By PETE BENNETT - Contra Costa Watch EMAIL
Phone: 510-460-5641
Posted: 10/24/2013

Reposted to Protect My Sons

Two BART workers struck, killed by train near Walnut Creek

By Matthias Gafni, Gary Peterson and Katie Nelson Contra Costa Times

POSTED:   10/19/2013 02:18:50 PM PDT | UPDATED:   4 DAYS AGO

WALNUT CREEK -- Two BART employees were struck and killed by one of the transit agency's trains between the Walnut Creek and Pleasant Hill stations Saturday afternoon -- while most of the system sat idle on the second day of a strike that has forced hundreds of thousands of commuters to seek alternate means of travel.

The accident happened about 1:53 p.m. on the Pittsburg/Bay Point line, between the Walnut Creek and Pleasant Hill stations, near the intersection of Jones Road and Chandon Court.

A statement from BART management said that the employees -- one BART employee and one contractor -- were performing track inspections at the time of the accident. Both had "extensive" experience working around moving trains, according the statement, which said that procedures called for one worker to inspect the track and the other to act as a lookout, watching for any oncoming traffic.

"Our hearts and prayers go out to the families of the two workers killed on the BART track," said BART general manager Grace Crunican, who showed up to the scene Saturday afternoon.

Officials from Amalgamated Transit Local 1555, one of the two unions on strike, ended a rally at the Pittsburg/Bay Point station once they received word of the accident and offered their own statement: "Our hearts go out to any BART comrades involved in today's incident. In the midst of this (strike), no one deserves to die." The union announced that it was canceling all labor rallies planned for Sunday.

A similar sentiment was echoed by Service Employees International Local 1021 in its own statement: "We express our deepest sympathies for the families of the individuals who died in this tragic accident."

BART officials said the train was being run by an "experienced" operator, and was in automatic mode and under computer control at the time of the accident. The manager was operating the train to shuttle a "couple cars in the Concord yard that were (tagged with graffiti)" to Richmond for a cleanup, said assistant general manager Paul Oversier. The manager was on his way back to Concord at the time of the accident.

A review of BART radio communications indicate a male train operator, who sources say was an operator supervisor who regularly drove trains some two decades ago, reported a "BART emergency" to central operations, noting that the train had just struck "some individuals" and advising that they "may be BART employees."

A technician on the train is asked to check for bodies and he reports the first one on the trackway. A "second victim" is then reported 50 yards away on Track C-1.

The male train operator reports that "both are deceased and definitely BART employees."

On another recording, a woman can be heard announcing that "There are no personnel wayside (adjacent to the tracks)."

Within five seconds, a second voice can be heard contradicting that report: "Attention all personnel: We do have personnel wayside between C-40 and C-50 on the C1 and C2 tracks."

Central BART communication officers are among the workers currently on strike. It was unclear who was operating the dispatch center while trains were moving.

One BART worker, who asked not to be named, said the accident should not have happened.

"These people are not trained to do these jobs," said the anonymous BART worker, referring to managers, some former train operators, who have been moving trains during the work stoppage.

BART trains have been idle for commuters since Friday due to a labor strike, but some managers have moved trains for other purposes. BART union representatives have repeatedly warned that allowing managers to operate the trains would be dangerous.

A BART police officer looks out of a BART car that struck and killed two people along Jones Road in Walnut Creek, Calif., on Saturday, Oct. 19, 2013. (Dan Rosenstrauch/Bay Area News Group)

When asked about those warnings, BART Assistant General Manager Paul Oversier said "we're not going there."

"We're dealing with a tragedy. The labor issues are not in the forefront of our mind," Oversier said. "This is a tragedy of the greatest proportion for the BART family.

"What they were doing today was something they had done hundreds, if not thousands of times in their careers."

The last BART worker killed while on duty was James Strickland, 44, who was killed on Oct. 14, 2008 as he was inspecting track on the same line near Oak Grove Road in Concord. In 2001, a worker was struck and killed in an underground section of track between 16th Street-Mission and 24th Street-Mission stations in San Francisco.

Four other BART workers have died on the job in the agency's 41 years of operation.

Check back for updates.

Contact Matthias Gafni at 925-952-5026. Follow him at Twitter.com/mgafni.

