“Look,
Sheila, get one rice cooker,” county planning inspector Patrick
Henriques said as he peered through a gap in the drapes that covered
a sliding glass door at Councilman Tim Bynum's house.
His
boss, planning supervisor Sheila Miyake, looked, too, and she saw a
refrigerator. “That, to me, is an installed appliance,” she said. Patrick
pressed his camera up to the glass and took pictures of the room.
Then, spotting a broken window, “I tried to peek through that
thing.”
The
two county workers were describing their unannounced “exterior
inspection” after receiving an “anonymous” complaint that Tim
had converted his Wailua Homesteads house into a multi-family
dwelling. Their words were caught on tape by former First Deputy
Prosecutor Jake Delaplane, who was secretly recording their Nov. 30,
2010 conversation.
— From
my Sept. 27, 2012 blog post: Terrible Words
As a
result of that visit, the planning department sent Bynum a cease and
desist zoning compliance notice and then-Prosecutor Shaylene
Iseri filed misdemeanor charges against him.
Bynum went on to file a
civil rights lawsuit against Iseri, Miyake and Kauai County,
resulting in a $750,000 county legal bill, a $290,000 settlement and extensive depositions being taken from county workers.
Here is an excerpt from the Henriques depo, which seems to outline an institutionalized abuse of process. Bynum's attorney,
Dan Hempey, is asking the questions, with Patrick Henriques answering:
Q.
Right. So you guys sent him a letter demanding that he submit
building plans based on a rice cooker in the room, because if there
was no rice cooker, it wouldn't have been a kitchen, right?
A. Yes.
Q. And
nonetheless, even though you didn't know they existed in April 15th,
2010, a zoning compliance notice went out telling him to cease and
desist those [gas and electric] connections that you didn't even know
existed in the first place, right?
A. Yes.
Q. Is it
common practice for people to get compliance letters telling them to
cease and desist things that nobody knows if they are doing in the
first place?
A. Yes.
Q.
That's common?
A.
Uh-huh.
Q. Okay.
It's a common practice on Kauai for the planning department to send
out zoning compliance letters telling people to stop doing things
that the planning department has no evidence that they are really
doing in the first place?
A. For
that zoning compliance letter.
Q. It's
a common --
A. The
heading, for the heading zoning compliance.
Q.
People get letters like this all the time on Kauai?
MR.
NAKAMURA: Answer the question.
THE
WITNESS: Yes.
BY MR.
HEMPEY:
Q. And
Sheila Miyake is the person who has trained you to send letters like
this telling people to stop doing things even though you guys don't
have evidence that they are doing them, right?
MR.
NAKAMURA: If you can answer the question, go ahead and answer the
question.
THE
WITNESS: I cannot answer him.
MR.
HEMPEY: Could you read back the question, I'd like to repeat.
THE
WITNESS: I cannot answer that.
BY MR.
HEMPEY:
Q. Well,
I think it's a yes, no, does Sheila – why can't you answer that
question?
A. Why
don't you strike the name and then I'll answer that question.
Q. Why
can't you answer it as I said it? Yes or no, ... -- was Sheila the
one who trained you to send out letters even though they tell people
to cease and desist things that the planning department doesn't even
know that they are doing, did you learn that from Sheila,
or did you learn it somewhere else, or did you invent it?
A. I'm
just going to answer yes already.
Q. If
you didn't have any evidence of illegal gas or electric service
supplies, why was he sent a letter telling him to cease and desist
such things?
A.
Because I never see a complete floor plan of the house.
Q. So
since you didn't know, you told him to stop doing it?
A. Yes.
Q. So is
it fair to say then that Mr. Bynum was given Exhibit B, telling him
to cease, among other things telling him to cease and desist and
remove all illegal and/or gas/electric supplies along with
cooking facilities, even though at the time this letter was sent you
had no idea if there was illegal gas or electric service in his
house, right?
MR.
NAKAMURA: Objection, asked and answered.
Q. Okay.
So I just want to make sure I get this right. After you inspected the
Bynum property in April 11 2010, Ms. Miyake told you to send the
zoning compliance, she gave you basic instructions as to what should
be in it, you gave her a draft, and then she made edits to the draft?
A. Yes.
Q. And
so this letter dated April 15th that's Exhibit B, went out, that went
out was ultimately the final edits were done by your supervisor,
Sheila Miyake, correct?
A. Yes.
Yes.
Q. And
then she handed it to you for signature?
A. Yes.
Q. And
did she tell you to sign it?
