911 Affidavit

2007-01-04T14:28:00.000-08:00

PRESENTMENT REGARDING DESTRUCTION OF WORLD TRADE CENTER EVIDENCE AND CONSEQUENT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

Bill Manning, then Editor-in-Chief, published an article entitled $ELLING OUT THE INVESTIGATION which
was published in FIRE ENGINEERING MAGAZINE, January 1st 2002. In this article, Manning issued the
following public statement:

"""
For more than three months, structural steel from the World Trade Center has been and continues to be cut up
and sold for scrap. Crucial evidence that could answer many questions about high-rise building design practices
and performance under fire conditions is on the slow boat to China, perhaps never to be seen again in America
until you buy your next car.

Such destruction of evidence shows the astounding ignorance of government officials to the value of a thorough,
scientific investigation of the largest fire-induced collapse in world history. I have combed through our national
standard for fire investigation, NFPA 921, but nowhere in it does one find an exemption allowing the destruction
of evidence for buildings over 10 stories tall.
...
Fire Engineering has good reason to believe that the "official investigation" blessed by FEMA and run by the
American Society of Civil Engineers is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political
forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure. Except for the marginal
benefit obtained from a three-day, visual walk-through of evidence sites conducted by ASCE investigation
committee members-described by one close source as a "tourist trip"-no one's checking the evidence for anything.
"""

Bill Manning's article was followed up with a public call for investigation in a January 4th 2002 FIRE ENGINEERING
article entitled BURNING QUESTIONS...NEED ANSWERS: BILL MANNING CALLS FOR COMPREHENSIVE INVESTIGATION OF THE WTC
COLLAPSE which reiterated the statements of the initial article and formalized a public call for investigation.

This public call for investigation from a prestigious public service publication was given by a competent
fire engineering professional fully aware of the proper standards for the investigation of any fire or explosion
incident. The allegation that evidence from the scene of a crime of mass murder was being destroyed would
constitute obstruction of justice and related crimes which would rise to the level of felony offenses if
deliberate violations of standard investigative procedure could be substantiated. The open call was based upon
violations of NFPA 921, the national standard for fire investigation. This standard is composed by the National
Fire Protection Association, a group of fire protection professionals dedicated to public dissemination of
standards for conducting fire investigation and ensuring public safety.

Under common law, the violation of
national standards leading to destruction of evidence and consequent obstruction of justice is a cognizable crime.

Private Citizens with knowledge of felonious activity are required by common law and United States Code to make
publicly known their suspicion of criminal activity in the interests of preserving law and order and of bringing
criminals to prosecution. Specifically, 18 USC Section 4, MISPRISION OF FELONY states

"""
Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States,
conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military
authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or
both.
"""

Public servants acting in their official capacities do not have the authority to arbitrarily engage in willful
misconduct.

New York Penal Law, TITLE L--OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION states clearly in Section 195.00 the classification of
official misconduct:
"""
Official misconduct

A public servant is guilty of official misconduct when, with intent to obtain a benefit or deprive another person of a benefit:

1. He commits an act relating to his office but constituting an unauthorized exercise of his official functions, knowing that such act is unauthorized; or

2. He knowingly refrains from performing a duty which is imposed upon him by law or is clearly inherent in the nature of his office.

Official misconduct is a class A misdemeanor.
"""

Destruction of evidence and consequent obstruction of justice, if proven, would have lead to the denial of due
process for victims of the World Trade Center destruction by allowing to remain unknown any hidden parties
participating in or profiting from such destruction. There is no known authority under which criminal evidence
may be deliberately sold for profit and destruction or concealed by disposal prior to proper investigative
analysis and so such activity would clearly be unauthorized. Further, knowingly hampering investigation into a
major crime is clearly outside of the lawful activities of any public servant.

2) ARTICLE 205 of the New York Penal Code contains definitions of the crime of hindering prosecution and states

"""
Section 205.50 Hindering prosecution; definition of term

As used in sections 205.55, 205.60 and 205.65, a person "renders criminal assistance" when, with intent to
prevent, hinder or delay the discovery or apprehension of, or the lodging of a criminal charge against, a person
who he knows or believes has committed a crime or is being sought by law enforcement officials for the commission
of a crime, or with intent to assist a person in profiting or benefiting from the commission of a crime, he:

1. Harbors or conceals such person; or

2. Warns such person of impending discovery or apprehension; or

3. Provides such person with money, transportation, weapon, disguise or other means of avoiding discovery
or apprehension; or

4. Prevents or obstructs, by means of force, intimidation or deception, anyone from performing an act which might
aid in the discovery or apprehension of such person or in the lodging of a criminal charge against him; or

5. Suppresses, by any act of concealment, alteration or destruction, any physical evidence which might aid in the
discovery or apprehension of such person or in the lodging of a criminal charge against him; or

6. Aids such person to protect or expeditiously profit from an advantage derived from such crime.
"""

If profit motives surrounded the destruction of the World Trade Center and the realization of profit hinged upon
prevention of full analysis of the criminal evidence, then any person engaging in destruction or concealment
of evidence would be a suspect in criminal activity.

