Some readers think I spend too much time looking for negative information about John Hoff a.k.a. Johnny Northside of North Minneapolis. They are right but, I continue to find cases like the one posted below where John does something stupid and rather than either learn from it or take responsibility, he sues whoever holds him to the fire and plays the "victim" and in this case, he claimed his rights were violated again. Click here for the other law suit against the city of Seattle... more-dirt-on-john-hoff-uncovered
Folks let me remind all of you that Minneapolis councilman, Don Samuels is a good friend of John's.
_______________________________
Brutal police behavior was recorded on video
Tukwila officer investigated; complaints, claims filed
Thursday, December 9, 1999
By KIMBERLY A.C. WILSON and ELAINE PORTERFIELD
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER ...
"In the claim against the city, John Hoff of Seattle is seeking unspecified damages for being gassed at least twice by police, and hit at least once by a projectile during WTO protests. Hoff also claimed violations of his state and federal rights."
Monday, December 7, 2009
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Johnny Northside Takes a Seat... To High Court!
Minneapolis City Councilman Don Samuels, may want to know what kind of ultra-liberal, nut-case he has in John Hoff and him kissing his ass all over the Internet and on his blog, The Adventures of Johnny Northside. Posted below is a copy of the court ruling in the case of the City of Seattle v. Hoff. It is just a matter of time before John gets irked at the city council and goes to court over something so stupid as the case below.
At least I don't have to worry about John Hoff of North Minneapolis, pulling a double standard on me like Don Samuels does.
_________________________
“SEATTLE SITTING ORDINANCE” UPHELD AGAINST CONSTITUTIONAL ATTACK -- In City of Seattle v. McConahy, City of Seattle v. Hoff, 86 Wn. App. 557 (Div. I, 1997), the Court of Appeals upholds the constitutionality of the “Seattle sitting ordinance.” Under that ordinance, it is a civil infraction for any person to sit or lie on the sidewalk in downtown Seattle and other neighborhood commercial zones between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. except in an emergency, or if he or she is in a wheelchair or on a bench or in a bus zone or patronizing a commercial establishment or attending a permitted event.
The facts in the two cases on review are described by the Court of Appeals as follows:
McConahy was cited while sitting on a street bulb with a group of friends, eating pizza, watching her friends play chess for change, and sometimes panhandling. Police officers approached the group and informed them that they were violating the ordinance. Her friends stood, but McConahy remained seated protesting the ordinance. McConahy wore an army jacket decorated with an American flag and a slogan that said, "Fuck your American dream." She also wore a button that said, "Sitting is not a crime." Hoff was cited while sitting reading a book and leaning against a building with leaflets advertising a protest against the ordinance in his lap. They had separate trials in municipal court. The Hoff court heard testimony and allowed extensive argument on his constitutional claims, and the McConahy court accepted much of this record. Both courts found that the defendants violated the ordinance and rejected their free expression and substantive due process claims.
The Court of Appeals rejects the defendants’ varied constitutional challenges to the sitting ordinance. However, the Court of Appeals warns that its ruling in this case is limited:
While we decline to invalidate the ordinance in this case, we wish to make clear what we are not deciding. First, we express no opinion about whether the ordinance is or is not good social policy. We hold only that the ordinance is constitutionally valid legislation. SMC 15.48.040 is quintessential legislative policy making, and we will not disturb the policy decisions made by legislative bodies unless they are unconstitutional or conflict with state law. We also hold that the City did not violate appellants' right to free expression because Hoff and McConahy were not involved in expressive activity when they were cited. But we do not decide whether, on different facts involving a protected activity or speech, SMC 15.48.040 would be a valid time, place, manner restriction. We also do not decide whether homeless residents could establish the requisite disparate impact to invoke the protection of the Privileges and Immunities Clause because these appellants have not done so.
Result: Affirmance of Seattle Municipal Court convictions for Sarah McConahy and John Hoff under sitting ordinance.
At least I don't have to worry about John Hoff of North Minneapolis, pulling a double standard on me like Don Samuels does.
