4_Justice says

That one must have really hit a nerve....can you read you like a book, my friend. 

By the way, please use my e-mail going forward.  Or do you prefer to hide behind the SR?

Buff says

Wow, you must be ollie's "supersleuth" twin.  How is it that you know so much about me?  And my parents?

Buff says

Happily married, sorry to burst your bubble.  Driven to provide the truth is more accurate.  Anything else you need to know. 

4_Justice says

ah, divorced...just as I figured

I figured it out...your hard working, blue collared mommy and daddy paid your way through school only to have you disappointment them.  You wanted so hard for them to be proud of you and now you hold deep regret and a great amount of guilt.  Again, there are professionals for that

4_Justice says

tell you what, please respond to chap4@att.net

Buff says

Once again, thanks for taking time out from your busy schedule to continue to be bothered by little 'ol me.

Threatened? Hardly.  Amused is a much better descriptor. 

Now who's hot under the (blue) collar? 

4_Justice says

Now you're resorting to degrading one's occupation?   You truly are a piece of work.  Do you have kids?  A husband?  Perhaps a cat or dog?  Someone who actually cares about you?  Whatever happened to you in life sure has made you a bitter person, lashing out at anyone you're threatened by.  There are actually people who can help you get over your past failures and move on with your life.  Medication perhaps?  You may still be hung up on the fact you graduated at the bottom of your class, knowing you could have done better if only you applied yourself.  A common theme throughout your life, I'm sure.

By the way, I am more educated than you think I am.  You should know that by now, pal.

Buff says

Your response simply reinforces/proves my point.  Thanks.  Were you with your family when you responded yet again? 

What do you have to focus on, the parts as they come down the line?  If so, good for you, that's a good, honest day's work.  I chose a different path. 

Oh, and I am not now, nor have I ever been your pal.

4_Justice says

Way too much time on your hands, pal.  You just won't/can't quit, can you?  You feel you must "correct" everyone you don't agree with, right?  That right there tells me what kind of person you are.  Would love to sit down and get to the bottom of your deep-rooted issues - my initial consultation is free of charge. 

It must be nice to have the luxury of sitting in front of your computer all day, not having to focus on your "job".  I, on the other hand, have a family (do you know what that is?) and real priorities.  I suggest you find a hobby or two to occupy your free time, which apparently is way too much.

Buff says

If 4justice would simply quit responding, maybe there would be no reason for further comment.  If he/she continues to post false/incorrect information, I will continue to correct him/her. 

Thanks.

4_Justice says

SR - this is getting ridiculous.  Can you please remove this blog, for the sake and common courtesy to our family?

Thank you

Buff says

Not long, as you clearly know, 4justice: there is a "lawvbook" that has handy "disclaimers".  I can draft those, because I am licensed to do so. This is getting old.  It's like fighting "with the left side of my brain tied behind my back".  Next time you post, have something that makes sense, it makes it so much more interesting to the reader.

Buff says

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and if you notice, everyone, including yourself, quotes me, and then tries to discredit me.  Thanks. 

You know I'm right. 

Note:  these are my opinions and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the Sandusky Register, its parent company, or its editorial staff and management, or any particular member of its readership.  Further, any similarities to any real person or persons or their heirs or assigns, is purely coincidental and in no way will subject myself, the Sandusky Register or its parent company to any liability whatsoever, whether it be civil or criminal pursuant to applicable Ohio law.

4_Justice says

You continue to make yourself look like a like a true idiot..." EVERYTHING varies based on the facts of each case. That's elementary my dear 4 justice, elementary".  You obviously admit you are no smarter than an elementary student because you throw out exigent circumstance without having your facts straight.  Tell me the truth, did you ever graduate?

You may assume and infer, but you are doing so without the facts.  Don't you want to collect the facts before you go spouting off?  It clearly makes you look even more foolish to do so.  You believe what you want to believe and then throw out some jargon based on your self-proclaimed knowledge. 

You are a true piece of work.  By the way, contact me on my personal e-mail, Ms. Lawyer...I need a few more laughs without putting these honorable people through the agony of reading your rhetoric.

And yes, there is a lot of animosity by the family towards you, but being the heartless coward you are, hiding behind electronic communication and your newspaper, we would come to expect nothing less.

