Return to "After the Formal Complaint" Main Page ||| Previous Document ||| Next Document


Heading — New Document 9, Under Construction

 

"Mike and the FBI"

 

 

specific information to get the FBI to open an investigation on a corrupt cpuc judge named Janice Lynn Grau

The above noted phone number is a "smoking gun" that proves the phone company violated public utility laws each and every day since 1996. A corrupt Judge created fraudulant statements in her Decision to avoid the issue of the phone number. Furthermore, she stated that altered repair records were irrelevant (when Federal Laws require accurate records for PUC record gathering), and she refused to follow the rule of law for many other violations that required fines be paid to the State of California.

As a result of a lucky photograph of a document that could only be obtained through photography, I was able to link the phone number to a phone line that was known to be defective each and every day since 1996.

Any reasonable person can look at the above document and see the circled phone number has the last five digits of "25093." As noted on the above photograph, a "2" is flat on the bottom, and an "8" is round at the bottom. Furthermore, I was the only person on the above document with "RSA" (Resale) Service. The high resolution picture can be seen on this link: http://mikeandmabell.com/362_hi-res.html

To avoid paying millions of dollars in fines to the State of California, and to avoid paying for business losses caused by phone problems, fraud, and malicious behavior, the phone company Attorney, Stephanie Krapf, told the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) that the phone number has the last five digits of "85093."

After looking at the facts, I have determined that the Judge is corrupt and concealed the facts of the Complaint from the Commissioners. Many of the violations (the use of defective phone lines and altered repair records) are linked to Corporate frauds. The corrupt judge is so well protected by State law, that by law, the State of California cannot admit that the above phone number is mine.

I have contacted various government agencies to see who would be responsible for dealing with a corrupt CPUC judge: Hong Chang, at the Governor's San Francisco Office, told me he could not comment on the above phone number because it was "Complicated." The State Attorney General's Office refused to look at, or comment on the above photograph, telling me that the CPUC is a part of the State, and the law requires the Attorney General to protect the corrupt judge. The US Attorney Office (in Washington DC) told me to contact the Commission on Judicial Performance. The Commission on Judicial Performance (in San Francisco) told me that the Judges at the CPUC are not under their jurisidiction, and suggested the State Attorney General. I again contacted the State Attorney General's Office, and was told to contact the California Bureau of State Audits, which then told me to contact the State Attorney General's Office.

The government agency with Jurisdiction in Corruption and Corporate Frauds is the FBI. The FBI webpage on corruption makes it very clear that corruption is one of the FBI's top priorities. The following is on the FBI webpage Why Corruption Matters :

  • Q: Does public corruption really have an impact on people's lives?
  • A: Absolutely. Public corruption can take funding away from your child's school and even prevent your street from being re-paved. Police who take bribes endanger your neighborhood. And guess who ultimately foots the bill for these crimes? We all do...through higher taxes. The Government Accountability Office estimates that at least 10 percent of the funding for federal government programs is lost to public corruption and government fraud every year. We're talking tens of billions of dollars.

Likewise, the FBI webpage on Corporate Frauds makes it very clear that Corporate Frauds is also a very high priority, and this includes lying to a regulatory agency, and obstruction of justice.

The FBI webpage on Corporate Frauds states:

  • "Corporate Fraud investigations involve the following activities:
  • ( 1) Falsification of financial information, including:
    (a) False accounting entries [which includes altering repair records to conceal problems in the infrastructure]
  • Obstruction of justice designed to conceal any of the above-noted types of criminal conduct, particularly when the obstruction impedes the inquiries of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), other regulatory agencies [such as the CPUC], and/or law enforcement agencies."

Based on the above statement on the FBI website, if the phone number shown above has the last five digits of "25093," and not "85093" as AT&T told the CPUC during a Formal Complaint, then this becomes an FBI matter involving Corporate Frauds, which includes falsifying documents to conceal problems in the infrastructue and obstruction of justice, by lying about documents obtained through photography.

I first contacted the FBI, via email on July 5, 2007, after speaking to phone repair expert, Don McCarty, about the trouble code "98" (http://mikeandmabell.com/FBI/History-WetCable.html). I received an email response from the FBI, that asked me to contact the San Francisco office ( read it).
Note: see below for links to a number of articles written by phone repair expert Don McCarty for "OSP How-To Network Solutions".

