STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE HELIN, i CIVIL ACTION NO. ) CV-00205-M ) . ) ) ORIGINAL FILED ON DAVID R. AMOS ) JEAN F. O"MEARA, d FRANCIS KICKHAM ) MAY 15 2003 WILLIAM J. KICKHAM, d ; U.S. DISTRICT COURT BARBARA J. KICKHAM, ; DISTRICT OF NH Defendants. ) ANSWER OF THE DEFENDANT, DAVID R. AMOS: Now comes the Defendant, David R_ Amos, and answers, the complaint of the Plaintiff, James A. MeLaughlin as follows: 1. Admitted Admitted 4 Admitted Admitted 5. The address stated is not that of the Defendant, William J. Kickham. Itis the address: of his criminal cousins’ Law Offices. The senior partner is Charles J. Kickham Jr He assisted William J. Kickham to close the estate of Elaine G. Kickham by act of fraud practiced against the court. The Norfolk Probate and Family Court assisted the wrongs of the lawyer, Charles J. Kickham Jr. in the first instance by removing the name of Jean f O'Meara and that of her cousin, Barbara J. Kickham, from the court records as interested parties of the Trust of El ine G. Kickham. Upon the ereation of the fraudulent trustdocument, (Norfolk Probate CA. No. 98 P.0792-T1) Charles J. Kickham Jr. closed the estate and used the trust document as proof that all interested parties had assented in order to defraud the interested parties of the bulk of the assets. One of the interested parties of all estates is The United States of America. Charles J. Kickham Jr. closed the said estate at a fraudulent figure just below the threshold that causes the United States of ndant, America to have the right to collect its interests in the form of Taxes. The Det David R. Amos, has proved many times in many Courts and to many authorities, this act of Tax Fraud, The Defendant is not only an interested party in the estate of Elaine G. Kickham pursuant to M.G.L 209. He also has a fifteen percent interest in the interest of the United States of America in the matter. The Defendant is entitled to that amount as a rest and reward for exposing the crimes and allowing the Government to assess Tax, 1 Penalties. The Defendant, David R. Amos. has had challenging task to force the IRS t0 act according to law and the scope of its employment in order to collect his reward pursuant to U.S.C. Title 26 Sec, 7623. His interests and the right to be heard as a Defendant in this action must not be denied in State Court or Federal Court The cover-up ofa common family feud about wrongful acts within an estate is only to protect the interests of outside parties with the Government and the Catholic Church 6 Admitted 7. Admitted 8 Admitted 9 Admitted 10. Admitted 11, Admitted12. Admitted 13, Admitted 14. Admitted 18, Admitted 16, Admitted 17. Admitted ABFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Byway of affirmative defense the Defendant, David R. Amos, asserts the following 1. The Plaintiff, James A. McLaughlin, filed this action in Norfolk Probate Court with in days of the removal of William J. Kickham as Trustee of the Trust of Elaine G. Kickham and his appointment as Trustee by Court Order. 2. During the hearing of the petition for the removal of William J. Kickham as Trustee on October 16, 2002, the Plaintiff explained the Tax issues to the court in the exact amount that the , Defendant, David R. Amos, reported to criminal investigators of the IRS a long time ago. 3. Judge Carey of Norfolk Probate Court heard that amount and stated it in her Court Order Dis ham, The IRS has ing the Petition to Reopen the Estate of Elaine G. still failed to act with the scope of their employment on behalf of the United States of America after The Defendant had made the US. Attorney, Michael J. Sullivan, undeniably aware of the facts, 4. The Defendant, David R. Amos, has since proven that the reasons for the conspiracy and cover up against the interested parties. 11 was not as he first thought in covering up as: evil lawyer's wrong it was to protect the interests of the Brookline Savings Bank because of their a ce to the Kickhams in the concealment of their ill-gotten5. At the time of the PlaintifY"s filing of this complaint he was months in default in US District Court in answering two complaints against him because of his assistance to the criminals. led as an effort to shill the blame of his wrongs trom his shoulders to that of the Norfolk Probate Court 7. The Plaintift and the Court did not expect an answer from Jean F_O"Meara to this complaint, The Norfolk Probate Court promptly destroyed most of the public record of the said answer & The Defendant, Jean F, O'Meara, tiled a Motion to Remove the action to Massachusetts Supreme Court for Declaratory Judgement, however the Registers ON refused to set a date for the motion ©. The Defendant, David R. Amos, was compelled to remove this action to U.S, District Court for the District of New Hampshire for many reasons so stated in his AMidavit ster, Patrick 10, The documents that were destroyed by the Norfolk