top of page
This site was designed with the
.com
website builder. Create your website today.Start Now

Swedelius' Reply to Commissioner Bahrke

There are showings of real harm done to me:

 

You have failed me each and every time I have come before you in need of your competent decisions, speady trial and financial boundaries further violated.  Then years later in unrelated situation I come before you forprotection for my health, safety and well being, you deney me and give pardon and power to my aggressor. 

 

 I asked for Help.

 

Commissioner Trilla Bahrke, you wrote in your ruling you could not seperate the (TDR) cases, however your orders show different.

 

 

I was denied.  My agressor was privilaged. I came to you and your court for help re: Funk now I am being punished:

Because I used digital communication (least contact) and without threat; in fact mercy and sign of defeat.  

The more unjustice and punishment that is given the more I have a story.

I have the Right to Discover what happened to me in your Court of Law.

I am a Warrior, I am a Survivor. I have a right to be in a Safe, Quiet environment.   

​

​

​

--------------------------------

Please google Commissioner Trilla Bahrke and see other complaints that have made the news.

found in approx page 3 of a google search, JUDGES BELIEVED TO AID AND ABET CHILD MOLESTERS AND ABUSERS.

http://www.courtlicensedabuse.com/judges1.html

​

Article in the Sierra Sun re Bharke and Ward, Esq. that I retained and thought  was odd!

As a few other things (can write & post brief -upon request ) .

 I had experienced a sense of relationship as if the "good old boys club"  between Bahrke & Ward . 

And as seen in this article in the Sierra Sun re a man who hit his elderly father and Bahrke supported the abuser; Mr. Ward states, he thinks Bahrke did a good job. 

Also my paperwork was wrong with Ward too, example I was at the court and so where my parents at the day of the Criminal Trial but the paperwork say I was not present. 

I believe Mr. Ward helped Bahrke step down {recuse herself as she was being served papers to be disqualified, on my case and a year later when I was at my Criminal Trial, Mr. Ward told me Trilla said to say hello and hoped I was doing well, I and was adamant that if she meant that she would have never have denied me my restraining order and granted an order for my aggressor or minimal at least give us both one, so at least he would stay away.   I told Mr. Ward I would take that to the grave.  I find it further odd but however the following events came, grateful that in  less than a month later Bahrke retired) 

​

Also I can not understand why would a mother, and  further a mother of an Olympian, ie a coach type supporter,, a peer in the community and a legal representative not support (life) success (and add for someone who is showing proof, innocence, community orientated, capable and in need)?;  

 instead the Commissioner supports  the aggressors (and basically set the stage for the ones in real help to fail)?

​

--------------------------------

​

​

​

 

Swedelius' experience with Commissioer Trilla Bahrke's Court:
​
​
2002-2004 Reynolds
 
2004-2006 Pankopf
 
2014 to current day Funk:
NOTE****
Commissioner Bahrke did NOT accept or read Swedelius' Exhibit reply to Witness  Statements.
Ruling
Order
Intent to Destroy Exhibits
Exhibit - My reply to Mr. Funk's paragraph two
 
 
TDR #000670 Funk vs Swedelius:
Ruling
Order
 
---see also outline page of downloadable files---

Make it Real, compared to What- 

John Legand & the Roots

Think (About It) - Lyn Collins

1972

 Swedelius' Experiences in Commissioner Bahrke's Tahoe City Superior Court

This is very relevant because past case experiences are key to learning and integration into the world.  Thru someone I have come to ask for help and guidance Bahrke has only restricted, belittled, turned around and worsened my (actual) experiences (plural) to heal, trust and adventure, feel safe & supported in my world when ever I have come before her as a judge of the court.  She has been plain wrong on many Rulings and Orders.  Please see my detailed comments per pager on her current day Rulings.

 

 

 

 

 

 

-----

 

I am scared. I am tired.  My neighbors and myself have called the police countless times just recently.  

I am scared of my current day aggressor, Jeffrey Funk.  For all the things listed thru out and more.

I am scared of the incompetency of Trilla Bahrke's Rulings & Orders (on my behalf), see history below.  

 

So, Which one?  Is the real question/answer= From my past case experiences (plural) with her incompetency level through the years (as I have only come to her for help after a violent life threatening assault and my case shortly got lost in the Justice System, to be used as a "school" type project for Trilla & the small town local attorneys.:

 

I am scared of the aggressive police officer who was rough regarding the phone call I had, when I returned his call- with regards to Mr. Funk turning my "you won" text message into the police, which comment that I actually could be facing jail time.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

---Bahrke's current day= Ruing & Order:

Jessica Swedelius' Reply to Bahrke's Rulings, Swedelius vs Funk TDR #000666

Order, Destroying my Exhibits, Not Accepting my Statement to Funk's Witnesses. 

 

Jessica Swedelius' Reply to Bahrke's Rulings, Swedelius vs Funk TDR #000670

Order, and more+  (current day, he nears my house and is a threat to me.)

-----------------------------------------------------

 

My past experience caused me much grief and still does:  I spent hundreds of hours, $10 of thousands of dollars on endless attorney 's fee in the Court years.   In addition to the bizarre Judgments & Continued Filings....I have never recovered from my experience in the Justice System, all in line from commissioner Bahrke.  

​

NOTES TO DISCUSS & GENERAL QUESTIONS FOR BOTH MATTERS

How long is the Restraining Order on me, Jessica Swedelius?  Permanent – Forever?

My Exhibits were destroyed after 30 days (less than time to file an appeal)- is that unusual?

What is the usual time an appeal, like this may take?

SWEDELIUS v. FUNK, Placer County Superior Court Case no.  TCV 666

FUNK v. SWEDELIUS, Placer County Superior Court Case no.  TCV 670

  • I did not see nor sign anything with the Court that would discuss other options than being heard in-front of Commissioner Bahrke.  Stipulation to commissioner.

  • This was to be a simple TDR (TDR 666).  Commissioner does not clearly address my #1 issue at hand that prompted TDR. The most recent assault was what prompted me to finally file for a TDR #0000666, which was that Jeffrey raised his fist in anger at me on 9/2/14.  (No matter the 19 pages of rulings, it is not ok to raise your hand at someone/a loving soul in anger.)

    • Another concern- Jeffrey Funk, initiates, threatens, proceeds, lies, intimidates and more,  his behavior shows to be steady if not escalating. 

      • Mr. Funk has priors with jail and Anger Management.

      • Commissioner herself has knowledge about me and my past, (re: I have suffered through prior criminal cases and civil while being victim and survivor resulting into real life-long damages, simultaneously for years, all the while I was also desperate for relief, restitution and experienced quite the opposite then too). (see below).

  • Commissioner Bahrke gets many things plain wrong:

    •  plain wrong, the current situation 9/2/14 has been in the immediate across/next door neighbors proximity not several houses down as been explained to her in many forms.

    • plain wrong , Key Witness Ryan Declaration quotes flip flopped.

    • plain wrong , That I was prowling., interpreted him moving to be harassment, etc..

    • plain wrong , That I was seeking an apology- (I was seeking a TDR).

    • plain wrong ,  The Email commentaries.

    • plain wrong , Dates and proximities of more than one altercation between myself and Mr. Funk.

    • wrong, That Mr. Funk & Ms. Broughton have good reason to need a TDR 670.

    • wrong, To use above and beyond fact material as reason to deny my TDR 666, and the dissolve TDR 666.

  • Jeffrey  did a great job to confuse the issues of TDR with serving a TDR 670 request for me at the first hearing 10/10/14, these documents were only in response to his and witness declarations.

  • Commissioner Bahrke objects to my accountable witnesses and key witness information. 

  • Jeff Funk nor Carin Broughton themselves did not object to my accountable witnesses and key witness information. 

  • Commissioner Bahrke discussed that the Court could not separate the two TDR’s. 

  • I find that very odd! These are two different TDR’s.  (These TDR’s are not a tit-for-tat situation).

  • Commissioner Bahrke grants Jeffrey Funk and girlfriend Carin Broughton the Order for TDR 670.

  • The Commissioner denies TDR request 666.

  • Commissioner Bahrke dissolved my TDR request 666.