Having reached the conclusion that criminal destruction and concealment of evidence and consequent obstruction
of justice have occurred in the illegal removal and destruction of World Trade Center crime scene evidence, this
presentment seeks to obey common law mandates regarding public disclosure of known criminal activity. This
complaint further invokes common law authority to prosecute known participants in the obstruction of justice via
unlawful destruction and concealment of evidence. This complaint further finds that profiteering from the sale of
criminal evidence has taken place, indicating that possible racketeering prosection should be commenced.

In order to substantiate charges that destruction and concealment of evidence and consequent obstruction of
justice have taken place, this presentment will now detail a portion of the supporting evidence with reference to
NFPA 921 as appropriate.

ANALYSIS OF NFPA 921

Basic elements of fire or explosion investigation

NFPA 921 establishes the proper purpose of a fire or explosion investigation. Section 14.2.8.1 list the
following as the basic purpose of investigation: leadership/coordination function; photography, note taking,
mapping, diagramming; inteviewing witnesses; searching the scene; evidence collection and preservation.

Leadership:

Primary leadership responsibility for the World Trade Center crime scene fell upon then mayor Rudolph
Giuliani. He was assisted in the removal of crime scene evidence by then NYPD police chief Bernard
Kerik and then fire commissioner Thomas Holden.

Acting under the authority of Mayor Giuliani, Kenneth Holden established the primary leadership role
for the removal of evidence from the World Trade Center crime scene. Kenneth Holden was the director for
New York City Department of Design and Construction.

These individuals and private corporations operating in collusion engaged in the complete destruction of the
World Trade Center crime scene and participated in covering up the evidence of that crime scene.

Photography, note taking, mapping, diagramming:

The FEMA BPAT team was the first investigative body present on the World Trade Center crime scene. According to
numerous public reports, the FEMA team was not given full access to the crime scene but was restricted to a
cursory "walk through" which was described by FIRE ENGINEERING MAGAZINE as follows:

"""
Except for the marginal benefit obtained from a three-day, visual walk-through of evidence sites conducted by
ASCE investigation committee members- described by one close source as a "tourist trip"-no one's checking the
evidence for anything.
"""

This failure to provide for a proper and thorough on-scene investigation ensured that the proper note taking
required for a detailed fire investigation was criminally obstructed.

Interviewing witnesses:

THe FEMA reports indicate that numerous witnesses to the destruction were inteviewed. Public records of
eye witness testimony are available from the New York Times website, from archives of news video from that
day and from news publications.

Searching the scene:

As previously indicated, the FEMA investigative team was not given the proper and lawfully mandatory access to
the crime scene which would be required for an investigation of such magnitude. The failure to allow the FEMA
team full access to the crime scene was a deliberate act to further an ongoing criminal destruction of
evidence and consequent obstruction of justice.

Evidence Collection and Preservation:

Section 16 of NFPA 921 details the proper procedure for evidence collation and preservation. It illustrates
the key deficiencies of the FEMA attempted investigation and explains the criminal degree to which obstruction
of justice was performed by key public officials and contracted corporations acting in collusion.

Section 16.3 of NFPA 921 states, in part:

"16.3.1 General. Every attempt should be made to protect and preserve the fire scene as intact and undisturbed
as possible....Evidence...could easily be destroyed or lost in an improperly preserved fire scene.

16.3.1.1 Generally, the cause of a fire or explosion is not known until near the end of the investigation.
Therefore, the evidentiary or interpretive value of various pieces of physical evidence may not be known until...
the end of the complete investigation. As a result, the entire fire scene should be considered physical
evidence and should be protected and preserved...

16.3.1.2 The responsibility for the preservation of the fire scene and physical evidence does not lie solely
with the fire investigator, but should begin with the arriving fire-fighting units or police authorities...
"""

It is clear from the proceedings of US House of Representatives Committee on Science that
[http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/science/hsy78961.000/hsy78961_0f.htm]:
"FEMA's investigation into the World Trade Center collapse was inhibited at several turns by an
inability to access the disaster site quickly, preserve evidence, and obtain necessary documentary evidence,
such as blueprints, in a timely way. Several observers, including the families of the Trade Center victims,
have called for World Trade Center investigators to be granted authorities akin to those of the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), which is authorized by statute to enter the site of airplane crashes,
preserve evidence, and issue subpoenas to witnesses or for documents to facilitate its investigation.
"

The above statement is misleading because it implies that there is some legal or lawful justification for the
failure to preserve the evidence of a crime scene of mass murder. There is no known lawful or legal
justification for such criminal removal of evidence.