Probate Court Re; W. MeDermott, were filed again after the removal to this court, A copy of the said answer and its attachments filed in Norfolk Probate Court are now on file in the docket of this action in U.S. District Court, The Plaintit¥ and the attorney of record the other Defendants William Kickham and Francis Kickham, have had the said documents for their review for a period of six months, Only the public has been denied access to view11. Prior to the removal to U.S. District Court, the Defendant, David R, Amos, filed a Notice of Appearance in Norfolk Probate and Family Coun on behalf of the Defendant Jean F. O'Meara under her Durable Power of Attorney in this action and others within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and pursuant to M.G.L, 201B. He does have his wite’ authority to do so and he acts as her in her name place and stead in all matters pertaining, to her interests or herself 12. Sometimes the Courts Strikes his Appearance and sometimes it does not, At this moment a Senate Committee has been appointed within the State to study the Durable Power of Attorney Act because of the aetions pending in its courts prosecuted by him. Apparently the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is very confused as to his standing, He is not, he is as her. 13. If the U.S. District Court does not cept the fact that the standing of David R. Amos should follow and be allowed in Federal Court afier the removal to it, the Defendant demands to have the reasons explained. If the U.S. District Court does decide against David R. Amos" the right to speak and be heard on behalf of his wite, he demands that the U.S. District Court appoint Counsel to do so at no expense to her 14. Recently a U.S. District Court Judge stated within his Court Orders remanding other actions to S fate Court that the Defendant, David R- Amos, had no standing in State Court ‘That is an absolutely untrue and malicious statement. The U.S, District Court Judge had no right to judge his standing within a State Court, Before even olering such an opinion the Judge should have studied the Massachusetts General Laws 209 and 201B and the Rules of Small Claims Court and the fraudulent Purchase and Sale Agreement that is on in both actions before coming to such a decision18. Under the Federal Law U S.C. Title 26 Seetion 7623, the Defendant, David R. Amos, has interest in the matters because the estate had been fraudulently closed with the assistance of the Kickham Law Offices He has fifteen percent interest in all of the taxes, interest and penalties that are assessed when the IRS finally does act 16. The evidence that supports the allegations of Tax Fraud were served on the Defendants during the process of discovery by the lawyer, Tammy L. Richardson and the Kickham Law Offices. Richardson was obviously aware of the crimes before filing an Appearance on behalf of the criminal, Trustee William Kickham. She appeared at the side of James M. Kickham of the Kickham Law Otfices and filed her Appearance has he withdrew his services. 17, Tammy L. Richardson argued against Jean F_ O'Meara, in complete agreement with the criminal, James M. Kickham on May 16, 2002., She fraudulently mpted to introduce the Trustee's son, Brian Kickham, as an interested party with the authority to settle the estate matters. Judge Carey clearly heard James Kickham affirm the fact that he had lied in his late answer and that Jean F, O'Meara did not assent to the closing the estate. He also stated that it was the Defendant, David R. Amos, that had forced the confession because of his actions within the Board of Bar Overseers, 18, Judge Carey of Norfolk Probate Court after hearing the Kickham statements did not place sanctions against the liar, James M. Kickham. Judge Carey attacked Jean F O'Meara with many legal words that were not relevant to what she had heard and knew to be fact, Judge Carey insulted her and caused her great personal suffering enough to be forced from work and be administered drugs, The Ds want, David R, Amos responded properly reported all to the Commission on Judicial, Conduct Justice was denied 619, The IRS Tax Documents and other records of crimes that came from the Kickham Law Offices to the hands of Tammy L. Richardson and then into the hands of the Defendant, David R, Amos, make the deliberate assistance to the criminals irrefutable ‘The lawyer Tammy L. Richardson and her partners have much to answer 20 The Plaintiff, James A. McLaughlin, has been well aware of the Defendant, David R. ‘Amos, interests under the Federal Law U.S.C. Title 26 Section 7623, since early August of 2002, James A. McLaughlin failed to answer the complaints against him because he knew not what to state as a possible defense, The PlaintitY had in his possession all records that proved the complaints of the Defendants, Jean F_O’Meara and David R ‘Amos were valid, Rather than uphold the law and settle with the