Mr. Walsh,

 

In my letter yesterday morning, I neglected to address spurious comments made by Tampa AP Bureau Chief, Vickie Chachere.

 

When I spoke briefly with Ms. Chachere last month (or longer; I forget) in my attempt to return the message of Mitch regarding Dave Sommer's thoughts that Stacy requested from me, Chachere made complaints that I wrote a "false" piece about the Associated Press.

 

When I asked her what she meant, she replied that "you know what I'm talking about," or words to that effect.

 

Let me be perfectly clear, Mr. Walsh: My publication, The Register, has **never** published slanderous of false material. After reflection, it seemed she might be talking about the piece below, but again, let me reiterate:

 

1) my paper did not purport to "be" the AP in its story (which incidentally, never published as of yet), however I see how Chachere may have been confused by the byline, which indicated that The Register was reporting on a story written by the AP.

 

2) my paper did not falsely accuse your bureau. The AP indeed did write the attributed story, as The Register claimed. (I mailed that to you, to offer feedback, but we never published it.)

 

First, I apologize for overlooking this in my email to you yesterday.

 

Second, I apologize for waiting roughly a month to address Chachere's cryptic and frantic comment, but my handlers insisted that you would need some "heavyweight" ammunition, such as the "AP Bias" press release signed by 23 citizens and containing strong proof of AP bias before you would be able to respond appropriately. The theory at that time was that it would be better to wait to contact you, becasue you might be under pressure by your colleagues (who might biew me as a "little person" to be ignored) to dismiss our claims at that time, because, without the "strong proof of bias -and voices of many citizens," 23 in all, I might add, you might be inclined to view me as a "Lone Ranger," and allow Chachere's activities to continue, and brand me as a troublemaker.

 

I have shown the proper patience in waiting until the right time to contact you, and I do not accuse you of being ready to dismiss me (as if you didn't care if I lived or died), but my "handlers" pointed towards your hanging up the phone (when we spoke last month) and urged I exercise caution.

 

I have heeded that caution and exercised patience and restraint in replying. I hope that you will consider the "merit" of my email, instead of just asking yourself "if this fellow, Watts, a 'big player' with 'gravitas'," or "can I treat him as less than a person," a "lower class" creature.

 

Here below is the letter in question, as it appears in my files, and I thank Vickie for provoking me: I am reminded that I needed to publish this news item which has set on the shelf too long now. (I may just publish this email instead.)

 

Subj: AP refuses to refer Tampa couple to local news media; Does story

Date: 5/2/04 6:41:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time

From: Gww1210

To: VChachere@ap.org, mstacy@ap.org, kwalsh@ap.org, pr@ap.org

CC: Gww1210, Gww12102002@yahoo.com, phenn@zimp.org, Life4terri, Fight4Terri

BCC: (suppressed list)

Lakeland, Florida (The Register) -- AP refuses to refer Tampa couple to local news media; Does story:

"TAMPA, Florida (AP) -- A couple who let their teenage daughter turn into an invalid as cancer consumed her body were sentenced to 10 years in prison."

In a recent set of events, the Associated Press of Tampa has given two disparate treatments to similar stories.

When Bill and Muriel Conroy committed chapter 825 felonies under Florida Law, the AP gladly did a story, according to online CNN source: <http://edition.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/02/cancer.crime.ap>

However, in an earlier attempt to break a out similar story by Lakeland citizen, Gordon Watts, the AP's Mitch Stacy of their Tampa, Florida bureau, told Watts that the standards for AP coverage were higher than that of a local paper, and Tampa AP bureau chief, Vickie Chachere told Watts that he should scout around to local news media for coverage.

Watts has two pending suits seeking enforcement of abuse laws in both the 2nd district appellate court and the state's supreme court.

