The 5 pages of racist Citibank transcript are now available, a 42 U.S.C. 1981 lawsuit is next.

I'll be down at Schroeder Plaza in the next hour or so to pay my $15.00 to receive the five (5) page transcript from Citibank calling the police on us on 24 March, 2009 and accusing us of being "suspicious persons" as noted in the police report.

Next, I will post it, probably later this week they should provide the sacred documents to me.

Then we will file an ethics complaint against Attorney Benjamin Velella for willfully misrepresenting (read: lying) to my attorney about the sequence of events on 24 March, 2009 because he said I used profanity BEFORE Citibank called the police on us. The transcript and bank video (that he touted himself) will prove otherwise.

Then we will file a legal action against the bank and its representatives and sue the City of Boston for the actual audio of the recording. First we want to be certain the transcript is 100% accurate and the City has not yet told me the name of the company who performed the transcription even though I asked last week. Second, there's so much you lose in the inflection that a Jury should get to hear so they can determine the real reason why Citibank refused to open a bank account for a black man even though they opened one for a white woman, and why 42 U.S.C. 1981 applies in this case.

Here are some sample 42 U.S.C. 1981 Jury Instructions.

Boston Bob and Derrick Gillenwater seek Professor Ogletree's support for a Boston "Beer Summit" with Citibank regional President.

Greetings Professor Ogletree and staff:

We are not asking for legal help per se. The police will eventually provide us with the sought written transcript and we will sue for the actual audio transcript after that. We don't need your help with that.

However, we are asking you to support a meeting, not unlike the Cambridge/White House beer summit, involving Professor Gates, Officer Crowley and President Obama, where the individual litigants can come together before we proceed to litigation. I have found often though my legal practice and through other outreach programs that such meetings can indeed prove fruitful.

Can we arrange a time to meet to get your support for this meeting? Please write or call me in the next calendar week, because Mr. Gillenwater is finishing up his studio work and we are gearing up for some serious warfare, and once we start to publicly address the bank's wrongful dishonor of a check to a Holder in Due Course -- and to threaten arrest -- it's going to get ugly.

Very ugly.

Mr. Gillenwater and I will take care of the tab and the Top of the Hub at a lunch date of the President's choice.

cc: Chuck Turner

At Citibank "Suspicious people" include a Holder in Due Course, a lawyer and a local artist trying to cash a check drawn against Citibank itself!

10 August 2009 VIA FAX TRANSMITTAL

Dear Keeper of Records of the Office of Legal Advisor:

Please don’t waste the time it takes to give me an estimate for the short written transcript of the 911 call I requested via fax transmittal on 3 August, 2009. My income bracket as a telecommunications manager is such that I scarcely worry about that. I know by law you can charge a reasonable fee and that’s it. So when it is ready, just email me or write me or call me with the AMOUNT DUE and I will retrieve it that very day and blog it.

Next issue: Your correspondence to me included a three (3) page legal memoranda to an unspecified person that reiterated your right to redact certain information before passing on legal documents pursuant to a Right-to-Know request. At no point in time does that correspondence direct you to withhold the actual recording, if redacted, from the actual subject(s) of the phone call (i.e. me), yet that is what you are doing to me despite the fact that I explicitly told you to redact any inappropriate audio if you believe there is any.

I asked you in my last letter of 6 August, 2009 to affirmatively tell me your Final Answer as to whether you are going to provide the audio and your return letter sidestepped the issue and I don’t understand why? Providing me the audio does nothing to threaten any pending investigation because there is no pending investigation, the matter is closed (except for the Civil Litigation).

This is a yes or no question and I demand a yes or no answer, are we clear?

Last issue: I read in the redacted copy of the “Incident History” (soon to be scanned and posted) that we were “suspicious person(s).” How and when did we become “suspicious persons?” We had a Holder in Due Course/local musician, a telecommunications manager with a law degree (and former Assistant Attorney General) and a local artist whose work was featured on the 2009 Mass Art Auction flier. We presented case law on the wrongful dishonor of a check and requested that the bank honor the check that was drawn against it, seeing as proper Identification had been provided pursuant to discussion with the branch manager at Chinatown.

The local artist is not Patty Hearst and we are not the SLA. We did not try to steal money, we only came for what is rightfully Derrick’s. The Jury will understand the distinction, I feel.