Read More

Limo Fire San Mateo Bridge - Five nurses killed - An alternate theory

By PETE BENNETT - Contra Costa Watch EMAIL
Phone: 510-460-5641
Posted: 06/25/2013

Reposted to Protect My Sons
Arson Murder - Magalia / Paradise CA
Related: Arson / Arson
======================================================================

Walnut Creek CA: When the San Mateo Bridge Limo fire occurred I was in Chico CA in a quiet place laying low but when I learned of the fires I did starting digging.  

The first reports of their jobs and careers gave my biggest clue as they were all H1b visa which is an expertise I've appeared on National TV.  This accident was just a few weeks after the Boston Marathon bombings which could make this a immigrant targeting case.  

For me this personal as I'm arson victim that wants answers. 

Read More

Contra Costa Arson Research

By PETE BENNETT - Contra Costa Watch EMAIL
Phone: 510-460-5641
Posted: 06/20/2013

To Protect My Sons

Related: Arson / Arson
======================================================================

Read More

Obit: Margaret Lesher May 13, 1997 Drowning of heiress left many questions, rumors

Walnut Creek CA: The Suspicious deaths of Margaret Lesher and the son of former late Senator John A Nejedly, John T. Nejedly.

Under a Cloud of Suspicion / Gossip plagues man after wife's death

Sam McManis

 Published 4:00 am PDT, Tuesday, April 17, 2001

Editor's Note: Sam McManis takes over the thrice-weekly Contra Costa column from John King, who becomes The Chronicle's urban design writer. King's column on the new Ritz-Carlton resort is on Page One today. McManis, 41, has written columns and features for The Chronicle's Friday sections for three years. He has also been a reporter for the Los Angeles Times and a columnist for the Contra Costa Times.

Four nights a week, to wild applause and squeals of shock, he lies in the dirt and lets a 3,000-pound buffalo crush his chest. He sits astride the rampaging beast and soars through rings of fire. Toting .45-caliber rifles, his posse deftly shoots objects out of people's mouths.

At show's end, Collin "T.C." Thorstenson doffs his cowboy hat to bask in the approval of an adoring audience at the Rawhide Wild West Town in Scottsdale, Ariz. Folks cheer, they fawn, they pose for photos with him.

"People absolutely love his show," said Rawhide publicist Dawn M. Sullivan. "T.C.'s very popular." 

But he also occasionally hears the whispers, the vicious gossip, the scurrilous accusations that he had something to do with the death of Orinda newspaper heiress Margaret Lesher nearly four years ago at a remote lake outside of the couple's Scottsdale ranch. 

He hears the talk, but he chooses to tune out. Keep smiling, keep showing off his beloved buffalo, Harvey Wallbanger Jr. The show, you know, must go on.

"You got to get on with life," Thorstenson said in his first extended interview with a Bay Area reporter. "Things happen that are major, you still got to make a living. They're trying to throw s-- into my face all the time when what they say never happened."

If Thorstenson were to come back to Contra Costa -- where he is considered, in some social circles, as the male version of Anna Nicole Smith -- he'd hear a lot more than whispers about his six-month whirlwind marriage to Lesher, 25 years Thorstenson's senior.

Though the Maricopa County sheriff long ago ruled Lesher's death accidental,

and authorities say Thorstenson never was a suspect, some still point a finger at the widower.

These are people who crave neat and tidy endings, who want the closure only a criminal conviction would bring. To them, Thorstenson is the logical choice as the villain. He gained more than $5 million of Lesher's $100 million estate after her death. He was, remember, with her at the lake in the early-morning hours of May 14, 1997, when she disappeared. And he, in the minds of Lesher's relatives, never came off as sincere in the grieving-husband role.

"There's no one in this county who thinks my mother's death was an accident, " said Wendi Alves, one of Lesher's four daughters. "I mean, come on, I hear he sought out somebody like my mother. That's all I can say. My attorney doesn't want me to make any accusations. But I think the entire community thinks he had something to do with it."

Vanity Fair and People magazines have long since moved onto other scandalous celebrity deaths, ones with easily identifiable villains. Even "Hard Copy" dropped its weekly leering into the Lesher lives after Thorstenson was cleared.

In upscale Scottsdale and opulent Orinda, though, curiosity lingers. Thorstenson, 43, knows it and accepts it, but doesn't like it one lick. He sees himself as an O.J. Simpson figure, forever dogged by the taint of his wife's death. The major difference, he quickly notes, is that he never was arrested or even was officially a suspect in the investigation.

"There are some people who, every time they hear my name, think I had something to do with it," Thorstenson said. "They talk behind my back -- the reporters, the people up (in Contra Costa). It's a sorry situation when something like that happens.

