Posts Tagged ‘Private Investigation’
Melinda Kidder: Wonder Why?
I have had a few people ask me about my blog post pertaining to Melinda Kidder: Melinda Kidder: Jealous, Wanna Be Private Investigator! I have had a few people actually tell me that I may have been a little too harsh, until I explained……… Once my friendly critics understood what happened, as much as I could intelligently explain to them, they no longer thought I was being so harsh. Believe it or not, there was a time that Melinda Kidder and I were friends, or so I thought…..
Melinda Kidder and Rick Gurley in “friendlier times”
What has happened to me the past six (6) months has happened due to vilest of human emotions, JEALOUSY! I am a high school graduate, that “screwed up” and acted like a natural born THUG, when I was a younger adult. I am a convicted felon! I was of a total criminal mindset when I was a younger man. I KNOW what I was, and I KNOW what I am! When I tell my story, when I talk about my early adulthood years, people are amazed because they are talking to a successful business man that they just never thought could run their own business, much less a Private Investigation business, and WAY much less working in the legal field; and be very successful at it. I am not bragging, I don’t usually take the time to toot my own horn, and I am not doing that now, but if I am going to tell you that I am successful, you need to know what my gauge for success is, right? So here it is; I helped parents recover their abducted children, I have assisted innocent people in not being wrongly convicted on serious felony charges that could have put them in prison for ten (10) to twenty (20) years, I have tracked down and returned to custody dangerous fugitives from other countries that otherwise might not have been held accountable for their accused crimes. I have seen a father’s tears when he got his daughter back that he thought he might not have ever seen again, I have seen tears of joy in a mother’s face who’s daughter was found not guilty on two (2) of the most vilest charges imaginable, and I have witnessed a private businessman awe as he thanked me for getting two fugitives out of Mexico for him, that nobody else could touch. I have seen $35,000.00 retainers, I have made $250.00/Hr. with NO college education. Most of all, I have changed my life, I am a pretty decent person, still angry, still not capable of tolerating bad people that like to victimize others, but a decent person, maybe not a good person but still a decent person. Yes, I believe that I am a success story, maybe not as great a success story as many others are, but none the less a success story! What is funny here is that Melinda Kidder has admitted that she is jealous of me, just ask her. Here is the statement she made in 2010:
I’ve considered whether its jealousy on my part, and perhaps I do have some jealousy that you might have more business coming in than I do.
I think that is as close to an admission of jealousy from Melinda Kidder as I need to have. What is even funnier is that Melinda Kidder wastes her time being jealous of all of the things she can actually make happen for herself, and not being concerned about any of the things that she should be trying to change within herself. Melinda Kidder is jealous of the money I make, and the business I bring in which is an uneven flow for all of us, meaning money and success comes and it goes for us all. Money and success are things that come and go in all of our lives, it is never constant; and some people never learn that. What is even more concerning is that Melinda Kidder never thought to consider once how she could make the changes in herself that I made in myself, so she would actually have the amount of business coming in that she perceived me to have, which is what she should have been concentrating on all along.
We all have trying times. I just had another trying time in my life, with one former employee trying to sabotage my company, and another one not being smart enough to see it. This latest round of what I like to call “Fuckery” bought on by this dishonest, morally challenged employee caused me a lot of problems. During this time of “attempted Fuckery” by one of my former employees, somehow or another Melinda Kidder managed to insert herself right in the middle of it. I wonder how? You know, I had one phone call with Melinda Kidder that lasted three (3) minutes in the past three (3) years. I was going to give Melinda Kidder some “over-flow cases”, as to extend an olive branch to her; however Melinda Kidder refused to sign a non-disclosure agreement and that precludes me from assigning case work to sub-contractors. I mean, (and let this be a lesson to the consumer) if a Private Investigator can not guarantee you that they will keep your information confidential unless under court order, or if the Private Investigator does not have a confidentiality clause in their contract; do you really want to risk giving sensitive information to that Private Investigator? So, I concluded my conversation with Melinda Kidder and “subbed” out the work to someone else. But here are the questions: How did Melinda know that my former employee had a court action against me, it was only listed on CaseNet by Case Number, not by either parties name? How did Melina Kidder even know who to get in touch with in regards to my case? She sure had to contact someone in regards to my case, because she was a witness against me in this case that was initiated by a former employee of mine. Melinda Kidder had to make an effort to try to find out what was going on after that phone call I had with her. So, there was an active effort on her part to dig into my personal business to find out about this case initiated against me by a former employee of mine. Why did Melinda Kidder have to dig into any of this, she should have just hung up the phone and moved on and minded her own business; just like I did in regards to her. Nope, Melinda had to try to insert herself into something that was NONE of her business. I mean, Melinda Kidder could not even truthfully testify that she had any idea about what cases I was calling her about, so what do you think her purpose was in my case? Fortunately Melinda Kidder did not lie under oath, but it was not because she is “The Investigator With Integrity”, it was because she is the Investigator that knows Rick Gurley records his phone conversations!
