Contributed by Eugene Carl Haberman, Self-Appointed Government Watchdog
The time was 12:58 pm, Tuesday, June 22, 2021. I had just completed preparing my speech that I had planned to give approximately four hours later.
I considered this to be my most important speech in a public meeting in my life.
I am now more than seventy years old. Forty-three of those years I have and continue to be a resident in the State of Alaska.
I was scheduled to address the Anchorage Municipal Assembly that evening.
Their meeting was scheduled to begin at 5:00 pm in the Assembly chambers at Z. J. Loussac Library located in Anchorage, Alaska.
I would be addressing the Anchorage Assembly that evening sometime between 5:10 pm and 5:35 pm under person to be heard.
I had received word the previous week on Tuesday morning on June 15th that my written request to address them under person to be heard was granted.
I had focused my time since then on preparing the speech and contacting many Alaskans who I have been personally in contact with during my life in Alaska asking them to schedule three minutes of their time to listen to my address the evening of Tuesday, June 22, 2021, sometime between 5:10 pm and 5:35 pm.
Most of them agreed to my request and that they would contact others they knew and ask them personally to listen in to my three-minute address.
My words to them in my conversation on the telephone were limited to simply asking them to listen to my speech and to personally ask others they knew to also listen to my three-minute address that evening.
They did not know the content of my speech. They only knew the significant commitment over the years I have played in the state to make our community a better place to live in for all Alaskans.
Many of them knew that I had not received any financial compensation for this work. The funds I had used for this work came from my own personal financial resources that were available to me to use as I wish.
My most recent commitment occurred full time seven days and nights a week that started from April 4, 2012, through the present day.
But when I found myself continued to being faced with the financial resources of local, and state governments in our state in order to interfere with my work there is limits to the financial resources that one person on their own can do.
Approximately ninety minutes after finishing the preparation of the speech, I was now traveling from the Matanuska-Susitna Borough to the Municipality of Anchorage.
After traveling approximately eighteen miles, about four miles north of Peters Creek located in the Municipality of Anchorage I found myself suddenly faced with being an individual in a scene that I might have watched in a horror movie.
Traveling in the right lane of two lanes available for those traveling south on the Glenn highway I found myself suddenly pulled off the road after hearing a thump sound.
The car within a few seconds, stopped after drifting off to the right side of the road.
Those few seconds, I could see nothing.
When the car came to a halt, I opened the car door and got to my feet and walked about six feet from my car.
I found myself standing not knowing what happened to me. What others could see was me covered with blood and glass.
Within seconds getting out of the car, I was greeted by many concern parties about my welfare. Included among them were members from the Chugiak Volunteer Fire and Rescue that just happen to be in the area.
I appeared alert particularly when a party at my request handed me my phone from my car and then I asked a party to turn off my car so I could get a telephone call through.
The call was to a friend who was expecting me just four miles away in Peters Creek.
A few minutes later, he arrived with his brother and followed me to Providence Hospital.
I believe it was not until I was traveling in the emergency vehicle to the hospital that I was informed that I was struck by a moose.
The blood that many saw and thought was mine was mostly moose blood that poured over me while I was in the driver’s seat.
On Friday, July 2nd, I viewed my car that had been towed to a lot without my being informed or notified where my vehicle had been transferred to.
When viewing the inside and outside of the vehicle, I realized how true what my friends said to me in the emergency room in Providence Hospital in that I was very fortunate in that I could have been more seriously injured.
The car I viewed on July 2nd showed a vehicle with a front hood substantially changed from its original condition; and a front windshield leaving a significant part being broken in pieces the size of salt from a saltshaker.
The damages included a section of the top hood ripped apart and the rear windshield shattered.
With all this damage no air bags were deployed. I was surprised and concern that with so much destructive force by the moose to the vehicle that no air bags had been deployed.
The vehicle crash had left me in a substantial weaken position. My first reaction when getting out of the car was with not necessary fearing what I did not know of my injuries, but the fear of not being able to address early that evening my most important speech of my life.
There was a lot riding on this speech. Any delay would interfere with receiving urgent need for immediate help that I considered a matter affecting all Alaskans and future generations.
After two brief telephone calls with parties familiar with the content of my prepared speech they agreed with me that if I was able to, I needed to make that speech that evening before the Anchorage Assembly.
I left the hospital around 7:35 pm that evening with great difficulty but with the assistance of close friends I managed to address the Anchorage Assembly a few hours later.
I did not realize it until several hours later that I still had fragments of glass from the car crash in my hair and even in my ears.
Before leaving the hospital, staff had failed to warn me of these conditions or provide me with any recommendations for medications to deal with my pain.
With the assistance from my friends and others I managed to cover my disfigurement from the car crash with clean clothes, a hat and face covering. A pair of pants, tie, hat, and face covering was purchased that evening.