  • In both TDR cases 666 & 670 my reply to witness declarations were not accepted by the Commissioner (and Respondents never (read or) replied (before Rulings).

  • Carin Broughton was not present for either of two The Hearings. 

    • In Ruling for TDR 666 Commissioner Bahrke says It’s difficult for her to believe, I would come near (I did leave the grounds btw for three days) (see festival campground/once a year event (in pursuit to commence my aerial job) since I was in fear.  

    • –VS-

    •  the Commissioner disregards the same applying concept for Mr. Funk & Ms. Broughton (see visiting my residential neighborhood and most specifically, the  immediate neighbors/ regularly/ and even after ‘their claims of fear’. 

    • Mr. Funk & Ms. Broughton’s pursuit to visit their “friend’s” all living in temporarily/ rental homes near my (proprietor-ized) established home.   Mr. Funk’s filings also resulted to those named neighbors in total to be five witnesses, and two immediately next door (and brand new to the area) are unnecessarily brought into this unnecessary situation by Mr. Funk.

    •  Jeff has been inappropriately pushing for uncalled for territory rights (documented) since 2012 .

  • The Rulings results came to that I have no legal protection 50 yard surrounding me nor my immediate “safe place” vs my aggressor (physical, verbal & passive) and girlfriend are allowed all right of way. 

  • Further shocking to me, as I came to the Court for Protective Order help, instead I now have the and the burden of legal consequence of a Permanent Restraining Order now placed on me TDR #0000670; this is and not limited to the concerns for what my future needs are and hold, minimally and not limited to Protection and Clear/ Record.

  • Thank you, please see below for more information-

 

 

My Reply to Bahrke's Ruling:

Page 1: 

  • Alleging---- why alleging; when I have shown the proof with documentation mine &/or opposing party.

  • Belittles my Concerns and Pre-Decided the matter, Commissioner negates my concerns which she later uses for reasons against me for granting Jeff’s Order.

  • Commissioner states my information is too confusing yet, she finds 19 pages to critiques me, my grammar and my extra data regarding old dates and unrelated altercations which is all and only in reply to Mr. Funk paperwork.  (I would never had submitted all this paperwork had it not been in need to reply to Jeff’s request for TDR 670 Order).

    • On page 3 of Commissioner Bahrke’s Ruling wrote she can not separate the requests of myself and Jeffrey Funk as they are both relating to the same situations, but from their own perspective.  Then how does the Commissioner Rulings two different ways?

  • A simple but consistent wrong fact throughout, is there where never e-mail correspondences between myself, Jeffrey Funk (and/or girlfriend) – as Bahrke stated throughout her Rulings. Nor were there ever any emails and/or complaints listed about emails. (My correspondences were civil plea request (ie., texts, non-threatening texts.)

    • On page 2, The Commissioner ridicules my statements of my Witnesses as she terms as Unknown People. 

  • Even though…Jeffrey Funk never rebutted or objected to any of my paperwork/documents/exhibits, etc…

    • Much of which I had a very different quality control level of witnesses than Funk brought.  As I brought: Sergeant Giovannini, Sheriff Gary, Deputy Lade, Deputy McCleary, my Aerial Team/Crew, Management and Producer of festival, Polly M Ryan (family therapist) as she and others such as Brother and Mother have been introduced and not specifically objected to by Jeff Funk nor Carin Broughton.

  • Witness I did list in original TDR papers Ryan Simpson (is also described in detail reply paragraph six exhibit.), did fill out a Declaration; I just did not submit it Jeff did before I knew he was going to serve me—I did not think I needed it yet, (was already granted 100 yards from my original 50 yards I requested), further more I thought it helped my case. Because of the fact Jeffrey never objected to my Witness, I did think it was necessary to bring them.

  • Commissioner states my information is too confusing, she points out my lack of legal forum/ knowledge; I didn’t know I needed to have such knowledge to ask for request for restraining order/protection.

 

 

 

 

 

Pages- 2 –3 : 

  • Commissioner ridicules/rejected my Witness exhibits &/or documents in my response to and reply to paragraph six and text exhibits (as described above).

    • Also and not limited to is my Text Message Exhibit where I show Jeff Funk initiated a text correspondence to my Brother was recognized by the Commissioner, this text message as you will see as topic discussions below and  shows to me:

    •  page 2 line 1-2 of the Ruling, Commissioner Bahrke immediately negated a correspondence/confrontation that was initiated from Jeffrey to my family (brother David Swedelius). 

    •  this initiated correspondence from Jeffrey to David had no point but to harass, slander and  further provoke me & or my family,  and clearly establishes my further point to my whole case it is’ Jeff can’t let things go” (as seen in more interpretations of the Rulings below). 

    • More interestingly, Mr. Funk never objected.

    • See all filings and paperwork, see also details in my replies and text exhibits.

  • Commissioner recognizes throughout the Rulings I have Fear & Concern; I’ve documented since 2009.  I feel this shows my level of patients, not quick to jump, and/or harm including supplying a log of numerous unpleasant (at best) altercations when Jeffrey Funk is present.

  • Commissioner Does not discuss my most serious concern.  Jeffrey Funk swung his fist at me in anger, is why I was seeking the Order TDR #666 in first place.

  • Commissioner Bahrke starts to discuss my two concerns from the Original TDR #666 but only discusses one.    A “main concern is that his actions are escalating rather than subsiding”. 

  • When I applied for the TDR, I only asked for Jeff to remain 50 yards away from myself & residence but Commissioner granted 100 yards, which shows she had concern.   

  • I fear Jeffrey Funk due to many facts and to substantiate my reasoning’s; I had given many pictures that Commissioner reprimands me about in page 2 of the Ruling and almost 100 pages of documents as written on page 3 of Ruling.  Commissioner did not discuss my concern as I know Jeffrey Funk has prior knowledge to me and my home, in addition he has served time in jail for Anger Management, which deeply concerns me.

  • A very profound concern to me, if he is “afraid“ of me ---why does he always come to/near me??

  • Why was restraining order given merit and withdrawn without explanation??   In fact, Commissioner changed 50 yards to 100 yards.

  • The Commissioner spends time talking about the old and unrelated data but not time discussing incidents, which are most current, concern and most combative (ie., swinging at me) and which is why she signed order in the first place.

  • How am I suppose to avoid Jeffrey Funk when he continually comes within 100 yards of my (proprietor-ized and established) ‘home’, business and my ‘safe place’???

  • I have been pushed from social and work scenes to retaliate and forced to get away from him and simultaneously and on the contrary however Jeff Funk regularly (and to current day) comes near (detail in my reply paragraphs six, seven and  full circle exhibits).

  • Commissioner wrote several houses down, which is plain wrong, old and unrelated data (see also Ruling page 9, line 10) .

*** This is misinterpreted information- I have been stating that this current trouble is when he was at the immediate next door neighbors (detail in my reply paragraphs six, full circle, and seven exhibits), which (Jeff had knowledge to these proximities and views) also happens to be in our direct & main view as well as audio; not a several houses down (detailed in my reply paragraphs two exhibit and three exhibit).

  • Commissioner wrote, I spent an inordinate amount of time preparing for the Hearing Oct 31st.  However,

  • The Fact is, I am taking the matter, consequences and necessity to organize my response seriously in my reply to Jeffrey’s TDR, seven paragraphs and nine Witness Declarations.

  • Through my notes/logs all these years, I am trying to show that I was not quick to jump in haste or claim false allegations, all the while putting up with anguish directly resulting from Jeffrey Funk.

  • Commissioner states my exhibits where not filed timely nor do they abide by the rules governing the length of submitted documents.  Where are these specific Rules for a Protective Order listed for layman’s in the Court Website?

  • What was not timely about bringing my document into the Hearing? What was wrong with submitting my information as Exhibits? Where does it say otherwise in the www.courts.ca.gov-  (documents how to file a restraining order and how can I respond to a request for a domestic violent restraining order)?

  • I specifically pointed out to the Commissioner my exhibit Request For Help and explained this was my TDR case #0000666.  I specifically brought the Courts attention to my page 5, we all flipped and I read, where I was asking the Court for help:

*Time Constraints with Court.