Here is what is REALLY sad, I bought Melinda Kidder into this business. Yeah, I really did. in 2005 I bought a desk from Melinda Kidder at her home, her and I got to talking and she asked what I did for a living and I told her; back then Melinda Kidder was driving a school bus. Melinda Kidder expressed an interest in the Private Investigation business, so I showed her how to apply for a license, where to get an insurance bond at, and what software might be useful to her for running her Private Investigation business. I even gave Melinda a few cases, and paid her pretty well to work those cases. Before she denies it by saying as she said to me once that I never gave her anything but a client that did not pay her, ask her about this picture below:
Retainer Check To Melinda Kidder
Now due to Melinda Kidder putting herself in the middle of a situation that was none of her business, she has caused me to blog about it and put some of her business out there; cause and effect. Melinda Kidder is her own worst enemy, now any time she is working a case that goes to court and opposing counsel does a search on her on the Internet, they will find this blog post: Melinda Kidder: Jealous, Wanna Be Private Investigator! And they will find this excerpt from the blog post:
My attorney was going to “obliterate” her on the stand, but after we saw that she actually told the truth under oath, my attorney and I made a decision not to bring out the fact that Melinda Kidder suffers from memory lapses. Just ask her. Ask Melinda if she did not get sick about 10 years ago, and if her illness did not cause her short term and long term memory problems. To any attorney that ever has a case against her, just ask her while she is on the stand about any illness she might of had, what the effects were, and if it affected her memory, and if it STILL affects her memory. Melinda Kidder does not make a good witness in any case due to her illness imposed memory problems. ATTORNEYS TAKE NOTE! I am happy to be a witness that Melinda Kidder personally told me that she contracted an illness, that she had to have a brain operation, and that it caused her and still does cause her short term and long term memory loss problems
And so, Melinda Kidder will have given the court another credibility issue to consider in any case she might testify in. A piece of advice Melinda Kidder: “You don’t piss off the keeper of the secrets by trying to publicly humiliate him, you either KILL the keeper of the secrets or you leave him alone”.
Melinda Kidder: Jealous, Wanna Be Private Investigator!
Back in 2008 when Joseph Lucero and Pam Smith were in court over some differences that they had, which seemed to arise from a student-professor relationship that they had when Joseph Lucero attended MU; I knew that Melinda Kidder was not really cut out for Private Investigation work. Not REAL Private Investigation work.
I remember the day as clear as if it was yesterday. Randall Johnston and George Smith two top-notch civil attorneys in Columbia, MO. were representing Joseph Lucero. Now George Smith and Randall Johnston are some of the best civil attorneys that I know of, they just have the experience to be two of the best civil attorneys that I know! On the day that Melinda Kidder took the stand to testify for Pam Smith and Randall Johnston made her leave the courtroom crying like a little baby, YES actually broke down in tears; I knew Melinda Kidder was not cut out for Private Investigation work and this pretty well proved it. Private Investigation work requires one to be tough, “thick skinned”, hard to intimidate, and cool under pressure. Anyone that actually breaks down and cries because some attorney raised their voice at them under cross-examination, has NONE of these qualities!
What is shameful is that I got Melinda Kidder started in the Private Investigation business. Back in 2005 – 2006 I bought a desk from her, and we got to talking and I told her what I did for a living. Melinda Kidder seemed interested in what I did, and wanted to start her own Private Investigation business; so I showed her where to get an insurance bond that was required by the City of Columbia back then, where to apply, introduced her to a few attorneys, and helped her along. I have to admit, I had my reservations; I told my fiancé that she would probably cause me a few problems because she was a short, fat, lesbian and card carrying man-hater. Okay, now I seem mean, cruel, even discriminatory; don’t I? Well, just hold on a second. Not all short, fat lesbians are man-haters, and not all man-haters are short, fat lesbians, and there is certainly nothing wrong or bad with or about being short, over-weight, or a lesbian. I think a person should be free to choose their sexual orientation, I don’t think a person can control their height, and I think a person’s weight is what it is; but when you have a female that openly hates men (except for the men that have female qualities that she can like), and you have these other descriptors that also illustrate something about her personality, then it is worth mentioning in a blog post like this. So, when you have a short, fat lesbian that is a man-hater; any man that associated with her will always have a potential problem, and what happened between Melinda Kidder and I is a classic illustration of that! If you, the reader ever wonder what Melinda Kidder’s problem was with me after she got into the Private Investigation business; just ask her about this single statement listed below that she made in a letter to me in 2010:
I’ve considered whether its jealousy on my part, and perhaps I do have some jealousy that you might have more business coming in than I do.
