OCCK

There are a number of innocuous items which have affected my judgment on the involvement of Christopher Busch in the OCCK murders. Among them are a series of unrelated facts which I will discuss before reviewing my other conclusions. These four items include (a) the statement of Richard Thompson that Busch was the leading suspect, (b) the four reports that the guilty party was the son of an automobile or GM executive, (c) the Task Force identification of Busch and his companions to the family of Kristine Michelich on October 19, 2009 and (d) the October 5, 2009 report that Jessica Cooper did not want to be kept current of this case.

The report that Richard Thompson thought Busch was the leading suspect demands clarification (Chapter 49). Thompson was the Chief Assistant Oakland County Prosecutor in 1977 who attended the Busch examination in Flint on January 28, 1977 and was later elected Prosecutor. Perhaps no one has better knowledge of this case.

Christopher Busch was the son of H. Lee Busch, a General Motors Vice President. Reports from four unrelated persons stated that the suspect in the OCCK case was the son of a prominent automobile or GM executive are not coincidental (Chapter 45). Based on the documents I have reviewed no one has talked to these individuals. If four people contacted the King family or the media did other persons provide similar information to law enforcement? If anyone else has received similar information, please bring it to my attention.

On October 19, 2009 MSP Sergeant Gary Gray, the leader of the revitalized Task Force, advised the family of Kristine Michelich that Busch and his companions were the leading suspects. On October 27, 2009 the Task Force did not answer any of the questions from the King family. See Chapters 33 to 35. Why couldn’t the Task Force tell the King family the same information it gave to the Michelich family eight days previously? Shortly thereafter Gray was replaced as the Task Force leader and Oakland County took control of the case.

At her first meeting with the Task Force on February 20, 2009 Jessica Cooper advised the investigating officers they could count on the full support of her office (Chapter 53). You can imagine my surprise when I later learned that as of October 5, 2009 Cooper did not want to be kept advised of the OCCK case (Chapter 53). What happened between these two dates to cause Cooper to change her mind?

Is the King family entitled to ask someone to explain the accuracy and the applicability of these observations?

Footnote: you can access this blog at “afathersstory-occk.com’. You can access specific Chapters by adding “/chapter-xx”.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather
OCCK

Based on my Story I have concluded that Christopher Busch was involved in the OCCK murders. Until Oakland County will answer our questions, the King family will always believe the Oakland County Prosecutor provided results favorable to the father of the murderer rather than to the families of the victims. Paul Walton told us on June 25, 2012 that the Oakland County Prosecutor had no evidence exonerating Busch (Chapter 63). When they completed and filed the search warrant affidavit on October 28, 2008 the Oakland County Prosecutor, the Wayne County Prosecutor and the Michigan State Police all thought Busch was the best lead they had reviewed to that date.

Except for the murder of 6 million Jews by the German government, I cannot envision a more hideous death than that imposed on Tim. My children remember my warnings to Tim not to enter a stranger’s car. Once he was in the car, either forcibly or voluntarily, this eleven year old boy knew what was coming. He had no ability to protect himself from sexual abuse or the hands that suffocated him. Marion, Cathy, Chris, Mark and I have lived with these thoughts since 1977.

In addition to my conclusions of what I have told you to date, from time to time I will list the questions I would like answered. Please be patient with me as I summarize my conclusions and list my unanswered questions.

Mike Goetz, the Republican candidate for Oakland County Prosecutor, has told the King family he will provide answers to us.

Footnote: You can access this blog at “afathersstory-occk.com” You can access specific Chapters by adding “/chapter-xx”

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather
OCCK

After I published Chapter 52 I had further thoughts on the Grand Jury background. I called the families of Mark Stebbins and Kristine Mihelich and Patrick Coffey, the source of the Christopher Busch lead. None of them had been called as witnesses. How does the prosecutor convict any criminal if she does not call the victims as a witness? The failure to call Coffey would eliminate any charges against Busch. Who was the suspect identified to the Grand Jury?

The history of the OCP reaction to the Busch lead is contradictory. In 1977 the OCP publicly announced that Busch was not a suspect in the Stebbins murder because he passed a polygraph test (Chapter8, Exhibit A)). After the appointment of the revitalized Task Force in 2005 Richard Thompson, the Chief Assistant Prosecutor in 1977 and later elected Oakland County Prosecutor, advised the investigating officers he believed Busch was involved in these murders(Chapter49). As of October 5, 2009 Jessica Cooper did not want to receive the Task Force reports (Chapter 58) and she called me on March 1, 2010 to tell me Busch was not a suspect (Prologue). Is the Cooper lack of interest because all concerned believed Busch was involved and Oakland County was embarrassed to admit its previous errors?