"I'm a little bitter, to say the least. Unless you lose somebody you love, you probably won't ever understand how I feel. Picture something happening to your wife or kids and then have to (watch) people coming after you like you did it when you were 100 percent innocent. Wouldn't that put you in a defensive mode?"

Thorstenson and his bison haven't appeared in Northern California since 1998. These days, he works quietly at the 17-acre Scottsdale ranch he inherited from Margaret after an acrimonious out-of-court estate settlement with the Lesher children. He has an exclusive engagement, Thursdays through Sundays, to perform at the Rawhide Wild West Town in Scottsdale.

Rawhide is sort of a cowboy's Disneyland, and Thorstenson is its E-ticket ride. T.C.'s act is described on Rawhide's customer phone line as featuring "six-gun spinnin', cowboy mounted shootin', bullwhip crackin' and buffalo ridin' " fun.

Perhaps part of Thorstenson's appeal is the cowboy-widower storyline. Then again, it could just be his charismatic bison. Regardless, T.C.'s 15 minutes of infamy seems stuck on 14:59.

"You think I'm rich, but I work," Thorstenson said. "What's wrong with smiling and enjoying how you make a living? I personally guarantee that if anyone doesn't enjoy the show, I'll give them their money back. Not a single person has asked.

"People ask to come on down and have us shoot stuff they hold in their teeth. Between me and you, we know who we're picking out of the audience for that. It's important to have people who'll stand still while you shoot."

Trust him. Thorstenson certainly knows how to pick 'em.

Read More

Seeno Attorneys - They've represented Seeno since the 80s and they run the Contra Costa Bar

By PETE BENNETT - Contra Costa Watch EMAIL
Phone: 510-460-5641
Posted: 06/13/2013

Reposted to Protect My Sons
Arson Murder - Magalia / Paradise CA
Related: Arson / Greenan / Seeno / CNET / Contra Costa Bar
=====================================================================

EMPLOYERS INSURANCE OF WAUSAU, a mutual company, formerly
known as Employers Mutual Liability Insurance
Company of Wisconsin, a Wisconsin
corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
ALBERT D. SEENO CONSTRUCTION CO., a California limited
partnership; Diablo Construction Company, a
California corporation, et al.,
Defendants-Appellants.

No. 88-15657.

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted July 18, 1991.
Decided Sept. 20, 1991.

1

Robert L. Sallander, Jr. and H. Paul Breslin, Archer, McComas & Lageson, Walnut Creek, Cal., for defendants-appellants.

2

Dale I. Larson and Robert M. Wattson, Zelle & Larson, Minneapolis, Minn., for plaintiff-appellee.

3

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

4

Before GOODWIN and SNEED, Circuit Judges, and TAYLOR*, District Judge.

TAYLOR, District Judge:

5

Albert D. Seeno Construction Company ("Seeno") appeals from an order denying its request for a preliminary injunction requiring its insurance carrier to segregate liability claims handling from coverage investigation in a reservation of rights situation. While this issue may have been unsettled at the time of the hearing below, more recent cases show appellant's position is without merit, and we affirm.

I. BACKGROUND

6

Seeno is a real estate developer and general contractor which built residential tract housing in and around Contra Costa County, California. From 1975 to 1985 Seeno built several thousand homes in the area, and over 400 homeowners have made claims against Seeno for construction defects and soil movement. Lawsuits have been filed involving some of the homes ("litigated claims"), but the majority of the claims have not reached litigation ("unlitigated claims").

7

Seeno had comprehensive general liability insurance coverage with Employers Insurance of Wausau, for bodily injury and property damage, that could potentially cover the homeowners' claims. Seeno submitted the claims to Wausau, but a dispute arose over whether the claims were covered by Seeno's policies and over the proper method to handle the claims. Wausau reserved its right to deny coverage.

8

Seeno exercised its right to engage independent Cumis counsel,1 and brought in the firm of Archer, McComas & Lageson to handle the litigated claims. However, Seeno declined to employ Cumis counsel for the unlitigated claims and requested that Wausau handle them.

9

Wausau retained the law firm of Robins, Zelle, Larson & Kaplan to represent Wausau's interest in all liability and coverage litigation stemming from the homeowner claims. This firm and the insurance company's internal investigators handled both the unlitigated claims involving the homeowners and the coverage dispute involving Seeno. Seeno contends that Wausau has used the investigation and settlement of these unlitigated claims to gather information for the coverage dispute against Seeno.

