Inquiry USARK/Andrew Wyatt, What's the story?

[Ken Foose]

Should have read "I will always be grateful". I are dumb sometimes

 

[LauraB]

From Erika's 9-19-12 email to Brian Potter, Bob Ashley and Andrew Wyatt: (previously posted by
Dave Giltner)

As a matter of standard operating procedure, I did a public records search on Ken Foose. I do these all the time and usually never even discuss them with Wyatt. Foose's search turned up a number of criminal convictions. The record pulled was for Kenneth W. Foose, II, husband of Kimberly Foose, owner of Exotic Pets, birth date of 3/1959, both his home and business addresses listed, executive affiliation with Southern Nevada Herpetological Society. This *is* our Ken Foose, not his father.

The fact that Erika took it upon herself to run a criminal background check on Ken for no justifiable reason in and of itself is reprehensible. So she subscribes to Thomson Reuters Westlaw and did a very quick check of the Foose name, coming up with her "erroneous" report. She then claims to have had it "corrected" and sent an email to Ken confirming same.

I wonder, was it really just as easy as a simple email from her to have the info corrected? This from Thomson Reuters Westlaw website, http://store.westlaw.com/about/privacy/records.aspx

How does Thomson Reuters acquire public records and nonpublic information?
Thomson Reuters collects public records and non-public information from established sources in the government and private sectors. In most cases, this occurs under license agreement with those suppliers. The terms of use and information protection requirements within those agreements may be more stringent or limiting than requirements in applicable law.

Are the records from Thomson Reuters accurate?
We take reasonable steps to accurately reproduce data we receive from suppliers. However, sometimes this data may contain errors. While some data suppliers and government entities will entertain requests for changes from members of the general public, many will only acknowledge and consider requests for changes when they are submitted by resellers such as Thomson Reuters. Therefore, if you find an error on WestlawNext, Westlaw Classic, or CLEAR related to non-public information or public records concerning you, please send an email message to [email protected]. Based on the source of the data and the requirements of that particular vendor, we will notify you as to the documentation that you may need to submit in order to have the vendor consider making the change being requested. Please be aware that we have no options in terms of the copies of documentation that may be requested to commence the correction process for any particular error. The requirements are dictated by each supplier.

It's completely obvious that she did NOT attempt to further research or corraborate the information she'd found at Westlaw before she went to Andrew. She was instructed by Andrew not to discuss it with anyone, but based on HEARSAY from Justin Meitz, she then discusses it with Brian Potter and Meitz. She even goes to the extent of saying that this is "our Ken Foose, not his father". Unbelieveable!

Had she spent more time (like 10 minutes) actually searching public records, she could have easily assertained that the individual who is currently incarcerated is NOT "our" Ken Foose. Good grief, the correct photo is right there at the Nevada Dept. of Corrections!

"Our" Ken Foose certainly is not some phantom whose image can't be found and compared in a 90-second search on the web. I'd hate to think that advocates/activists the calibre of Andrew and Erika haven't actually watched "Elephant in the Room" or actually can't figure out that Ken Foose II couldn't possibly be in his 70's.

Again from her 9-19-12 email:

It is discoverable, and I am not the one who put it there

Yes, it is discoverable and was easily corroborated (in my own 10-minute search) that Ken Foose of Exotic Pets was NOT the individual Erika decided was guilty of multiple criminal convictions and a sex offender ... and then spread the word.

Now that Ken has posted, I will also add that a very quick search also provided certain addresses, phone numbers, names and ages and clearly do corroborate what Ken has stated - clearly Erika should have been able to glean the same conclusion had she not been overzealous and unprofessional. I can't help but wonder how her employers would view what appears to be unethical and unprofessional behavior. it doesn't speak well for that firm, frankly.

I would hope there will be considerable consequences for those involved in perpetuating such slander and libel.

 

[WebSlave]

And Rich, this was posted on the US Herp Alliance page by Kim Lucas' boy friend Danial. After Andrew had it deleted from face book, Daniel sent it to me.