The state's highest court has accepted 2 of Watts' 3 recent petitions for review, a racial discrimination suit alleging discrimination based on Native American heritage, and the enforcement suit, for Schiavo, similar to suits that voters often bring to the courts, seeking enforcement of elections laws, a valid but less important type of mandamus. Watts is the only entity anywhere to seek the writ of Habeas Corpus for Schindler-Schiavo, who is being held at a hospice, even though she is acknowledged by all parties as not being "terminal." Habeas is a versatile writ, which can be used to challenge child custody, an illegally imposed parole, or even improperly computer prison gain time, and Watts is alleging that Schiavo's treatment is not legal, because the deprivation of needed basic medical services and food goes well beyond the court order regarding removal of the feeding tube.

Watts' suit alleges, among other things, that felonies are being committed and sanctioned by local law enforcement, and names the local police in the suit. In defense of the claims that he does not have legal standing, Watts refers to the election suits, in which the voter is not running in the race and yet sues. Watts also opines that the State routinely removes children from homes in which a mere allegation of abuse is brought, but leaves Schiavo in the care of the hospice, even after having endured multiple abuses, such as lost of 5 teeth, bed sores, vomiting episodes, and a mysterious refusal by staff to allow visitation or required therapies and rehabilitation, mandated by chapter 744 of State Law.

Mr. Watts questions estranged husband and guardian, Michael Schiavo's motives in his disabled wife's care. "If he were innocent, why would he insist on cremation, which would prevent an autopsy that could clear his name in regards to allegations of spousal abuse. Also, why in the world would Mike want to deny even examination and therapy offered by local doctors, if he were innocent?" Watts thinks that only a guilty person wanting to silence the witness would have such a motive, but if he is innocent, he should have no problem in letting such greats as Nobel nominee, Dr. William M. Hammesfahr, a Clearwater neurologist, give expertise in care for free for his disabled wife.

Watts has pending complaints before the Florida bar that two attorneys involved in the Schiavo case have committed Bar violations. Watts alleges that Schiavo attorney, George Felos has a conflict of interest in his referral of his client to Woodside Hospice, as he was a former board member. Watts also alleges that Felos and Pinallas Park attorney, Chris Hammonds, have advised their clients that it was OK to commit felony crimes, and points out that attorney-client privilege ends when a client admits to having plans to commit a crime, the latter circumstance mandating that the attorney reveal his or her clients plans and advise the client that such actions are against the law.

Watts' pending suits are as follows:

SC04-68 A case accepted for review by the Fla Supreme Court alleging a state agency did not investigate allegations of racial mistreatment, stemming from being asked to leave from a Tallahassee motel, based, according to the police report, on his "Indian feather" being offensive ethnic attire.

SC04-66 A recount lawsuit, not accepted for review by the State's highest court, which alleges that former gubernatorial candidate, Janet Reno, was not given the mandatory machine recount due candidates who were defeated by a margin of less than one-half percent, as was done with presidential candidate, Al Gore and others.

SC03-2420 A petition for writs of Habeas Corpus, Quo Warranto, Prohibition, and the extraordinary writ of mandamus, in direct intervention of both State Law, in general, and Theresa "Terri" Schiavo, specifically. Watts is allowed to intervene, even though he is not an immediate family member, because he is the closest person under "next friend" standards set out by case law. The State's Highest
Court has accepted for review this case, and it is pending.

2D04-414 A similar case as SC03-2420, but before the 2nd DCA; the court has denied review, after charging Watts a fee. Watts plans to petition the court for a rehearing.

Permission is hereby given by Register editor-in-chief to use this story, in part or in its entirety, so long as attribution is given to the author, Gordon Watts.

Permission is given to do news coverage of this news piece.

Gordon Wayne Watts
BS, The Florida State University, Biological and Chemical Sciences
AS, United Electronics Institute
821 Alicia Road
Lakeland, FL 33801-2113
http://HomeTown.AOL.com/Gww1210 <http://hometown.aol.com/Gww1210> or http://www.GeoCities.com/Gordon_Watts32313 <http://www.oocities.org/Gordon_Watts32313>
Home: (863) 688-9880 Work: (863) 686-3411 Voice&FAX: (863) 687-6141
Gww1210@aol.com ; Gww12102002@Yahoo.com
Truth is the strongest, most stable force in the Universe.
TRUTH doesn't bend to the will of tyrants.
Gordon Wayne Watts
Get Truth.