Oh, and nice disclaimer...how long did it take you to look that one up in your handy lawbook?  Although it's a simple statement learned in your basic law course, I would imagine it took you most of the afternoon - we all know you had the spare time.  Once again, you have proven us right.

Buff says

And 4:  EVERYTHING varies based on the facts of each case. That's elementary my dear 4 justice, elementary.

Buff says

Again, wow!  So much rage tman.  Are you okay?

4 justice:  Lawyers may assume if they choose to do so, and they certainly are allowed to "infer". 

In my opinion: clearly in this case, exigent circumstances were present, allowing the police to perform a warrantless search and seizure that was not in violation of the 4th Amendment. 

Note:  these are my opinions and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the Sandusky Register, its parent company, or its editorial staff and management, or any particular member of its readership.  Further, any similarities to any real person or persons or their heirs or assigns, is purely coincidental and in no way will subject myself, the Sandusky Register or its parent company to any liability whatsoever, whether it be civil or criminal pursuant to applicable Ohio law.

4_Justice says

Biff was backed in a corner last night and pulled the "tinfoil" comment out of her pocket.  I suggested perhaps she was a main customer of tinfoil while in law school, hence the grades - but she reported it as an attack.  It sure is a touchy subject with her.

"The value I add here is knowledge of the law-it's what I do.  I provide truthful, accurate, legal information."  

Oh Biff, another highly amusing comment from you: "Feel free to have him or her (lawyer) contact me for a tutorial on exigent circumstances, and how to deal with difficult clients."  Biffy obviously thinks she is the expert on this subject, but fails to realize exigent circumstances varies based on the facts of each case.  She even admitted exigent circumstance is a highly complex topic, but she sure was pretty quick in throwing the term out there as an excuse, based on the article.  Her statements suggest she either has been hired by/works for the SPD and has gathered all the hard facts or has performed her own investigation, thus coming to the conclusion there were exigent circumstances.  Come on, Biff, we all know you haven't a clue as to the facts of this case (lawyers aren't supposed to assume, are they?), and therefore your legal jargon doesn't apply.  However, I would be more than happy to enlighten you as to the facts (my initial consultation is free of charge), allowing you to become a more sensible blogger on the next topic where you feel you need to add your "truthful, accurate, legal information." 

Salvatore says

Where's buff at? Didn't buff state "The value I add here is knowledge of the law-it's what I do.  I provide truthful, accurate, legal information." So why doesn't buff provide any truthful, accurate legal information on the LEADS story or that prescription drop off program. That's right, buff is only on here to protect crooks and then go after anyone that asks too many questions about what is happening in our area. This morning, somebody told me that a woman was murdered in a motel in Perkins a few years ago. It too was ruled a suicide but evidence found at the scene suggested murder.

Tman says

Tman says

Tman says

Buff - .......................

Tman says

Tman says

Tman says

Tman says

Buff - Evidently you are so concerned with your own agenda you don't even know who you are or who we are. 

Salvatore says

Oy 4_Justice,  I hear a lot and wonder what is true and what is rumors. I heard a LOT of how drugs come into the Sandusky area with the protection of the police both in Perkins and Sandusky. I am not trying to discredit the honest police officers of the SPD or PPD. Sometimes where there is smoke there is fire. For the past few years, I have followed the blogs on the Cleveland newspaper http://www.cleveland.com/ and questioned if Frank Russo and Jimmy Dimora were really crooks or if the tin foiled hat crowd had too much to drink. I admit that I thought that Elsebeth Baumgartner was some nut case after she tried to expose corruption in our area thanks to the Ragister. You know, I think that she was telling the truth after all. Elsebeth was sent to prison and your brother was assassinated. I think that your brother was a very GREAT SOLDIER that fought against the domestic powers that be. I think that buff is a crook that is trying to protect those who were responsible for your brother's death. Your  brother Bob was a TRUE patriot for our country. He Fought for truth and justice for our country against domestic terrorists. Rest In Peace Bob.

4_Justice says

4_Justice says

Buff says

Time to replace the tinfoil, fellas.  Wow, I need to plug my favorite breakfast food:  "Cuckoo for Coco Puffs!"