_________________________
“SEATTLE SITTING ORDINANCE” UPHELD AGAINST CONSTITUTIONAL ATTACK -- In City of Seattle v. McConahy, City of Seattle v. Hoff, 86 Wn. App. 557 (Div. I, 1997), the Court of Appeals upholds the constitutionality of the “Seattle sitting ordinance.” Under that ordinance, it is a civil infraction for any person to sit or lie on the sidewalk in downtown Seattle and other neighborhood commercial zones between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. except in an emergency, or if he or she is in a wheelchair or on a bench or in a bus zone or patronizing a commercial establishment or attending a permitted event.
The facts in the two cases on review are described by the Court of Appeals as follows:
McConahy was cited while sitting on a street bulb with a group of friends, eating pizza, watching her friends play chess for change, and sometimes panhandling. Police officers approached the group and informed them that they were violating the ordinance. Her friends stood, but McConahy remained seated protesting the ordinance. McConahy wore an army jacket decorated with an American flag and a slogan that said, "Fuck your American dream." She also wore a button that said, "Sitting is not a crime." Hoff was cited while sitting reading a book and leaning against a building with leaflets advertising a protest against the ordinance in his lap. They had separate trials in municipal court. The Hoff court heard testimony and allowed extensive argument on his constitutional claims, and the McConahy court accepted much of this record. Both courts found that the defendants violated the ordinance and rejected their free expression and substantive due process claims.
The Court of Appeals rejects the defendants’ varied constitutional challenges to the sitting ordinance. However, the Court of Appeals warns that its ruling in this case is limited:
While we decline to invalidate the ordinance in this case, we wish to make clear what we are not deciding. First, we express no opinion about whether the ordinance is or is not good social policy. We hold only that the ordinance is constitutionally valid legislation. SMC 15.48.040 is quintessential legislative policy making, and we will not disturb the policy decisions made by legislative bodies unless they are unconstitutional or conflict with state law. We also hold that the City did not violate appellants' right to free expression because Hoff and McConahy were not involved in expressive activity when they were cited. But we do not decide whether, on different facts involving a protected activity or speech, SMC 15.48.040 would be a valid time, place, manner restriction. We also do not decide whether homeless residents could establish the requisite disparate impact to invoke the protection of the Privileges and Immunities Clause because these appellants have not done so.
Result: Affirmance of Seattle Municipal Court convictions for Sarah McConahy and John Hoff under sitting ordinance.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Johnny Northside Back Tracks
Upon looking at the comments posted by John Hoff on the Adventures of Johnny Northside, it appears John has deleted all of the comments. It must have something to do with my posting the proof of the video he claimed I am lying about.
Why would John delete those nasty comments?
I have told John in private that this is not about my friend. This is about me being devoted to exposing John for what he is. A hypocrite.
Why would John delete those nasty comments?
I have told John in private that this is not about my friend. This is about me being devoted to exposing John for what he is. A hypocrite.
Johnny Northside Calls B.S.& Anti-Johnny Goes All-In
"John Hoff" a.k.a. John Hoffman a.k.a. Johnny Northside
Photo by Jim Watkins
I have always thought that bluffing is a dangerous game and the safe bet is to have a good hand. Whether or not the opponent thinks you are bluffing is not important at that point. Well, John Hoff a.k.a. John Hoffman a.k.a. Johnny Northside had the following to say after being informed that a meeting was recorded on video back in April...__________________________
"Jim (who likes to call himself the "DFW Mentor" and claims expertise in real estate) claims to have video covertly shot of a meeting I had with him at Broadway Pizza, along with my 12-year-old child.
Of course, nothing of note was SAID at that meeting, and it was actually a friendly meeting, and I think Jim is lying about having any video."
__________________________________
I have been advised to not post any of the video online because, it provides too much content that would be more useful in court than online. So, I decided to take a still shot of the video and post that instead.
John still likes to link my name with my friend and somehow he thinks this bothers me. Not at all. It simply goes to prove the very points that John has made in his emails where he threatens to do exactly that.
This isn't about my friend. This is about exposing a total nut case who has made a career out of hurting others while bucking the system. In short, no one has ever held John accountable for his actions until.... Now.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
John Hoff the Name Caller
John Hoff a.k.a. Johnny Northside who resides at 2226 Bryant Ave N, Minneapolis, MN had these kind words to say in his comments section of his blog today. Jill Clark, are you getting all this?
__________________________
On another note, I have rejected four or five comments from Jim Watkins of Texas, self-described "best friend" of Thomas Balko, one of the imprisoned T.J. Waconia mortgage fraudsters. Jim calls himself a "best friend" but I prefer the more accurate and descriptive term of "greased up prison errand boy."