Defendant, David R. Amos, the Plaintiff placed his faith in the fraudulent acts of the US. Atorney, Michael J Sullivan, in his ‘tempt to have the complaints against all litigants dismissed 21. Prior to the hearings on October 16, 2002, the PlaintitY, James A. McLaughlin called the Defendant, David R- Amos, and conferred with him about the matters, Defendant, David R, Amos knew that the Plaintiff was merely on a fishing expedition for the US. Attorney and no doubt he was listening in or would be informed. The Plaintiff, James A McLaughlin, was one of the few litigants in pending matters in U.S. District Coust that could speak to him directly. David R. Amos told the lawyer just enough to scare him into revealing the truth in hearings the following week. The Pla tif was not required appear but did so much to the chagrin of all the other litigants in U.S. Distriet Court, The PlaintifY clearly stated the Tax issues that needed to be addressed before any accountings of the Trust of Elaine G, Kickham. He also pointed to many other wrongs that were being complained of in U.S. District Court, He also stated that he would file this complaint22 The subject of calls from federal phones must be mentioned, because it has played a key role in this action and others. Only Federal Authorities under the Homeland Security Act that can cause cell phone airtime to not be recorded. It is a very big intrusion into privacy and the right to obtain or keep personal records, the government can call you and harass you but you can not prove it. If'you call them, they record it, This happened to the Defendant, David R. Amos, on two occasio’ s that were witnessed and he can prove. Assistant Attorney General Robert L. Quinan Jr, had called the Defendant only once and ce. The Defendant has has been very sorry he did ever si alked to other people trom the Office of the Massachusetts Attorney eral and the ID on his phone shows many zeros, That call trom Quinan came from a federal phone just before the U.S. Atorney, Michael J. Sullivan, removed the matters. Quinan was so spooked by the Defendants one question that he filed his answer late because he had to obtain a copy of Judge Carey's malicious Court Order and rewrite his Motions, Another time Chief Mearns of the Milton. ‘Town Police called the Defendant in Canada and the call to the Canadian cell phone was not recorded. The Defendant knew immediately that Chief Mearns was a conspirator against him 23. With reference to the preceding Statement, the question the Defendant asks of every lawyer after he can prove that the lawyer has read certain documents is simply this: Do you or do you not see the misconduct of Charles J. Kickham Jr To date not one lawyer has answered. All have run away and do their worst to stop the Defendant from being, heard on the record. Itis very good question to put a lawyer into an ethical dilemma. If answered truthfully and acted upon according to the Rules of Professional Behavior it exposes the corruption and the lawyer's livelihood will suffer because of his honesty.That is the reason no lawyer will work for or even talk to Jean F_ O'Meara and why she granted the Defendant the Powers 24. The PlaintifY, James A. McLaughlin is charging his fees to the interests of the Defendants except that of William J. Kickham. He is compelled to protect the trust from ful acts. On June 17. after avoiding the Defendant, David R. Amos, for one month the Plaintiff returned his call and failed the ethical stress test. Within nwo weeks the Defendants, David R. Amos and Jean F_O°Meara, filed complaints against the Court Appointed trustee who was charging his fees against their interests and not upholding the law, He now complaining of us in this action and asking the court to declare what he already knows he should have done according to law. 25. In early January 2002, the Plaintitl, James A. Melaughlin realized that he was about to be found in default. He delayed the court ordered revised accountings of William J Kickham for a period of almost three months by keeping the records in his possession, He deliberately delayed the court ordered accountings of the Trust in an effort to have this action heard first. He did this in order to have the Judgments against him in Norfolk Superior Court vacated. Apparently his fellow litigants against David R, Amos in Norfolk Probate Court would not go along with his plan and illevally delayed this action for lucre and malice of their own, Please view attachments. 