*Request for Protection.

*Request for Not Living in Fear and Intimidation.

*Request for Right to Quiet Enjoyment.

*Request for Help – How to File Properly To Not Confuse

TDR #0000666 -and - TDR#0000670.

The rest of the documents are all relating to Reply to Jeffrey Funk’s serving me TDR #0000670. 

  • Line 24, page 3 Commissioner wrote she cannot separate the requests of myself and Jeffrey Funk as they are both relating to the same situations, but from their own perspective.

  • If Court can not separate the requests of myself (TDR 666) and Jeffrey Funk (TDR 670) as they are both relating to the same situations, then how does Commissioner Bahrke justify two different Outcomes for Rulings??

    • My perspective is they are always coming near me & my residence and it has proven trouble, treats, dares, lies, drugs, etc, they ignore my civil requests all the while disregarding my privacy and wellbeing for years, now it has escalated to being a physical threat.

  • Jeffrey Funk and (girlfriend)- Carin Broughton’s documents show his reasoning’s to be he just learned a filing was not $450 and only in response to my filing did he file a TDR, as to say he is afraid/in an emergency protective need from the state for us to be away from each other, yet he wants to visit his “friends” (in rental housing situations) on my street and he does as to current day (details in my reply to paragraph five exhibit).

  • Only at this point does Jeffrey Funk also added his girlfriend Carin Broughton to his claims and this Protective Order.

 

CARIN BROUGHTON NOT EVEN AT HEARING!!!

MY REPLY TO CARIN’S  ‘WITNESS’ DECLARATION WAS NOT ACCEPTED.

Great evidence of Slander & Bulling, Etc…

 

  • Line 18-21, page 4 Commissioner gives merit, as she began to discuss, “Petitioner (me) states, “Funk has taught his girlfriend & others to not have regard or moral interest for me.  This is elective behavior of Jeffrey Funk to ever need come to my street. This has been my established place of residence of near two decades.  Mr. Funk violates my sense of security, tranquility and rehabilitation.”   (see my reply to Witness Declaration Carin Broughton (not accepted by the Court, however pieces were intermittently explained throughout my reply exhibits per Mr. Funk’s paragraphs).

    • Line 19. page 15 in Ruling, Commissioner wrote that Carin Broughton wrote, “This has gone on too long and it’s time for everyone involved to let go and move on.” 

    •   Line 14, page 15 in Ruling, Commissioner wrote that Carin Broughton wrote, “We (Jeff & Carin) come over to visit them.”

    • Line 14- 15, page 15 in Ruling, Commissioner wrote that Carin Broughton wrote, “It’s truly not meant to invade your private space.”

    • This desperate (very late date (9/2/14) text from Carin only came in after they had been warned I took the pictures as recommended from the police for record keeping.

      • I have been dealing with Jeff’s inappropriate behaviors and threats since 2009 and documenting them since 2012.

​

​

Page 4: 

  • The Commissioner goes on & on in her Rulings regarding her impression of the scenario, if I’ve gotten over a past relationship with unnecessary, old and out of order examples randomly picked from my data/paperwork, which I’ve shown to be different in my documents.  How does her repeating this old and unrelated data that I care about him, relate to the necessity of a TDR?

  • In my opinion, I am being punished for attempting to handle this civilly first prior to going to Court.  A harmless example of me calling Jeff handsome in my correspondence and trying to handle this civilly as Commissioner Bahrke refers.

  • Commissioner has odd time blocks that she quotes which causes misinterpretations of my civil plea information and requests (as I submitted everything- not knowing what would stick and have nothing to hide). 

  • Commissioner recognizes giving it merit that there is much contention on my street since 2009 when Jeffrey first moved in, however interprets this information as if I created and/or orchestrate his bulling and electively coming near ever since (detailed  in my exhibits).

    • Commissioner herself has prior knowledge regarding me, she has been the Commissioner in some of the (original civil cases proceeding the violent assault in 2000 lasting approx 2002-2008, in which her Rulings were devastating to me.    I wound up in the Appellate Court some odd years ago Reynolds vs Swedelius and won; Reynold went on to claim Bankrupt.  A different case Pankopf vs Swedelius sum of money was taken from my bank account at approx $7k over her signed writ of execution) as I reminded  I was not found quilt however because I owed a lawyer bill I lost the case.  Now, near 8 years later, in my current TDR documents  Commissioner Bahrke gets thins plain wrong and misinterpreted at best.  {All the while I’m desperate to rest, have peace and not worry about more and or serious, continued, etc.. intrusions. (details in my reply paragraphs two and full circle exhibits).

  • Commissioner recognizes my concern is, Mr. Funk Violates my sense of security, tranquility and rehabilitation.  Why are Jeffrey’s actions of almost hitting me, down played and my actions which are not severe toward Jeffrey & girlfriend addressed so seriously?

  • False, there (again) never any e-mails as Commissioner wrote twice on page 4 (once on page 1, 5, 6, 12,15, 18, 19 and three times on page 14 ) in Rulings. In addition Commissioner wrote about emails in the Ruling for TDR #670 as well, when in fact there where never any emails nor complaints listed regarding emails.

 

Page 5 & Page 6: 

  • Commissioner writes two pages on old and least severe incidences that she found in my extra data/documents supplied from 2012.

  • Commissioner does not address the majority of Mr. Funk’s actual aggressive quotes to me regarding the Threats, Dares and Lies from Jeff Funk (detailed in my reply paragraph two, five, six and seven exhibits).

  • In Commissioners Bahrke’s Ruling, she writes I was prowling; this particularly is not sitting well, because it is an isolated incident and has been proven different numerous times (detailed in my reply paragraph four exhibit and in pro per in Court).  I would have avoided his address had I had knowledge, however he lied to me on three specific occasions I specifically asked (approx 8 months prior to accident/incident).

    • See above and details in  my reply paragraph two, four, five and full circle exhibits).

  • As mentioned above this incident was an accident, could have been prevented by Jeff Funk himself, and to which he himself recognized this and called the police off.  There was no prowling. There was not even a police report- let alone a crime, conviction or need to instate a Permanent consequence on me.—

  • Commissioner takes all Witness Declarations as truth and did not accept any of my reply’s to Mr. Funk’s Witness Declarations. 

  • Lastly the terminology is disturbing because the Original Reason, I have ever needed the Courts/ Bahrke was established after from a roll of hard times (14 years ago) after needing civil help in the law and not knowing anything about it, all the while needing to just simply heal (period) immediately and years post from a Violent Assault on myself from a convicted Criminal of 28 years, and that criminal was indeed “prowling”. 

In summery- I have serious Protective Rights Concerns. 

  • I have in the past, unbeknownst been the intragul reason that initiated and commenced to take two major Criminals off the Streets.   One was convicted and sentenced for 28 years for a violent assault on my person and we are 14 years into ((how we know of each others name).  David Reber, myself have a mutual friend &/or colleague Alan Smith, Esq. (Reynolds vs Swedelius), stays he is available should we need him) (more details in my reply paragraph two and full circle exhibits).   In current day, In efforts to get away from Jeffrey Funk, I was establishing a move to Hawaii & my truck was stolen/embezzled; later, we (Srgt., Giovannini & San Diego Auto Theft Task Force) captured one of Americas Most Wanted in Grand Theft Auto and I still am awaiting information on my Damages being attached in that his restitution (details in my reply paragraph three exhibit).  I’m not sure what the future holds, but I do know I don’t need any more unnecessary trouble (more details in my reply In Short and paragraph one exhibits)!!! 

 

Page (last ¼  of- 6) &  all of 7: 

  • Commissioner again writes about e-mail’s sent, however there was never an email sent or complained about.  My correspondences were texts, non threatening texts.

  • Commissioner Bahrke is repeating data, as she is discussing the isolated incident and the text messages between myself and Jeffrey Funk when I’m asking his location in 2013.  

    • This text correspondence was upon returning from a long stent of being gone from my residence; necessitated in order to continue rest and healing and specifically be far far away from Jeffrey Funk and Carin Broughton while they decided to live on my street.   When she finally moved away, ironically similar time frame I came back from Hawaii and I asked where he moved, so we could avoid each other.