10

Wausau brought this action for declaratory relief to determine that there is no coverage for the claims. Seeno counterclaimed, including a request for injunctive relief requiring Wausau to segregate its liability claims handling from its coverage investigation.

11

During what the trial judge described as an "acrimonious litigation," the parties filed cross-motions to disqualify each other's counsel for claimed breaches of duty to the other side. After a lengthy and careful analysis of some of the same contentions asserted on this appeal, the trial judge denied the motions. Employers Insurance of Wausau v. Albert D. Seeno Const., 692 F.Supp. 1150 (N.D.Cal.1988).

12

Thereafter, Seeno moved for a preliminary injunction to require Wausau to separate its handling of liability claims from its coverage investigation. At the hearing, the trial judge observed there was no legal authority to support Seeno's contentions and denied the motion.

13

The order is appealable to this court under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) (1982). The grant or denial of a motion for a preliminary injunction is within the discretion of the district court, and the order of the district court will be reversed only if the court relied on an erroneous legal premise or otherwise abused its discretion. Chalk v. United States, 840 F.2d 701, 704 (9th Cir.1988). Questions of law underlying a preliminary injunction motion are reviewed de novo. Guam Fresh v. Ada, 849 F.2d 436, 437 (9th Cir.1988).

II. DISCUSSION

14

Seeno argued in the trial court, and again on this appeal, that California law and insurance industry practice require insurance carriers to segregate their coverage investigations from their liability claims handling. This duty, Seeno argues, arises from a fiduciary duty between an insurer and insured like that between an attorney and client, whereby the insurer must preserve and promote the insured's interests above its own and avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Thus, Seeno asserts, where the carrier reserves its right to assert a coverage defense, it must use different people on the liability side and the coverage side, without exchange of information between them. This court concludes that California law is to the contrary.

15

The cases relied on by Seeno as mandating file segregation do mention insurers' segregating files. See Executive Aviation, Inc. v. National Ins. Underwriters, 16 Cal.App.3d 799, 810, 94 Cal.Rptr. 347, 354 (1971) (practice of segregation unusual); Travelers Insurance Co. v. Lesher, 187 Cal.App.3d 169, 183, 231 Cal.Rptr. 791 (1986) (insurance company tried and failed to keep declaratory judgment separate from underlying action), Betts v. Allstate Ins. Co., 154 Cal.App.3d 688, 709, 201 Cal.Rptr. 528 (1984) (both parties involved in accident were insured by the same carrier, commingling of information not permitted). However, as the court below correctly observed, none of these cases, or any other California cases, requires the separation of files.

16

The ethical conflict that arises when an insurance attorney represents an insured, but coverage is denied, was dealt with in the landmark case of San Diego Navy Federal Credit Union v. Cumis Insurance Society, 162 Cal.App.3d 358, 208 Cal.Rptr. 494 (1984). In 1987, the California legislature codified Cumis in Cal.Civ.Code § 2860 (West 1988), providing for appointment of separate counsel to represent the insured, at the expense of the insurance carrier, in a conflict situation. Seeno's position here is contrary to the statute, which does not impose a duty to segregate and affirmatively requires disclosure to the insurance carrier of all unprivileged information relevant to the coverage dispute. Cal.Civ.Code § 2860(d).

17

Although there was no California case authority specifically against Seeno's position at the time of the hearing below, it has come down in the meantime. In late 1989, a California appellate court commented under similar circumstances that the fiduciary-like relation between insured and insurer does not mandate segregation of files. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Superior Court (Durant), 216 Cal.App.3d 1222, 265 Cal.Rptr. 372 (1989). In State Farm, plaintiffs sued for "bad faith" torts and contract breaches for their insurer's failure to adequately defend after accepting the insured's defense under a reservation of rights. The insurer provided Cumis counsel and retained other counsel for the declaratory relief action contesting coverage. The insurer also assigned an adjustor who dealt with the insured's counsel, although the adjustor continuously advised that he believed no coverage was available under the policy. This adjustor also was the agent who dealt with the coverage counsel, served in a dual capacity, and maintained only one file. Id. at 1225, 265 Cal.Rptr. at 373.

18

Plaintiffs did not claim specific injury from this dual representation, although they alleged the adjustor did transmit adverse information to coverage counsel. Plaintiffs sought discovery of all information in the adjustor's file for the bad faith action. They argued that the adjuster aiding in the liability defense is the agent of the insured and the insured's Cumis counsel, and thus plaintiffs are privileged to see everything in the file. Id. at 1226, 265 Cal.Rptr. at 374. The superior court granted the discovery request.