Jim (who likes to call himself the "DFW Mentor" and claims expertise in real estate) claims to have video covertly shot of a meeting I had with him at Broadway Pizza, along with my 12-year-old child.
Of course, nothing of note was SAID at that meeting, and it was actually a friendly meeting, and I think Jim is lying about having any video. But all the same, for the record, I've been rejecting the comments of this TROLL, Jim Watkins the DFW Mentor, and I will continue to reject his comments on the basis of him being a troll.
Generally, though, his comments question whether the individuals who post the signs are, in fact, scammers and
slumlords and Jim claims to have called them about the removal and destruction of the signs. Whatever.
If I gave a rip, I would have bothered to blur out the phone number on the signs, but obviously I don't give a rip. North Minneapolis has the same right as other neighborhoods to NOT have our boulevards and utility poles used as free advertising space by slippery, scammy entrepreneurs. I remove the signs, Jeff removes the signs, and I hope others will take a moment to remove the signs as well.
November 29, 2009 10:30 AM
_____________________________
A funny thought that is worth looking into:
A person has a right to sit on a sidewalk, right? A certain pioneer in Seattle took that as far as he could in court. WAIT... That someone was John Hoff! So, how about we organize a little meeting in front of John's house and we all just sit on the sidewalk. Even better, we can hand out copies of John's writings with his opinions of "cops" where he calls them "pigs."
Why do that? I would think it would be great fun to have on hand when his pals from the 4th precinct show up after he calls about the sit down in front of his house.
__________________________
On another note, I have rejected four or five comments from Jim Watkins of Texas, self-described "best friend" of Thomas Balko, one of the imprisoned T.J. Waconia mortgage fraudsters. Jim calls himself a "best friend" but I prefer the more accurate and descriptive term of "greased up prison errand boy."
Jim (who likes to call himself the "DFW Mentor" and claims expertise in real estate) claims to have video covertly shot of a meeting I had with him at Broadway Pizza, along with my 12-year-old child.
Of course, nothing of note was SAID at that meeting, and it was actually a friendly meeting, and I think Jim is lying about having any video. But all the same, for the record, I've been rejecting the comments of this TROLL, Jim Watkins the DFW Mentor, and I will continue to reject his comments on the basis of him being a troll.
Generally, though, his comments question whether the individuals who post the signs are, in fact, scammers and
slumlords and Jim claims to have called them about the removal and destruction of the signs. Whatever.
If I gave a rip, I would have bothered to blur out the phone number on the signs, but obviously I don't give a rip. North Minneapolis has the same right as other neighborhoods to NOT have our boulevards and utility poles used as free advertising space by slippery, scammy entrepreneurs. I remove the signs, Jeff removes the signs, and I hope others will take a moment to remove the signs as well.
November 29, 2009 10:30 AM
_____________________________
A funny thought that is worth looking into:
A person has a right to sit on a sidewalk, right? A certain pioneer in Seattle took that as far as he could in court. WAIT... That someone was John Hoff! So, how about we organize a little meeting in front of John's house and we all just sit on the sidewalk. Even better, we can hand out copies of John's writings with his opinions of "cops" where he calls them "pigs."
Why do that? I would think it would be great fun to have on hand when his pals from the 4th precinct show up after he calls about the sit down in front of his house.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
We Burn "We Buy Houses" Signs... So What If It Violates City Ordinance
All pictures by John Hoff
Johnny Northside has decided it is his right to take signs (he steals them really but, I am sure he will have a logical reason for stealing) from the area and promptly burm them.
I copied the city ordinance regarding Recreational Fires.
_____________________
178.10. Definitions. Recreational fire. A small outdoor fire burning approved materials for pleasure, religious, ceremonial, cooking, warmth or similar purposes.
Approved materials. Fuel for a recreational fire consisting solely of unpainted wood which has not been treated in any manner with chemicals or preservatives. (2003-Or-143, § 1, 12-15-03) .
178.20. Applicable rules. Every person starting, engaging in, conducting or hosting a recreational fire shall observe and comply with the following regulations, which are reflected in or are in addition to those imposed by the Minnesota State Fire Code:
(2) Recreational fires shall not be conducted within twenty-five (25) feet of a structure or combustible material
(3) A surrounding fire barrier of non-combustible material that is at least six (6) inches in height must be used.