Further, any evidence removed was, so far as publicly known, not properly preserved according to requirements
to document the chain of custody and original location for any moved evidence. NFPA 921 states clearly
the proper requirements:

"""
16.5.2.1 Physical evidence should be thoroughly documented before it is moved...The investigator should strive
to maintain a list of all evidence removed and of who removed it.
"""

The events of September 11, 2001 clearly fall beneath the category of major crimes: mass murder and
terrorism. As such, the fire or explosion investigation of the World Trade Center crime scene was undeniably
a criminal investigation. As a criminal investigation, NFPA 921 makes clear the requirement for preservation
of criminal evidence:

"""
16.11.2 Criminal cases...require that the evidence be kept until the case is adjudicated.
"""

In the case of the World Trade Center evidence, steel from the crime scene was not simply removed but was
actually sold at bargain rates to domestic and foreign contractors. American contractors participated in
profiting from crime scene evidence. According to public news reports, the purchase of World Trade
Center crime scene evidence was undertaken by the following corporations:

1) Metal Management Northeast of Newark, New Jersey purchased 40,000 tons of World Trade Center steel.
2) Hugo Neu Schnitzer East of Jersey City, New Jersey purchased 25,000 tons of World Trade Center steel.
3) Baosteel Group Corporation of Shanghai, China purchased 50,000 ton of World Trade Center steel.

The destruction of World Trade Center evidence was commented on by fire investigators attempting to
follow proper procedure:

"Upon arrival to NYC on September 19, [2001] and after visiting Ground Zero and paying my respects and
prayers to the victims, I started my reconnaissance and collection of the perishable data. I have collected
some data on design and construction of the WTC and have met and discussed the case with the structural
engineers who have designed the WTC Buildings. Thanks to cooperation of the HNSE recycling plant, I have been
able to study the steel from the WTC before recycling. ... I wish I had more time to inspect steel structure
and save more pieces before the steel was recycled."
- Dr. Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of
California, Berkeley, Before the Committee on Science of the U.S. House of Representatives, March 6, 2002

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/03/06/national/main503116.shtml
"The investigation into the collapse of the World Trade Center has been hampered by the destruction of steel
wreckage that could hold vital clues about why the twin towers fell, a fire expert says.

Glenn Corbett, a fire science professor at John Jay College, criticized New York City's decision to melt down
and recycle tons of charred and twisted steel from the trade center. "

"I find the speed with which potentially important evidence has been removed and recycled to be appalling."
- Dr. Frederick W. Mowrer, an associate professor in the Fire Protection Engineering Department at the
University of Maryland, New York Times, 12/25/2001

The sale for profit of crime scene evidence has no known lawful authority prior to proper investigation. To
hamper or interfere with a criminal investigation for purposes of profit is properly classified as
obstruction of justice.

Motive for evidence removal and obstruction of justice:

It is clear that the investigation of the World Trade Center was deliberately interfered with and therefore a
reason for such interference must be determined. The only reasonable explanation for the criminal interference
with the World Trade Center investigation and for the illegal and unlawful removal, destruction and sale for
profit of World Trade Center crime scene evidence was to prevent proper investigation. It was publicly assumed
that evidence removal was engaged in to allow for rescue attempts, but such rescue attempts would only be
reasonable within the first few days of the event. The destruction and removal of evidence spanned weeks of time,
long past the point where any survival was likely. Further, as later evidence indicates, the below ground
temperatures at the World Trade Center site precluded long term survival of any victims. Concerns about the remains
of the victims also are irrelevant as the remains of victims were also deliberately disposed of in a public
landfill:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/10/10/wnyc10.xml
On October 10, 2004, Charles Laurence, reporting for the UK Telegraph newspaper issued the following report:
"""
The remains of hundreds of victims of the September 11 attacks are to be permanently buried in the world's largest
rubbish dump, to the consternation of their grieving relatives...

Relatives were assured that ashes would be returned after they were sorted, but city authorities have since balked
at the estimated $450 million cost of transferring them again. Instead they have promised to lay a 2,200-acre park
on top of the dump, whose rotting contents smell strongly of methane, and to erect a memorial to the victims.
"""

Recovery of victim remains, therefore, was not related to the destruction and removal of World Trade Center
crime scene evidence because the bodies of victims were also disposed of without consideration.

Interference with an investigation and destruction of evidence constitute an attempted cover up of the nature of
any crime. In the case of the destruction of the World Trade Center, a cover up of the evidence would imply that
the examination of the evidence by impartial parties would reveal some element to the crime which participants in
the crime, either before or after the fact, would not desire revealed.

Evidence supporting explosives:

In examining the possibility that explosive or related technologies were used to accomplish the near complete
disintegration of the World Trade Center North and South Tower as well as the more conventional collapse of
World Trade Center Building 7, a proper fire investigation would have been compelled by forensic analysis, physical debris
patterns, video footage of the collapse, seismic data, the incredibly high thermal temperatures of the post
collapse crime scene and eye witness testimony to pursue the possible use of explosives.