JEALOUSY is a terrible thing. Only pathetic people would rather sit around and be jealous than to actually be what they are jealous of. Remember this; better to be the one that inspires jealousy than to be the one that is inspired by jealousy!
Just as early as 3 months ago, I tried to offer Melinda Kidder some work, think of it as an “Olive Branch”; and Melinda Kidder would not sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement; which is standard in my company before I sub-contract any work. I was going to give Melinda Kidder some of my “over-flow”; it was about 6 cases. Melinda Kidder turned the work down, and then immediately ran to one of my former employees that had bought a court action against me (THAT I JUST WON) and made her believe that I was trying to have her investigated. Melinda Kidder and one of her “cohorts” on the west coast also tried to cause some problems with some of the tools that I subscribe to in my line of work. None of this has worked, but it was not for lack of trying on her part.
Melinda Kidder had to testify in the civil action between myself and my former employee, and fortunately for her she had just enough decency in her to tell the truth under oath; although I must admit I was shocked when she did. My attorney was going to “obliterate” her on the stand, but after we saw that she actually told the truth under oath, my attorney and I made a decision not to bring out the fact that Melinda Kidder suffers from memory lapses. Just ask her. Ask Melinda if she did not get sick about 10 years ago, and if her illness did not cause her short term and long term memory problems. To any attorney that ever has a case against her, just ask her while she is on the stand about any illness she might of had, what the effects were, and if it affected her memory, and if it STILL affects her memory. Melinda Kidder does not make a good witness in any case due to her illness imposed memory problems. ATTORNEYS TAKE NOTE! I am happy to be a witness that Melinda Kidder personally told me that she contracted an illness, that she had to have a brain operation, and that it caused her and still does cause her short term and long term memory loss problems.
This is Melinda Kidder and I outside of my office back in the days she was playing along and being nice to me to “get what she could get”:
See? Short and Fat!
Now, remember that this is the Private Investigator that claims to run a company that touts having “The Investigators With Integrity”.
Stay tuned, there will be an entire series of articles on people like this, that have tried to damage my business to promote their own, and how they conspired to do so. Hopefully, this blog will give you a good idea of who to steer clear of when the need arises to do business in my profession.
NEW TECHNOLOGY AT RMRI, INC. EQUALS GREATER CAPABILITIES
We Are In The Age Of Information
As we progress in this technological world we find that information has become a commodity; and accurate, current information is a precious commodity. It is not enough to just have information on a person or a business when there is a need to investigate a person or a business, the information must be actionable! There is only one way that information is actionable and that is if it is current, accurate, and in-depth.
Today there are more files kept on consumers than ever before. We all have a file! There can be no doubt that we all have a vast amount of information that is kept about us in a file on a computer, somewhere. Rarely do we get to see all of the information that is archived and stored about us. One of the problems with accessing this information is that it is broken up into pieces and stored on various computers, depending on the category and classification of this information. There is no central repository for this information, but we are getting close to having a central repository for consumer data. So, the problem for the consumer that has a legitimate need for this information is ACCESS!
While there is no known central repository for consumer data, there is technology that can pull these files on consumers from the various storage mediums that they are housed in and combine them into one report. Even with this technology there is still a problem for the consumer. That problem is accuracy and “freshness”. In order to act on information one has to have accurate and up to date information. Personal data archived on computer systems is often “stale” and inaccurate by the time it is made available to the consumer. In order to overcome this problem, one has to have access to data coming directly from the terminal as it is being archived in the system, instead of access to “canned data” that has been archived for three (3) to six (6) months, and have the resources to check and verify the sources of information against alternate sources of the same information.
Once there is a system in place that can tackle these two (2) problems, a better, more accurate and current grade of information can be produced for those that have a legitimate need for it. RMRI, Inc. has tackled these two (2) problems! RMRI, Inc. is not relying on one (1) database to solve these problems, nor are we simply ordering a report and reselling it. We have developed a streamlined process by which multiple databases are pulled together and the information from those databases is put into a cue where it is checked for integrity and accuracy, and then all of the relevant information that has passed the necessary checks for accuracy, freshness, and integrity are then put into a consumer report with visual mapping, that is actionable!