  • Commissioner dismisses and misinterprets and in fact still uses this information against me in the Ruling for TDR #670, even though I stated the facts in Court and my reply paragraph four exhibit, where I detail Mr. Funk specifically lied to me on these three text correspondences.  Jeff Funk, himself called the police off,   however in page 8 of the Ruling….

 

 

 

Page 8: 

  • Commissioner misinterprets our conversation as seen above.

  • I did not interpret as the Commissioner stated, a purchase of a home on Loch Levon for being close &/or in a campaign to harass me!  What other information is there to support this?

  • My correspondences where (texts) to ask/know the exact location of my enemy, so we could make sure to avoid each other (period). 

  • Commissioner dismisses my facts Jeffrey lied on each response I received from Mr. Funk.  (detailed in my reply paragraph four exhibit).

  • Commissioner wrote, things appeared tranquil, and that reason is because they bullied me so much with their tireless actions, things eventually forced me to relate to the point- I left my home and started researching else where to go- just to be away from this extra circular trouble.

  • Commissioner spends time on unimportant and old (2013) festival topics. 

  • As referred above, Commissioner states comment about Mr. Funk’s girlfriends dog (old, unrelated and not sever) and wrote I brought a dog inside my RV (festival 2013).  

    • FOR THE RECORD—NEVER EVER- was there a DOG INSIDE my RV, nor was this a part of my TDR CONCERNS AND PROTECTION ORDER, let alone a problem.

  • The content on this Ruling page 8 is also not true, regarding myself and Ms. Broughton, we did not have that conversation simply because her dog was never inside my RV.

    •  - if Commissioner Bahrke, went thru that data/paperwork, she failed to discuss Carin’s negligence of her dog caring skills (to which I think, is Carin’s profession).

 

Page 9: 

  • Line 1-3, page 9, the Commissioner Bahrke writes about the old (2012) situation of violated sense of security, tranquility and rehabilitation when she down played a friend who was really a new girlfriend at the time, several houses down (detailed in my reply paragraph two exhibit).

  • Line 4- 9, page 9, When in fact is, my main point of the reason why we are in Court for a Restraining Order TDR #666, is the house of a ‘new’ neighbor and Jeff’s closets friend, which is immediately next door, not several down.

  • This ‘new’ neighbor who moved in a rental house immediately across from me and in my main visual view & audio parameters, claims to be Mr. Funk’s closest friend.

    •  (detailed in my reply paragraph six, full circle and seven exhibits).

  •  Upon Jeffrey visiting his” friend” and friends there is routinely trouble. 

  • Line 4-9, page 9 the most sever and recent altercations was when Jeffrey Funk was visiting this new neighbor (as seen above) while enjoying my own outside yard an argument started, Jeff got enraged as I took pictures of the event and when I turned off the camera is when he lunged toward me as he swung his fist at me.   That was when I recognized how desperate things were becoming; I filed for a TDR (#666) and are not competently discussed)(detailed in my reply paragraph seven exhibit).  As is the reason I submitted many pictures (and am now seeking Appellate relief; as I have been additionally ridiculed and suffering permanent consequence for my extra data/documents I supplied to reply to Mr. Funk’s TDR #670 as seen also page 2 in Ruling.

    • page 15, lines 7 – 20 in the Rulings, Commissioner retypes a (rare) text of girls Mr. Funk’s current girlfriend Witness Carin Broughton and myself (extremely rare correspondences as we bicker) [{(and now Restraining Order Granted)}],

      • I had nothing to hide, fore I submitted this data/correspondence/paperwork.

      • Carin Broughton only at the late date of 9/2/14, sends me a text, where she is establishing her knowledge of this serious situation between Jeff, she and myself by her admittance and standing ground/intimidation texts (that is not fear):

      • Line 10, page 15 in Ruling, Commissioner wrote that Carin Broughton wrote, “The friends across the street….”

      • Line 19. page 15 in Ruling, Commissioner wrote that  Carin Broughton wrote, “This has gone on too long and it’s time for everyone involved to let go and move on.”  {Carin uses- sounds like key witness Ryan Simpson}

      •   Line 14, page 15 in Ruling, Commissioner wrote that  Carin Broughton wrote, “We (Jeff & Carin) come over to visit them.” Aren’t they scared of me- (being across the street and all)?

      • Line 14- 15, page 15 in Ruling, Commissioner wrote that  Carin Broughton wrote, “It’s truly not meant to invade your private space.”

      • I have hard documents of inappropriate behaviors and threats from Jeffrey Funk & Carin Broughton since 2012.

  • Line 10, page 9, Commissioner goes back to a totally different and an old (5/18/14) unrelated, non sever topic I discussed in Court (and in my reply to paragraph three exhibit) that Jeffrey Funk’s dates are inconsistent with all of his elective witnesses, (along with much more facts, as she also concludes her paragraph to read as if the recent assault (9/2/14) was included with this old (5/18/14) story and different location (several houses down) as the recent physical assault 9/2/14 was while Mr. Funk was visiting the immediate neighbors/across the street.

  • Line 15 - 16, page 9, Commissioner is Plain wrong--- Bahrke, wrote in the conclusion of the paragraph described above re old date (5/18/14) “ Upon my last encounter near my established residence his threats escalated to physical”.   However this is PLAIN WRONG as stated in my original TDR #666 filing and all throughout (specifically my reply paragraph seven exhibit) was on 9/2/14 was the last encounter near my established residence his threats escalated to physical violence which Commissioner Bahrke has completely ignored.

  • Line 10 -20, page 9, Commissioner disregards the significant discrepancies I pointed out in Court in addition supplied in paperwork, that I found down the board with Respondent Jeffrey Funk and  his Witness Declarations (along with much more facts in my reply to paragraph three exhibit).

  • Line 10, page 9 Commissioner covers herself by briefing on the May 18th date and in The Ruling writes as if, Jeff’s witness statements are taken as total truth, even though all the dates of the Declarations are inconsistent with Jeffrey Funk’s and Rules as if the old date (May 18th 2014) and house address (290 Park Lane) was same as current topic (September 2nd 2014 at 205-207 Park Lane).

  • Page 2 in The Rulings, Commissioner Bahrke rejected my witnesses.

  • Then In Court  Bahrke, did not accept/allowed to me to show/turn in my reply to Witness Declarations and the discrepancies with Jeff’s Witnesses where I have established from the Witnesses (most specifically Mr. Jeffry Baird Funk’s)  I will establish, slight of story, embellishing, lies, bullying, changing or getting away from subject, elective, inconsistencies,  disregard of civil attempts (from Mr. Funk and his friends/girlfriend, etc..), threats, prior knowledge, embezzle (- flip my real time/proven scenario’s on to his claims), party regulars, righteous, hostile &/or irrational judgment and maybe more….

    • To place these witnesses and whom they are to Mr. Funk and Event:

    • Majority of witness statements primarily address a 5/18/14, (which was another elective visit to my residential area from Mr. Funk to a party venue) which has resulted in trouble.  Many witnesses where either not present, did not witness first part of the altercation and or slighted fact.

    • I’m glad he (they) electively brought these additional people and their issues to the table for discussion.

    • My one person named in my request for a restraining order, Ryan Simpson shows remorse and sense of disappointment. 

    • Where all of the other (elective and quick coming) witnesses’ Funk prepared are shown to be majority of unbeknownst &/or slighted story influence themselves.

      • I show the other witness have addressed a few of my concerns that I had and in my opinion help to substantiate my case throughout my reply paragraph exhibits particularly paragraph two, three, six and seven.