4_Justice says

Really hits a nerve with you, right Biff?  No need to defend your ignorance and inability to keep up with the rest of your class...

Sal - no offense taken at all.  You have excellent points that Buff wouldn't even begin to comprehend.  It isn't about the computer at all, but Buff was fixated on that topic so I carried on the conversation out of pure amusement.  She is finally backed in a corner on this one, but would never admit it.

The crime scene was never combed for evidence.  Your point about the cigarette butts is intriguing, Sal.  The family found 1 butt not far from my brother's body.  Great detective work on part of SPD.   In fact, this should have never been ruled a suicide until all facts were gathered.  It is treated as a crime scene until such information is available and the coroner rules as such (I believe Biff would concur).  And SPD has the stupidity to hose down the area with my brother's garden hose?  Are you kidding me?  SPD sure didn't collaborate on their stories...one said it was being treated as a homocide, two others insisted it was a suicide, and re-iterated to family members over and over again (within an hour of finding his body - we didn't know they could conduct and conclude the investigation that quick), as if they were covering something up.  Yet another tells us there is an on-going investigation.  Perhaps they know something we don't.  This might explain why they led us outside the station when giving us their "ruling" of suicide.  Were they trying to avoid the cameras, recordings, etc in the lobby?  Just some of the many questions I ask myself on a daily basis because we have received absolutely no answers - 16 days after finding my brother.  The whole thing stinks and they know it.  Why is Graybill, the lead narcotics detective, heading this up?  Someone out there knows something, and that is what's truly a shame.

Buff says

Duly noted, 4justice.  Since you know who I am you should also know my correct class rank, and what law school I actually graduated from.  Clearly you do not.  Again,  let  your own lawyer challenge the actions of law enforcement.  Feel free to have him or her contact me for a tutorial on exigent circumstances, and how to deal with difficult clients.

Salvatore says

Oy buff! I can understand the free initial consultation. If the victim were a female, would the police have the right to search the laundry hamper and sniff the undies? I apologize again to the family of Bob. I am just trying to make a point here. I don't think that a personal computer or its contents were relevent to the case. What was relevent was any DNA that could have been found in the alley be it a hair, cigarette butt or other relevent evidence that should have been protected and not hosed down. Again, I am sorry if I offended Bob's family in any way. I feel that buff is trying to protect those who were responsible for Bob's death. I very much doubt that this was a suicide. I have many questions about this. Were Bob's hands checked for gunpower residue?

4_Justice says

First, let's get something straight.  I neither seek nor want any legal advice from someone who graduated at the bottom of her class.  Moving on...

If you are on top of your game, you would know the family does have an attorney...and he would run circles around you, making you look even more foolish than you are.  If you read the article, it has to do with accessing the computer.  Didn't we already address this awhile back, Buffy?  I would certainly expect the cops to search the house for any foul play or clues...that isn't what this is about (see previous posts).  It's about accessing his computer and sifting through his e-mails.  You truly are lost, and I'm really starting to feel bad for you...no matter what others think of you, there's always hope, Biff

Salvatore says

Oy buff! I want to hire you and take advantage of the free consultation. You can contact me through the Ragister.

Salvatore says

Oy buff! Please explain to us in simple terms for the common man.

Buff says

My remarks were specific to entering and searching the premises, not the computer.  I believe the police acted properly on the former.  That is truthful and informative.  If you want specific legal advice, you need to consult with an attorney.  My initial consultation is always no charge.

4_Justice says

Again, you have way too much time on your hands, leading me to believe you bill your existing clients for the countless hours you spend blogging.

You comment about exigent circumstance being a very complex area of the law, yet you don't elaborate when it comes to my brother's circumstance.  You attack me by saying I am seeking a black and white answer because I wouldn't understand anything deeper, but you don't provide any details regarding the law.  This leads me to believe you don't understand it yourself  - please, try to provide us that all-encompassing, truthful, informative legal insight you hold, as opposed to just throwing out two words on a blog.  You first need to understand the facts around what happened before you can blurt out "exigent circumstance".  Assuming you have gathered these facts, surely you must be able to provide a more granular explanation, no matter how complex. 