"First, they [Nazis] came for the Jews. I was silent. I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists. I was silent. I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists. I was silent. I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me. There was no one left to speak for me." (Martin Niemoller, given credit for a quotation in The Harper Religious and Inspirational Quotation Companion, ed. Margaret Pepper (New York: Harper &Row, 1989), 429 -as cited on page 44, note 17, of Religious Cleansing in the American Republic, by Keith A. Fornier, Copyright 1993, by Liberty, Life, and Family Publications.

(Actually, they may not have come for the Jews first, as it's far more likely they came for the prisoners, mentally handicapped, and other so-called "inferiors" first -as historians tell us -so they could get "practiced up;" But, they did come for them -due to the silence of their neighbors -and due, in part, to their own silence. So the general idea is correct: "Speak up now, or forever hold your peace." --gordon)

*
*

 

 

In a message dated 8/5/2004 3:49:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, Gww1210 writes:

Mr. Walsh:

Subj 1: Regarding our phone call about a month ago:

Subj 2: Florida AP inaccuracies are criticized by a local attorney's highly rated blog, and then this charge is repeated in today's PRWeb.com press release about the "Schiavo" case. (said press release was #4 when it published this morning at 3am EST)

 

I am writing you becasue you had agreed to speak with me over some treatment I received at the hands of one of your employees, but when I began to tell you about it, my mother, who had a psych attack over the recent death of my cousin Reno, picked up the phone and began yelling that she had to use it. I am sorry that this may have offended you, but please respect the death of my cousin and respect my mother: Please don't blame me for this and use this as an exuse to refuse to consider the situation with your bureau chief. (Remember: When I asked if you had a moment, you gave your "word" that you did.)

 

When one has a dispute, you can either go to war, or try writing a nice letter: I will try the latter alternative, and acknowledge that you are the boss in this situation, the "Big Chief," or "Big Cheese," as one might call it --even more so than, say, Mike Vascillinda, the "Dean of the Florida news corps." (Translation: You can make the decision about your employee as you see fit.)

 

Now, to the point, here's my criticism of your Bureau:

 

The very talented Mitch Stacey of your Tampa bureau (not the subject of my complaint here), had told me that he would only give news coverage on my involvement in the sSchiavo case, were I to "win big" in court -and even said he'd be the 1st to interview me. Now, while I did not like his prejudice (the AP does coverage on "big name" attorneys for merely speaking on the matter: Example -George Tragos, the "Manuel Noriega" attorney helping the Schindlers --I kick butt and am ignored), nonetheless I accepted my bitter medicine and peddled on.

 

However, several months, I am not sure how many, elapsed, and noticing that the Supreme Court refused to dismiss my case, I felt this was proof my Schiavo court filings weren't bogus garbage: Even after several court orders asking me to make modifications, still no dismissal, so I called mitch back up and pointed this anomoly to him. He said that he respected the opinion of Dave Sommer of the Tampa Trib, and asked I get his take on it. -Mitch had suggested if I had a story that a locap paper would pick it up. However, 4 professionals disagree:

 

A Ledger news reporter (Harrold muddiman) had already asked me to get the AP to do the story so they could "pick it up off the wire," and then, upon calling Dave, and his boss, Rick Barry, not the most likable guys, i might add, still all four of us concurred: Big stories like this should go to the AP. (I liked Dave's comment: What's mitch trying to do? Bury me under the train -or something like that! --He obviously meant to say Mr. Stacey was trying to  "pass the buck,")

 

so, what would you have done in my shoes? I called mitch back with the news, but who answered? The talented Vicke Chachere. I have spoken with her about the schiavo case approximately 2-3 times, and the 1st time I spoke with her it was when SHE called MED back regarding my racial discrimination treatment (I got a cop to admit in a report he tossed me due only to my race; That too is a court case and pending in the supreme ct)

 

According to Vickie, my line was busy, as I was fielding calls from other news media, and when I called her back she was interested -until she found out my minority status was American Indian -not black --wrong skin color -not story. But, I didn't make an issue of it or compalin at the time -or ever, as I recall.