19

On appeal, Seeno appeared as amicus curiae, urging the same contention made in the present appeal. The Court of Appeals rejected Seeno's argument:The Cumis rule requires complete independence of counsel when an insurance company interposes a reservation of rights, the basis of which creates a conflict of interest. [Insured] requests that we add a layer of separation to this mandate, requiring that not only the counsel involved in the cases but the adjusters assigned to each case (the 'liability' case as distinguished from the 'coverage' case) be separate--that the files on each case be separate and apart--and indeed, as urged by amicus curiae [i.e., Seeno], that a veritable wall be erected between the insurance company's administration of the two cases. We cannot subscribe to this proposition.

20

Id. at 1226, 265 Cal.Rptr. at 374.

21

The court found that normally, although the adjustor is the agent of the insurer, he may represent both the insurer and the insured. But, when coverage is an issue, the adjustor's loyalty is divided, and the insured cannot expect him to represent the insured's interest. This is the reason, the court noted, that the insured is provided with Cumis counsel. Id. at 1227, 265 Cal.Rptr. at 375.

22

The court cited California law to show that, while the relation between the parties is akin to a fiduciary relationship, the protection afforded by that relationship is not unlimited, and the insurer has no duty totally to disregard its own interests. Id. at 1226, 265 Cal.Rptr. at 374. The court went on:

23

The insurance adjuster is the agent of the insurer ... That the adjuster can under particular fact situations become also the agent of the insured is clear, and this most usually will occur when no issue as to coverage arises. Where coverage is in issue, however, it is obvious that the adjuster's loyalties are divided and the insured and his counsel cannot reasonably expect that he represents only the interest of the insured. Indeed, it is to remedy this problem that the concept of the Cumis counsel has been created.

24

The existence of independent Cumis counsel adequately protects, we believe, the interests of the insured. In these days of ever-increasing costs in the processing of insurance settlements, we conclude it would be unwise to impose yet another layer of administration.

25

Id. at 1227, 265 Cal.Rptr. at 375 (citations omitted).

26

The concurring opinion in State Farm also rejected Seeno's argument:

27

The [insured] contends the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing requires dual adjusters in a Cumis situation. Amicus curiae, Albert D. Seeno Construction Company, makes a similar contention, asserting 'several California decisions have recognized the need to segregate the coverage file handling from the liability claims handling.' ... [N]ot only has amicus curiae overstated the scope of existing law, there is nothing in the implied covenant to prohibit an insurer, under the circumstances of this case, in using a single adjuster for both liability and coverage ...

28

. . . . .

29

Because an insurer may appropriately consider coverage questions, and because an insured in a Cumis situation will have independent counsel charged with zealously representing solely the insured's interests, I agree with the majority's implicit conclusion that a single adjuster in the circumstances of the case does not violate the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

30

Id. at 1234-35, 265 Cal.Rptr. at 380.

31

Seeno's argument is undermined by other recent cases. The same court that decided State Farm noted in another case that the California Supreme Court has "never squarely held that an insurer is a true fiduciary to its insured," but instead it "has consistently described it as a special relationship." Love v. Fire Insurance Exchange, 221 Cal.App.3d 1136, 1147, 271 Cal.Rptr. 246, 252 (1990); see also Henry v. Associated Indemnity Corp., 217 Cal.App.3d 1405, 1418, 266 Cal.Rptr. 578, 586 (1990) (no third-party breach of fiduciary duty claim lies against insurer). Similarly, a federal district court recently held that, "As best this court can determine, the current state of California law is that the relationship between an insurer and an insured has many of the elements of a fiduciary relationship, but is not an actual fiduciary relationship." Hassard, Bonnington, Roger & Huber v. Home Ins., 740 F.Supp. 789, 792 (S.D.Cal.1990); see also Love, 221 Cal.App.3d at 1149 fn. 7, 271 Cal.Rptr. at 253 fn. 7; Bennett v. Allstate Ins. Co., 753 F.Supp. 299, 302-303 (N.D.Cal.1990) (California Supreme Court has not characterized this relationship as fiduciary).

32

Federal courts look to the California Supreme Court for its interpretation of California law. But where that court has not definitively spoken on an issue, the decision of the state's intermediate courts represent data that a federal court must consider in undertaking its analysis. Air-Sea Forwarder, Inc. v. Air Asia Co., Ltd., 880 F.2d 176, 186 (9th Cir.1989). Although the California Supreme Court has "characterized" the insurer-insured relationship as fiduciary,2 California law seems clear that that relationship does not compel the result plaintiff seeks. These recent decisions by the California courts confirm that the relationship does not require segregation of liability and coverage files.