NOW THE CONSUMER THAT HAS A LEGITIMATE AND LEGAL NEED HAS ACCESS TO GREATER, MORE ACCURATE, AND UP TO DATE INFORMATION THAN EVER BEFORE; AT AN AFFORDABLE COST!
RMRI, Inc. now has the technology to deliver actionable information to our clientele! From detailed current location information to in-depth criminal histories all the way to full, all inclusive National Comprehensive Reports that span everything from location information to utility information to asset information, criminal and civil records; and RMRI, Inc. can quickly put it at your fingertips.
RMRI, Inc. now has the latest, cutting edge technology to offer our clientele actionable investigative intelligence at competitive industry prices. Considering the value of accurate and current intelligence over stale, outdated data our clientele can expect significant long term savings in time and money when in need of investigative intelligence.
BRIEF PRICE LIST
NATIONWIDE CRIMINAL RECORD SCAN: $50.00
NATIONWIDE CIVIL RECORD SCAN: $50.00
NATIONWIDE CIVIL AND CRIMINAL RECORD SCAN: $75.00
LOCATOR REPORT: $100.00
LOCATOR REPORT WITH BUSINESS AFFILIATIONS AND EMPLOYMENT SCAN: $150.00
COMPREHENSIVE BACKGROUND SCAN: $250.00
VISUAL MAPPING: ADD $25.00
THIS IS ONLY A PARTIAL LISTING; PLEASE CALL FOR ANY CUSTOM REQUESTS
TOLL FREE: (888) 571-0958 OR CELL: (573) 529-4476
Ricky B. Gurley.
Confidentiality: Good P.I.’s Remain Silent About Their Cases And Clients!
I have been on the Internet for a very long time, probably longer than most Private Investigators have. I am always amazed at the information one can find on the Internet. Most of the information on the Internet is information that we freely give about ourselves. Between social networks, email, and the ”deep web”, we can find out almost anything about anyone. It has become accepted and even expected that the consumer will inadvertently give out private information about their self on the Internet in current times. But what about Private Investigators? One would think that a Private Investigator would be cautious of what they allow others to see about them and their business on the Internet. Sadly, this does not seem to be the case.
The Private Investigation business is a funny business, while the Private Investigator has to be able to keep his or her case information confidential, he or she also has to find an effective way to advertise or market on the Internet these days, also. Often times Private Investigators blur the lines between marketing and giving out confidential information on the Internet. I was amazed eight years ago when I found a naked picture of one Private Investigator on the Internet. Not surprisingly this Private Investigator was the very person responsible for their naked picture being on the Internet. If this Private Investigator had not sent their naked picture to other unsuspecting people of the opposite sex in email, their picture would have never been found on the Internet. This is just an example of how careless one Private Investigator had become with their information. But there are literally hundreds of examples like this where Private Investigators have shared a little too much on the Internet.
We all remember the Baby Lisa Irwin Case, and one Private Investigator’s attempt to grab some attention by proclaiming how he was working this case, then “backpedaling” and stating that he was blogging this case as an “Investigative Journalist”, right? Look at all of the information and inferences one could make from that situation. First, the question comes to mind; why wouldn’t anyone actually hire him to work this case? Second, one has to wonder was this Private Investigator using his fee based, proprietary databases to cull information on this case, while he was clearly not working as a hired Private Investigator conducting a Private Investigation? Third, was it appropriate to share the results of his investigation with the public, while the Police were conducting an investigation into the disappearance of this infant, if he was not hired by anyone to conduct this investigation? It is one thing to conduct an investigation as a hired Private Investigator where you have an obligation to your client to investigate the case and keep the information that you gather confidential; it is entirely another thing to possibly interfere with a Police investigation by conducting an investigation for the sake of blogging about your findings for a little media attention. And to this day, this Private Investigator has put himself in the unenviable position of not being able to prove that he did one single thing that helped in locating this child; the only thing he did do was make himself look like an attention starved, low-rent Private Investigator that would do anything for a little media attention.
RMRI, Inc. works a good deal of very sensitive cases that go to court and can be “life altering” to our clients if certain critical information were to come out about our cases. RMRI, Inc. has a few hard and fast rules and protocols about how we conduct business and what we choose to let the public know about our business. First, the ONLY time we are working a case is when we have a paying client, we don’t work cases for free in the hopes of getting some media attention. In all cases that go to court, we enter into a contract with the client. If the case is something simple, where a contract is not necessary (such as: serving a summons) we get an email acknowledgement or an on-line acknowledgement that we are working for the client and that the client expects any information we find in the course of doing our work to remain confidential. We NEVER speak to anyone outside of the client and our team members about an active and ongoing case. Even after a case is completely finished we have a ninety (90) day wait time before we can even acknowledge that we had any involvement with the case whatsoever, and then after that ninety (90) days we can not mention anything that identifies the case we can just speak in general terms about the case. Our approach is quite simple; “we don’t want attention, we want to be paid”. We liken our work to that of any other job, we “punch in” and work, we “punch out” and go home, and we collect our pay. We work to make a living, not for glamour and fame.