Just one last thought, why would the ex-chief lie about having consent from a family member to access my brother's computer, given the fact he didn't need to get consent per exigent circumstance? 

I am assuming you will report this to SR as an attack because you don't have the answers and don't want to look any more foolish than you already have.

R U Serious says

Buff says

Now who's hot under the collar?  I don't need your permission to comment on here, so long as I comply with the guidelines. 

I don't have to ask the police about their investigation either.  My comments only relate to their actions with regard to the doctrine of exigent circumstances. 

4_Justice says

Don't tell me what I have permission to do, Buffy.  And who here is asking for your "informed explanation"?  Judging by the repulsion others have for you on this and other blogs, it certainly wasn't any of us.  Does it make you feel important by giving "informed information" due to the fact no one pays attention to you otherwise?  It's easy for someone like yourself to hide behind your words...electronic communcation is a wonderful thing. 

It would be best if you "offer" your information elsewhere, or better yet, ask the police why, after over 2 weeks they have not provided the family with any ballistics conclusions...or why they haven't interviewed the ex-convict next door...or why they are asking others for Bob's e-mail address (I would have to believe they already have this, since they accessed his e-mail the night they found him - computer is being scanned)...I think you get the picture, or at least I assume so.

West says

Buffoon:

I guess you're sorry that Attorney Steven L. Howland is dead too, right! Well, the evidence shows that his murder was covered up by the police and others associated with him.

Oh yeah.............were closing in.

Trust me, it won't be long now.

4_Justice says

Sal - it's only because I called Biff out and the family found out who this "person" really is...I guess SR takes that as a personal attack.

Must be some kid behind the scenes following a yes-no flowchart to make removal decisions...

Salvatore says

Oy Ragister!!!!

Why do you allow buff to attack people? Even buff admits to "going after" people. So tell me Ragister, is buff one of the moderators at the Ragister? Personal attacks by buff are very common yet I see good decent comments by others deleted.  

4_Justice says

Stick to your discussion guidelines, SR, or shut this blog down completely.  Make a decision, one way or the other.

What about this garbage from the all-knowing Biff,,,"julie, you haven't a clue what precedent means.  sally:  you don't remember what you did in my bathroom?"

4_Justice says

4_Justice says

Tman says

Buff says

You don't get to ask me to leave and then continue to denigrate me.  You don't get it both ways. 

Again, the title of this article is "Police accused of illegal search in death case".  I simply offered an informed explanation why the police acted properly despite not having a warrant. 

I also correct those who misstate the law.  I think people reading these comments should be able to consider the truth. 

As for what kind of lawyer I am.  Let's just say that none of you is among my clientele.

4_Justice says

No offense at all, Sal.  In fact, we thank you for your comments.  We're just glad there are sensible people on here like yourself and the many others who see through Buffy's egotistical and cowardly personality.  Unlike Buffy, we are are realistic about the world around us and have enough common sense to add value to a conversation.  You are exactly right...Buffy can't stand the fact there are actually others who disagree with her, and the only way she knows how to respond is by attacking others - thus giving her some sort of justification in her own mind that it is ok to do so.  This is where the cowardly personality is evident.  Again, any solid lawyer wouldn't have the time or desire to participate in online blogs.  Perhaps she is billing her limited amount of clients for her countless hours spent online.  With all her self-proclaimed knowledge, what she doesn't know is that the family has figured out who she is and has come to expect nothing less than the professionalism she has shown.

Again, to the others...thanks for your support and thoughtfulness

Salvatore says

Very good comments by Jay. Thank you Jay. I noticed that buff seems to only attack people that ask too many questions about what goes on in our area. First I noticed that buff went after Julie for her problems with the courts. Then buff came after me for asking too many questions on the local level. Then buff went after the family of Bob because they too asked questions about a so called suicide that doesn't make sense at all. Lately, I found out that buff used to go after Elisabeth Baumgardner and Oliver Hardy because they too asked too many questions about what is going on in the Sandusky area. I have come to the conclusion that buff is a crook that belongs in prison. That is my opinion about what I have read and what other people told me. I think that Sandusky is a little brother or sister of corrupt Cleveland. I apologize to the family of Bob if my comments offend them in any way.