Skip navigation

California v. Niroula, CA, Def Mot for Order protecting attorney-client calls, sheriff illegal telephone monitoring, 2011

Download original document:
Brief thumbnail
This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.
Kaushal Niroula
Defendant In Pro Per
Booking # 200910575
Indio Jail
P.O. Box 1748
INDIO, CA 92201
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
(INDIO BRANCH)
______________________________________________
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
) CASE NO: INF 064492
PLAINTIFF
)
)
v.
) EX PARTE MOTION
) FOR PRIVILEGED
KAUSHAL NIROULA,
) TELEPHONE CALLS
DEFENDANT
) BY DEFENDANT
______________________________________________)
TO: HONORABLE DAVID B DOWNING JUDGE PRESIDING
MOTION FOR COURT ORDER PROTECTING
THE PRIVILEGED NATURE OF TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS
BETWEEN DEFENDANT AND COURT APPOINTED ASSETS
AS WELL AS OTHER COUNSEL PROVIDING REPRESENTATION
MAY IT PLEASE THIS HONORABLE COURT. Defendant, KAUSHAL
NIROULA, (hereinafter referred to as "Mr. Niroula" ) respectfully submits the following
request for an Order of this Honorable Court ordering that those assets appointed by this
Honorable Court be granted freedom from wire and/or oral interception of their
communications with Defendant. In support, Mover shows the following:
1.

On or about the ___day of ________, 2011, this Honorable Court appointed

William Picard to aid and assist in Mover's Defense by researching and producing drafts
of Motions to be considered and upon approval of Mover filed on his behalf. In

1

conjunction with the free access to this Court appointed asset and other assets appointed
by this Court, Mover has secured local telephone numbers for his use.
2.

To date there is evidence that privileged telephone calls were illegally

intercepted by persons unknown at this time.. As this Court indicated on June 17, 2011,
and as reflected in the record found at Pages 30-32 (EXHIBIT "A") , "It is illegal to
listen to a privileged call. We all recognize that. And anybody who does that, does it at
that peril. So that will be that." { See: Pages 31-32; Lines 28; Lines 1-2}.
3.

On August 24, 2011, your Mover spoke telephonically with S. Stephen

Spring, II, Attorney at Law, who has been retained to represent your mover in separate
civil matters. Further, each and every phone call has been prefaced with a standardized
statement from your Mover that it is a felony under California law to intercept such
privileged telephone calls. Further, both Mover and have counsel have consistently stated
prior to engaging in any conversation, that neither has consented to any wire intercepts or
monitoring. As has been the usual custom, on August 24, 2011, Mover requested that his
civil attorney establish local telephone numbers through the use of Vonage so that Mover
will have greater access to his Court appointed assets. Further, within twenty or so
minutes of the telephone accounts being established, the account was suspended for a
"fraud" alert which apparently was triggered by a third party communication which could
have only arisen from a real time and illegal wire interception of this privileged phone
call going through the telephone system installed and maintained by the Sheriff of
Riverside County. As a result, Mover was required to submit to Vonage Subpoena
Compliance Department a Preservation Letter transmitted and received on August 25,
2011.

2

4. By separate pleading concomitant with the filing of this Motion, Mover is also
seeking the issuance of a subpoena directed to Vonage Holdings Corporation, Legal
Compliance Unit, located in Holmdel, New Jersey. A copy of the Preservation Letter is
attached and annexed hereto as EXHIBIT "B".
5. As a result, the following telephone numbers are being submitted to this
Honorable Court for use by the Court appointed assets:
A) William Picard - Motion Writer - 760.989.4108
B) Graham J. Desvernine – Private Investigator - 760.989.4475
C) James Butts – Florida Private Investigator assisting Mr. Desvernine760.501.0409
6. Mover further requests that this Honorable Court direct an order forthwith to
the Honorable Stanley Sniff, Sheriff of Riverside County, California, that these telephone
numbers are privileged phone numbers and are, in no manner whatsoever, to be
intercepted, monitored, or subjected to Global Tel Link's Call IQ - which is a system
installed in the Riverside County Jail that is an ongoing data mining operation in which
all calls are indiscriminately intercepted, subjected to wholesale transcription and
computer analyzed for certain trigger words that trip an "alert" resulting in either an
employee of Riverside County or the Sheriff's Department reviewing in its entirety any
telephone intercepts which have been subjected to this operation, including privileged
telephone calls which are, upon information and belief, being illegally intercepted on a
wholesale basis within the jail. (See: EXHIBIT "C").

3

WHEREFORE, Mover, Kaushal Niroula, requests that this Honorable Court order
that: 1) The respective telephone numbers: 760.989.4108; 760.989.4475; and
760.501.0409 are privileged numbers; 2) That under no circumstances, save a Title III
(See: 18 USC § 2510, et seq.,) warrant in effect, are any of these calls to be intercepted,
monitored, or subjected in any way to Global Tel Link’s “Call IQ”; and 3) That the
Honorable Stanley Sniff, Sheriff of Riverside County, his subordinates, agents, assigns,
and/or employees are prohibited in any way from intercepting, recording, monitoring,
and/or using “Call IQ” for any of the telephone calls made by your Mover until further
orders of this Honorable Court.
Dated this ___day of August, 2011, from Indio, California
Respectfully submitted,
_______________________________
Kaushal Niroula, A Propria Persona
Defendant In Pro Per
Booking # 200910575
Indio Jail, P.O. Box 1748
INDIO, CA 92201

4