26. The Judgment of this complaint has a very important impact on the interests of all interested parties including the United States of America ‘The matter must be heard in Federal Court and by Jury Trial27. On March 31, 2003 the Defendant, David R Amos, served upon the Assistant U. S. Attorney Don Feith for the District of New Hamphire, The documents that Jean F (O'Meara had attached to her Affidavit in U.S. District Court and to the answer of this complaint. In both courts the documents have disappeared from the Public Record 28, The followin evening Agents of the U. S. Secret Service and the Milton Town Police woke the Defendant up at his home and asked him many questions, Many of the questions were against the law pursuant to U S.C. Tile 42 and the Amendments to the Constitution. Two days later the Secret Service returned asked some questions and claimed that their investigation was at an end, They stated that they found the Defendant, David R. Amos of no threat to anyone and that the Allegations that had been made against him were unfounded in fact, They had informed him that it was the Quiney District Court that had made the Allegations. Under the Freedom of information Act the Defendant now demands to know who in the Court said this of him 29. On May 12, 12, 2003 the Defendant, David R- Amos demanded an answer trom Ass tant U. S. Atomey, Don Feith, 30. Today the Defendant has received all documents back from the US. Attorney claiming he does not see any crimes that apply to federal court, This includes three tapes ed to this action what of Fourth Amendment Violations of a great many people not rela so ever. The Defendant had instructed him not to send these tapes back to him or it would implicate the Defendant in the Fourth Amendment Violations, He had demanded that the U.S. Attomey report the existence of the tapes to proper authorities for their investigation 031. The documents and the tapes are now on file in the Clerks Office of U.S. District Court as received and as proof of the Government Corruption at its extreme ‘The Defendant, David R. Amos, asked the Assistant U.S. Atorney, Don Feith the same question he had asked all other lawyers in writing, How the U.S. Attorney Don Feith failed to understand Tax Fraud, Mail Fraud, Judicial Miscond ct, Perjury, and First and Fourth Amendment Violations clearly explained and presented to him is the ultimate proof of all that has been stated in this answer and elsewhere: Please view his response Dated May 15, 2003 Respe filly submitted by AGA Crd ugk f he (our David & Anjos eo Se 153 Alvin Ave. Milton, MA, 02186 (617) 240-0008 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1, David R. Amos certify that on May 15, 2003, I served a true copy of the attached documents in by US mail the Plaintiff, James A. MeLaughlin, at 2 Pleasant Street, South Natick, MA.01760 and to Tammy L. Richardson at 99 Summer St Boston MA, 02110, attorney of record for the Defendants Francis Kickham and William Kickham the Defendant at Barabara J. Kickham at 12 Tamarack Lane Shrewsbury, MA. 01545 Cc} en hea “| (own David R Amos 153 Alvin Ave Milton, MA, 02186 (617) 240-0098elands ee —— A New Imperative for National Security ‘When President Bush issued the Executive Order #13228 on October 8, 2001 and. thereby presented the nation's first Homeland Security initiative, he simultaneously set in motion what is perhaps the single greatest undertaking in information integration the modern world has ever seen. 13 months later, Congress passed the President’ initiative, the largest reform of government in over half a century, wh: 2 federal agencies and over 170,000 federal workers uader a single Caotaetievel depastme ee oe ‘To succeed, the Homeland Security initiative will require the comprehensive analysis of all incoming intelligence information and other key data regarding 8 terrorism threats in the US. and abroad. This necessitates the development of a vee decentralized, horizoatal information architectre able to ceach across several oe Siterent and disparate agencies Such an architectare must allow fr each ofthese pee agencies to have personalized access to literally tens of thousands of new and ___ existing information sets, containing both structured and unstructured data, ‘The nature of the Homeland Security initiative is both preventative, seeking to anticipate incidents of domestic terrorism before they occur, as well as responsive, to minimize the impact of incidents of domestic terrorism if and when they do occur. This requires access to information from sources within various agencies, from all levels of governments, as well as outside of governmental environments, The success of Homeland Security will require that agencies from federal government to local law enforcement be able to cross-correlate information such that itis both actionable and instructive. From this perspective, the mission of Homeland Security can be distilled down to two specific objectives: 1) Information Sharing, and 2) Information Analysis, The achievement of these Homeland Security objectives will xequire the full leverage of new and existing investments in information systems. In the 2003, federal budget submitted by the White House, an investment of $700 million is | recommended to improve intelligence gathering and information sharing. This investment targets the development of systems