Ken, we need a last name for this "Daniel". This is one of the reasons that I discourage cut and pastes from other websites. Most don't have the requirements of the BOI concerning ownership of the words they post via a REAL FULL NAME. So most of such posting is pretty much just hearsay and/or anonymous, because there is no penalty for posting in such a manner. Such postings in this sort of context are considered evidence by the people reading these threads, and they are using such evidence to make up their own minds about where the truth actually lies in a discussion that involves parties that might have different opinions about what actually is the truth. So when someone has THEIR name attached to their posted words, it is THEIR credibility on the line and THEIR words that are being scrutinized for truthfullness. Perhaps it is naive of me to believe that people still value their credibility, but I am running this BOI with the assumption (and hope) that MOST people still do.

So, a REAL FULL NAME for "Daniel", please. If words are posted here that he is claimed to have made, then his identity is required here.

 

[Ken Foose]

Sorry Rich. I'm not used to this stuff. His name is Daniel D'Neuville. He is Kimberly Lucas boy friend, and a very nice fellow.

 

[Ken Foose]

Laura, I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart. If there's ever anything I can do for you, just ask. I can't offer you the world, but I'll share my half with you. Take care.

 

[Skiploder]

Andrew Wyatt and his doberman are making a big deal about the "corrected" report.

Anyone with a half a brain and a computer can log into the Nevada law enforcement page that shows the info that Laura, I and others have already found:

That the Foose in question is not Ken but his father. Period. End of story.

There is no conspiracy theory here folks, there is nothing to hide. Anyone with internet access can do a quick little search and confirm that "our" Ken, as Erika so malevolently put it, has no criminal past.

Even the Great and Almighty Savior of the Reptile Universe, Andrew Wyatt knows this. Instead he decided to tease Ken in an effort to embarrass him with the fact that his father is the convicted child molester. Dangling it in front of his face in an effort to shut Ken up or to retaliate for going public with this.

It's as simple as that. You can support this type of bullying behavior - the unauthorized background checks, spreading lies and misinformation, causing rifts between reptile organizations and teasing someone about a potentially embarrassing family "secret".........

Or you can send him a message and make him irrelevant.

Think about what happened here. On the BOI, people who ship animals incorrectly, people who steal photos from other websites, people who sell mite infested or sick animals, sellers who lie to buyers - are outed.

What we have here is worse. Much worse.

In my opinion what we have here is a person who wants to represent YOU to various federal, state and local governments, using Nixon-esque tactics to bully, embarrass and intimidate.

If seeing the report is important to you - look it up. Then the reason why Wyatt is taunting Ken on Facebook should become crystal clear..........

 

[Skiploder]

Looks like Wyatt took down ALL the facebook posts in which he taunted and teased Ken.

Good thing I saved a screen shot - actually five of them to capture the whole disgusting exchange. It's on page one of this thread. I will also gladly email it to anyone who is interested in seeing it - just PM me.

What are you trying to hide Andrew?

Let's see:

Unauthorized criminal background searches - check
Spreading lies and defaming people - check
Trying to bully people in order to shut them up - check
Destroying incriminating evidence - check
Swiping USARK's email list - check
Lying about PIJAC's compromise bill in Nevada - check

That's quite a list of accomplishments you've racked up in a very short time.

 

[Lucille]

http://www.iardc.org/htr_filingarequest.html

Our principal purpose is to assist the Supreme Court to determine a lawyer's fitness to practice law in Illinois. If a complaint is made that an attorney, licensed to practice law in Illinois, has engaged in illegal, unethical or dishonest conduct, we will investigate and, if warranted, bring formal disciplinary charges.

 

[Jay Sommers Reptiles]

For the people saying Ken should just suck it up and let it go for the good of the hobby...disgraceful. There is nothing i can think of that is more devastating to an individual and their reputation than being falsely accused of child molestation let alone a convicted child molestor. The worste part is no matter how righteous Ken is and can validate his innocence there are still going to be folks out there who believe the lies.You just can't convince some people once they have made up their mind about something. This whole thing is disguisting. Ken has every right to "make a stink" and rock the boat. The people who are complaining about the damge to the hobby have no personal investment,their name and rep are not being destroyed. Who cares about the hobby in a situation like this.

It was time for a shift.Too much banging on the drums for money about big snakes.Don't you guys know that ship has sailed,whats done is done.Nothing will change and on a national level no more restrictions will be placed on big snakes.They (A.R. groups)won that battle and are on to other things. The bigger threat that noone ever talks about and I have personally had at lenght discussions with Wyatt about ,is the attack on amphibians and turtles. Noone ever talks about it because its easier to rally the defiant big snake keepers. Do some research it isn't relevent here,but they have been trying to list all amphibian species in the whole world as injurious wildlife under the lacey act. And the great state of California has been trying to ban all amphibians and turtles for 2 years.Yet we hear nothing.A ban in Ca.or a federal listing would have a much greater impact and affect infinitely more people than any legislation or ban on constrictors,crocs and venomous combined.