A. Yes.
Q.
Knowing now that she told you to sign a document that told Mr. Bynum
to cease and desist things that there was no evidence of, does that
make you feel like Ms. Miyake has put you into a spot?
MR.
NAKAMURA: Go ahead.
THE
WITNESS: Yes.
Q. If
you didn't have any evidence of illegal gas or electric service
supplies, why was he sent a letter telling him to cease and desist
such things?
A.
Because I never see a complete floor plan of the house.
Q. So
since you didn't know, you told him to stop doing it?
A. Yes.
Q. And
then you wanted a second inspection so you could go in and verify
that he stopped doing what you didn't know that he was doing in the
first place?
MR.
NAKAMURA: Well, I'm going to object as argumentative.
If you
understand the question, you can answer the question.
THE
WITNESS: Try repeat that question.
MR.
HEMPEY: Can you read that back?
(Requested
portion of the record read by reporter as follows: And then you
wanted a second inspection so you could go in and verify that he
stopped doing what you didn't know that he was doing in the first
place?)
THE
WITNESS: Yes.
BY MR.
HEMPEY:
Q. Thank
you. And at the time you knew that this zoning compliance notice,
Exhibit B, was sent to the prosecuting attorney, did you not?
A. Yes.
Q. Do
you think it's fair to tell someone to stop doing something even
though you don't have any evidence they were doing it in the first
place, and then send that document to the prosecutor, just in your
basic sense of human fairness, do you think that's fair?
MR.
NAKAMURA: Objection, argumentative, assumes facts, it does not state
all the facts in evidence.
THE
WITNESS: I would say no.
MR.
NAKAMURA: It's about an hour, Counsel. Is this a good time for a
break?
Posts
14 comments:
You shouldn't live here if you don' t want the Planning Department looking in your windows.
Looks like you get a cease and desist letter even if they don't find anything anyway.
Another example of a great County Attorney, Patrick Henriques should have been advised by CA to make sure he understood all questions and if he couldn't remember say "I don't remember".
Forget the weird manipulations how Tim got cited, he had an illegal rental. He may have been wronged but to sue the people he represents and costing them well over a million is the real crime.
The County, especially the Bynum/Hooser duo has encouraged neighbors to turn in their neighbors over suspected zoning, grading, drugs, and now barking Doggies for years.
This is a joke wrapped in a lie covered in greed.
Yep, I vote for the folks that put Kauai first, that is why I vote for Jackpot Tim.
Honesty, integrity and loyalty, errr, Deceit, Lies and Jackpots.
Inspector Henriquez deserves credit for testifying truthfully. He told the truth and even said what planning was doing was unfair. He should consider a run for Council.
And is Sheila still employed by the county? You guys bustin' on tim and Gary on this one is pathetic. Funny guy with the fake racist accent and the stupid batman stuff should find another hobby -- or are you a pro employed to do such things? The question remains: is she still employed by the county? Why?
Jackpot Huh?
Having your escrow for your home killed and selling it for much less, along with 3 more years of mortgage and prop tax payments, endless legal bills, loss of reputation, as well as a bunch of fake pidgin county staff trying to brand you as having scored a Jackpot after the fact.
Shayme Crackpot tried to ruin Tim Bynum, and was no match.. I hope she keeps it up with her crackpot antics and the one of her two only friends keep up with the seriously stupid batman banter.
"Another example of a great County Attorney, Patrick Henriques should have been advised by CA to make sure he understood all questions and if he couldn't remember say "I don't remember".
You mean he should have been coached to lie to protect Sheila? He had special counsel representing him. Quit blaming Tim and what does Hooser have to do with this? Joann introduced the barking dog law.
Tim Bynum isn't ruined? You mean we're going to keep electing dishonest politicians here who think they're above the law??? I don't get it. Do we really want dishonest people making the laws here? This is really troubling.
There's always hope. We un-elected Shay, didn't we?
Let's read Shay's deposition. Spit must fly in that one!
Abercrombie was quoted recently as saying...." We don't break the law, we make it." Same old stuff different day.
Effing brilliant cross-examination. I about peed my pants laughing. ,mmm, way to go Dan Hempey!
Kaipo was at the core of this mess.
Arrogant old bugger.
There are so many "wrongs" here and it all points to a corrupt system. You have Bynum breaking zoning regs and then you have the county compounding the wrong by illegally entering the premises. ALL of them should be run out of office. The people need to help themselves and take action - thanks to blogs like this, we have been informed. If it continues, it's our own fault.
Post a Comment