Spreadbury v. Bitterroot Public Library et al

Filing 241

MOTION for Leave to Reconsider by Plaintiff Michael E. Spreadbury. Motions referred to Jeremiah C. Lynch. (APP, )

Michael E. Spreadbury
700 S. 4th Street
Hamilton, MT 59840
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]

Pro Se Plaintiff
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA

MISSOULA DIVISION

MICHAEL E. SPREADBURY

) Cause N09:11- cv-0064-DWM-JCL

Plaintiff

)

v.

) LEAVE FILE MOTION

BITTERROOT PUBLIC LIBRARY,

) TO RECONSIDER

CITY OF HAMILTON,

) LEE,CITYDEFAMATlON

LEE ENTERPRISES, INC.,

)

BOONE KARLBERG, PC,

)

----------------------)
Comes now Spreadbury requesting leave of court to file reconsideration Defendant
City, Lee defamation with LR 7.3 new information before court.
Motion
Plaintiff requests leave of court, moves court to accept specific defamatory
material in evidence against Defendant City, Lee.
1

Plaintiff Leave file reconsider City, Lee defamation

9:11-CV-1l-64-DWM-JCL

February 28, 2012

Defendant opposes motion.
Brief in Support
Defendant Lee published AP stories on or around August 20, 2010 which
contained false information about Plaintiff, quoted City Defendant Bell in false
statement against Plaintiff.
Defendant Bell quoted by Lee: Defamation
Defendant Lee published article December 9,2009 that Defendant Roddy folt
threatened of Plaintiff (PLA 327). Defendant City Prosecutor Bell committed
Official Misconduct MCA§45-7-401(PLA 090) in appearing for Defendant
Librarian Roddy (affidavit: PLA 089) November 20, 2009 outside statutory duties
(PLA 091) under order of Defendant City Judge Michael Reardon (PLA03 3) in an
action for criminal trespassing on public property Plaintiff has liberty, property
interest (tax paid to city for library: PLA 032) Amendment 5, 14 US Constitution.
It is clear with Plaintiff evidence that Defense Actors acted together to deprive

Plaintiff right to peaceful assemble, liberty, property as protected in US
Constitution.
Defendant Lee articles on or around August 20, 2010 in 2nd Amended Complaint
(Doc. #10; ~68-73) one year after peaceful assembly, protected Amendment 1 US

2

Plaintiff Leave file reconsider City. lee defamation

9:11-CV-11-64-0WM-JCl

February 28, 2012

Constitution, not in Federal Rules (Text Order; Doc. #61). City Defendant Bell
quoted in Defendant Bell is quoted in Defendant Billings Gazette AP story (PLA
332) as saying Plaintiff "threatened the staft", An identical quote was made in AP
story :from Defendant Helena Independent Record (PLA 333). There is no
evidence, nor admission of guilt of threatening any person in Ravalli Co. (Notice of
Speech, Law Violation; Modified Exhibit: No probable cause felony charge Exhibit
B; served November 21, 2011), (Plaintiff affidavit of October 6, 2010: PLA 261).

Plaintiff has published a request for a world audience to "Find (his) threat" and has
access to \vww.findmythreat.com. No person has indicated they have found a
threat of the Plaintiff of any person. Plaintiff has made affidavit in this case (PLA
094-095) that no crime has been committed or admitted to in Hamilton, MT.
Supreme Court "upheld" Library Ban of Plaintiff
As stated in 2nd Amended Complaint (Doc. # 10) Lee published 4 articles on or
around August 20, 2010 one year after Plaintiff peacefully assembled on public
property at 306 State St. Hamilton, to whit Plaintiff is taxpayer (PLA 032)
establishing property, liberty interest Amendment 1, 14 US Constitution.
On August 10, 2010 Montana Supreme Court denied Plaintiff out of time appeal
(PLA 255-266). In no way was this order upholding Defendant Library unlawful
ban (PLA 044). Plaintiff was never asked to leave library, testimony of Gloria

Plaintiff Leave file reconsider City, Lee defamation

9:11-CV"11-64-DWM-JCL

February 28, 2012

Langstaff February 18,2010 in CR-2009-53 Hamilton City Court, Plaintiff
Affidavit in case (PLA 007-009). Letter to unlawfully remove privileges (PLA
044) indicated Defendant Library operation polices V.l 0 (PLA051-053). Roddy
protection order did not have finding of fact, conclusion of law, opposed
controlling authority (PLA 197-205) which allowed intimidation by Bonemarte,
dismissed protection order as parties were not related, pending charges, not in
relationship as in aforementioned Edelen v. Bonemarte 162 P. 3d 487 Mont (2007).
As Defendant Bell is quoted that Spreadbury threatened: is published false
information actionable in the aforementioned.