Explosion debris pattern:

NFPA 921 describes basic standards for determining that a fire investigation must also consider explosions as
a probable occurrence:

"""
17.5.4 Explosion Evidence. Any displacement of the exterior surfaces should be documented. The distance the
pieces traveled and the extent of the displacement of walls and roofs should be noted...
"""

According to news reports and the FEMA/NIST investigative reports, multi-ton steel elements of the World
Trade Center structure were flung hundreds of feet, striking surrounding buildings and embedding within
the stricken buildings. And example of the acknowledged wide debris pattern can be found within the FEMA
World Trade Center Building Performance Study. In Chapter 1 [http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch1.pdf]
on page 9, a graphic of the debris pattern shows that steel columns and other debris were thrown hundreds of
feet causing damage to surrounding buildings. Two examples of building damaged by thrown debris were
World Trade Center Building 7 and Bankers Trust Building. A typical example of the force with which World
Trade Center debris was thrown is found in Chapter 6 of the FEMA Building Performance Study
[http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch6.pdf]:

"""
Debris from WTC 2 fell along the north side of the building...A column section from WTC 2 was embedded in the
north edge of the building...and collapsed it into the basement in this area. A column section from WTC 2 was
embedded in the north edge of the floor slab of the 29th floor. It also appears that one section, or perhaps
several sections, of exterior column trees from the south wall of WTC 2 plunged through the north wall of the
building, just above the 23rd floor.
"""

Chapter 7 of the FEMA Building Performance Study makes clear that numerous buildings in the area surrounding
the World Trade Center suffered comparable damage [http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch7.pdf]:

"""
In addition to the WTC buildings and Bankers Trust building, a number of other buildings suffered damage from
the projectiles and debris...
"""

The force required to fling multi-ton steel beams hundreds of feet as well as the general displacement of the
entire exterior facade of World Trade Center North and South Towers falls well within the NFPA 921 classification
for explosion evidence.

NPFA 921 makes clear that shrapnel or projectile damage is an identifying characteristic of an explosion:

"""
21.13.4.1 Identify Damage Effects of Explosion. The investigator should make a detailed examination and analysis
of the specific explosion or overpressure damage. Damaged articles should be identified as having been affected
by one or more of the following typical explosion forces:

(1) Blast pressure wave - positive phase
(2) Blast pressure wave - negative phase
(3) Shrapnel impact
(4) Thermal energy
(5) Seismic energy
"""

The debris radius surrounding the World Trade Center crime scene extended for hundreds of feet. For example, the
shattered remains of victims of the destruction of the World Trade Center were found in buildings located
hundreds of feet away. The Deutsche Bank Building was found to contain at least 600 pieces of human remains,
prompting a public statement from Senator Charles Schumer:

http://www.senate.gov/~schumer/SchumerWebsite/pressroom/press_releases/2006/PR124.Bone%20Fragments.042306.html
"""
In September, construction workers from Bovis Lend Lease who were working on demolishing Deutsche Bank found scores
of bone fragments. They found the remains as they were removing the roof ballast, stone by stone...
Last month, more fragments surfaced bringing the total of bone fragments found at the Deutsche Bank Building up to
nearly 600....

“The appearance of these new fragments, all of this time after the attacks leads me to believe that we have to
cast a wider net,” Schumer said. “

Schumer today asked that the JPAC unit expand the search to buildings like Fitterman Hall and others on the
perimeter but said he would leave the parameters of the search to them.
"""

The presence of fragmented human remains hundreds of feet away from the main World Trade Center towers fits the
criteria for shrapnel impact from explosion. The extreme disintegration of all human remains from the World
Trade Center crime scene indicates a high level of explosive force:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15391091/site/newsweek/
"""
At the urging of New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, other manholes and underground areas were searched this
weekend: so far, more than 100 additional human remains and artifacts have been found, including ID cards,
fragments of arms, ribs, cranial bones and vertebrae...

It was horrible enough to learn almost 800 pieces were found on top of the Deutsche Bank [building] last year,
including someone’s full scalp...

Every single funeral broadcast on the news of a fireman included a casket, but people didn’t realize most of those
caskets were empty. There were only 19 full bodies recovered from debris—and that number may not even be exact. A
full body isn’t even a full body—it counted as a full body if it was 50 to 75 percent there.
"""

Steel columns embedded in building hundreds of feet from the source of the columns can also be considered examples
of shrapnel impact. The shrapnel effect can also be determined by watching the trajectory of laterally ejected
material. NFPA 921 describes the relevance of ejection trajectory to determine explosion force:

"""
21.4.2.1 When the containers, structures, or vessels that contain or restrict the blast pressure fronts are
ruptured, they are often broken into pieces that may be thrown over great distances. These pieces of debris
are called shrapnel or missiles...