Was the OCCK case added to the Grand Jury list of cold cases after its formation? Did the OCP call me as a Grand Jury witness solely to charge me with a crime as I discussed in Chapter 65? Why did Oakland County form a Grand Jury on the OCCK case when there was an existing Grand Jury in Wayne County? Who did the OCP ask the Grand Jury to indict? Are my questions valid?

You can locate the previous Chapters at “afathersstory-OCCK.com”.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather
OCCK

My son Chris and I met with the Michigan State Police and Wayne County Detective Cory Williams after this Chapter was published. For this reason I stated in the original Chapter I might publish this addition after the meeting. We had been advised that Sloan was offered freedom under some conditions which were not given to us. We were subsequently advised that Sloan had decided not to accept this offer.

Why would Sloan refuse freedom? First, he may not know anything which would be helpful to solving the murders. Second, he may have been afraid of punishment from any living person he could identify. Third, at age 80 plus he may have preferred three meals a day and a place to sleep. Four, his sense of loyalty to his friends and/or customers supersedes his concerns for the children. Can you think of any other reasons?

While the Oakland County Prosecutor has never told me why Christopher Busch was no longer a suspect in her March 1, 2010 phone call, my degree in bar room psychology has led me to conclude that the Sloan lead replaced Busch as the leading suspect primarily through the use of scientific evidence rather than circumstantial evidence. Remember, the scientific evidence, specifically the mDNA match between a hair in Sloan’s car which matched hairs on two of the victims, was accumulated by the revitalized Task Force after 2005 without any input from Oakland County. It also gave Oakland County an opportunity to hide any of its many possible mistakes or cover up on the Busch involvement.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather
OCCK

This is the day Jessica Cooper asked me to come to the courtroom of Judge Martha Anderson where she falsely accused me of a crime.

It is a crime in Michigan if you disclose the existence of a grand jury after you are served with a subpoena to appear. Grand Jury subpoenas contain this warning. I was served with a subpoena in early July to appear on July 20. I discussed this with David Binkley, my attorney in the Michigan State Police case and Lisa Milton, my attorney in the Oakland County Prosecutor case. I did not discuss it with anyone else.

Sometime after service of the subpoena and before July 20 Kevin Dietz of Channel 4 called my son Chris and me to meet with us. When he came to the house he advised us that the existence of the Grand Jury would be announced on the 6:00 news broadcast. When I told him that the person who gave him this information had committed a crime, he told me he had three sources.

On July 19 Cooper or Walton called Binkley and asked us to appear in the courtroom of Judge Martha Anderson the next morning. This was not surprising as I would not call a witness if I had not interviewed him or her. When we arrived the court clerk asked us sit in the jury room. After 20 or 30 minutes we were taken to the chambers (office) of Judge Anderson where Cooper and Walton were already seated.

To my surprise Walton told Judge Anderson that I had told Dietz of the existence of the Grand Jury. I do not recall any facts supporting this allegation. My response was an absolute denial. Rather than stating any supporting facts Walton repeated his accusation. I don’t know what Cooper and Walton told Judge Anderson in my absence. It is improper per for any judge to discuss any case unless both parties are present.

After we left the court room Binkley talked with Walton. It is my understanding that Walton admitted the OCP had no facts to support this allegation. Let me tack you back to the November 13, 2009 letter I received from Cooper where she states “The Oakland County Prosecutor’s Office is not an investigative agency. Rather. We prosecute crimes which have already been investigated by police…” (Chapter 62, Exhibit I).
If Cooper relied on someone else for this false information she should take appropriate action to punish them for a false report and allow me to sue them for damages. If it was all conjecture she should be punished for taking up the court time without properly preparing her facts. A court room is not the forum for pretrial discovery.

After I called Dietz to advise him of this situation he sent me an email denying I was the source of his information (Exhibit K). He then prepared a letter identical to the email which I picked up from his office the next morning and delivered copies to Cooper, Walton and the clerk for Judge Anderson. When I asked Walton at our June 25, 2112 discussion (Chapter 63) who advised him that I disclosed the grand jury information to Dietz he responded “Kevin Dietz”. I believe Dietz and not Walton. How about you?