to assist federal agencies to share information with each other, as well as to allow better access to critical information by state and local organizations. It would be naive, however, to expect that new technology investments alone can adequately address the full array of information access and analysis requirements, necessary to the success of Homeland Security. Of equal importance is the need for an information architecture which integrates existing information and data sources, For decades there has been inadequate cross-agency coordination in the deployment of government information systems. This has led to information "stovepipes" with limited access outside of the agencies that built them.2 In addition, insufficient security mechanisms, as well as legal and cultural barriers, often prevent government agencies from integrating and exchanging critical information, The success of Homeland Security will require not only new technologies and approaches for information sharing and analysis, but also the development of new strategies for information architecture and security. Farther, these new strategies must balance privacy rights with government's need for information access. In the document entitled The National Strategy for Homeland Security, recently released by the newly formed Office of Homeland Security, the role of information systems across the entire Homeland Security initiative is framed within five governing principles. These are: 1) Balancing security requirements with citizens’ privacy 2) Viewing state, federal and local agencies as a single entity 3) Reusing individual information sets across ‘many different contexts and instances 4) Establishing trusted sources of information 5) Maintaining the information architectures of Homeland Security as a dynamic and evolving entity, rather than a single static representation Both addressing the information sharing and analysis needs of Homeland Security and adhering to the five Principles above would be at best unmanageable, if not entirely impossible, with a single centralized database, What is instead required is the ability to define and overlay a new information architecture on top of existing and external information sources. Requirements for Homeland Security: Information Categorization ‘A comprehensive solution for information access and analysis will require the ability to categorize information from both structured and unstructured sources, extract, key concepts based on general and specific definitions, and deliver access to information for analysis with a high degree of security and scalability, Such a solution for Homeland Security would need to address the following set of requirements: 1) Granular Information Security 2) Concept and Feature Extraction, 3) Support for Domain-specific Taxonomies 4) Capture of External Information and Multiple Media Forms 5) Rapid Indexing and Categorization 6) Multi-lingual Categorization 7) Collaborative Discovery 8) Scalability information Security Traditional approaches to information security focus on the role of individuals. In the context of Homeland Security; however, an equal or greater emphasis needs to be placed on the role of the information itself. This requires information to be secured at a granular level across multiple parameters, or reason of both national security and privacy protection, For example, information concerning an individual's phone calls or travel habits should not be part of a public record, unless correlated to other factors, which combined highlight a potentially dangerous situation, Secondly, there is no unified directory for security or access privileges across all agencies. This requices sensitive information to be secured at the object or document level, and only visible inthe appropriate context, Concept Extraction, Entity Extraction and Categorization In every language there exist multiple words used to express essentially the same concept. Within the context of Homeland Security there are also domain-specific terms that refer to concepts which might otherwise be expressed in lay-terms. (also see “Support for Domain-specific Taxonomies" on page 3) ‘The optimal access and analysis of information requires the ability to recognize and interpret the semantics, surrounding words. For example, the words "ilight schoo!” and "World Trade Center" had litle if any connection until September 11th, nor do the words “fertilizes" and "U-haul" have a semantic relationship recognized by any general dictionary. In the context of Homteland Security, however, both sets of terms are now closely related. Entity extraction relates to the ability to identify specific entities connected to a word when itis used in context. For example, the word “unabomber” is uniquely and explicitly related to the name “Theodore Kaczynski” Yet without an entity extraction ability, a query using one of the terms would fil to find occurrence of the other. Entity