While it is true that you can find RMRI, Inc.’s company name in certain publications for attorneys and certain news papers and magazines, what you wont find is any specific information about cases we work, such as names, dates, and specific locations. While you might see a mentioning of cases on our website, what you will not see is any specific mentioning of the details of these cases unless they are over seven (7) years old. While you might see a Facebook Page for RMRI, Inc., what you won’t see is any mention of a case we are working. We make tremendous efforts and take great pains at RMRI, Inc. not to blur the lines between advertising and giving out even a hint of information about our clients and our cases. RMRI, Inc. is not so desperate for attention that we are willing to forsake our client’s privacy for some media attention.
RMRI, Inc. is made up of two (2) licensed Private Investigators, one (1) Pending Licensed Private Investigator, one (1) Process Server, two (2) Technical Consultants qualified as Expert Witnesses, and one (1) Secretary and all of our staff have committed to keeping all case and client data at RMRI, Inc. confidential. Each member is well aware that intentionally “leaking” case and/or client information outside of the confines of RMRI, Inc. is grounds for termination and possible civil action.
In Summary
A Private Investigator’s ability to keep his or her case and client information is paramount. Confidentiality in the Private Investigation Business is a justified expectation of the client. A successful and confident Private Investigator feels no need to boast about their cases or their clients. Confidentiality is the hallmark of any successful Private investigation Business. If you don’t understand confidentiality, you don’t understand the Private Investigation Business!
Missouri PI Licensing Law, The Missouri Supreme Court; What It All Means
First of all, as much as it pains me to preface this post like I must, it is important to make it clear that no profession is without it’s ignorant, mis-informed, and downright stupid people. And the Private Investigator Profession is just like any other profession; it has its share of “Dipsticks”. What amazes me is the number of Private Investigators that can not correctly interpret a court’s ruling. While it is true that these rulings can generally only go one of two ways, there is much to be gleaned from reading these rulings in their entirety. It is shameful to have to admit that some Private Investigators don’t understand the value of reading these rulings in their entirety.
As we all know, I have been fighting a very lengthy battle with the state of Missouri in regards to the way it has set up the licensing statutes for Private Investigators. This week I lost my case in the Missouri Supreme Court; here is the opinion: Missouri Supreme Court Opinion_SC91741. Some Private Investigators believe that this means that I no longer have a Private Investigator’s License. Well, those Private Investigators should probably stick to Mystery Shopping and not ever try their hand at REAL P.I. work; because they seem to have less of an understanding of the law than the average consumer. So, let me clarify for the “Dipsticks”. My case in the Missouri Supreme Court was a completely separate case from my appeal to the Adminsitrative Hearing Commission, which granted my license over a year ago; as we can see below:
And this can be easily searched at this link: Missouri Professional License Search. My case in the Missouri Supreme Court had nothing to do with trying to obtain my PI License, as there was no need since I already had my PI License since 01/12/2011 as we can see above on my PI License Information Sheet, certificate, and actual license. Now again, for the “Dipstick Private Investigators” that believe this was a license denial; you have just shown the world how ignorant you are.
Now, let us dive into the actual ruling from the Missouri Supreme Court. There was nothing “bad” about the court’s ruling. The Justices used perfect logic in their ruling. I am not so sure that they completely considered the full implications of this statute that they were considering, but their logic was in fact perfect. The ruling was not harmful to me in any way, and as a matter of fact it was actually PROTECTIVE of every license holder in the state of Missouri and myself. Because the ruling set forth a clarification, and perhaps even a warning to any professional licensing board that might try to take away a person’s professional license. Read the language:
B. Procedural Due Process Claims:
Because professional licenses are considered to be “property” for the purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment, procedural due process is required before the government may deprive anyone of his or her professional license. See Stone v. Missouri Dept. of Health and Senior Serv., 350 S.W.3d 14, 27 (Mo. banc 2011). On the other hand, because no one has a property interest in a mere unilateral expectation, see Daniels v. Bd. of Curators of Lincoln Univ., 51 S.W.3d 1, 6 (Mo. App. 2001), due process generally is not required before the denial of a new application for professional licensure.
