Subject: Contesting Citations and Request for Advance Deposit Hardship Waiver
To Whom It May Concern,
I am writing to formally contest the citation(s) issued by the town of Windsor on the behalf of the property owner,at 7064 Hastings Pl, along with any other responsible party.
It is imperative to highlight that the actions taken by personnel of the town of Windsor represent a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which safeguards personal privacy and protects individuals from unreasonable government intrusion into their persons, homes, businesses, and property.
Upon careful examination of the records released by the town of Windsor, it is evident that there was no probable cause and no warrant for any investigation conducted. Furthermore, any complaint mentioned in the records pertains to a property behind 7064 Hastings Pl, not the property in question. The misidentification of a 25 ft 5th wheel trailer parked behind 7064 Hastings Pl as a reason for accusing the owners of code violations is perplexing and baseless.
Moreover, it appears that there was collusion between the town of Windsor and North Bay Animal Services to fabricate false documentation and claims against the property in question, with the aim of manufacturing probable cause. Such actions constitute a violation of USC code 42 section 1983, which holds individuals accountable for depriving others of their constitutional rights while acting under the color of law.
It is worth noting that North Bay Animal Services has since retracted their involvement due to their unlawful actions, which were not in compliance with state and federal laws. However, the town of Windsor has neglected to address these violations, thereby allowing them to persist.
These unlawful and malicious actions not only put the property owners at risk of financial hardship but also violate the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which prohibits excessive fines. The Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Bajakajian serves as a precedent, demonstrating that fines must be proportionate to the offense committed.
Furthermore, any evidence obtained through unlawful means, such as an unreasonable search and seizure, should be excluded from consideration, in accordance with the exclusionary rule. Therefore, any alleged evidence currently or planned to be used against the property owners of 7064 Hastings Pl should be deemed inadmissible.
Given the circumstances outlined above, I kindly request a waiver for the advance deposit hardship. The property owners, who are elderly and financially vulnerable, are already facing undue burden as a result of these citations and cannot afford to deposit additional funds.
Your prompt attention to this matter and fair consideration of our request are greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Christina Urena
G&Cs Advocacy and Rescue 