extraction allows an information cetrieval system to connect words and concepts in the same way that the human brain works, rather than simply locating occurrences of a specific word. Both concept extraction and entity extraction require the ability to recognize “synsets” (synonym sets), geoups of words linked to concepts, defined by all of the terms used to reference to that concept. The analysis of unstructured information, as well as optimal retrieval of any information, requires the ability to measure and assess the degree of the relationship a word has to & concept, based on its synset. For example, "hijack" relates to both "terrorism" and "airplane," yet a search for “terrorism” may have nothing to do with airplanes while “hijack” almost always relates, TBF pho tre Utaiga Aisne nsdnto airplanes. ‘Thus “hijack” has a closer relationship to “terrorism” than “terrorism” does to “airplane?” The distance between related terms such as these is know as the “synset vector.” Effective information analysis requires the ability to both automatically quantify and manually fine-tane these relationships. Another aspect of this is the ability to recognize ‘or multi-word phrases with a conjoined meaning that cannot be easily determined from either word separately, such as “collateral damage” which most often refers not to collateral or damage, but specifically the killing of civilians. For use in Homeland Security, a categorization system must be able to discern the context of idioms such a5 this, to avoid “false positives” or cases where “collateral” and “damage” occur together but do not relate to civilian casualties. Support for Domain-Specific Taxonomies Categorization actoss multiple systems and information sources requires the ability to support both a universal semantic network, based on the commonly understood meanings found in any dictionary, as well as domain specific taxonomies. For example, the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) maintains multiple taxonomies for describing the relationships between various military terms and concepts, as well as their relationship to other generally accepted terms. Other specific taxonomies include those promoted by UNESCO, various industries, and specific manufacturers For analysts and others involved in Homeland Security to properly analyze and access unstructured information requires a system able to categorize and retrieve information according to these specific relationships and related synsets. Capturing External information Sources and Multiple Media Formats One of the shortcomings of many information systems is aan inability to access or correlate information outside of a single application, an ability erucial to Homeland Security. Given its multidisciplinary nature, involving. information ranging from travel records to video feeds, the ability to rapidly correlate and transform multiple forms of information is an absolute necessity for any Homeland Security application. For example, intelligence analysts require access not only to secure and classified information, but also to monitor news feeds and other Public information sources. This will inevitably require access both text-based sources and the ability to convert, and categorize video and audio news sources. Rapid Indexing and Categorization The ability to make use of external information requires @ system for rapid indexing and categorization. Today, ‘many categorization systems require manual “training” of information, which eliminates the ability to make use of time-sensitive information from a news feed, for example. Multi-lingual Categorization One of the greatest challenges for intelligence gathering and information analysis relates to the ability to correlate information across multiple languages. Today this is largely the province of only the most sophisticated analysis systems and remains an extremely difficult area to automate, Significant progress has been made, however, in the area of multi-lingual categorization, ‘where common phrases in various languages as weil as ‘multi-lingual dictionaries have been correlated together, Collaborative Discovery Collaborative discovery allows multiple users working on the same data and potentially investigating the same concept relationships to find “hidden® information and present it to each other, A typical scenario might involve multiple analysts across various agencies working on the same data sets but coming up with alternative potential tecrorist attacks, which could then be collaboratively evaluated and prioritized. Ths is facilitated within a solution for information access and analysis is by offering the ability to save and modify sp2:ic queries and taxonomies. Scalability The last requirement for a successful information access and analysis application for Homeland Security is that it be scalable. Agencies must access information within multiple repositories which combined add up