    •  In my opinion eight of Funk’s nine witnesses are to be considered party friends with a social agenda (&/or some of to which just moved here, under is influence  His “friends” will help to me show my interpretation of Jeffrey Funk’s excuses and their abuses. (defiantly not anyone of any established authority, ie Sheriff, etc…  as I show  different)--Commissioner Bahrke listened to my oral description of witnesses, and is additionally written through out my reply exhibits:

    •  Deputy McCleary (2000 -2012) re: partner to officer on my Violent Assault Bealor case from year 2000 & then idol trespassing threat from Mr. Funk.   As seen below and detailed in my reply paragraph two and seven exhibits

    • Sergeant Giovannini (2013- current) re: all information re his deputies and (nonrelated but lightly intermixed heroic story- we caught one of America’s Most Wanted Grand Theft Auto) while I was awaiting the truck to continue my efforts to flee from Mr. Funk & Ms. Broughton 2013. As seen below and detailed in my reply paragraph three exhibit

    • Deputy Lade (2014) accident/innocent report, from night I took a picture of license plate. As seen below and detailed in my reply paragraph four exhibit.

    • and Sheriff Gary (2012- current). Yet Commissioner Bahrke never commented. 

      • Commissioner Bahrke never discussed my Witnesses: Deputy McCleary (2012), Sergeant Giovannini (2013- current), Deputy Lade (2014) and Sheriff Gary (2012- current) in my reply to paragraph two, three, four and seven exhibits.

      • Commissioner Bahrke never discussed my duress and harm directly related to Mr. Funk (sister) Stacia and (girlfriend) Carin that led me to enroll into EMDR Therapy with Polly M Ryan, Therapist CA providing counseling for PTSD  (violent assault case (sleep/depression/anxiety/social trauma, etc..) combined with Mr. Funk & Ms. Broughton have knowledge how to trigger and onset trouble and much more (details in my reply paragraph two exhibit, reply to Witness Carin’s Declaration and throughout). 

  • Line 10 -28, page 9, Commissioner recognizes there is a problem (first part of slighted story)- giving data/paperwork merit, however…

  • Commissioner interprets the second half of the story and my paperwork incompetently.

    • Example: the dates were wrong across the board, and it was a Son- not a daughter (further there was no screaming and foul language) as I addressed these wrong dates and Son not a Daughter, did not screamed foul language or drive fast in Court (and in my reply to paragraph three exhibit). 

 

Page 10: 

  • Commissioner Bahrke inappropriately inter-mixes two different stories as seen below.

  • Line 1- 5,  page 9 in the Ruling, Commissioner continues to discusses old (5/18/14) Incident as seen above and covered in detail in my reply paragraph three exhibit.

​

  • All throughout The Ruling, Jeff’s witness statements and takes them as truth, even though many facts and information, including and not limited to the dates of the incident is wrong {down the board with Respondent (along with much more fact)} in more than one of Jeff’s witness statements.).  

    • In Court and page 2 of the Ruling, I am rejected throughout Rulings to show my discrepancies with Jeff Funk’s witness declarations as also I tried to give my Reply to Witnesses Declarations exhibits and those were denied in Court. 

    • Commissioner failed to mention, my police and other strong witness figures I discussed both in Court and in my documents, all to which Mr. Funk never objected.

      •  I have established Violence, Bullying, Slight of Story, Fabrications, Lies, Etc…

    • Jeffrey Funk brought in Nine (9) witness declarations– Six (6) of which are regarding an old issue (5/18/14), all of which dates where not consistent with Jeffrey Funk who wrote April 28th, 2014 (and more) and additional two (2) witnesses who were not even present (girlfriend Carin Broughton & wife Morgan Vilkin) nor did they care to be bothered nor care to address me at the current time of issue.   

    • Instead thought-out/unbeknownst to Jeffrey Funk he has now involved near every (rental/party house occupant)/neighbor (six (five renters plus one owner) than mentioned above) Witness’ are neighbors (of mine)) for his quick to jump, defensive, slighted story, non-sever, inconsistent statements of an old event (5/18/14) including filings TDR# 670 and Witness Declaration, in which there are flaws and inconsistencies.  (detailed in my reply paragraph three exhibit).  

    • Jeffrey’s elective witnesses are all mainly bully friends of his, which led to now having more unnecessary contention and with random temporary neighbors (rental residences), two of which are new and immediately next/across from me.

    • Where does Commissioner Bahrke discuss my real hard concerns? `` Instead I feel critiqued about  one small claim quiet enjoyment, where’s my deep concern, Jeff has served time for Anger Management, Etc…. Jeff successfully thus far has, six Witnesses he collected from my residential street, who reside in the only few rental/temporary/party homes, thus continues give Jeff reason to be boisterous, which is extreme difference between just please stay 50 yards from my residence.

    • In the (unaccepted replies to) Declarations, I am able to show Slight of Story, Severity, Lies, Bullying (one witness Graham Vilkin discusses a gun/ another girlfriend Carin Broughton is a known to be a Columbine Colorado contemporary (high school shooting)… (detailed in my reply to paragraph three exhibit (and in replies to each individual Witness Declaration but Commissioner would not accept that exhibit).  The Witnesses (and now further socially (see also example text exhibits A-K Jeffrey Funk -> David Swedelius), see from this case the victory and the major conclusion, my civil request for privacy and protection is recognized, belittled and negated (see random data found in The Ruling page 16 line 15 re: text exhibit from Carin Broughton -> Jessica Swedelius).  I feel, I’ve needed to take a more protective living stance (please stay away from me & my home 50 yards) than before.  I came to the Court for help--- I got just the opposite.

  • Line 7- 14, page 9, in the Ruling Commissioner continues to introduce current (9/2/14) Incident as detailed in my reply paragraph seven exhibit but then DOES NOT complete the discussion.

  • Line 15- 28, page 9 in the Ruling, Commissioner continues to discusses old (5/18/14) Incident as seen above and covered in detail in my reply paragraph three exhibit.

    • I even show the incident was not important to Witnesses at the relevant time.

    • Mr. Jeffrey Funk and/or Ms. Carin Broughton did not object to any of my Witness descriptions nor other TDR pages  and/or my reply exhibits. 

    • Hearing for TDR #666 set  for 10/10/14. 

    • Since, Jeff served me a TDR # 670 on that Hearing date 10/10/14 with the exact same paperwork for his reply and filing TRD#670, which made a reschedule for 10/31/14. 

    • I had been pushing from 10/10/14 to 10/31/14 with due diligence to get my reply to his paperwork prepared, since he filed the exact same paperwork for both cases.

    •  I felt it was imperative to have those specific topics  he and his witnesses wrote about addressed.

      •  Especially since Jeff convoluted my TDR with duplicate paperwork as he filed in his TDR 670.

      • And for the growing concern of this passive aggressive person and his friends are not subsiding but initiating and or threatening.

 

 

Page 11: 

  • Commissioner retypes old unrelated topic from 5/18/14, (detail in my reply paragraph three exhibit) where she recognizes there were problems, (this is my residential area).

  • Commissioner retypes old unrelated topic from 5/18/14, (detail in my reply paragraph three exhibit)  where she recognizes there  were problems, and I tried to resolve them with two of the Witnesses Jeffrey elected, even at that relevant time both of those witnesses felt there was no importance  and saw no reason to get involved. 

 

Page 12: 

  • 1st paragraph page 10, in the Ruling, Commissioner continues to discusses old Incident 5/18/14 as seen above and covered in detail in my reply paragraph three exhibit.

  • In The Ruling, the Commissioner accepts Jeff’s witness statements and takes them as truth, I even show the witness were not concerned nor showed no reason to get involved.

  • There was never any e-mail’s, as Commissioner continues to write in her Rulings.

  • Jeffrey Funk never objected to my TDR #0000666 listed altercations nor my reply exhibits.

  • Commissioner has her information wrong, her comment of where Jeff used to live- does not apply/even make sense- (details in my reply paragraph four exhibit).

    • From the Commissioner’s comments lead me to believe, The Commissioner misinterpreted the point that the topic for a restraining order is fear, concern, harm, etc… and we are so far off point is the reason why I am in your office seeking appellate relief.

  • Commissioner wrote reason is unclear to court why I took pictures; this is an insult due to fact that professionals, peers and Police Personnel have all recommended taking pictures (especially when I suspect things are wrong, problematic, estranged, harmful, odd, contentious, etc….).

  • There was no prowling (this does not sit well as seen in cliff notes/ this document regarding pages 5 & 6 of these Rulings).  A small random fact  was I was required  to be in white clothing from attending a “white wedding/billy idol theme” – describes polar opposite of the profile of being a “prowler”- also Commissioner’s profile of me doesn’t make sense to  me to “prowl” for a picture(?).

  • The police where specifically called off by Respondent Jeffrey Funk himself.

  • This accident could have been prevented, had Jeffrey Funk not lied to me on three specific, documented occasions, (and he recognized that himself, that is the reason he called off the police) there was no prowling, no harm, no police report, no conviction; all which was discussed in Court in addition to supplying data/paperwork/exhibits and that the Commissioner plainly disregards.   

  • Commissioner Bahrke named the terminology of “prowling” in the Ruling for TDR 670— and her terminology does not sit well with me as described above in this document pages 5. 6, 9 and 12).  Why did she Rule for a Protective Order on prowling with only an incident report which is not even prosecuted upon?  And dropped by Jeff Funk himself.

    • I find this extreme punishment that Commissioner inflicts on me as to grant a Permanent Restraining Order for something not even deemed worthy of a police report, let alone a conviction is inconsistent, exaggerated, extreme, sever and unwarranted.  Example, Commissioner was hung up on thought of midnight or after and she exaggerated wrote 1AM.  She wrote I said suddenly saw a bear- and suddenly realized in-front of Mr. Funk’s house (that is exaggerated, there was no suddenly about my scenario- (detailed in my reply paragraph four exhibit). 

      • In the Ruling, she wrote I became very emotional, which stemmed primarily from being present in front of Commissioner Bahrke due to many years of past bad cases rulings and anxiety while I need to rest/heal instead of being in-front of Bahrke.

 

Page 13: 

  • Lines 1-7 page 13, Commissioner recognizes my fear & concern at the recent music festival I listed in my TDR however, lines 8, she negates my concerns and fears by stating I did not have Witness Declarations. 

    • As  seen above:

      • Commissioner in page 2 of the Ruling for TDR #666 ridicules my statements of my Witnesses as she terms as Unknown People, however Jeffrey Funk did not object to any of my data/paperwork/exhibits/documents.

      • I had very different quality control level of witnesses than Funk brought (as seen above) Deputy McCleary and Polly M Ryan both found reason to term Jeff Funk is a narcissist agreeing that is not good behavior and it is not appropriate for him to come near me.   Polly M Ryan (2013), EMDR Therapist treated me for being abused by a narcissist and a sociopath and it is not good for him to be near me. My mother, Brother, Sergeant Giovannini, Sheriff Gary (2012 – to current day for idol trespassing threat & current day update/ he suggested I take pictures) , Deputy Lade (6/15/14 non-prowling, accident/incident) , Deputy Mc Cleary(2012) idol trespassing threat from Mr. Funk, My Aerial Team/Crew, Management and Producer (August – September 2014) of festival and more…(see above and detailed in my reply paragraph two exhibit). 

      • Commissioner Bahrke herself wrote in page 3 of The Ruling, that the Court could not separate the TDR matters because they both relate to the same situation but from their own perspectives--- My fact is that the Producers and Main Coordinator were aware of the altercations surrounding this event and we all thought that we addressed Mr. Funk’s inappropriate behavior early on and that there would be no more problems.   In addition he himself heard the Main Producer tell me he wanted and welcomed me to stay. Furthermore, I am the Main Aerial Coordinator and my aerial crew was sharing same tent zoned area where we had set a meeting.   Why Mr. Funk thought he had territory rights to all...(ie., the campground (at the this once a year event vs my current topic my residential area)). (detail reply paragraph six exhibit.)

  • A specific (key) Witness I did list in original TDR #666 papers Ryan Simpson (is also described in detail reply paragraph six exhibit.), did fill out a Declaration; I just did not submit it. 

  • Oddly, Jeff did before he served me with a TDR#670 at the Court (10/10/14) at the time of the first and original hearings for TDR #666. 

  • I did not think I needed another Declaration from Witness Ryan Simpson at that time since there was current 100 yards Temp Restraining Order Signed Granted and upgraded signed by Commissioner Bahrke upgrading my original TDR # 666 for 50 yards stay away request.

  • Furthermore, I thought Witness Ryan Simpson’s Declaration was extremely helpful in my TDR #666 case.

  • Most important, because of the fact Jeffrey never objected to my Witness, I did think it was necessary to bring them. 

    • Nor was there proper time.  I was working with due diligence just to sort the Mr. Funk’s and his Witness variations of their stories  and stay healthy thru the process before our next hearing was set (10/31/14)  (details in my reply Request for Help, In Short and Full Circle exhibits).  In page 2 of Ruling the Commissioner states my information is too confusing, she points out my lack of legal forum/ knowledge; I didn’t know I needed to have all that knowledge to ask for request for restraining order/protection.

    • Jeffrey Funk brought in Nine (9) witness declarations– as seen above.

    • Witnesses are neighbors (of mine)) that Mr. Funk’s used for a quick to jump, defensive, slighted story, non-sever, inconsistent statements in the Witness Declarations, which I have found to be flawed and inconsistent and wrote in my reply but was unaccepted.     

    • Commissioner discusses random statements from Jeff’s Witness’ declarations as truth and they are not (detailed in my reply paragraph six exhibit). 

  • Commissioner disregards that my Aerial Team was in the exact same tent camping space/allotted area for crew which we all were, at this intimate camping music festival.   In addition to which no one mentioned throughout is the proprietor of any camping sites In addition the Management, Producers and more wanted, welcomed and counted on me to do my job safe, well and have fun. (detailed in my reply paragraph six exhibit).

  • Line 16, page 13 in The Ruling Commissioner starts to introduces a key Witness Ryan Simpson, that I listed on my original TDR 666 and Jeffrey Funk contacted and had him fill out a declaration first for Jeff’s TDR 670.  I think his Declaration helped my case TDR 666! As I will delineate:-

  • Line 17, page 13 Commissioner wrote, “Ryan Simpson, who knows both parties…. recognizes that we all have prior knowledge of each other (ie.,  small town dynamics), 

    • Reminder* The reason why we are in court, it is not ok for Mr. Funk  to raise his fist at anger and swing it toward me (or any one else for that matter as this witness, friend and contender- Ryan Simpson has experience himself with Mr. Funk re: jail, fist fights, etc…in previous years).

    • Mr. Jeff Funk poses a threat and numerous problems  to me- when he is near me.  At this event I  discussed specifically with Ryan earlier in that day that Jeff needs to simmer down.

    • Above is detailed in my reply paragraph six exhibit.

  • Commissioner Bahrke delicately turns key Witness Ryan Simpsons statements to the opposite of what he wrote in his Declaration then in the end of paragraph re: Ryan her rulings are a misquote!

  • Line 18, page 13 Commissioner downplays (flavoring no severity) my real quote  - The quote is “quite upset” as she wrote I am “just upset”.  See below line 25, page 18 Commissioner quoted “extremely upset” that’s a wide variation and not the words used in key witness declaration, where she up-plays the Ruling.

  • Line 18, page 13 She wrote, “And that it is a shame things have come to this” from Mr. Ryan Simpson’s Declaration, Sentence Nine- I Agree with Ryan Simpson, A shame it has come to this, as he is showing recognition that there has been known trouble in the past ((details in my reply paragraph six exhibit) and my reply to individual  Witness Declarations that where not accepted by the Commissioner) . 

  • Commissioner Plainly misinterprets Witness Ryan Simpson’s Declaration!!!—this is extremely profound to me because of the above reference notions that Commissioner disregards imperative pieces, misinterprets, and moves time periods or sentence structure & flip flops yet another scenario, which leads directly for unjust rulings.

  • Line 21, page 13 Commissioner’s Ruling is False—she wrote the reverse, “She (I) would not let go”.    

    • The simple fact is I have been trying for years, but Jeffrey Funk (and girlfriend) threaten, dare and intentionally without regard/good reason continually come near me.  It is Jeffrey who can not let things go. Ryan Simpson states in his declaration that Jeffrey Funk would not let the issue go--- (this substantiates my whole case, Jeffrey Funk is the aggressor and has hostile actions which even his friends/witnesses try to get him  to let things go and he can not ‘ let things go’ as in witness Simpson’s declaration. 

    • For details see Witness Ryan Simpson Declaration, Text Message Exhibit A-K Jeffrey Funk -> David Swedelius and my reply paragraph six exhibit), and as  seen below

  • Fact is Commissioner Bahrke wrote on line 21 page 13,  quoted key Witness facts absolutely opposite and incorrect; Sentence five in Witness Ryan Simpson declaration continues … as Jeff insisted Jessica leave/go and would not let it go or even allow her to stay even though I (Ryan) personally asked.

    • Note*  (As I discussed above it’s not about campsite lines, it was about showing he and girlfriend think irrationally with hostile attitude, judgment, inconsistencies, embellishments or already proven null issues

    • [he can’t let go}), he & she will inappropriately fight for territory.

  • line 21 and 22, page 13 Commissioner is flat wrong.   Ryan Simpson did not ask me to leave the campsite.  

  • In fact, Sentence five of Ryan Simpson declaration asked Jeff to stop and have me stay. Witness Ryan Simpson wrote… “as Jeff insisted Jessica leave/go and would not let it go or even allow her to stay even though I  personally asked”.

  • In fact, Ryan Simpson acted as my strong arm and in essence body guard against his friend/contender Jeff Funk.

    • I was shocked, threatened, scared, upset and more from the verbal attack Mr. Funk assaulted me with just days earlier (7/31/14), which forced me to retaliate- leave the festival grounds/camp/my aerial work and go to “my safe place/home” July 31, August 1 & 2 2014,  - (to  again later where Mr. Funk wound up  verbally leading to physically assaulting me (outside of my home while ‘visiting’ neighbors (seven additional times through the rest of August 2014 since he yelled/insisted/threatened at me to “go away”) until current and related (9/2/14) reasons listed on TDR # 666.

  • line 21 and 22, page 13  the Commissioner rewrote, Witness Ryan’s sentence.  Commissioner Bahrke’s was full of typo’s and  up-plays  (flavoring  severity) the Ruling with not exact to declaration quote as seen above , she wrote,  “They (Jeff & Jessica did not get within five feet of each other, not extremely nasty works or true  insults were said as Jeff kept insisting Jessica leave, which she finally did after about five minutes, extremely upset. “ with good reasons:

    • I agree with witness declaration, sentence five --- we did not get within five feet because when Jeff did an about face and was irate, coming toward me arms out & moving; I stealth fully & swiftly I felt urge to move back a few feet from where I was the moment he advanced.   At that moment I held my arms up & out and exclaimed with anxious protective energy “and, here’s me ex!” as we (aerial team) scampered to get out of his rath.

    • I agree with witness Sentence Seven --- there was no nasty words (as in deep profanities however there was the repeated slanderous type comments about how he had to call the police, while not admitting that he called them off too. 

    • I agree with witness Ryan Simpson sentence seven—Jeff just insisted Jessica leave which she did after about 5 minutes, quite upset; and with good reason (see above & see throughout).

    • This is not exclusively “Mr. Funk’s camp” and Yes (left that tent-site).

IPage 14: 

  • Line 1-3, page 14 Commissioner spends time discussing that she finds it difficult to understand why Petitioner (me) would come to Respondent (Jeff Funk) campsite uninvited on two different occasions, If she had prior confrontations with Respondent where she feared for her personal safety.

  • The Fact was, my aerial Team (whom I am the main aerialist & coordinator) was in the exact same tent camping space/allotted area for crew which we all were, at this small camping music festival.

    •  Commissioner has claimed too confusing and flavors it’s hard to understand this information however as it has been given to her in many forms: in person and the details in my reply paragraph six and text exhibits.

    • I think it is It is ridiculous for anyone to suggest/allege there was proprietorship/territory rights amongst the music festival crew &/or patrons at this camping event, nor would I know where Mr. Funk was at all times...

  • Line 2, page 14  the Commissioner is plain False, she states I was uninvited on two different occasions! As seen above and in my reply to paragraph six exhibit; on the contrary I was wanted, welcomed, accompanied, expected, tended to, working with many and already discussed Mr. Funk’s prior inappropriate behavior with Producer and Jeff in addition myself to Management and Co-Founder. 

  • Fact is I missed work, and left the grounds days prior (for days) in seek of relief from Mr. Funk and his second outburst.  The third outburst being discussed is upon arrival where I was just wanted, welcomed, expected and ushered back full hearts/arms! (detailed in my reply paragraph six exhibit).

  • Line 1-3, page 14  shows the inconsistent reasoning’s in rulings.

  • As line 1- 3, page 14 Commissioner spends time discussing that she finds it difficult to understand why Petitioner (me) would come to Respondent (Jeff Funk) campsite uninvited on two different occasions, If she had prior confrontations with Respondent where she feared for her personal safety ((*btw campground is many times larger than my residential street).

  • However as read above- isn’t that exactly what TDR #670 is also impling? (ie., ot welcomed  

Jeffrey Funk coming to a place (house/or campsite) because he is welcomed by “friends” and he is not wanted/ invited or anything else by me on more than two occasions *btw, if he had a prior conformation with (respondent to TDR 670- (ie., me)) where he feared for his  (and girlfriend- Carin’s) safety (as they consistently and to current day are coming to my neighbors/ residential neighborhood continually)?????

  • Line 4, page 14 another False fact, even if slight written by Commissioner Bahrke, in her Rulings, there were no e-mails, EVER!.

  • In the last ¾ page- how can the Commissioner find time to retype random sections of bickering girls texting, however still calling correspondences emails.   I’m sorry where does Mr. Funk and girlfriend Carin feel feared(?).

 

Page 15: 

  • Line 2. page 15 Continuing from above the Commissioner, she again writes the word email,  although there were never e-mail’s. 

  • Line 3- 29 page 15 Commissioner, Commissioner retypes an incomplete version of a text correspondences (from girls(rare)) bickering.  And “If” (see page 19 line 1-2 of Ruling) these texts are the worst thing – where is the fear of violence?

    • Why does Commissioner Bahrke complain about my data/paperwork being too confusing yet, she can sure pick out Respondents correspondence throughout the 19 pages of Ruling

    • Why does Commissioner Bahrke complain about my data/paperwork being too confusing yet, she does not discuss my concerns Jeff swinging his fist at my face in anger. My concern need and for legal protection, my concerns re: proven convicted criminals and furthering my concern for legal consequences, all combining with concerns about my health, family, well being, social, work and more is being compromised etc…

    • This in actuality is showing my level of patience turning to frustration thru the years..

    • I am able to show there are consistent, negative situations directly related to altercations when Jeffrey Funk comes too near me and has had many altercations he created/advanced in my neighborhood.

    • I am showing Above And Beyond Material how my wellbeing, privacy,  levels of anxiety, fear of intimidation and right to quiet enjoyment and much more has been effected and compromised) has been Breached by Jeffrey Funk (and entourage).

    • detailed through and my reply paragraph two, five, six, seven, full circle, in short and text exhibits.

  • Line 7 – 20 page 15 the Commissioner continues to retype (a rare) text of girls who is Mr. Funk’s current girlfriend Witness Carin Broughton and myself.   

    • As seen above – (and Declarations, my reply paragraph seven and text messages exhibits)

Page 15, 16 & 17: 

  • Commissioner stated in page 2 of The Ruling my information is too confusing however… 

  • Commissioner clearly writes 19 pages to critique me, my grammar, my lack of legal forum/ knowledge, my data/paperwork/exhibits/Above and Beyond Fact Material regarding many old dates and unrelated altercations I am simply replying to since Mr. Funk chose to bring up. 

  • Commissioner seems to simply retype random few line items of bicker with many typo’s to cover broad topics however all the while showing there is underlying merit. 

  • Commissioner spends a page and ½ on Airblower Guy—and doesn’t competently address my number one concern Jeffrey Funk swung his fist at me in Anger. Or that my health and well being is being comprised, my loved ones are concerned, I have legal protection concerns, etc…

Page 18: 

  • Commissioner spent her time on 19 pages of incompetent Rulings and did not cover my issues and then insults me by saying…

  • Line 1-2, page 18 Commissioner Bahrke wrote, “The Court does not believe that Petitioner is truly bothered by anyone interfering with her peace…”

    • Jeffrey Funk has specifically threatened me on more than on occasion since 2009 and documented since 2012 as detailed throughout and specifically in my reply paragraph two, five, seven and Witness Carin Broughtons Declaration. 

    •  Line 14- 15, page 15 in Ruling, Commissioner retypes Carins admittance text from 9/2/14,

      • “It’s truly not meant to invade your private space.”

    • Jeffrey Funk verbally attacked and physically threatens me,

      • details in my TDR #666 and in my reply paragraphs six and seven exhibits.

    • Regarding Protective Order Grantee Carin Broughton who wasn’t even present at any of the Hearings

    • Nor was Carin present at most sever and or current altercations,

    •  I establish from her Declaration from day of learning who I was, Mr. Funk and his (entourage) was teaching Ms. Broughton inappropriate behaviors regarding the social treatment toward me,

    •  Line 18-21, page 4 Commissioner gives merit, as she began to discuss,

      • “Petitioner (me) states, “Funk has taught his girlfriend & others to not have regard or moral interest for me.  This is elective behavior of Jeffrey Funk to ever need come to my street. This has been my established place of residence of near two decades.  Mr. Funk violates my sense of security, tranquility and rehabilitation.”  

 

  • Line 2-3, page 18 Commissioner Bahrke,  negates information and continues”… however, the evidence presented to this Court, reveals that it is the Petitioner (me) who cannot let go of her dead relationship with Respondent.” 

    • He comes near, see all throughout and to current date.

    • What does the Commissioner imply-- And so what, if I had cared once, now or ever; that shows care not harm.

      • A few pictures the Commissioner rudely distracts the readers on in page 2 of the Rulings, was an (above and beyond) example regarding a man & girl fishing, happens to be current day and a nice gentleman I am interested in compounded by showing care for other(s) than “Mr.Funk”  (ie., this man, my family, my aerial team, my work, etc…).

    • What more does the Commissioner need to grant a TDR?

  • Line  3-4 page 18, I am not seeking an apology or admittance; I was seeking 50 yards of a Protection Order to Stay Away from Me and my established Home/is also place of business.

  • Line 5-7, page 18. Commissioner Bahrke completely missed the content of the paperwork that she complained about in page 2; I have not been the instigator in these Events.

    • In fact the very contact between the two parties the proximity and underlying conflict issues  and almost every time Jeffrey Funk is near and most commonly in my residential area

    •  (this is not orchestrated &/or created by me as see throughout my exhibits).

  • Line 10-15, page 18 the Commissioner discusses constraints and orders put on me re: Respondent Jeffrey Funk and girlfriend Carin Broughton (who was not even present at any of the hearings).

  • Line 10-15, page 18 Commissioner discusses Respondent Jeffrey Funk’s and girlfriend Carin Broughton’s legal Rights but not mine.

  • Line 20- 28, page 18 into line 1-4 page 19 Commissioner ridicules me as she is in  the conclusion paragraphs of her Rulings.

    • line 15 page 18,  am not ok with what she is saying to me- stop taking pictures.

    • As I have been prompted, asked and affirmed to by peers, police, paralegal, and more to log events, including and not limited to taking pictures.

Page 19: 

  • Line 5-7 page 19, Commissioner Bahrke, wrote, “It is clear to the Court, that if Petitioner (me) wants Respondent to leave her alone she shall cease and desist from contacting him.”

  • Line 5-7, page 19, The Commissioner’s critiques my grammer &/or paperwork  but she is the professional I am seeking relief and a protective order and her Grammer in her Ruling (see above) does not make sense, to me,

    •  (see above) to use the word “if” is very unclear choice of words for finding reason for a  Permanent Restraining Order

      • How is the Commissioner interpreting this: “if” I do or “If” I don’t do something, (as in civilly correspond) that is Bahrke’s reasonings to Justify a Permanent Restraining Order-- as to say “if, I don’t leave him alone it’s ok for him to “Swing his Fist at me and do what he wants”(???).

      • Commissioner Bahrke’s paperwork is Very confusing!!!!

  • Line 5-7, page 19, The commissioner’s Ruling (see above) does not make sense or does it Justify a Permanent Restraining Order, lastly  because of plausible Civil Attempt Text messages and there “if”.

  • Line 7-8, page 19, Commissioner Bahrke wrote, “Respondent (Funk) has ignored her texts and confrontations, but Petitioner continues to instigate contact with Respondent and Carin.

    • In page summary:

    • I had nothing to hide, fore I submitted this data/correspondence/paperwork; to me Carin Broughton is establishing her admittance.

    • I am showing Above And Beyond Material how my wellbeing, privacy, levels of anxiety, fear of intimidation and right to quiet enjoyment and much more has been effected and compromised by Jeffrey Funk (and entourage).

    • Line 7 – 20 page 15, Commissioner retypes (a rare) text of girls Mr. Funk’s current girlfriend Witness Carin Broughton and myself (extremely rare correspondences as we bicker) [{(and now Restraining Order Granted)}],

  • Line 8, page 19 Commissioner yet again in her Ruling discusses alleged argument about email, but here never where emails, nor complaints of emails.

  • Line 8- 10, page 19 Commissioner wrote, “Each email (see above) submitted by Petitioner (me) and physical confrontation between Petitioner (5’2”- me), Respondent (6’4” Mr. Funk) and (6’- Carin) has been instigated by Petitioner, which is untrue.

    • This TDR was a Request to the Court for Protective help for myself and my Rightful Safe Place to Go. This TDR was about me and my Home. 

  • Line 12, page 19 Commissioner Bahrke wrote, “Petitioner’s (my) request for a Permanent Restraining Order is denied.

    • Commissioner clearly stated the Respondents (Funk & Broughton’s) needs are more than mine by the point of Granting a Permanent Restraining Order against me- with two Parties attached Jeffrey Funk and girlfriend Carin Broughton. 

    • In my opinion, the Ruling is full of wrong, mute and/or incompetent discussions. Most bizarre is the Commissioner basically stating, I care too much/ example, supposedly putting a dog “inside’ an RV at a music festival in 2013 and which is an example of a mute point &/or with untrue facts.

    • Commissioner negates my needs.  Negates my key Witness. Negates my reply exhibits. To the Point of Dissolving my Protective Order requested on a Bully of an ex-boyfriend  who has been in jail for Anger Management and has prior knowledge to me and my home.  Never acknowledging my real hard concerns of Jeff’s violent nature as listed in my original TDR #666 Filing, my reply Request for Help and my reply In Short exhibits.

    •  Furthermore Jeffrey Funk insists he needs a TDR #670 but regularly and to current day frequents my immediate neighbors home.  Jeffrey Funk and company need pass by my home each time they go in & out of this small bottle neck (one way in/out residential street).   How is that in Fear?  {Why does he continually insist to come this way (to the severity of serving me with a TDR)- why doesn’t he respect the situation and go to his own home to avid supposed confrontation?} This opposite theory goes hand in hand with her Rulings on page 14 lines 1-3.

-------

The Ruling for TDR #0000666 was 19 pages concluding that Ms. Jessica Swedelius was not Granted a Permanent Restraining Order against Mr. Funk

(and after discovery (evidence to prove Bully, etc..) request to add Carin Broughton).

 

 

The Ruling for TDR #0000670 was two pages concluding that Mr.  Jeffrey Funk and (girlfriend) Ms. Carin Broughton was Granted a Permanent Restraining Order against Jessica Swedelius.

 (Carin wasn’t even at any of the altercations between myself and Mr. Funk.  Carin Broughton was not at either of the Hearings.  Mr. Funk and Carin Broughton did not object to witnesses and/or other information.  There was no prowling!!!  Where is their fear?  Where do they show real concern &/or I’m violent)?   Mr. Funk and Ms, Broughton still come near (see her admittance text 9/2/14- and Mr. Funk’s questionings “can he still come to the neighbors”?  Jeff and Carin’s last log when they came next door was 12/7/14).

bottom of page