If this is how Cooper treats victims how does she treat criminals? Is anyone in the media interested in asking her for Comments on this Chapter?

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather
OCCK

Item 8. 07/14/2011: I have difficulty understanding why my statement to a third party is a meeting. I did not know at that time Jessica Cooper, at her request, was not receiving reports (Chapter 53), that she would share documents and information with the media and not the victims (Chapters 38-40), that the Oakland County Prosecutor had no evidence exonerating Busch (Chapter 63) or that on October 28, 2008 the Oakland County Prosecutor, the Wayne County Prosecutor and the Michigan State Police all believed Christopher Busch was the best suspect when they filed the search warrant affidavit.

Item 9. 07/17/11: On this date Cooper publicly requested information on the possible involvement of Archibald Sloan in the OCCK murders. The Task Force had determined there was a mDNA match between hairs found on the bodies of both Mark Stebbins and Tim King with a hair found in the car of Sloan. I later learned that the investigating officers requested Cooper to go public because they had no facts to charge Sloan other than the mDNA match (Chapter 64). As a courtesy MSP Lieutenant Denise Powell and FBI Agent Sean Callaghan advised my son Chris and I an hour prior to the announcement. I believed then, and I still believe, Sloan could be a good lead. However, the Task Force has not discovered any facts to identify this unknown suspect. On the other hand, the information my daughter Cathy provided the Task Force did result in an identified suspect which Cooper will not discuss with me.

Item 10. 07/18/2012: See my response to the two previous dates.

Item 11. 08/29/2012: When Jessica Cooper would not discuss the Christopher Busch involvement with me I wrote Sheriff Michael Bouchard requesting a meeting with his chief investigator. Bouchard offered to attend but I advised him this was not necessary. No prosecutor was present and I thought that Don Tullock was with the sheriff’s office.

Item 12. 08/29/12: Attached as Exhibit J is the four page memorandum I dictated on my drive home after the meeting. I referred to Tullock as Phelps and made the handwritten insert after this was brought to my attention. Gary Miller called me upon receiving the memorandum to indicate my reference to the Sloan involvement was perhaps understated. I did not receive any facts exonerating Busch from possible involvement.

* * * *
Trial publicity is discussed in Rule 3.6 of the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct. The rule states “ (a). A lawyer who is a participating or has participated in the investigation or litigation of a matter shall not make an extrajudicial statement that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know will be disseminated by means of public communication and will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding in the matter. …” Did the TV appearance of Cooper violate this rule?

As I asked you in Chapter 61, how many of these 27 meetings were actually meetings with the Prosecutor?

THIS LIST DELIBERATELY OMITS THE DATE OF JULY 20, 2011 WHEN JESSICA COOPER AND PAUL WALTON ASKED ME TO APPEAR IN COURT WHERE THEY FALSELY ACCUSED ME OF A CRIME. I WILL DISCUSS THIS IN MY NEXT CHAPTER.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather
OCCK

7. 06/–/12: My notes indicate this discussion took place on June 25 at the request of Paul Walton. This was shortly after Kevin Dietz of Channel 4 announced that the Oakland County Prosecutor no longer considered Christopher Busch a suspect. Present with me were my attorney, Lisa Milton, and my son, Chris.

Walton delivered to us the original criminal complaint filed against Busch in his Oakland County pedophile case. This complaint contained a hand written note stating “No Deals R. Thompson”. Walton explained to us that this note did not allow the assistant prosecutor handling the case to accept a plea deal without the approval of the Oakland County Prosecutor, L. Brooks Patterson, or the Chief Assistant Prosecutor, Richard Thompson. Assistant Prosecutor Leonard Gilman, who was later appointed U. S. Attorney for Eastern Michigan, accepted a plea of guilty with probation and no jail time. The file did not contain any information that Patterson or Thompson had approved the settlement of the case.
Walton did answer a few our questions on the Busch involvement. He responded “no” when Chris asked him if there was any exculpatory evidence regarding Busch. My notes indicate Lisa Milton, my son Chris and I thought the primary purpose of the meeting was to criticize Patterson before the upcoming November election.

You can imagine my surprise when I learned on November 20 that Jessica Cooper had made this information available to Kevin Dietz of Channel 4 on June 18 without a FOIA request and then, after receiving his FOIA request dated June 19, provided him with 121 pages which included the one page original criminal complaint (Chapter 38).