That evening, I made my speech before the Anchorage Assembly. I had requested an additional minute of time due to my weakened state and to allow for an opportunity to explain my delayed appearance.
My request was denied.
This resulted in my speech being read quickly in my weakened state and it made this more difficult for the public to listen to and follow what I was saying. There were no questions asked by the assembly.
That evening there was still one member of the press present at the meeting. I provided a copy of my speech to a representative of the Anchorage Daily News. I am not aware of any reporting by the Anchorage Daily News in reference to this speech.
I left the assembly chambers that evening knowing their next meeting would be the assembly committee on homeless the next morning.
I had thought of calling in and speaking before the morning meeting but a news story by KTUU-TV reported that they would probably not provide any time for public comment.
I knew this being a violation of Alaska State Law AS 29.20.020 (a) in providing a reasonable opportunity for the public to be heard at public meetings.
My thoughts at the time that if I were able to address the assembly committee, I would question whether they had the ability to show compassion during the homeless meeting after exhibiting a lack of compassion to myself when addressing the assembly the evening before.
Before closing, I appreciate if you would take the time to first read Attachment A that follows toward the end of this email that represents my address to the Anchorage Assembly on Tuesday, June 22, 2021.
After reading the speech, please note the following with regards to the lawsuit filed by the State of Alaska (Plaintiff) against myself (Defendant):
1) I conducted approximately a two-year ongoing audit of the public process of the Alaska Court System reporting serious issues of concern affecting both past, present and future cases in the Alaska Court System.
2) The lawsuit was overcharged by the State of Alaska (Plaintiff) leaving a sentencing for grabbing someone’s arm a possible sentence for the Defendant of one year in jail and a $25,000.00 fine.
3) This legal case by the State of Alaska (Plaintiff) against me with this presiding judge for trial was the first case opened for criminal trials since COVID-19. The trial was held on June 8, 9, and 10th. Sentencing is scheduled for July 12, 2021.
4) There was a gag order that prevented the Jury for this trial to be informed by the Defendant that since this so-called incident noted in the legal complaint a temporary restraining order was never requested.
The gag order prevented the Jury for this trial to be informed by the Defendant that when this legal complaint was filed approximately six months later the Defendant could not inform the Jury that the arraignment judge and another judge two days later denied a restraining order on the Defendant.
5) The officer’s affidavit in the complaint noted two different years for the so-called incident to occur leaving confusion as to when this so-called incident occurred.
6) The police officer affidavit in the complaint failed to identify what police force he was assigned to. No city and state was referenced for this police officer.
7) The presiding judge for this legal case denied a request by the Defendant for a copy of the policies and procedures for the Police Department for the City of Wasilla. Verbal reason given by the presiding judge was that this was too much litigation.
8) The presiding judge for this legal case denied a request by the Defendant before the start of trial for financial hardship legal assistance. Verbal reason given by the presiding judge was that it was too late.
9) The presiding judge for this legal case refused to provide a careful and thoughtful review of Defendant’s motion to dismiss. Trial started without defendant havng opportunity to do a motion of reconsideration.
10) Several presiding judges for this legal case ignored Defendant’s requests in obtaining a copy of the policies and procedures for the Alaska Court System.
There were several judges for this legal case due to retirement of two judges that then required this case to be reassigned to another judge.
11) Several presiding judges for this legal case ignored repeated concerns raised by the Defendant that staff with the clerk’s office refused to provide their full name when requested by Defendant.
There were several judges for this legal case due to retirement of two judges that then required this case to be reassigned to another judge.
12) Several presiding judges for this legal case ignored Defendant’s concern of the court record in that the court file had been doctored and altered from the original record.
There were several judges for this legal case due to retirement of two judges that then required this case to be reassigned to another judge.
13) Several presiding judges for this legal case ignored concern by the Defendant on the court recordings for the teleconference proceedings being of poor quality leaving serious flaws with the quality of the transcripts.
There were several judges for this legal case due to retirement of two judges that then required this case to be reassigned to another judge.
14) The presiding judge for this legal case during trial inappropriately limited the character witnesses’ testimony for the Defendant.
15) The presiding judge for this legal case during trial prevented the Defendant from introducing during trial an expert witness with regard to the American with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The so-called incident occurred during a joint meeting of the Matanuska-Susitna Borough Assembly and the members of the Alaska State Legislature representing the Matanuska-Susitna Valley before these members of this legislature went to Juneau to start the legislative session of that year.
The meeting was held in a meeting room in the legislative information office located in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley.
Defendant witnessed there were very few members of the public in attendance. Almost everyone present was elected or governmental officials from the Matanuska-Susitna Valley.
The Defendant during the meeting photographed the meeting. A standard the defendant does at public meetings he attends.
During trial the Defendant was only able to enter these photographs into the record and for distribution during trial after Defendant called himself as a witness.