21.4.2.2 The distance to which missiles can be propelled outward from an explosion depends greatly on their
initial direction...An idealized diagram for missile trajectories is shown in Figure 21.4.2.2...
"""

The figure indicated above shows a series of trajectories which match the trajectories taken by debris from
World Trade Center North and South Towers. An excellent source for analysis of these trajectories is the
eye witness footage taken by Rick Siegel available from 911eyewitness.com.

Evidence of a blast pressure wave was provided by eye witness testimony to news reporters. An example of such
testimony was given by Stationary Engineer Mike Pecoraro:

http://www.chiefengineer.org/article.cfm?seqnum1=1029

"""
The two decided to ascend the stairs to the C level, to a small machine shop where Vito Deleo and David Williams
were supposed to be working. When the two arrived at the C level, they found the machine shop gone.

"There was nothing there but rubble, "Mike said. "We're talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press ? gone!" The two
began yelling for their co-workers, but there was no answer. They saw a perfect line of smoke streaming through
the air. "You could stand here," he said, "and two inches over you couldn't breathe. We couldn't see through the
smoke so we started screaming."
...
The two made their way to the parking garage, but found that it, too, was gone. "There were no walls, there was
rubble on the floor, and you can't see anything" he said.

They decided to ascend two more levels to the building's lobby. As they ascended to the B Level, one floor above,
they were astonished to see a steel and concrete fire door that weighed about 300 pounds, wrinkled up "like a piece
of aluminum foil" and lying on the floor.
"""

Construction worker Phillip Morelli described being thrown to the floor by a blast and subsequents blasts taking
place: http://www.ny1.com/pages/RRR/911special_survivors.html

Seismic indication of explosion damage is present in data collected at the Lamont-Dohert Campus of The Earth
Institute at Columbia University indicated magnitude 2.1 and 2.3 seismic events associated with the destruction
of the World Trade Center [http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/20010911_WTC/WTC_LDEO_KIM.pdf]:

"""
The waves from the WTC events resemble those recorded by regional
stations from the collapse of part of a salt mine in western New York on March 12, 1994 (ML
3.6). That source also lasted longer than that of a small earthquake. A truck bomb at the WTC in
1993, in which approximately 0.5 tons of explosive were detonated, was not detected seismically,
even at a station only 16 km away.

An explosion at a gasoline tank farm near Newark NJ on January 7, 1983 generated observable
P and S waves and short-period Rg waves (ML 3) at PAL. Its Rg is comparable to that for
WTC collapse 2.
"""

Evidence of explosion thermal energy can be found in reports of the temperature of the WTC crime scene.

The New York Department of Sanitation reported molten steel beams being recovered from the World Trade Center
crime scene: http://www.wasteage.com/mag/waste_dday_ny_sanitation/

"""
But for about two and a half months after the attacks, in addition to its regular duties, NYDS played a major
role in debris removal — everything from molten steel beams to human remains — running trucks back and forth
between Ground Zero and Fresh Kills landfill, which was reopened to accommodate the debris.
"""

http://www.messenger-inquirer.com/news/attacks/4522011.htm
"""
Underground fires raged for months. O'Toole remembers in February seeing a crane lift a steel beam vertically
from deep within the catacombs of Ground Zero. "It was dripping from the molten steel," he said.
"""

http://www.neha.org/9-11%20report/index-The.html
"""
“Standing down there, with your eyes closed,” says Ron Burger, a public health advisor at the National Center for
Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who arrived in New York to help September 11th
but didn’t arrive to the Ground Zero the site until the night of September 12th, “it could have been a tornado or
an avalanche or a volcano.”

A veteran of disasters from the Mississippi floods Mt. St. Helens, Burger said it reminded him most of the
volcano, if he forgot he was in downtown Manhattan. “Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon
layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen’s and the thousands who fled that disaster,” he said.
"""

The USGS Spectrography Lab confirmed extremely high temperatures at the World Trade Center site with the hottest
temperature being in excess of 1300 degrees Fahrenheit:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/thermal.r09.html
"""
Solutions that include reflected solar radiation, hot spot temperature and hot spot area are shown in Thermal
Figures 6a and b. Hot spot A, which from Thermal Figure 5 has a temperature greater than 800 Kelvin, is found to
have a 1000 Kelvin temperature in a spot covering ~15% of a pixel, or 0.56 square meter. Similarly, hot spot C is
found to have a 900 kelvin temperature over 20% of a pixel, or 0.8 square meter.
"""

Relevance of eyewitness testimony:

NFPA 921 makes clear the importance of recording eye witness testimony to any fire or explosion event. The New
York Times has provided a substantial record of eye witness testimony for that day. This records includes
a large number of accounts of explosions which should have been considered as relevant during any proper
fire or explosion investigation.