"It was (Spreadbury) thatfrightened and threatened the staff." (PLA 332-333).
Spreadbury has posted on internet, sentenced to 72 hours solitary confinement for
chalking sidewalk with the request for any person to find his threat. No one has
answered, and no threats are found in information for felony intimidation
contained within those "fmd my threat" documents.
Due to AP nature of story, most radio, TV and internet within Montana covered the
story of Spreadbury "threatening" Defendant library staff, patrons which has no
findings of fact or conclusions oflaw. The USA Today publication, circulation
I.8M daily publication in USA, UK online viewers published story.

4

Plaintiff Leave file reconsider City, Lee defamation

9:11-CV-11-64-DWM-JCL

February 28, 2012

Montana Code Ann. for Library Privileges found in MCA§22-1-311. Statute
indicates library board, not librarian, not board president Defendant Brophy can
remove privileges as patron "willfully violates rules" (PLA 077). As Defendant
Library never infonns Spreadbury of behavioral, rule violations, or ever requests
removal from the library, Board President Robert Brophy acts outside law, in
violation of Board President duties (PLA 001-002; PLA 192) MCA§ 22-1-309
[Trustees-Powers and Duties]. Defendant Library Director Langstaffletter of
June 11,2009 removing Spreadbury's Privileges was not lawful due to 1) no
adherence to Library Policy to request a patron to leave 2) Never asking
Spreadbury to leave library for any reason. Brophy's August 20, 2009 letter "fully
backing" Library Director acted outside of Montana Code Ann. MCA§22-1-311
[Use of Library-Privileges] and therefore a violation ofBrophys power as a
library trustee as stated in Montana Code Ann.
The four (4) stories three (3) as AP stories (PLA 332-334) one non-AP (PLA 335)
that the Supreme Court upheld library ban were false: 1) the actual order did not
uphold (or "essentially" uphold) an unlawful ban of Spreadbury's library privileges
in violation of Amendment 5, 14 US Constitution, but is evidence of conspiracy to
deprive right 42 USC§ 1983 amongst City, Library, Lee Defendants in the
aforementioned.

5

Plaintiff Leave file reconsider City, Lee defamation

9:11-CV-1l-64-0WM-JCL

February 28, 2012

August 9, 2009 Lee Article
Defendant Boone actor Natasha Prinzing Jones articulated that Defendant Bell was
allowed in a civil courtroom, and added that no statute stated that he was not in

court, and was reflected in the August 9, 2010 oral argument (PLA 228-237) and
Lee Article. Lee did not fact check, and misquoted Spreadbury saying Bell was
only allowed in a city court although transcripts clearing indicate Spreadbury told
court Bell could not appear for non-city party in a civil courtroom (see transcript
PLA 228-237). Spreadbury was not talking about emotional distress as Lee
reporter misquoted Spreadbury "lost in space" as Bell outside statutory authority,
and duties MCA§ 7-4-4604 committing Official Misconduct MCA§ 45-7-401 in
article (PLA 284-285). Defendant Lee indicated, false attributed to Spreadbury
supervision of Angela Wetzsteon in August 9,2010 article. August 17,2007
affidavit of Judge Bailey (PLA 254-257) indicates Angela Wetzsteon not
supervised, although Wetzston, Com affidavit (PLA 258-264) indicate perjury
before the Court. Spreadbury clearly said in oral argument Wetzsteon was not
supervised (PLA 212-227) as a law student although Lee attributed supervision as
Spreadbury's speech.
Defendant Lee in August 9,2010 article falsely attributed Spreadbury's three cases
worth $675,000 as "spralling cases" worth $3.6M (PLA 284). Defendant Lee
published article June 9, 2010 [30 days earlier] which correctly indicated $3.6M
6

Plaintiff Leave file reconsider City, Lee defamation

9:11-CV-11-64-DWM-JCL

February 28, 2012

complaint against Sheriff Hoffman [Spreadbury I] (PLA 280). Defendant Lee
published known false information in August 9, 2010 about Spreadbury cases as
"eyewitness" reporter Michell v. US 368 A. 2d 514 - DC: Court ofAppeals (1977).
As Defendant Bell is quoted as saying Spreadbury threatened staff at Defendant
public library within Defendant Lee article protecting Defendant Public library is
indication of violation of right to liberty, property Amendment 5, 14 US
Constitution actionable as pled 2nd Amended Complaint (Doc. #10).
Certificate of Compliance
From LR 7(d)(2)(E) US District Court Rules Montana, I certify that this brief
conforms with 14 point font, New Times Roman typeface, is double spaced,
contains 1151 words excluding title page, this compliance.

Respectfully submitted this

1!>-­

ZJ) daX

February, 2012

BY:_ _--#-~'--~-"--___js-<--------

Michael E. S readbury, Self Represented Plaintiff

7