The presiding judge for this legal case during trial prevented the Defendant from introducing during trial an expert witness with regard to the American with Disabilities Act (ADA).
This interference prevented a review of these photographs and testimony by an expert witness to the violations with regard to the American with Disabilities Act (ADA).
16) The presiding judge for this legal case during trial ignored Defendant’s concerns on selection of jury that show cause for mistrial.
17) The presiding judge for this legal case for trial refused to grant Defendant’s request for his removal from presiding over these legal proceedings. This would have been the first time Defendant requested this since the lawsuit was filed. The Defendant has a right to have this granted without reason when requesting it for the first time in a legal proceeding.
18) The Defendant recalls only one occasion in which the state of Alaska (Plaintiff) filed a written response to Defendant’s numerous written motions regarding this legal matter. The written response by the State of Alaska (Plaintiff) occurred to Defendant’s request for dismissal that Defendant filed on May 24, 2021.
(See Attachment B that follows towards the end of this email representing letter dated May 24, 2021)
19) The State of Alaska (Plaintiff) falsely stated to the court before at least two presiding judges for these legal proceedings that Discovery was available for the Defendant to pick-up.
The Defendant found on Thursday, June 3, 2021, that Discovery was not available for the Defendant to pick-up from the Plaintiff.
Defendant informed the Court that same day during legal proceedings that Discovery was not available for Defendant to pick up from Plaintiff.
On Friday, June 4, 2021, the Defendant informed the Court that Defendant had just prior to these legal proceedings picked up Discovery from the Plaintiff.
During these legal proceedings that same day the presiding judge recessed for a few minutes and then returned to the proceedings noting he had spoken to parties not-mentioned by the judge and decided the Defendant had previously had time to pick-up Discovery and stated that the trial would begin on Tuesday, June 8, 2021.
On Tuesday, June 8, 2021, before trial began the Defendant informed the court that the Defendant reviewed Discovery and found the failure of Plaintiff to properly mark items. Among them included recordings that appeared to be duplicates leaving the Defendant with difficulty not knowing there were other recordings.
In addition, the Defendant informed the court that when reviewing the recordings the Defendant was unable to identify parties who were speaking leaving a situation as who was saying what at what date and time.
The presiding judge inappropriately allowed the case to proceed to trial that same day without these concerns by defendant being corrected.
20) The trial judge failed to correct the record in the complaint filed by the Plaintiff before, during and after trial to issues raised by the Defendant in number 5, 6, 12, and 13 noted above.
21) The Defendant informed the Court in writing in more than one occasion that these proceedings have violated the Pledge of Fairness as stated on the website for the Alaska Court System viewed by the Defendant on Monday, August 3, 2020.
The Pledge of Fairness states:
“ … PLEDGE OF FAIRNESS
The fundamental mission of the Alaska Court System is to provide a fair and impartial forum for the resolution of disputes according to the rule of law. Fairness includes the opportunity to be heard, the chance to have the court process explained, and the right to be treated with respect. The judges and staff of the Alaska Court System therefore make the following pledge to each litigant, defendant, victim, witness, juror, and person involved in a court proceeding:
We will LISTEN to you
We will respond to your QUESTIONS about court procedure
We will treat you with RESPECT …”
In this pledge noted above it stated:
“… The chance to have the court process explained, …”
(See Attachment C that follows towards the end of this email representing letter dated August 3, 2020, with regard to the Pledge of Fairness)
Most recently in a successful lawsuit by the State of Alaska I have been found guilty by a Jury that I grabbed someone’s arm at a public meeting and that they felt threaten.
I am innocent of this. Thousands of Alaskans have been witnessed to my character over the years and know this could not possibly be true.
On July 12th, I will be sentenced by a judge that I could receive a maximum sentence of one year in prison and $25,000.00 fine.
I plead for your assistance for help both legal and financial assistance in order to file an appeal and stay sentencing and allow for justice to be done.
Please note that throughout this case I have been representing myself without sufficient financial and legal support that I desperately needed.
You have decided those priorities in life and continue to reexamine and change those priorities of importance.
I am asking you to direct your priority of importance to what I consider being important.
I am asking you today to focus your efforts in forwarding this communication with attachments to others you know in the community you live in, in your state, in our country and elsewhere in the world.
Please provide a personal request that they would also follow up this request in the same manner.
It is my hope that the more people are made aware of this in a very short time that this could reverse the path that my journey appears to be taking by parties that I have no control of stopping without yours and others assistance.
Before first sending this communication out on July 10, 2021, I have witnessed a silence in the community since the Jury found me guilty on Thursday, June 10th, 2021.
I am not aware of any reporting or even comments on the internet with regards to the matters that I address you today.