The New York Times archive of these eye witness accounts is available on their website:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/met_WTC_histories_full_01.html

An example of the eye witness testimony from the New York Times resource indicating explosions taking place was
given by Chief Frank Cruthers

"""And while I was still in that
immediate area, the south tower, 2 World Trade Center, there was what appeared to be at first an explosion.
It appeared at the very top, simultaneously from all four sides, materials shot out horizontally. And then
there seemed to be a momentary delay before you could see the beginning of the collapse.
"""

Louie Cacchioli, FDNY stated to People Magazine on 9/12/2001:
"""
We were the first ones in the second tower after the plane struck. I was taking firefighters up in the elevator
to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there
was bombs set in the building.
"""

Pat Dawson a reporter for NBC News stated on 9/11/2001:
"""
Just moments ago I spoke to the Chief of Safety for the New York City Fire Department, who was obviously one of
the first people here after the two planes were crashed into the side, we assume, of the World Trade Center
towers, which used to be behind me over there.
...
The Chief of Safety of the Fire Department of New York City told me that shortly after 9:00 he had roughly ten
alarms, roughly 200 men, trying to effect rescues of some of those civilians who were in there, and that
basically he received word of a secondary device, that is another bomb, going off. He tried to get his men out
as quickly as he could, but he said that there was another explosion which took place.

And then an hour after the first hit here, the first crash, that took place, he said there was another explosion
that took place in one of the towers here. So obviously, according to his theory, he thinks that there were
actually devices that were planted in the building. One of the secondary devices, he thinks, that [detonated]
after the initial impact he thinks may have been on the plane that crashed into one of the towers. The second
device, he thinks, he speculates, was probably planted in the building.

So that’s what we have been told by Albert Terry, who is the Chief of Safety for the New York City Fire
Department. He told me that just moments ago.
"""

William Rodriguez a WTC Maintenance worker stated for reporters
[theconservativevoice.com/articles/article.html?id=7762]:
"""
"When I heard the sound of the explosion, the floor beneath my feet vibrated, the walls started cracking and
everything started shaking." said Rodriguez, who was crowded together with fourteen other people in the office
including Anthony Saltamachia, supervisor for the American Maintenance Company.

Just seconds later there was another explosion way above which made the building oscillate momentarily. This,
he was later told, was a plane hitting the 90th floor. Upon hearing about the plane, he immediately thought of
the people up in the restaurant. Then there were other explosions just above B1 and individuals started heading
for the loading dock to escape the explosion's resulting rampant fire. When asked later about those first
explosions he said: "I would know if an explosion was from the bottom or the top of the building." He heard
explosions both before and after the plane hit the tower.
"""

The widespread failure of any proper fire or explosion investigation was included within a series of House
Committee on Science hearings in 2002:

http://www.house.gov/science/hearings/full02/mar06/charter.htm
"""
· No clear authority and the absence of an effective protocol for how the building performance
investigators should conduct and coordinate their investigation with the concurrent search and rescue efforts,
as well as any criminal investigation: Early confusion over who was in charge of the site and the lack of
authority of investigators to impound pieces of steel for examination before they were recycled led to the loss
of important pieces of evidence that were destroyed early during the search and rescue effort...

· Difficulty obtaining documents essential to the investigation, including blueprints, design drawings,
and maintenance records: The building owners, designers and insurers, prevented independent researchers from
gaining access – and delayed the BPAT team in gaining access – to pertinent building documents largely because of
liability concerns...
"""

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/science/hsy78961.000/hsy78961_0f.htm
"""
FEMA's investigation into the World Trade Center collapse was inhibited at several turns by an inability to
access the disaster site quickly, preserve evidence, and obtain necessary documentary evidence, such as
blueprints, in a timely way. Several observers, including the families of the Trade Center victims, have called for
World Trade Center investigators to be granted authorities akin to those of the National Transportation Safety
Board (NTSB), which is authorized by statute to enter the site of airplane crashes, preserve evidence, and issue
subpoenas to witnesses or for documents to facilitate its investigation.
...
FEMA responded to this disaster by deploying a building performance assessment team (BPAT)—a group of experts in
engineering, design, construction, and building codes—to conduct a formal analysis of the causes of the collapse
of the buildings and determine what can be learned from the disaster to save lives in the future. Concerns
regarding the timing of the BPAT deployment, their access to the site and building records, premature disposal of
evidence, and FEMA's lack of regular communication with the public were the subject of a previous Science
Committee hearing, and are explained in detail in Appendix 1 (the March 6 hearing charter).
"""

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/science/hsy77747.000/hsy77747_0.HTM
"""
On November 12, I, and my constituents, had the misfortune—and hundreds of families were ravaged by the crash of
Flight 586. Within literally moments of that plane crash, the National Transportation Safety Board was on the
ground sequestering evidence, interviewing witnesses, subpoenaing information, if necessary. And since then, they
have offered periodic reports.