Anyway I can assure you USARk is going in a new direction that will work more toward the benefit of the hobby as a whole and not the radical minority of big snake keepers. There is way more detrimental economic impact on an amphibian ban than a big snake ban. The money exchanged literally crushes the amount of revenue from constrictors.By the way before i get slammed,i am on your side big snake keepers,my point is that everyone else in the hobby is being left out.

A terrible thing has been done to Ken.I don't know him well.We have met a few times and I have sold his company a few hundred animals over the last 2 years.He is a stand up guy as far as our business dealings have gone.I am friends with people who are good friends with Ken(Big T,if your wondering Ken)and never really hear anything bad about him. It's really too bad and hopefully you get some justice Ken. Remember Ken is not at fault for any of this he is a victim. Apparently a victim because he inadvertantly took away Usarks ability to use Nevadas issue to be the next big fundraiser for Wyatt.Thats my suspicion anyway.Take away their opportunity to make money and they will attempt to destroy you. The new USARK will be different.I might actually join and donate money now.I was way too conflicted to do so before.Keep your Head up Ken.

-Jay Sommers

 

[Jay Sommers Reptiles]

Mrs. Walsh should have never done what she did.Unfortunately once she did the background check it was done.What she should have done was contacted Ken first to ask if it was true before going public.It is very obvious this was all done with an agenda,it was not just some random act of benevolence to protect peoples children.It is very clear it was all planned out to destroy Ken. Any way it is spun now is just complete B.S. Wayne Pacelle and Andrew Wyatt are apparently cut from the same cloth.They must be studying the same playbook.And the hobby,as a whole, is so easily manipulated.

 

[Skiploder]

Andrew and Erika both had posted on their facebook re: "The Truth is Out There".

Essentially, these posts were hinting that some alternative story (other than Ken's) existed and that the allegations they were facing from the Reptile Nation were false.

All of these posts, in addition to the one in which Wyatt taunted and teased Ken, have been erased.

What's the matter Wyatt - what happened to the Truth? Is it not out there anymore?

I predict that very soon, Zuzana's bar-be-quing of you over your lies and rumor-mongering about the false PIJAC compromise in Nevada will also be erased from your Facebook pages.

At some point we will also get the 2012 financials from USARK - and then we will be able to see if there was indeed a payoff to you.

From now on I am taking regular snapshots of your Facebook page. Be very careful what you post Andrew.

You've been very clever hinting that there is some deep dark secret in Ken Foose's past. Why don't you just sack up and admit that the only thing you were hinting at was outing his estranged father?

 

[WebSlave]

First, I'd like to say thanks to Bob, Kim Bell and especially Kim Lucas. And second, I'd like to make one correction on what Bob posted.

Yes, Erika did a background check on me at the request of Justin Mietz. Yes, she found a man named Ken Foose who was convicted of child molesting. But she pulled up the wrong person. It was not me. Then she said it was the fault of the source. Then she said she "fixed" my record on the Internet. This is false. There was nothing to fix. I have no criminal record of any kind. She had the wrong guy. Then, once she realized her mistake, she tried to make it sound like she was helping me by "fixing" the mistake. This was stated to get her off the hook of telling people I'm a child molester. I'm not letting her off the hook. And Justin Meitz, you are not off the hook either. And Andrew, well, what can I say. I once called you my friend. I backed you up. I joined USARK and provided thousands of dollars in cash and product because of you. I never rocked the boat, and I kept to my own business. I never did anything to you, ever. We were friends. And this is what I get as a reward? Thanks pal. I'm far from done with you yet.

So, let me get this straight to make sure I understand what is being claimed.

This Erika found what turned out to be false information about Ken Foose on the internet and generated a report based on that information. Apparently this report became public via hearsay, yet the report itself has not been actually physically reviewed by anyone outside of a very tight circle (perhaps just Erika and Andrew Wyatt). Later finding out that the information was false, not only did Erika destroy that report, but "fixed" the information at the source of where she got that information from. So did she also destroy the evidence of her efforts to "fix" that information as well? She is an attorney? One would think that an attorney would recognize the importance of retaining evidence, wouldn't one? Why would an attorney destroy the PROOF that the source of a damaging report (which was also destroyed) was the source of such a report?