This should have not surprised me since for years my work had resulted with a standard response by elected and governmental officials with a policy of indifference to my continued charges that they being in violation of the following Alaska state laws:
1) Alaska’s Open Meetings Law – AS 44.62.310
2) The governing body shall provide a reasonable opportunity for the public to be heard at regular and special meetings. AS 29.20.020 (a)
This was carried out with the cooperation of members of the press who rarely ever reported my concerns at hundreds of public meetings over the many years of work in Alaska.
But what was even more puzzling for me was that the social media has failed to report anything with regard to these legal matters.
I need your help today. For example, I need legal representation from criminal attorneys practicing law in Alaska in order to properly file an appeal and stay sentencing and allow for justice to be done.
Simply sending me a name of an attorney to contact would not be workable at this time.
Law firms in Alaska are now faced with a backlog of cases that have been delayed for trial due to COVID-19.
Now with the courts opening trials for these cases my legal ability to obtain legal counsel is even more difficult at a critical moment.
I need your assistance to reach directly with the criminal attorneys you know and encourage their assistance at this critical moment.
But one important note to mention is that any attorney willing to come to my assistance must be willing to cooperate and treat me more of a co-counsel in this case.
I will not be agreeable for them to proceeding in a matter that continues to allow for an inappropriate public process of the Alaska Court System.
The ongoing deterioration of the public process of the Alaska Court System is the result of the cooperation of all parties involved in the Alaska Court System today.
The future of our state is in your hands.
Sincerely,
Eugene Carl Haberman
Attachment A
Address by Eugene Carl Haberman
to Anchorage Municipal Assembly
During Persons to be Heard
for the Meeting of Tuesday, June 22, 2021
Address by Eugene Carl Haberman
to Anchorage Municipal Assembly
During Persons to be Heard
for the Meeting of Tuesday, June 22, 2021
My name is Eugene Carl Haberman, an Alaskan resident for over forty-three years.
Tonight, I am addressing you in a matter of importance in which I consider my most important address in a public meeting in my life.
I am now more than seventy years old. Forty-three of those years I have and continue to be a resident in the State of Alaska.
Tonight, each one of you have decided those priorities in life and continue to reexamine and change those priorities of importance.
Tonight, I am asking you to direct your priority of importance to what I consider being important.
It is a matter affecting today all Alaskans and future generations and those not yet been born.
We all make choices in life. Over the years my choice has been and continues to be focus on improving the situation that I was born into on this earth, and once my life ends, I believe I have been part in making this a better place for others here now and future generations.
For a number of years, I have been known to many throughout the state as a self-appointed government watchdog providing an audit of the public process and frequently stating at these meetings that when the public process is done appropriately the decision made by the governing body is more likely in the public interest.
During these years I have frequently reported at public meetings being hosted by local and state officials in Alaska my concerns that these meetings were in violation of:
(1) Alaska’s Open Meetings Law – AS 44.62.310
(2) The governing body shall provide a reasonable opportunity for the public to be heard at regular and special meetings. AS 29.20.020 (a)
During these years, I received a standard response by these same officials with a policy of indifference.
I also received a standard response to my words of concern in silence by the members of the press.
During these meetings I had witnessed members of the press violate their professional journalism by rarely reporting what the public states at a public hearing, and instead generally report only statements by elected and governmental officials.
While this was going on I receive words of encouragement for my work from many members of the public.
Unfortunately, those words of encouragement were directly to me and rarely would they ever be made at the microphone at a public meeting that I attended.
This left open an opportunity for elected and governmental officials to carry out efforts to interfere with the success of my work by providing a false narrative to my character.
Most recently in a successful lawsuit by the State of Alaska, I have been found guilty by a jury that I grabbed someone’s arm at a public meeting and that they felt threaten.
I am innocent of this. You have been witnessed to my character over the years and know this could not possibly be true.
On July 12th, I will be sentenced by a judge that I could receive a maximum sentence of one year in prison and $25,000.00 fine.
I plead for your assistance for help both legal and financial assistance in order to file an appeal and stay sentencing and allow for justice to be done.
Please note that throughout this case I have been representing myself without sufficient financial and legal support that I desperately needed.
The future of our state is in your hands.
Attachment B
Motion of Dismissal Letter Dated May 24, 2021
Eugene Carl Haberman
P.O. Box 1581, Anchorage, Alaska 99510-1581
Telephone (907) 277-2415
May 24, 2021
Honorable Thomas V Jamgochian
District Court for the State of Alaska Third Judicial District in Palmer
435 South Denali Street
Palmer, Alaska 99645
Subject: In the matter of State of Alaska Plaintiff vs. Eugene C Haberman Defendant
Case Number 3PA-19-01623CR
NOTICE OF MOTION FOR DISMISSAL
BY THE DEFENDANT
IN THE MATTER OF
STATE OF ALASKA, PLAINTIFF
VS
EUGENE C HABERMAN, DEFENDANT