or contacted the Reporter. Gamps also knows he has spoken the idea of being in Law Enforcement at a Council Meeting on the topic of the Town Center. So its mention in the PE was what it was. HOW it got there is between Brian and Julie.
Brian offers a final correction:
I didn't, and if I did inadvertently, I didn't mean to. Post this to make it very clear. I have no auditing of forensic acounting training or experience! Nothing even close. I am acting solely as a private resident of Grand Terrace.
Brian