33

Seeno cites Manzanita Park v. Insurance Co. of North America, 857 F.2d 549 (9th Cir.1988), where the court applied Arizona law and construed an insurer's obligations under an attorney-client concept where the insurer retained an attorney to defend the insured. However, California law, unlike Arizona law, has not equated the insurer-insured status to an attorney-client relationship. Moreover, Manzanita Park does not deal with the dual adjuster situation. Finally, in this case the trial court determined on a previous motion that there is no attorney-client relationship between each attorney and the opposing party, Employers Ins. of Wausau, 692 F.Supp. 1150, 1160-1161, and we concur in that reasoning.

34

Seeno's argument that most other carriers in the California insurance industry choose to segregate their liability and coverage activities does not establish that it is Wausau's duty to do so. As stated above, the nature of Wausau's duty to its insured does not require such a segregation. The fact that other carriers may choose to segregate does not necessarily arise out of any duty to do so, but may arise from a precautious decision to avoid later complaints of mishandling from the insured.

III. DISPOSITION

35

We conclude present California law does not require an insurance carrier to segregate its liability claims handling from its coverage investigation in a reservation of rights situation. We leave it to the California legislature to decide if a change is appropriate. The trial judge committed no error, and we AFFIRM.

*

Honorable Gary L. Taylor, U.S. District Judge, Central District of California, sitting by designation

1

Cumis counsel is counsel selected by the insured to represent its interest and paid for by the insurer in a conflict of interest situation. This right to separate counsel by the insured, which takes its name from San Diego Navy Federal Credit Union v. Cumis Ins. Society, 162 Cal.App.3d 358, 208 Cal.Rptr. 494 (1984), has since been codified in Cal.Civ.Code § 2860

2

See Egan v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co., 24 Cal.3d 809, 169 Cal.Rptr. 691, 620 P.2d 141 (1970); Frommoethelydo v. Fire Insurance Exchange, 42 Cal.3d 208, 228 Cal.Rptr. 160, 721 P.2d 41 (1986)

Read More

Watch This: This almost happened to me on 680

ALAMO CA:

Date: Mid-August 2004

Location: Northbound 680

Responding Agencies: San Ramon Fire and California Highway Patrol

Event: Arson Fire of F-250 Truck where mechanic said he was right behind me. The owner is a Mormon from Alamo 1st who repaired the truck. He's got Pete Amnesia, can't remember the fire, can't remember the name of the mechanic, can't remember anything and wasn't too interested in hearing about my sons or the fire. The sad part is my ex-wife who has custody knows about this fire and she knows everyone at the this ward.




Alamo 1st Ward Bishop's Office

2949 Stone Valley Rd. A

Alamo CA




925-837-2629








Suspect: Mechanic

Gregs Muffler


Address: 3329 Mt Diablo Blvd, Lafayette, CA 94549


Phone:(925) 283-0323


This mechanic stated he was behind my truck and witnessed flames shooting back over 100 feet, he watched firetrucks arrive, he saw CHP who didn't think it was arson - even though flames were shooting back over 100's feet it wasn't good enough, then I thought I was lucky, now I'm screaming foul as weeks later





Danville Building Inspector Attacks and nearly kills resident - you didn't know about it did you




Apparently Mr. Collins had dual jobs and worked across the street? At Greg's muffler, Greg is a Danville Mormon, he can't remember the mechanics name, nor can he say much about Gary Collins. I'm sure that Collins attended PHE, knows Lynds, knows the mechanic, knows Greg, and they all know the Danville Town Council, many live walking distance to Tanabe's house who knows officer Jason Nunn, who's brother was killed with BART Officer Craig Wilson who knows several other now deceased BART officers, who know me, and they seem to know people near the Piedmont Lumber Family, they know investigators on the Vitale case, who lived down the road from Wild Wood Acres where this Photographer person is as suspect in my July 20th 2011 hit and run who happens to be friends with members of the Danville Council whose peer died from a bacterial infection which nearly killed me in 2005.