 

however, when mitch had asked me to get dave's opinion, what would *you* have done? I called him back, but Vickie "The Interceptor" Chachere intercepted the phone call.

 

now, you can keep her on as an employee if you want, but it is my duty to report the facts to you: She went off on me saying I was harrassing the AP or something like that? And she asked I never all any ap bureau ever. Huh? Am I missing something?

 

I rarely interact with the AP, and two times at least (when vickie called me and when mitch asked me to call him back w a report), I was not the one making the move, only reacting.

 

The result? I had to call you up that day, and I know you were busy. The secondary result to this mindlessness is subject 2: The ap is being lambasted in the press:

 

The highly-rated: http://AbstractAppeal.com website (atty matt conigliaro of Carlton Flieds law firm, clearwater, i think), in its, I believe, June 10 news, went off on the ap's inaccurate reporting of who initiated the motion to certify the Bush appeal to the supreme ct -- your agency inaccurately reported it was George Felos' (Schiavo atty) motion, when in fact it was on the court's own motion.

 

I took things a step further, and when contributing to a staff report of my paper, supplamented a press release on the wire: No, I wan not alone in this: 23 of us contributed to this story slash press release, but I got to bring up the inaccuracies in the AP's reporting , and, as promised, tie this in with the "racial bias" of the Tampa Tribune, which makes the hook or logical link to your agency fit --not well, I might add.

 

So, I know you are not intimidated at all by this threat to embarass or expose your agancy and other racially prejudiced news media (Trib got a big mention), but since you may need to have an excuse to act, and since I know you really do want to get the news out, here is your excuse:

 

As I've said, youre the "big cheese," and you may do whatever you like, but, just as I've told Gil Thelen, don't say I didn't tell you so if your tampa bureau chief, Chachere, **embarrases** you. I will sympathize, but I will not empathize, nor will I be able to bail you out.

 

PS: Would it hurt anything if your emploees were able to speak to me without yelling --and would it hurn mitch and vicke to cover the story instead of censor the press? Or, is there some importan purpose served by keeping the public uninformed and in the dark? If there is, please let me know, and I may learn something I didn'y know. (You know, I don't know it all.)

 

PS: Vickie said to not contactthe AP, and I have not phoned her, at her request, but she does not tell you who you speak with by email --resultantly I am emailling you this one short note --however, I must give her and mitch a copy, becasue I am not going to speak behind their back at all. Muddiman, Barry, and Sommer can be contacted to verify or deny my claims about what they said, should it become necessary.

 

I would be glad to learn what purpose is served by the news blackout and the rude behavior; and, when you answer me, I will be awaiting your wise answer to tell me this "hidden purpose."

 

Gordon Wayne Watts
BS, The Florida State University, Biological and Chemical Sciences
AS, United Electronics Institute
821 Alicia Road
Lakeland, FL 33801-2113http://HomeTown.AOL.com/Gww1210 or http://www.GeoCities.com/Gordon_Watts32313
Home: (863) 688-9880 Work: (863) 686-3411 Voice&FAX: (863) 687-6141
Gww1210@aol.com ; Gww12102002@Yahoo.com
Truth is the strongest, most stable force in the Universe.
TRUTH doesn't bend to the will of tyrants.
Gordon Wayne Watts
Get Truth.

"First, they [Nazis] came for the Jews. I was silent. I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists. I was silent. I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists. I was silent. I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me. There was no one left to speak for me." (Martin Niemoller, given credit for a quotation in The Harper Religious and Inspirational Quotation Companion, ed. Margaret Pepper (New York: Harper &Row, 1989), 429 -as cited on page 44, note 17, of Religious Cleansing in the American Republic, by Keith A. Fornier, Copyright 1993, by Liberty, Life, and Family Publications.

(Actually, they may not have come for the Jews first, as it's far more likely they came for the prisoners, mentally handicapped, and other so-called "inferiors" first -as historians tell us -so they could get "practiced up;" But, they did come for them -due to the silence of their neighbors -and due, in part, to their own silence. So the general idea is correct: "Speak up now, or forever hold your peace." --gordon)
*
*