to hundreds of terabytes of data, images, video, and other unstructured information, The ability to categorize the largest volume of information possible is critical to the success of Homeland Security. Virtually any limitation on the accessibility of information holds the potential to jeopardize the success of any Homeland Security initiative, This places a heavy burden on any information retrieval solution used in Homeland Security, which will require the ability to index and categorize enormous amounts of information from many different sources and ina variety of formats. RetrievalWare from Convera An industry pioneer in the area of information categorization and retrieval for more than 20 years, Convera has deployed solutions throughout the Department of Defense, across various intelligence agencies worldwide, as well as within private industry. Convera provides « modular platform for secure categorization and retrieval of information from multiple sources, formats and languages. This provides RetrievalWare with an unique ability to address to the requirements for Homeland Security applications, where native support for multiple languages and multiple media is essential For example, information may come from a public source (such as a CNN broadcast) or a privileged source (such as a satellite feed). Yet regardless of their source, both sets of information must correlated with other text and data "SPH Dp as en gana on HBOS aT HS Seog ON Repsdubeantots gvHighlights > Toure they are to be usetal fo Homeland Security applications. Without a native ability to capture the context of video content in the same way as text- based information, the only way to correlate the two (video and text) is through {me consuming manual analysis. However, by combining an industry-leading solution for managing and manipulating video content with its proprietary Adaptive Pattern Recognition Processing (APRP) pattern-based retrieval engine, RetrievalWare offers the ability to index and analyze information from virtually any format in near real-time. Convera Retrievaltare delivers Secures mult lingual matt dia categorization and retrieval solutions for applications with large stores of diverse information, Such as those involved in Homeland Security. Convera's categorization and retrieval technology leverages an established Additional features of Semantic Network, comprised ofa collection of spproniteatly $00,000 English Retrevalare include: words that expands to over 1.6 million semantic reationghips and sdlome hat are beganized by concept. This accelerates the inital eategoraston process, which further auginented oy Both manual taining and the tegration bfexisting taxonomies Leveraging this concept based categorization ability users need not rely upon the vagaries sesoclated with keyword-tagging of documents by + Pattern search through Convera's proprietary Adaptive Pattern Recognition Processing (APRP) «Document level security which individuals unaware of other potential zalationships. For example, intelligence leverages LDAP and Microsoft's analysts may well understand a particular subject, but often lack visibility into Active Directory for authentication how a specific piece of information relates to other topics. The ability to search by based on existing user profiles ‘concept allows for discovery based on related words and notions. and security investments Security + Support for natural language _RetrievalWare provides a security infrastructure that respects the native security queries using feature extraction _of the disparate document repositories accessed by RetrievalWare through a and concept-based retrieval single log-on, using LDAP-based directory services. This leverages organizations! which parallel human thought existing security investments and offers the convenience of a single sign-on when searching across multiple secure repositories. The eross-repository library-level, rather than machine indexin a and document-level security helps to ensure that only the information a given + Support for content in over user should see is displayed, thas reinforcing the overall security ofthe system. 45 languages including Arabic eee menn hel and Hebrew Support of Languages and Subject Domains RetrievalWare includes modular support for more than 45 languages, including + Developer's SDK that enables Arabic and Hebrew. This ability, essential to security and intelligence third parties and Convera’s applications, is distinct from other approaches which simply translate text from Integration Services Group to ‘multiple languages into English. For example, someone with native fluency in a ‘modify, extend, or embed given language will be able to pick up nuances and relationships between words RetrievalWare at client or and concepts that otherwise may be lost in translation. RetcievalWare is able to server levels categorize and correlate concepts across languages so that both the