We all know Tanabe, and Butler walked into my house days after the 2004 Danville assault connected to the Danville mom spent 100K fighting charges from Hayward that she had attempted to hire a hit man, whose husband won one of the few large jury awards but one of the deceased BART officers was about to come forward as a whistle blower in his new job at an important agency.



http://contracostawatch.blogspot.com/2012/12/danville-building-inspector-gary-vinson.html?q=Collins









RICO - the best part about operating alone - is it only takes two to make a RICO Conspiracy

10 Cardozo L. Rev. 2167 (1988-1989) When Will the Idling Statute of Limitations Start Running in Rico Conspiracy Cases; Jancko-Baken, Ellen

Also, violations of state law which constitute “racketeering activity” under the federal RICO Act must be punishable by imprisonment for more than one year.  The offenses falling under this category include murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in obscene matter, and dealing in narcotic or other dangerous drugs[ii].  Courts have held that the list of state law crimes that can constitute “racketeering activity” under RICO is exclusive[iii].

Read More

Suicide ► Nordstrom 1200 Broadway Plaza Walnut Creek, CA 94596

Read More

Towncar Burning?

Arson or Accident?

Car Fire Another Towncar Bites the dust?

Author: Pete Bennett 

Date: September 4, 2012 11:54 am

Walnut Creek CA:  In my quest for information I'm constantly searching for arson fires, accidents and incidents.  

There is something going on in Contra Costa County where there are so many fires including my own fire in 2004 

Read More

Microbes of the Night - Delivering Us Unto Random Misery

Delivering Me Unto Misery

December 31st 2012 - 5:00
Temp 30 Degrees Freight

My Former Mormon Friends:  Those fine folks from Danville who know about my truck fire. 
Christian Friends: The Perched Church - Their member helped with targeting and totaling my car in Lafayette

Editing in Progress 01/01/2012 - Happy New Year? Not really but I'll do my best

Walnut Creek CA
Being out last night in the cold was the last thing I'd expect but years of events have taken a toll on me but Words Over Swords Anyday.  My normal crash spot is with long term friend where I couch surf spent was out of the area - little warning leaving me few choice.  The thread between warmth and cold is a few hundred bucks.  My brothers "The executors" forged trust documents but getting counsel challenging when the learn your documents were forged, and that your other attorney was beat up in Walnut Creek 


The night was bitter cold but posting to Facebook produced little help.  During early 2011 far too many "new" friends appear to be fake and worthless and lead to officers in Walnut Creek, Contra Costa Sherriff's deputies and several DA Investigators. 

Some may wonder what is going on, why so much angst about all these accidents, setbacks and apparent endless legal problems well if your life was turned upside down as often as mine has been then you'd be unstable or more unstable as most couldn't survive a night in the cold at less than 30 degrees.   

The final straw was when Walnut Creek Officers staged a scene in front of the Walnut Creek Library that endangered patrons, residents and employees as Walnut Creek Officers were poised to shoot.  nother defining moment was my attempts in seeking counsel where the attorney at the end of the conversation said "are you getting bumps in the night?", I said yes and far too many - he laughed and knew he's one of them.  But part of my call was reconnaissance - gotcha you targeteer (profiteer)

Reconnaissance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReconnaissanceShare
Reconnaissance is a mission to obtain information by visual observation or other detection methods, about the activities and resources of an enemy or potential

Since the eighties I've endured incident after incident but over time a pattern emerged.  I've been building a victim profile for years based on reading local news.  I always pondered how seemingly normal people suddenly vanish, crash, die sudden deaths or commit suicide especially when knowing them.  When you personally know a Father whose son kills the mom but knowing he's getting bumps in the night that perhaps rash out of character events are not so random. 

Online comments provide insight rarely heard outside of law enforcement.  The recent accident involved Charles Silverman occurred in Lafayette CA October 7th 2012.  The driver dies in high speed crash into a telephone pole but comments nested under patch from other drivers was traveling at well over 100 mph.   One distinct observation point was at Withers/Talyor Blvd a few miles preceding that accident was "The driver had look of terror in his eyes" but I called this person as I recognised her name I've known for many years.  Our conversation was poignant that she feels something is going on but she also called investigators to relay her statements to investigators.  Like many investigators they need a customer relationship tool like sales force. 

Mr. Silverman is not the only accident victim in Lafayette but in my case they're not interested in seeking out suspects in my July10, 2011 "hit and run" accident but Lafayette Cheif of Police Eric Christesen paltry response was my accident was unfortunate but perhaps that my letters resonate with Steve Falk City Manager as Mr. Falk my accident was an attempted murder but there are other events, I'm an arson victim, an assault victim, and I'm now positive that perhaps the incident on August 5th 2011 was attempt to allow an officer to use deadly force.