Effectively this language indicates that when I first applied for a Missouri State Private Investigator’s License, I did not have a protected property interest because I did not currently hold that state license, all I had was an idea that I might be issued a Private Investigator’s License. But this language also strongly suggests that now that I have had a Private Investigator’s License since 01/12/2011 that I effectively have a “protected property interest” under the Fourteenth Amendment, that can not be taken away from me without procedural due process.
Furthermore, when one looks at the ruling even closer one can see that I actually raise a valid point, and the court even admits that I raise a valid point, again read the language:
The crux of Gurley’s argument is that subdivision (9) lacks a commercial element. Thus, Gurley argues that “private investigator business” includes numerous First Amendment-protected activities performed every day by most American citizens. He focuses especially on subdivision (9)(b), arguing that anyone who uses a social networking website to locate a former classmate or to search for a potential romantic partner is “making [an] investigation for the purpose of obtaining information pertaining to … [t]he identity … whereabouts … 8or character of [a] person.”
Gurley also argues that the definition of “private investigator business” describes the work of any political volunteer conducting opposition research, any freelance reporter and any author. 8
Gurley is quite right that requiring prior government approval before engaging in so many speech-related activities by uncompensated volunteers would raise serious constitutional questions. But the Court need not confront those questions. “[T]he first step in overbreadth analysis is to construe the challenged statute.” Stevens, 130 S. Ct. at 1587. “The primary rule of statutory interpretation is to ascertain the intent of the legislature from the language used, to give effect to that intent if possible, and to consider the words in their plain and ordinary meaning.” S. Metro. Fire Prot. Dist. v. City of Lee’s Summit, 278 S.W.3d 659, 666 (Mo. banc 2009) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). That being said, “[i]t is presumed that the General Assembly would not pass laws in violation of the constitution.” Planned Parenthood of Kansas v. Nixon, 220 S.W.3d 732, 742 (Mo. banc 2007). For this reason, “[a] narrowing construction is the preferred remedy in First Amendment cases.” Id. at 741. “In determining claims of overbreadth, our construction of the statute is definitive and we are obliged to give it a construction which will render it valid, if possible.” Pollard v. Bd. of Police Comm’rs, 665 S.W.2d 333, 341 (Mo. banc 1984).
8 An even more troubling possibility would be that licensure might be required for members of religious congregations volunteering to investigate candidates for leadership and other positions.
In essence, my argument certainly is not being viewed as frivolous or meaningless; it simply raises questions that the court feels are not necessary to address at this time. The court does not advocate that the issue I bring could never happen, the court just simply states that this issue has not happened yet and so at this point in time it is purely speculative. All and all, I believe the Missouri Supreme Court made a logical conclusion that I can live with. The Missouri Supreme Court’s ruling certainly did not damage, harm, or hurt me in any way.
I think that there is one issue here that should be understood. There are many Private Investigators out there that are not very fond of me, and that is okay because I don’t care about anyone’s fondness. Some of these Private Investigators seem to derive a pleasure out of what they ignorantly believe is a failure for me, and that is okay too because I really enjoy watching ignorant people show just how ignorant they are. But here is a point for them to consider, and they may have already considered it, which is why they are not too fond of me. Could you have taken a case all the way to your state Supreme Court? Do you have the resources and finances to take a case to the highest court in your state? Could you deal with the stress and financial hardship of having your bsuiness shut down for ten months, and then turn around and revive your business after you open it back up ten months later? Could you stand such a loss and still come back? It is not for the faint of heart. It takes a certain kind of person to be able to do what I have done. It was not easy, and most people could not do it; most people would have thrown their hands up and gave up a long time ago. Me? I still have plenty of fight left. I have not been worn down. I adopted two mottos a long time ago that I try to live my life by; I believe there is a simple three word motto that every person should live their life by. It is an old British SAS Motto, which simply says “Who Dares, Wins”! I am a Risk Taker by nature, and always have been. That is the true spirit of the Entrepreneur, which is what most of us strive to be but very few know how to be. I have fought battles and won some and lost some; but I have never been afraid to step up and fight for what I believe to be right. I also live my life by this motto: “Illegitimi Non Carborundum”; meaning “Don’t Let The Bastards Grind You Down”! Thus far, I am still standing. I am still here, fighting the good fight and I would not have it any other way!
It would not be right to take credit for winning my license at the Administrative Hearing Commission and getting this case to the Missouri Supreme Court by myself. I had two of the very best attorneys that I have ever had the pleasure of handing a case for me: Jay and Randall Barnes. Also, I think it is worth mentioning that every attorney and every Judge that I dealt with in this case, the State Attorneys, Judge Paul Wilson, and Commissioner Nimrod Chapel were all very professional and civil, they treated me with dignity and were very respectful to me. They have all honored their profession in my eyes.
For those of you that like to read my blog, and are fans of my blog, thank you for taking the time to read this post. For those of you reading this because you thought I failed here, perhaps now you will see how ignorant you really are. But, the chances are that you are ignorant about your own ignorance. Stupid people simply do not believe that they are stupid…
Baby Lisa Part (4): Amateur Hour!
Well my audience will just have to forgive me; but it is time to say what needs to be said. There are always a few “media vultures” out there in the world, and we can see at least one showing up every day here on the Lisa Irwin Case.
I have had a pretty busy week, working PAYING cases, so I have not had much time to blog about this case in the past five days. Not to brag, but last week was somewhere around a $10,000.00 week for me. It is always important to take care of your paying clients first, and then focus on the topic that interest you. I have had to focus on paying clients. Apparently not all Private Investigators have paying clients to focus on; so they can try to play “Commentator” on cases like the one we are discussing here. Tonight I want to talk about how a “mediocre at best” Private Investigator can harm a case like this, and how a good Private Investigator can help a case like this.
I suppose the first place to start is with the approach that should be taken when working any case as a Private Investigator. One of the most important things to remember is that when it comes to how a Private Investigator works a case, the approach in at least one aspect is much like how a Doctor approaches a patient’s care; First Do No Harm! Often times in the Private Investigation business it is just as important to know what NOT to do as it is to know what to do. If you are a Private Investigator, the “Do No Harm Approach” requires one to be honest with theirself. A good Private Investigator’s first question to himself or herself should be: “Am I qualified to handle this case”? Think of it like this, you would not perform heart surgery on a patient if you did not have the necessary skills, training, and credentials to do so; would you? And if all you have done as a Private Investigator is serve subpoenas and conduct some “cheating spouse surveillance”, what makes you think you are qualified to even give any intelligent commentary on a Child Abduction Case, much less participate in such a case? I take exception to how one of my colleagues seems to want to insert himself into this case and act as if he is some kind of authority on the Lisa Irwin Abduction. What he is doing is selfish, harmful, and has the potential to take away valuable media resources from where they need to be. I will first call your attention to a post made by Mr. Ronald Rugen on 10/25/2011 which is pictured below:
Ron Rugen on Lisa Irwin "Defense"
Kris Cantil is a highly experienced Criminal Defense Investigator from Utah, that has spend more time adjusting her make-up in a courthouse bathroom than Mr. Rugen has in a courthouse. She is well qualified to understand the intricacies of a criminal defense case, and to certainly understand what a criminal defense case is. Click on her name and you can see her qualifications. Kris Cantil works for Kane Consulting and her question to Mr.Rugen is important and “dead on”. Folks, the attorneys working for Lisa Irwin’s parents are NOT a “Defense Team” at this point in time, they are simply trying to keep the focus on looking for the person that abducted Lisa Irwin, going on the assertion that the child was in fact abducted. despite what the media wants to title the attorney or attorneys here; there can be no defense without a prosecution and there has not even been an arrest made yet much less a prosecution. The harm in making statements like this is that it gives the public the inaccurate illusion that the parents of Lisa Irwin are the culprits in her disappearance. Now while I am not ready to say that Lisa Irwin’s parents had nothing to do with her disappearance, I am certainly not willing to point the finger at them just yet. The fact is that there just is not enough evidence to make a determination either way at this point in time. Attorney Cyndy Short was right when she said that “this is how people get wrongfully convicted”, these types of presumptuous statements make the public think that there is something that they don’t know but the person making this statement knows that may indicate guilt, which in turn causes public pressure to be put on the Police, which in turn often times impedes their investigation. This can all have the effect of making people rush to judgment in a case where evidence needs to be dispassionately analyzed. These cases have to be worked with a high degree of objectivity, which apparently Mr. Rugen does not have:
Ron Rugen Admits He Has Not Been Objective
it is not hard to see from reading Mr. Rugen’s comment above that by his own admission he has not been very objective in regards to this case. he has “jumped to conclusions”, and implied that Lisa Irwin’s parents had something to do with the disappearance of their child. This is NOT what a good Private Investigator would do. A good Private Investigator would check out everything, including the parents; but he or she would be objective and receptive to reasonable and logical scenarios so as to not easily dismiss something that might be the key to solving this case.
I have personally worked two (2) Child Abduction Cases, and successfully concluded each one within one (1) week. Now, I will admit that both of these cases were non-custodial parental abduction cases; one (1) from Los Angeles, California over seven years ago for an attorney named Shirlee Bliss and one (1) here locally where we recovered the child in Kansas City, MO for the father named Orlando Hayes. These cases are easier than a “Stranger Abduction Case”, none the less they do require objectivity, professionalism, and the ability to keep a “low profile”. My Lead Investigator, Karen Giboney has worked multiple non-custodial parental abductions and “stranger abduction cases” Someone should as Mr. Rugen how many of these cases he has worked?