Sincerely,

____________________________
Christopher King, J.D.

cc:

John N. Moore, Esq.
Benjamin Velella, Esq.
Charles Ogletree, Esq.
Barack Obama, Esq.
Professor Henry Louis Gates

Boston Police deny access to 911 call made by racist Citibank branch manager.

6 August 2009 VIA FAX TRANSMITTAL 9:00 a.m.

Dear Keeper of Records of the Office of Legal Advisor:

Please provide me a copy of the written transcript of the 911 call I requested via fax transmittal on 3 August, 2009.

Whatever redaction costs you deem appropriate is fine, just email me when it is ready and I will bring you the money directly. I would imagine you could have that ready for me tomorrow, Friday 7 August 2009.

************

As to your policy of not providing the audio, I must warn you that litigation will follow.

I have successfully sued the State of New Hampshire to recover 911 and dash cam video from the cruiser of one Norman Bruce McKay and I won the right to receive everything I requested, just as I will win here. They did redact personal information at various times on the audio (a VIN number, etc.) and I have no problem with that. More on this situation will come to light in a few weeks when Casey Sherman’s book “Bad Blood: Freedom and Death in the White Mountains” is released.

In Florida, they just redact if necessary which is what I am specifically asking you to do in this case.

In sum, I am of the opinion that:

Only that portion of the voice recording of a "911" call relating to the name, address, and telephone number of the person calling the emergency telephone number "911" to report an emergency or to request emergency assistance is exempt from the disclosure requirements of Ch. 119, F.S. Thus, the voice recording of a "911" call is subject to disclosure once the name, address and telephone number of the caller have been deleted.

Sincerely,

Robert A. Butterworth
Attorney General


None of your stated reasons apply in this situation, if you are concerned about it then redact the names of the people not involved with my party – we all know the call was made from the bank so the bank can identify the players involved later during litigation. The non-criminal matters to which your letter alludes would be Domestic Violence sorts of things between private people, or the Virginia case involving a minor who had stopped breathing. This is a matter with a bank – a public institution – and three grown adults who were wrongfully threatened with arrest and who are not shy about coming forward to sue in a public light.

Frankly, I like my chances. If you like yours, then certify your final answer that you will not provide the audio and you can prepare for a round of vigorous Right-to-Know litigation.

Sincerely,

____________________________
Christopher King, J.D.

cc: John N. Moore, Esq.
Benjamin Velella, Esq.
Charles Ogletree, Esq.
Barack Obama, Esq.
Professor Henry Louis Gates

Request for 911 audio, Frederick Douglass style.

3 August 2009

Dear Keeper of Records of the Office of Legal Advisor

Please forward me a copy of the 911 call made on or about 24 March, 2009 (in the afternoon hours) from the Citibank branch located at 1365 Washington Street, Boston MA 02118. The bank video that they brag about (but refuse to release without litigation of course) will show that this call and a threat to arrest me (and others) was issued immediately after I provided them a copy of a document that addressed wrongful dishonor of a check and relevant case law, i.e. Your Style v. Mid Town Bank of Chicago, 501 N.E.2d 805 (1986).

See, a week earlier the bank had promised to cash a check drawn against it for a friend of mine, who was a Holder in Due Course. All he had to do was get a current state ID card to go along with his Social Security card and he was supposed to have his check cashed. He held up his end of the bargain but the bank reneged on its end of the Deal, now they are using a dirty little attorney to try to cover up and hide.

But that’s okay, they can play this little game all they want to.

Meanwhile I’m busy on a project at work and on this matter gathering documentation to file suit, to initiate sidewalk protests and pamphleteering, and to show the appropriate attorney and other regulatory agencies that bank attorney Benjamin Velella should be sanctioned for his willful misrepresentations to my lawyer.

Thank you in advance for your prompt response. Scumbags like Attorney Velella and his client need to get a lesson in Honesty – one that I will be more than happy to administer via litigation, YouTube and other modern media.

As you can see by my YouTube interview of Boston Transportation Director Thomas Tinlin,

http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2009/07/kingcast-says-scoot-on-up-respect-and.html

I am quite reasonable with people who are reasonable with me. If you are not reasonable with me, you are in for a hell ride. Just sit back and wait, because it’s coming for you pal.

Sincerely,
____________________________
Christopher King, J.D.

cc: John N. Moore, Esq.
Benjamin Velella, Esq.
Charles Ogletree, Esq.
Barack Obama, Esq.
Professor Henry Louis Gates

PS: What's next, is Attorney Velella going to try to get me arrested for breaking and entering the building rooftop next door to the bank, LOL.