On July 6, 2007, by phone, I spoke to an FBI agent at the San Francisco office who told me his computer would not allow him to look at the webpage with the high resolution photograph. http://mikeandmabell.com/362_hi-res.html

I spent several months organizing this webpage with the facts obtained in July 2007, so the FBI would have an easy time understanding the frauds that are linked to the above photograph.

In October, I called the FBI, and the agent asked that I come to the San Francisco office. The nameless (due to "security" reasons) FBI agent I met at the San Francisco office on October 15, 2007 told me the FBI did not have the resources to investigate my complaint. He went on to tell me that the FBI did not have the money to buy paper for the photo-copy machine. When I asked the Agent what the above phone number looked like, he said, "I cannot make that determination." He then proceeded to tell me I was wasting the FBI's time. He also told me that if I were to repeatedly contact the FBI, he would charge me with harassment.

I contacted Congresswoman, Ellen Tauscher, by telephone on November 28, 2007. Her staff member looked at the above photograph, and quickly agreed that the phone number on the above document has the last five digits of "25093" and that the attorney committed perjury. He agreed this was an FBI matter, and he agreed to open a Congressional Inquiry, provided I fill out the appropriate form.

On January 7, 2008, I mailed the "help form" to my Congresswoman, asking the FBI to investigate the frauds and corruption linked to the above phone number. In a letter dated January 28, 2008, I was told that my complaint was sent to the FCC, and that I should have a response within 60 days.

In February 2008, I told the Congresswoman's assistant that I needed the FBI to investigate my Complaint. She told me she forwarded my Complaint to the FBI, and she said the FBI will contact me.

By April 2, 2008, I had not heard from the FBI, so I called the San Francisco office and spoke to another nameless duty agent, and asked him to look at the phone number on the top of this webpage. The duty agent told me he could not determine what the numbers were. I then drove down to the San Francisco FBI office, and asked to speak to the supervisor of the duty agent. Two nameless FBI agents came out to speak to me -- they refused to say if they thought the phone number shown above has the last five digits of "25093." The agents told me that I should not expect the FBI to investigate my Complaint.

On April 15, 2008, I received a letter from my Congresswoman, and the responses from the FCC and the FBI. The letter from the FBI ignored the evidence on this webpage, and advised me to contact the San Francisco office:

Letter, FBI to Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher, March 28

April 16, 2008. I called the FBI. First, I asked the (nameless) duty agent to look at the above letter so that he knew my Congresswoman was involved. Next, I asked the duty agent what the phone number at the top of this page looked like. The duty agent verbally told me that the above phone number has the last five digits of "25093." This was very encouraging, but at the same time, it was meaningless, unless the FBI was willing to state, in writing, that the phone number has the last five digits of "25093."

April 18, 2008. I mailed a letter to my congresswoman, begging that she ask the FBI to provide a declaration, in writing, as to whether the phone number has the last five digits of "25093" (as I claim), or "85093" (as the phone company attorney claims).

Tuesday, April 29, 2008. I spoke to a duty agent (agent Mandy). She asked me to explain why the phone number shown at the top of this page is within FBI jurisdiction -- I referred her to the FBI webpage on Corporate Frauds. The FBI agent asked me if the phone company lied about the phone number to prevent exposing other violations. Bingo!!! She said she needed some time to study this webpage, and said she would get back to me. On May 13, 2008, she called me to ask a few questions.

Friday, May 16, 2008. My Congresswoman mailed a letter to the FBI San Francisco office, asking if the phone number in the photograph is a "2" (as I claim) or an "8" (as AT&T claims), and to respond in writing, to me. My Congresswoman sent copies of the letter to the CPUC, the State Attorney General Jerry Brown, and Senator Don Perata.

Letter from Ellen Taucsher, 4-14-08

The State Attorney General responded with the following letter, confirming it cannot investigate a corrupt judge or a corrupt commission -- State law forbids it. It should also be noted that I had already contacted the California Bureau of State Audits, which has done nothing.

The Attorney General had no legal obligation to respond to me. The tone of the letter was very polite -- unlike the letters I have received from the CPUC. My interpretation of the Attorney General letter is that it went as far as it could legally go, in saying this is an FBI matter, without actually saying this is an FBI matter. Cc'ing the letter to my Congresswoman reinforces my belief that the Attorney General wants my Congresswoman to continue to help me.

 

May 29, 2008. FBI Agent Mandy called me, and told me the photograph did not provide enough information to prove the phone number was mine. I told the FBI the phone number could be proven to be mine by looking at the letters "RSA." After our conversation, I added the webpage "RSA" (Resale) Service to identify the phone number as being mine based on the letters "RSA."

June 3, 2008. FBI Agent Mandy called and told me that my website was one-sided, and wanted to see the Briefs and Testimony. She agreed the number looked like a "2" but was concerned that I may have altered the photograph to make an "8" look like a "2." She asked for the MLT documents I received in Discovery.

June 4, 2008. I went to the FBI office in San Francisco. I asked to see Agent Mandy. She was not in, so I provided an FBI duty agent with Pacific Bell Testimony, Briefs, Response to the Appeal, the Response to the Application for Rehearing, as well as my Testimony, Briefs, Appeal, Application for Rehearing, and the MLT documents provided in Discovery. Sadly, according to agent Mandy, who called me on on July 8, 2008, the documents I provided on this date could not be found.

July 8, 2008. Agent Mandy called. She told me she did not receive the documents I provided to the FBI on June 4, 2007. She then asked questions that focused on the evidence that the cable pairs were defective and that Pacific Bell (now AT&T) lied about the condition of the cable pairs. She stated she would submit the evidence to her superiors to see if my complaint met the criteria necessary to open an investigation. I asked why the FBI couldn't just ask AT&T if the phone number was mine, and the FBI responded that it would have to open an investigation before it could ask such questions. She also stated that if AT&T continued to deny the above phone number was mine, that a jury would have to make the determination.

August 14, 2008. I called Agent Mandy, and asked what was happening with my complaint. I asked her if she received the documents that I provided to the FBI office on June 14, 2007. She told me she could not find them. She told me she forwarded my complaint to the corruption department. She told me that if I hadn't heard from the FBI, that they would not open an investigation, and that I should just "let it go."

August 15, 2008. My brother and I wrote to our Congresswoman, telling her that the SF FBI office refused to respond to her letter dated 05/16/08. Karen Tedford, my Congresswoman's case worker, was clearly frustrated by the situation. She asked me what I think needs to be done. I told her that because the SF Office won't answer the letter, she should send a letter to Kenneth W. Kaiser, the assistant director of the FBI, (who wrote the letter shown above, dated March 28, 2008), and ask that he answer the question of whether the number is a "2" or an "8".

 

last updated 08/22/08

 

Congresswoman Tauscher requested the FBI to identify what the above noted numbers are in May 2008. The FBI refused to answer the question -- costing California millions of dollars.

In a phone conversation with Tauscher's staff in Washington DC, I was told the orders are coming from the Executive branch of Government, and the Legislative Branch of Government (which includes Congress) cannot do anything about it. This occurred during the Bush Administration. I later received an email from Congresswoman Tauscher stating she could no longer help me.

If the FBI were to "officially" acknowledge that the above "RSA" phone number has the last five digits of "25093," and not "85093" as the phone company claimed in court documents, or that the letters "RSA" identified the phone number as being mine, and not someone elses phone number, as the phone company claimed in court documents, the FBI would be obligated to open an investigation into Corporate Fraud.

I have been trying to get the FBI to look at the above photograph, and open an investigation linked to the above phone number, since July 2007. The high resolution photograph can be seen on this link: http://www.mikeandmabell.com/362_hi-res.html

To make a long story short, the "RSA"phone number is my phone number. It received phone service through a phone line (cable pair) that was known to be defective. This proved the phone company violated laws each and every day, since 1996, costing me a great deal of money. This also proved that AT&T wrongfully imposed "special" rules upon me, for complaining about the recurring service problems. To avoid paying fines to the State of California that could exceed $100 million, and to avoid compensating me for business losses, the phone company commited perjury by telling the California Public Utilities Commission the number has the last five digits of "85093," and that it was not my phone number.

The act of perjury was so blatent, that when combined with other fraudulant statements made by the CPUC Judge, as well as the Judge's refusal to follow the Rule of Law, and a lack of signatures on the Denial for Rehearing, it became obvious the Judge is corrupt. See: The Corrupt Judge and the "admittedly defective DAML" , The Corrupt Judge and legal error , The Corrupt Judge and Altered Repair Records , The Corrupt Judge and the Denial for Rehearing. Corrupt Judges are within FBI jurisdiction, as are corporations that lie to state agencies.

From July 2007 through April 2008 (over nine months), the FBI was not cooperative, literally, refusing to make a determination of whether the phone number has the last five digits of "25093" as I claim, or "85093" as the phone company claimed. On April 30, 2008, an FBI agent told me that I should have moved when the phone problems affected my business. The laws are very clear, a person should not have to move because a phone company does not want to repair a phone line.

It wasn't until Congresswoman Tauscher got involved that the FBI showed some cooperation. See FBI communication history for the long version of my contacts with the FBI, and the evidence I obtained in July 2007, which caused me to contact the FBI.

From May 2008 through July 2008, the FBI verbally agreed the number shown above is my phone number. On July 8, 2008, FBI "duty agent" Mandy told me she would file a report in an attempt to open an investigation. On August 14, 2008, she told me the FBI would not open an investigation and to, "let it go." I told her I wanted to see the report she filed, to see if it was accurate, she told me she would have to talk to her supervisor. On August 22, 2008, the FBI called, told me it could not make a determination if the number was mine, and again, told me to go away.

The most important reason for the FBI to acknowledge the phone number is my phone number, is to establish a Telecommunications Consumers' Bill of Rights.

On Friday, May 16, 2008. Congresswoman Tauscher sent a letter to the FBI San Francisco office, asking if the phone number in the photograph is a "2" (as I claim) or an "8" (as AT&T claims), and to respond in writing, to me. Despite my claims that this was within FBI jurisdiction, copies of the letter were sent to the CPUC, the State Attorney General Jerry Brown, and Senator Don Perata, as well as a note in the letter that she did not believe this to be an FBI matter.

Letter from Ellen Taucsher, 4-14-08

The State Attorney General responded with the following letter, confirming it cannot investigate a corrupt judge or a corrupt commission -- State law forbids it. It should also be noted that I had already contacted the California Bureau of State Audits, which had done nothing.

The State Attorney General had no legal obligation to respond to me. The tone of the letter was very polite -- unlike the letters I have received from the CPUC. My interpretation of the letter is that it went as far as it could legally go, in saying this is an FBI matter, without actually saying this is an FBI matter. Cc'ing the letter to my Congresswoman reinforces my belief that the State Attorney General wants my Congresswoman to continue to help me.

On July 8, 2008. FBI Agent Mandy called. As a result of the Congresswoman's letter, she agreed verbally, that the phone number had the last five digits of "25093" as I claimed. She agreed this was within FBI jurisdiction, and she stated she would submit the evidence to her superiors to see if my complaint met the criteria necessary to open an investigation.

August 14, 2008. I called Agent Mandy, and asked what was happening with my complaint. She told me she forwarded my complaint to the corruption department. She told me that since I hadn't heard from the FBI, that they would not open an investigation, and that I should just "let it go."

August 15, 2008. My brother and I wrote to Congresswoman Tauscher, telling her that the SF FBI office refused to respond to her letter dated 05/16/08. Karen Tedford, the Congresswoman's case worker, was clearly frustrated by the situation. She asked me what I think needs to be done. I told her that because the SF Office won't answer the letter, she should send a letter to Kenneth W. Kaiser, the assistant director of the FBI, (who wrote a letter dated March 28, 2008, see: FBI communication history ), and ask that he answer the question of whether the number is a "2" or an "8". Karen Teford refused to comply with the request, telling me she received her orders from Washington. On August 20, 2008 a staff member in Washington DC, explained that they cannot ask a question more than once, because it is considered "disrepectful." He also explained that it would be up to the Executive Branch of Government to order the FBI to investigate my complaint.

August 18, 2008. I called the FBI, and asked to speak to the Special Agent in Charge (SAC). The duty agent asked, "Is this Mike Knell?" When I answered, "yes," she said she was Agent Mandy, and she laughed. I told her that I would not give up trying to get the FBI to open an investigation. I asked to see the complaint she filed, to see if it was accurate. She said she would contact her supervisor to see if I could look it.

August 19, 2008. Below: E-mail response from Rep. Tauscher to me. Sadly, this is typical of the roadblocks I have experienced since 1997, when I first asked the CPUC for help.

August 22, 2008. An anonymous FBI "special agent" called.

This was a very disturbing call, as it became quite clear the FBI is protecting somebody. The "special agent" told me he looked this webpage (and the links), and the FBI will not open an investigation.

I asked if he could determine if the number at the top of this page was a "2" or an "8". He said, "I cannot make that determination." He told me he wasn't a specialist in looking at numbers. I asked if he had consulted with an FBI "specialist" who could determine what the number is. He refused to answer.

I also asked if he could determine if the phone number was mine, based on the letters "RSA". Again, the FBI agent told me he could not make that determination. When I asked what his title was, he told me he was a "Special agent." I asked if his superviors had told him to tell me to go away. He would not answer the question -- basically, he told me not to come back to the FBI office.

The tone of the call was more of a threat than anything else. The fact that the FBI claims they cannot make a determination that the phone number is mine, makes the FBI agent just as corrupt as the Judge, and just as costly to society.

I believe that the FBI called me as a result of my sending the following email message to phone company attorneys, Stephanie Elena Krapf and Michelle Galbraith on 08/17/08:

"As a result of recent events, Congresswoman Tauscher asked the FBI to determine whether or not you lied, when you told the State of California that a phone number in a photograph was not mine. See the following link: http://mikeandmabell.com/FBI/     Hopefully, justice will be served."

There was no other reason for the FBI to call me on 08/22/08. This is evidence that AT&T contacted the FBI, and asked for a "special" favor from a "special agent." The reason I sent the email to Stephanie Krapf and Michelle Galbraith was to rattle some cages, and see what would occur. The fact that the FBI called me to tell me they can't determine if AT&T committed perjury is evidence of a cozy relationship the FBI has with AT&T. On December 17, 2008, I sent a complaint of corruption to the Department of Justice website:

To Report a Complaint about Waste, Fraud, Abuse, or Misconduct in the Department of Justice

December 16, 2008. I went to Congressman Jerry McNerney's Pleasanton office. I asked his staff to ask the FBI to determine if the phone company committed perjury when it stated the phone number at the top of this page was not my phone number. I told his staff, that since Obama got elected, maybe the FBI will answer the question. In the meantime, if the FBI will not answer the question, I have the domain, www.APhoneNumberForThePresident.com, which asks President Obama to acknowledge the phone number is mine (I have repeatedly contacted the White House about this problem). If Obama and his staff are as good as I hope they are, they will welcome the opportunity, as this can lead to a Telecommunications Consumers' Bill of Rights that can save this country billions of dollars each year.

On December 16 and 17, I spoke to the evening duty agent at the FBI. He told me the FBI would be unable to determine who called me on August 22, 2008, at 4:18 pm. On December 16 and 17, I asked to speak to the Special Agent in Charge (SAC) about the letter from Congresswoman Tauscher's Office which asked the FBI to identify the phone number in the photograph at the top of this page.

December 18, 2008, I spoke to Gina at the Governor's Office. We talked about the State financial crisis. I then told her how a phone company attorney defrauded the State of California out of milions of dollars. She told me to write to the Governor's Office. I told her I did, on Feb. 25, 2008. She told me she would look into the case, and get back to me -- she never did.

 

 

 

Questions and Comments to JTR Publishing. (JTR@JagsThatRun.com)

You are welcome to visit my business website, JTR Publishing, for V-8 engine swap manuals and parts

Web Site Designed and Created by One Source Graphics, Limited
http://www.GrafxSource.com
info@GrafxSource.com