One month and a day earlier, when the World Trade Center collapsed, nothing could have been further from the
truth. According to reports that we have heard since, there has been no comprehensive investigation. One expert
in fire engineering concluded that there was virtually a nonexistent investigation. We haven't examined any
aspects of the collapse that might have impacted rescue worker procedures even in this last month.

Second, reports have emerged that crucial evidence has been mishandled. Over 80 percent of the steel from the
World Trade Center site has already been sold for recycling, much of it, if not all of it, before investigators
and scientists could analyze the information.
"""

On the basis of extensive research into a large body of mutually supportive and publicly reported information,
We, the undersigned, do hereby find cause to issue a formal presentment regarding the participation of known
individuals and corporate entities in the destruction of evidence of the crime of mass murder
having taken place on September 11th, 2001 at the World Trade Center in New York City and consequent
willful obstruction of justice. We, the undersigned, do hereby formally demand the formation of a common law
Grand Jury as secured to the People of the united States by the fifth amendment to the Constitution of the united
States to investigate the information hereby presented and issue formal indictments upon confirmation. We, the
undersigned, do hereby swear under penalty of perjury, that we believe the foregoing information
to be factual to the best of public knowledge.

We, the undersigned, hereby demand the exhumation and return to family members of any victims of the World
Trade Center destruction currently dumped in the Fresh Kills landfill in Staten Island, New York City.

We, the undersigned, hereby demand that the evidence buried in the Fresh Kills landfill be made open to
Grand Jury subpoena and investigation.

We, the undersigned, hereby find cause to demand that a Grand Jury investigation of the following known
participants, as well as any heretofore unknown accessories, accomplices or originators to the illegal and
unlawful destruction, concealment and profit taking from the destruction of the World Trade Center. We call upon
local and State law enforcement personnel to participate in and confirm the findings of this investigative body.

PARTICIPANTS IN DESTRUCTION AND CONCEALMENT OF EVIDENCE AND CONSEQUENT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

Public servants:

Rudolph Giuliani, former Mayor, New York City, New York
Thomas Van Essen, former Fire Commissioner, New York City, New York
Bernard Kerik, former NYPD Police Chief, New York City, New York
Kenneth Holden, NYC Department of Design and Construction

Cleanup companies:

Controlled Demolition, Inc [given contract by Giuliani on 9/22/2001]
Tully Construction, Sacramento District
Bovis Lend Lease International, Mobile District
AMEC Construction Management, Portland Distric
Turner Construction, Baltimore District

Steel recycling:

Metal Management Northeast bought 40,000 tons

Hugo Neu Schnitzer bought 25,000 tons

Baosteel Group Corporation of Shanghai, China purchased 50,000 ton of World Trade Center steel.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Invaluable research assistance for this presentment was provided by David Ray Griffin:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=GRI20060129&articleId=1846

Also of invaluable assistance were the Internet resources: 911research.wtc7.net, 911eyewitness.com and
cooperativeresearch.org.

This presentment is dedicated to the courage and outspoken quest for answer demonstrated by Bill Manning,
former Editor in Chief of FIRE ENGINEERING MAGAZINE.

2006-01-09T14:56:00.000-08:00

How to locate the Law

A great deal of understanding how the law operates is to understand that crimes are typically penalized by written statutes and codes. The codes enable the court to establish an appropriate level of punishment and to ensure that crimes are consistenly punished, as opposed to "cruel and unusual" punishments being a matter of the whim of any particular judge.

In examining the crimes of 9/11/2001 and how they may be prosecuted, a major part of understanding how the law may be invoked is to understand where the crimes are defined as punishable acts.

This blog will place a preference upon online resources for law research but it must be understood that *nothing* replaces access to a law library. In particular, law dictionaries are continually being modified over time as words are redefined according to, arguably, political sensitivities. This means that laws written at a particular point in time may come to mean very different things over the decades as the words themselves are redefined. Yet, the closer the dictionary printing is to the time when the law is written, the more closely that dictionary represents the original intent of the written law.

The first resource listed by this blog will be one directly relevant to research crimes within New York State, housed on a public server:

http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/frmload.cgi?MENU-30486320

At the above URL, click on "Laws of New York" and you will be directed to a searchable listing of the various laws for the State of New York.

In the main query field, one may use typical search behavior to locate relevant topics. Let us consider a concerete example:

Is it a punishable crime to remove or alter evidence of a crime, such as the removal and destruction of the steel from the World Trade Center crime scene?