The media can be a useful tool in helping to solve cases like this. The media gets the word out so that citizens can be on the look out for the child and so that if there is someone out there that knows something they will know who to call and talk to about it. It is self serving and selfish for a Private Investigator to try to inject himself into a case like this for the sake of trying to get some publicity and attention. Someone should ask Mr. Rugen who hired him to work on this case?
Folks, it is important that you don’t give this mediocre at best Private Investigator the attention he is seeking, and you stay focused on the important media aspects of this case. Follow what the media is reporting about possible sightings. Follow what the media is reporting about person’s of interest. Keep your eyes and ears open for information that may relate to those topics, instead of following an “armchair quarterback” that serves subpoenas for a living and has high aspirations of being some kind of a recognized news commentator on cases that he has no experience in what so ever. If I had experience that Mr. Rugen has in the Private Investigation Business, I’d stay out of the media and keep my opinions to myself for being afraid that those opinions might come back to haunt me later on. PICTURE that, if you will…….
Ricky B. Gurley.
The Criminal Defense Investigator’s Adversarial Role!
Often times I am asked if it bothers me that “I help to put criminals back on the street”? I get asked this questions in various forms, sometimes “harshly”, sometimes in intelligent debate and/or conversation. I understand that this question is usually a “non-malicious question”; yet I can’t seem to get over the implications that this question makes about the person asking it….
First; let us consider this question: “does it bother you that you help put criminals back on the street”? When you consider this question carefully you can only assume that the person asking this question believes that the defendant in a criminal case is guilty before he or she has ever had their day in court. The logic of this question is that if I work a case as a Criminal Defense Investigator; for a Defendant that is accused of a crime, I am assisting a guilty person in trying to get away with this crime. So; when you think about the person asking the question, you begin to see a person that does not seem to believe in the presumption of innocence, the concept of “innocent until proven guilty”, and the practice of giving a person accused of a crime due process. Of course that person’s views would change considerably if that person was charged with a crime. The correct philosophy in our current Judicial system is that a person accused and charged with a crime is completely innocent of said crime until they are convicted in a court of law; or at least that is supposed to be the way criminals cases are viewed by our current Judicial System…….. Yes; the questions we ask can often tell much about us….
Second; I think it is important to get into the process of Justice. Our Justice System is designed to be adversarial; the Prosecution and the Defense are adversaries in criminal cases. Both sides are supposed to work hard to prove their opposing theories in a criminal case. Both sides will use various tools that are at their disposal; Investigators, Expert Witnesses, Technology, etc., etc. in trying to prove their case. The hopes are that through this adversarial process, and the hard work that both sides have to do in this adversarial process, the truth will come out; and justice can be served.
Third; I think it is important to define the role of the Criminal Defense Investigator. In a criminal case the Criminal Defense Investigator first and foremost must remain dispassionate, and emotionally detached from the case; no good can come from a biased Investigator in a criminal case. It is important to remember that the quest is for truth and justice, not for a “win”. The Criminal Defense Investigator will assist the Defense Attorney in building his or her case by gathering evidence that will allow the Defense Attorney to accurately assess and evaluate their case. The Criminal Defense Investigator knows that he or she is simply a “tool” that the Defense Attorney has chosen to use in a very delicate process, with very serious consequences. So, it is imperative for the Criminal Defense Investigator to be dispassionate, emotionally detached, and yet also able take his or her job VERY seriously.
Having made these three points, I want to answer the question we are confronting here very bluntly. “Does it bother you that you help put criminals back on the street”? My answer is a resounding NO! Because in a criminal case without a fair process, where the rules and protocols are not strictly adhered to; there is no justice. Even if one guilty man goes free due to poor, inadequate, or dishonest work on behalf of the Prosecution it is the lesser of two evils when you consider that the alternative threatens the very fabric of a fair and impartial Justice System (the term “Prosecution” in this article includes the Investigators, Expert Witnesses, and anyone else working on the side of the Prosecution). The long term effect of the adversarial system used in our current Judicial System is that everybody gets better at their jobs; good Defense Attorneys challenge Prosecutors to be better and vise versa; good Criminal Defense Investigators challenge Law Enforcement Investigators to be better Investigators and vise versa. I should also mention that I believe it is better to let one hundred guilty people go free than it is to imprison just one innocent man. We can always bring a person to court, but we can never get the years back that an innocent person spends in prison.