text and the semantic relationship are captured. Using its cartridge-based, modular Sentccure Recena Wace dle allows space doseinapecifeeargatc setmenks fr ores ob iene fram fateee ie deeees, ec adrania significantly faster processing of information, presenting semantic relationships Pere a ee eee re ee sed ais og tac a wana See tae an ee ae pan information coateraly can the fared hetene esd deo Summary Homeland Security presents a Herculean effort of information integration, access and analysis. To successfully address this initiative also requires an understanding of the unique circumstances involved with defense and «Industry specific semantic intelligence applications. Convera's successful history in defense and intelligence networks which expedite rapid __stem trom three primary competencies: security-sensitive queries, categorizing categorization and concept-based multi-media formats, and adaptive query formulation. Intelligence, defense, and retrieval across multiple languages law enforcement agencies demand virtually limitless retrieval capabilities relating ‘and media formats to the ability to retrieve diverse forms of information, from foreign language text to satellite video feeds. Convera’s native support of both multiple languages and multiple media forms offers a unique advantage in this regard. ee i Spee meigrr + Support for most major operating platforms including Windows, UNIX, and LINUX + Profiling to alert users to new relevant documents and changes in documents } Butimeteceinmarenansmancomcnsascier‘Served in hand to the Office of May 12, 2003 Don Feith May 12, 2003 AL FILED ON Assistant U.S. Attorney, ORIGIN 55 Pleasant Street, MAY 12 2003 Concord, NH 03301 y.S. DISTRICT COURT a NH Re: Your investigation DISTRICT OF Sir, On March 31, 2003 I served on you in person a great number of documents and three tapes that warranted a criminal investigation by the Office of the U.S. Attorney. You and I spoke only briefly and not in private ‘at your convenience. I openly answered your every question and of fered you ‘as much explanation as you were willing to hear. The next day the Secret Service woke me up with many questions to ask to aid their investigation of me because false allegations had been made against me. That has been resolved. I know you should be aware of this because I told them of you and all Federal Computers are linked. You and they should have been aware of the Treasury and the INS Depts. investigations of me as well At the time of our meeting I did sense your disdain for me which is OK by me. You have that right, but you still must listen to me and investigate my allegations and examine my evidence. When you asked where to send back the stuff, I found it comical that I would have to explain to you why you should not. After all, you are a Government Lawyer and I just an alien layman. You did ask for one month before responding to me. I have extended the courtesy two more weeks. Now that I am aware of Judge DiClerico’s Orders, I must go above your head and on to Washington. Perhaps you should review my recent filings hereto attached to aid in your understanding. Please keep the Tapes in your possession. I believe the Of fice of the Independent Counsel should be requesting them from you shortly. I will bother you no more with any more evidence of crimes I will take it elsewhere. But I do demand an answer from you to this Question. Inall of the evidence that I have provided to you, do you see any Civil Rights Violations and Professional Misconduct? I expect a response in writing and signed in your hand. I will file the documents I gave you in the matter now before Judge McAuliffe when yoyace finished Pee Oped 153 Alvin Ave, Milton, MA. 02186Department of Justice United States Anorney District of New Hampshire Federal Building 09228.0982 55 Plewsant Siert, Roum 182 Gancand New Hampshire 03301 May 12, 2003 Mr. David Amos 153 Alvin Avenue Milton, MA 02186 Re: Return of Materials Dear Mr. Amos: am returning the materials you left with this office. All of the allegations you make arise from a probate dispute in the Commonwealth of Massachuset There is nothing in the documents you left that would provide the basis for jurisdiction in the Meate of New Hampshire. Accordingly, the materials are being returned to you. Attorneys in this office are prohibited from providing private legal advice to citizens. You should contact a privare ttorney for a legal opinion on your questions concerning professional misconduct and civil rights violations very truly yours, THOMAS P. COLANTUONO united States Attorney wy \AWLE Donald Feith Assistant U.S. Attorney DE/dft EnclosureUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Case# CO 3- 2OR -p/a EXHIBITS OFFERED BY: NUMBER/LETTER cheb toe 2 Ree yk bi TB Twp Ki covtr te PE (257 yoitat © gee tty Bybi bto tops Rex ot VecimetstI1c ad OR GINAL FILED ON MAY 15 2003 DISTRICT COURT ISTRICT OF NH ‘USDCNH-25 (2-96)