Typing "physical evidence" into the main search field returns a sizable listing. Within this listing are some relevant sections:

"""
§ 215.35 Tampering with physical evidence; definitions of terms.
The following definitions are applicable to section 215.40:
1. "Physical evidence" means any article, object, document, record or
other thing of physical substance which is or is about to be produced or
used as evidence in an official proceeding.
2. "Official proceeding" means any action or proceeding conducted by
or before a legally constituted judicial, legislative, administrative or
other governmental agency or official, in which evidence may properly be
received.
"""

and

"""
§ 215.40 Tampering with physical evidence.
A person is guilty of tampering with physical evidence when:
1. With intent that it be used or introduced in an official proceeding
or a prospective official proceeding, he (a) knowingly makes, devises or
prepares false physical evidence, or (b) produces or offers such
evidence at such a proceeding knowing it to be false; or
2. Believing that certain physical evidence is about to be produced or
used in an official proceeding or a prospective official proceeding, and
intending to prevent such production or use, he suppresses it by any act
of concealment, alteration or destruction, or by employing force,
intimidation or deception against any person.
Tampering with physical evidence is a class E felony.
"""

These two sections define an offense cognizable under the courts and upon which the courts may act. You will notice that Section 215.35 defines terms that are used in Section 215.40. This is a very important thing to note: terms used within statutory code may have specialized definitions that are not necessarily the common meanings of those terms. *ALWAYS LOOK UP THE DEFINITIONS OF WORDS. DO NOT ASSUME THAT YOU KNOW A WORD'S DEFINITION.* My apologies for shouting but this is a very relevant point. Many people are wrongly assuming definitions and hence allowing sections of law to be misapplied to them when under the relevant law they should acquiese to improper jurisdiction.

At some point, the rules of evidence will also be examined. These are listed under the "Criminal Procedure" in Article 60 "RULES OF EVIDENCE AND RELATED MATTERS". It is important that the rules of evidence be understood and adhered to as inadmissible evidence can have an adverse effect on any criminal proceeding.

Why a 9/11 Affidavit?

2005-11-28T08:26:00.000-08:00

Before commencing with this initial post, I would ask the reader to please review the following audio:

Richard Cornforth Interview:
http://www.treeofthegoldenlight.com/audio/cornforth9-10-05.ram

Richard Cornforth's exhortation for the People to exercise self preservation by learning and applying the Rule of Law directly is an excellent introduction to the discussion entertained by this blog.

The following Scotsman.com news article is an excellent example of what happens when a democratic society stands up against corruption and graft:

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2320312005

"""
The Canadian government has lost a vote of no confidence in the country's parliament which was triggered by a corruption scandal.

Canada's three opposition parties, which control a majority in parliament, voted against Paul Martin's government, claiming his Liberal Party no longer has the moral authority to lead the nation.
"""

With these thoughts in mind, the blog now turns to the crimes of 9/11/2001:

The crimes of 9/11/2001 have formed the basis for a massive worldwide assault upon a rather evanescent group of alleged conspirators whom are collectively given the name "Al Q'aeda" by mainstream media. In the official story of the events of the day of 9/11/2001, a shadowy group of 19 alleged hijackers, allegedly masterminded by the notorious Osama bin Laden, were able to hijack four airliners and subvert the entired chain of standard operating procedure which was in effect for preventing and responding to hijacked aircraft. These 19 hijackers allegedly accomplished this subversion using plastic box cutters with possibly the help on one flight of a gun. Such an accomplishment, in itself, should constitute a grave matter of concern, simply because it implies that Americans should be spending money on knife fighting instruction to protect domestic flights rather than spending trillions upon one of the most sophisticated military infrastructures in the history of known human civilization.

There are many reasons to question the official story of the crimes of 9/11/2001. Some of the more standard questions:

1) Why was no one in authority fired nor reprimanded nor demoted for the many failures in standard operating procedure of that day? Why, indeed, were several of those involved in the failures promoted subsequently?
2) Why did the BBC and other news agencies report that at least six of the hijackers were alive after the day of the events, indicating, at the least, that forged documents were used?
3) How could three steel framed skyscrapers collapse at free fall speeds merely from the effects of burning jet fuel with what to all accounts was moderate structural damage?
4) Why do individuals such as William Rodriguez, along with 14 other concurring witnesses, state publicly that explosions in the basements of the World Trade Center took place *before* and after the impact of the airliners? Why do numerous firefighter accounts and news video from that day continually refer to explosions?

These are some of the basic questions and they are a good indication of the breadth of discussion which has been taking place on this topic. The reader is directed to public searches using teoma.com or google.com to research further. The purpose of this blog is not necessarily to rehash the above discussions as they have been given ample digital space in many sites around the Internet. The reader is requested to research and challenge this blogger on all factual contentions. The only online 9/11 related resource I will directly mention in this post is the draft paper of Steven E Jones, a professor of physics at Brigham Young University. This paper is excellent because it presents in a rational manner a very detailed overview of the improbability of jet fuel being responsible for the collapse of the World Trade Center:

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

This blog will attempt to address what appears to be the most glaring omission in the 9/11 debate and discussion currently taking place online: how these crimes may be criminally prosecuted. This blog will attempt to discuss how the crimes of 9/11/2001 may be brought under the jurisdiction of the common law for criminal proceedings and tort actions. The author of this blog is not a lawyer and appreciates all observations and constructive comments.