Contra Costa County has a series of attacks, fire bombings and arson "dressed as fires" spanning decades but this observer takes a different approach knowing these fires are close enough to the perfect conduit which is the East Bay Parks Trail Network that weaves around the county.  Something that's good for residents provides numerous undected pathways.  This could be the entry and escape conduit for many fires. 

A witness to my 2004 Truck Fire works in Lafayette on Mt. Diablo Blvd.  The building inspector that nearly killed me weeks later but as fact that took over eight years to surface was he worked across the street.  He cannot respond as current horizontal location prevents him from speaking up.  A sidebar is he was father that left a wife and children behind.

We have real "pipe bombs" or "pipe bombs fakes" but these are found "just in time" by important people but they are "disarmed" which brings a constant bright light on a certain agency. I could be wrong but none have gone off but searches in other demographic areas fail to produce similar incidents. 

About two years ago a local musician was found foaming at the mouth on trail - no one stopped, Silverman races about 4 miles at speed good enough to blow the engine, one of the biggest privately held lumber company burns to the ground that's just down the street from a former restaurant blamed on transients. 

A homeless transient squatting in a vacant Pittsburg house dies of "natural causes", a hairdresser suddenly becomes someone else, a normal man jumps from the 680 overpass, a janitor with 30 years of tenure jumps to his death,, a homeless man walks in front Amtrak, a senior vice president bicycles directly into a CalTrain, and a homeless man is crushed in Walnut Creek plus bicyclists everywhere getting hit or the pedestrian in Antioch run over by two separate cars. 

On August 3rd a bouncer from a local bar was found on WB 24 but like all my coincidences he was killed about 20 minutes after our conversation at the end of night.

The list goes on and on.  A man is found dead in the creek behind Barnes and Noble, then several years later a nearby business is fire-bombed but the programmer that flipped on 680 just like the Contra Costa resident found in Idaho, they are found alone, they call it suicide which to my observations seems to be an overused convenient untruth. 

"If you can keep your head when all about you

Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;

If you can trust yourself when all "

The Microbes of the night could explain why the musician was foaming at the mouth, why the transients being found dying alone, why are the homeless women was found on the freeway, why was the mom was found on 680 at Bollinger Canyon Road. 

Many have threads leading to local businesses, real estate, mortgage, banking or locally but many also have clubcards, live near trails, eat food, some have EBT cards but I'm suspecting they are some type of financial, estate, or matrimonial obstacle. 

For me I've become hyper careful about food while super cautious on where I get my food. 

The Microbes Model is tasteless, invisible but near impossible to intercept but grocers would be forced to withdraw products and again like the Tylenol Scare suggests we've got a huge problem and Contra Costa County is ground zero. 

On another level a threat exists that's on a threat level of it's own where your medical records are used against you.

Seeking Weakness through medical records:  Knowing the targets medical weaknesses would be the logical first move by the tactician -

The Drama of the Kill?  Depend on which side of the deal you're sitting on

Asthma or Anaphylaxis.  A bee sting can bring down a target in seconds but knowing the targets weakness would is found in their medical records.  If you knew the person well-enough that information would be common knowledge but the medical records in the wrong hands are simply dangerous.  

One could surmise that a coveted advantage would be food allergies where perhaps a peanut laced lunch coupled with a scenario where investigators conclude perhaps that the victim made a fatal mistake.  Using my Perfect Circle Model - anything is possible. 

Anaphylaxis is a life-threatening type of allergic reaction. Symptoms develop quickly, often within seconds or minutes. They may include the following: Abdominal pain; Abnormal (high-pitched) breathing sounds; Anxiety; Chest ... There is a death locally that fits this model.  

Corporate Weaknesses - The Achilles Heel - Outsourcing your data. 

In the late nineties there was all this effort on Year 2000 code, nuclear plants, social security, hospitals and your personal computer but in the end no planes dropped out the Sky.  Fixing the problem required years of effort but today we have more systems, applications and programmers working around the world. To watch every second of a programmer's activities near impossible so in the end the programming community is about trust - trusting them with your data.

The banking industry were the early adopters of computerization but one core problem was programming departments are run by managers and programmers are good at double-speaking their way out of every question. 

One malicious code tactic was using rounding errors where excess change landed accounts controlled by the programmer.  I've heard everything from millions on down but I'm sure plenty slid through and were never caught. 

During my research I found this WikiPedia link that is reasonable to assume matches my arguments.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Carpenter

Read More