(4) Only approved materials may be burned in a recreational fire.
(6) On-site fire-extinguishing equipment - such as operable garden hoses, sand and shovels, water buckets or barrels, or a portable fire extinguisher with a minimum 4-A rating - shall be readily available for use at recreational fires
_____________________________
I didn't see any fire extinguishing equipment in the pictures but, I see trash, leaves and chairs as well as a box of wood behind his son which has treated and/or stained wood (not approved). I missed this the first time I looked but, in the third picture on the lower right side there is a big Rottweiller dog standing by watching the sign burning. I hope the yard is fenced in because, that dog has no collar or leash round its neck. Another code violation that John does not feel apply to him.
This is the post from Johnny Northside's blog titled, We Burn "We Buy Houses" Signs
____________________
"On Sunday, I put together a last-minute father/son activity with my 12-year-old, Alex: we went around collecting the "We Buy Houses" signs littering the grassy boulevards of NoMi. My blog post about this activity actually made the Twin Cities Daily Planet, hooray.
Well, it's Thanksgiving and I have visitation with my son AGAIN. We'll be enjoying our Thanksgiving with the fine men and women of the Fourth Precinct but, in the meantime, we thought it would be fun to have a little bonfire. So we burned the signs and roasted some Peeps."
_____________________
I posted two comments to JohnnyNorthside.com but, John has not allowed either one to be posted. Thats all right because, I copy them all to show later that they did not have anything that would cause them to not be posted.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Attention Jill Clark
RE: Public appeal to Attorney Jill Clark
Miss Clark,
Please know and take into consideration that Jim Watkins has done extensive research and has located dozens of articles and documents about John Hoff. All of which may be of help to you in a legal capacity.
I understand that you are not able to discuss anything that is related to cases you currently have but, I would like to offer you this information (all public information) for you to review.
Thank you,
jim watkins
Miss Clark,
Please know and take into consideration that Jim Watkins has done extensive research and has located dozens of articles and documents about John Hoff. All of which may be of help to you in a legal capacity.
I understand that you are not able to discuss anything that is related to cases you currently have but, I would like to offer you this information (all public information) for you to review.
Thank you,
jim watkins
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Johnny Northside Loves His House in NoMi--!
John Hoff a.k.a. Johnny Northside photo
Source: http://www.johnnynorthside.com/
It has been a while since "John Hoff" has come after me with his public attempts to give me a bad name by linking me with a friend who has been crucified by the media, politicians, former friends and lets not forget... John Hoff as well. Thats alright though because, when you live a life that doesn't revolve around crime, you can sleep at night with the knowledge that you made the right choice to choose other ways to live your life. Enough about that.
I think it is important for people to protect themselves after working hard while sticking to the philosophy of "Always try to do the right thing." You never know when you may find yourself having to defend yourself against people who make their living promoting themselves by using intimidation, public information and dirty force against those that have chosen to do the opposite.
They even change their identities at times when Johnny Northside, John Hoff and John Hoffman are separate personalities one person has. Sort of like Sybil.
What can someone do to defend themselves against people who don't have any concern for other people and what happens to them in their lives?
Recording phone calls and keeping them on hand should you need to prove you were threatened.
Perhaps, you can document those special moments where face to face conversations took place and things were said against you and others. An example could be as simple as a hidden video camera recording your chat while you enjoy a nice pizza over lunch.
Maybe you can save emails that have been sent to you that show how you were bullied by bottom feeders such as Johnny Northside.
Enough of my babbling! Here is the link to The Adventures of Johnny Northside and his latest post, (click here) I Love my home in NoMi.
It is a good read and it does a good job of showing an example of how someone like John Hoff operates.
I wonder if John will approve the comment I wrote and submitted to his blog after reading the post. I get a feeling he will not want to have my words appear on his site so..... Here is a copy of what I submitted:
______________________
Hi John!
I am looking forward to that something special you have for me.
Recently, I have felt very special as I have begun to understand how Seattle was such a special place for you while you lived there. So many memories.
By the way John, I have not lived in Plano since 2002. Could I help you out with verifying your upcoming special assault of me?
Take care John.
______________________
Note: John claims I live in Plano, Texas but that is a false statement. I once lived in Plano several years ago but, I have not lived there since 2002.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)