And at any time did the internet "source" of said information attempt to contact Mr. Foose to corroborate not only the information they had on file, but also that a person attempting to "fix" that information not only had the authority to do so, but the facts she was presenting were actually correct and factual?

Uh huh..............

 

[Skiploder]

Erika continues give conflicting info:

Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 10:30:43 -0700
From: Erika N. Walsh
Subject: The Current Situation
To: Brian Potter; Bob Ashley
CC: Andrew Wyatt

Bob and Brian,

I wanted to jump in here and to clear a few things up regarding the current situation.

First, regarding public records searches, I am an attorney and I do them all the time. I screen every prospective new client and opposing party. I ran public records searches on Potter, Wyatt and USARK before I ever got involved with the herp community. In Ohio, I ran public records searches on multiple business owners and screened many out before referencing them in testimony. The reasons for doing this I think are obvious. There are a lot of people with civil and/or criminal backgrounds that are relevant to legislative issues. I am not talking about DUIs or IRS liens. It is important to know if someone was convicted of a violent crime, a crime involving deception (fraud, embezzling, etc.) or a crime involving animals. Those kinds of people pose a risk to our goals of fighting legislation and we need to know that information before we are in the middle of an engagement. Rest assured, our opponents in these legislative battles have access to the same attorney databases I do. We would rather know in advance if we have an issue than to read about it in the newspaper.

When Ken Foose posted on Facebook that he wanted to lead the fight in NV for the time being without involvement from USARK, Wyatt backed his play. Wyatt has his plate full in Virginia and Washington DC at the moment and Senator Roberson is not going to introduce a bill until February. USARK has made no forays into NV as of this date and was not planning to do so until seeing what headway Foose could make there. (Notwithstanding the fact that we are getting many communications from members of the NV herp community and the exotic animal community to engage.)

As a matter of standard operating procedure, I did a public records search on Ken Foose. I do these all the time and usually never even discuss them with Wyatt. Foose's search turned up a number of criminal convictions. The record pulled was for Kenneth W. Foose, II, husband of Kimberly Foose, owner of Exotic Pets, birth date of 3/1959, both his home and business addresses listed, executive affiliation with Southern Nevada Herpetological Society. This *is* our Ken Foose, not his father.

I spoke to Wyatt about this information and he instructed me not to discuss it with anyone and to keep it to myself, which I did. Wyatt has discussed it with no one.

Justin Meitz later talked to me about the NV legislation. He said he had been hearing rumors from old timer herpers that Foose had had some legal entanglements and I told him I had heard the same. No specifics were discussed. Meitz has forwarded me his correspondence with Kim Foose from yesterday. All he told her was that he had heard rumors and I had asked him about those rumors.

I then raised the issue to Potter that I had done a public records search on Foose and it contained information that there were criminal convictions. When Potter asked me if Ashley should ask Foose, I said yes so that it could be cleared up and what he had to say. To this day, the only people with whom I have discussed this are Wyatt, Potter and Meitz (to the limited extent explained above). No one has seen the actual report except me. Wyatt does not even have it. Wyatt was cross with me for raising the issue to Potter and is furious with me now because of the way it has been blown out of proportion.

The idea that this information is somehow being manipulated to denigrate Foose by Wyatt, me or USARK is preposterous. To the contrary, it has been very much protected. If Foose has a complaint, it is against the public records that are available out there. If the information is incorrect, that is a terrible gaffe on the part of the records databases. Nonetheless, it is there. It is discoverable, and I am not the one who put it there. Think about it. If we wanted to discredit Foose, we could have removed the headers and released the report publicly and let it speak for itself. That was not done. It was not done because we protected the information and instead I chose to ask Brian about it.

I am still not going to disseminate this report, not even to this small group, because it will take on a life of its own. However, I have invited Potter to have lunch with me this week and I will show it to him so that he can see with his own eyes and make his own judgment. Frankly, Foose should be grateful that we brought this to his attention so that he can deal with it if necessary and that it has not been distributed or discussed beyond the circle I have described. Anyone else who knows about this at this point has been told by someone other than me or Wyatt.

If you have a question about this, please let me know directly.

Erika

Remember that post folks, because today, the story has changed again:

....to be crystal clear, I have the corrected report of Kenneth W. Foose, II, born in 1959 with the erroneous criminal record of his father (born in 1938) removed from Kenneth Foose II's public records, per Westlaw.

I called Westlaw this morning and was told by a reference attorney that subscriptions are not limited to attorneys, but she could not tell me with certainty how much it would cost and what databases are available to non attorneys.

I just received a call from Brian Potter today. Brian Potter is the only person other than me who has ever seen the original report. Brian informed me that after a telephone conference as of this morning, he and Bob Ashley will be removing all reference to these events from the NARBC page and their individual pages.
Erika N. Chen-Walsh
Herp Alliance
The Future of Herpetoculture

 

[DaveyFig]

At the time of her communication with Bob and Brian in September, she had already "fixed" the report, and nobody had seen it. How is it that Brian has seen the original when she had already fixed?

 

[Lucille]

From the above post:

Erika


I called Westlaw this morning and was told by a reference attorney that subscriptions are not limited to attorneys, but she could not tell me with certainty how much it would cost and what databases are available to non attorneys.





Westlaw is often available free in law libraries to the public, sometimes they will limit each person searching the database to a specific amount of time such as 30 minutes. Often places like law libraries pay a contract amount and are not charged by the minute, but in any case the services are often available free to the public.
Those who seek facts, sometimes others will deliberately paint the path to knowledge as difficult and fraught with technical difficulties or expenses.

 

[AF Exotics]

The hit's just keep coming .I hope all the people defending Wyatt would be just as critical of Ken or supportive of Wyatt had they been in Ken's shoes .I wonder if they have ever pondered that question ? I THINK NOT .So Wyatt supporters.....Try to be Ken for the day ,have your good name ran through the mud ,sit there quietly for months in order to preserve some decency ,then get trashed for telling the truth ,all because of some money. Your illustrious wonder boy Wyatt wanted to furher line up more donations ,to go where ? .SIMPLE GREED FOR MONEY .

 

[AF Exotics]

As far as al the legal ramifications go ,all that will be determined in the court system ,but we are the court of public opinion ,and that court needs to get beyond this .I don't know Ken ,or Wyatt .Ken once did an inquiry on me ,and another member ,decided to add his own personal bias off this site,(cowardly imho,the other member ,not Ken) and Ken decided not to do business with me ,so some could say I might have a bias against Ken .I never did ,because he contacted me personally and handled it like a man would .

I think he has handled this the same way .Wyatt ,on the other hand ,with his veiled inferences ,did not .He knew that information was erroneous .He knew it would inflict damage to Ken's name ,and his business .It would also damage the credibility of USARK from there on .Now it should be easy to see why he would engage in such a reckless manner .His decision was preemptive .He knew he was gone ,and now it was time to ruin USARK on the way out .He knew he was forming another group ,and he had to cause and inflict damage .DIVIDE AND CONQUER .It has been a tactical strategy for years .Wyatt did not care about the collateral damage(the Herp community) ,he wanted one thing .That thing should be easy to see .

 

[meowmeowkazoo]

Thank you for sharing your story, Ken. I don't know you personally but I wish you the best of luck with this. I hope you get every penny they own and then some. If anything it seems their plan to slander you has backfired, as you've gotten quite a bit of positive publicity from this!

 

[jbt123]

Wish I could feel sorry for you, ken, but as far as I'm concerned, you are no better than the people you are accusing... Why did you bring up Justin's name like that? Absolutely NO reason to. He did not do what you are suggesting.

 

[DaveyFig]

Wish I could feel sorry for you, ken, but as far as I'm concerned, you are no better than the people you are accusing... Why did you bring up Justin's name like that? Absolutely NO reason to. He did not do what you are suggesting.

What did Justin do then? What "rumors" did Justin hear that he took to Walsh "later"?

According to Erika, "Justin Meitz later talked to me about the NV legislation. He said he had been hearing rumors from old timer herpers that Foose had had some legal entanglements and I told him I had heard the same."

Which old timers? What legal entanglements? Ken has said he had no criminal past. For Justin to "hear" the rumors, he would have had to been privy to the information found in the report. That means he either initiated it as Ken suggested, was told by Andrew or Erika, or some "old timer" came up with some juicy rumor at the same time the others were spreading what they found in the report.