It is now my conclusion that this discussion would allow Jessica Cooper to avoid any election year publicity that she had made media disclosures on pending cases while denying this information to the victims and continuing to tell the court that I was not entitled to documents in my FOIA cases.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather
OCCK

The following items are the 12 meeting dates without a check mark:
1. October 27, 2009: This is the date of my first and only meeting with the Task Force and is discussed in previous chapters. The Task Force did not answer any of my questions. I later learned that as of October 5, 2009 Jessica Cooper had not been kept current on the status of the investigation at her own request (Chapter 58).

2. November 13, 2009: The letter referred to for this date is attached as Exhibit I. When Cooper warned me of the criminal aspect of polygraph disclosures she was apparently unaware that her predecessor, L. Brooks Patterson, had previously told the media in February 1977 that Christopher Busch was not a suspect in the murder of Mark Stebbins because he had passed a lie detector test. Cooper has continued to deny me access to the contrary conclusions by three other polygraphers (Chapter 8, Exhibit A).

Cooper also states that the OCP does not publicize investigations. However, last year she publicly stated that she would not charge the officers who killed a customer at the Northland Mall because they did not intend to kill him. How many times have you seen or heard the prosecutor conclude that the deaths were a murder-suicide? If the conclusion is professional Cooper goes public. Is it possible her reasons for silence in the OCCK case are personal, political or control rather than professional? If so, silence was her only defense?

3. February 23, 2010: My unanswered phone calls requesting permission to attend the February 26 Task Force conference is a meeting?

4. February 24, 2010: I did call twice more requesting permission to attend the February 26 meeting. Cooper had my friend, Don Studt, tell me I could not attend. Perhaps Cooper can tell us how I asked for information discussed at the meeting which took place two days later.

5. Spring of 2011: My attorney in the FOIA cases was Lisa Milton. She was not contacted. In addition to being a friend and member of my former law firm, Binkley is also an acquaintance of Cooper. I asked permission to attend which was denied. Binkley advised me that Cooper wanted to terminate my questions on the OCCK case. I advised Binkley not to accept any further requests from Cooper unless I could attend.

6. July 21, 2011: This is the day I was called as a witness before the Oakland County Grand Jury. I am forbidden to discuss my grand jury testimony. I met with Cooper, Walton and another prosecutor prior to the hearing to discuss my testimony. We primarily discussed my testimony. I do not recall any discussion on the status of the investigation. During this conference I asked Cooper why she was not talking the Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy. Cooper responded with words to the effect that Worthy wants to be governor. Why political aspirations should interfere with a criminal investigation is beyond my comprehension.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather
OCCK

During the 2012 elections I publicly supported Michael Bishop who was Jessica Cooper’s opposition for the Oakland County Prosecutor. My principal complaint was the failure of Cooper to discuss the OCCK case with me. On October 25, 2012 Cooper appeared on television and waived some papers claiming she had met with me on 27 occasions. After her reelection on November 20, 2012 Assistant Prosecutor Thomas Grden provided me with the list of these meetings (Exhibit H).

I have placed a check mark next to the 15 dates which involve court filings or court hearings in my two FOIA cases. As previously noted the Oakland County Prosecutor successfully argued that I was not entitled to any documents or pretrial discovery. I have even heard statements that the attorneys appearing in court were instructed not to talk to me.

I will discuss the other 12 meeting dates in the following Chapters. With one possible exception I do not believe any of these “meetings” were actually meetings.
When I finish please tell me how many of these 27 dates you would treat as a meeting.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather
OCCK

During the 2012 elections I publicly supported Michael Bishop who was Jessica Cooper’s opposition for the Oakland County Prosecutor. My principal complaint was the failure of Cooper to discuss the OCCK case with me. On October 25, 2012 Cooper appeared on television and waived some papers claiming she had met with me on 27 occasions. After her reelection on November 20, 2012 Assistant Prosecutor Thomas Garden provided me with the list of these meetings (Exhibit H).

I have placed a check mark next to the 15 dates which involve court filings or court hearings in my two FOIA cases. As previously noted the Oakland County Prosecutor successfully argued that I was not entitled to any documents or pretrial discovery. I have even heard statements that the attorneys appearing in court were instructed not to talk to me.

I will discuss the other 12 meeting dates in the following Chapters. With one possible exception I do not believe any of these “meetings” were actually meetings.
When I finish please tell me how many of these 27 dates you would treat as a meeting.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather