My Third Novel's Conclusion, My Heartbreak

My heart begins to break when I think about completing this particular book -- because this narrative has sustained me like no other story I've known. It's both more personal and more universal than my other works. But beyond memory and archetype, it's a cri-de-coeur about needing to become the person one is destined to be. And in the writing, I have met my own life's work, my own fated journey -- having the sense all the while that the pages are suffused with a resonance, an energy, an electrified field that defies explanation. Writers hope and pray to be overtaken by a work in this way -- to be conscripted into passionate service of a profound story. To experience it even once in a lifetime seems a great privilege. I still have several months before this novel is complete, and this constitutes my reprieve. Because I'm not ready for the beauty to end.




Thursday, August 4, 2022

Did Attorney Nick Heimlich Contact Attorney Peter Schlueter, in Violation of My Privacy Rights and Attorney/Client Privilege?

 Following herewith are a series of communications extended to Attorney Peter Schlueter concerning slanderous and defamatory communications he is alleged to have received from Attorney Nick Heimlich.

It is noteworthy that I never mentioned these attorneys to one another.  The only manner in which Nick Heimlich could have learned about my consultations with Peter Schlueter  was through the FBI's unlawful surveillance of my communications, and further, the agency's unconstitutional attempts to deprive me of objective legal representation.

Segments of these communications are redacted, although the OIG Hotline will be provided with complete emails.

Sent: February 12, 2021 at 9:07 a.m., From: lanemacwilliams@gmail.com To: peterinla@aol.com

Peter, I need, as a precautionary measure, to inform you about an apparently compromised attorney named Nick Heimlich.

I have been told that Mr. Heimlich is a xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx who has had recent communication with xxxxxxx xxxx.  I have also been told that, at xxxxxxx xxxx's express direction, he has attempted to discredit me with other attorneys with whom I have consulted.  Further, I have been told that he has engaged in slandering me in a communication to the xxxxxxxxxx xxx, in an attempt to protect himself against any potential misconduct complaint.

Obviously, this information should be handled in the most confidential way possible. Mr. Heimlich is clearly a xxxxxx xxxxxxxx man with, according to others, a xxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx history.

I thought it important that you should have this information at this time.

Would you please inform me immediately if Mr. Heimlich has had any recent communications with you or attempts to do so in the future?

As you well know, ethics and integrity mean everything in cases such as this one, involving potential collusion between organized crime and law enforcement.

I look forward to speaking to you later today.

Most sincerely,

Lane

********************************************************************************

At 1:39 pm on February 12, 2021, four and a half hours after I sent the above email, Peter Schlueter declined representation of my case in writing, after having assured me verbally many times that he had accepted the role of my legal advocate.  That communication follows:

From: peterinla@aol.com To: lanemacwilliams@gmail.com

Ms. MacWilliams, while I appreciate that you contacted my office and myself regarding a public records matter, please be advised that I and my firm are declining your case.  In other words, we will not be your attorneys.

Please contact another attorney as soon as you can to determine your rights and potentially to protect your ability to seek redress.

Peter Schlueter 

***********************************************************************************

Sent: February 12, 2021 at 3:06 p.m. From: lanemacwilliams@gmail.com To: peterinla@aol.com

Peter, I have a concern that your sudden withdrawal from my case is connected to communication you may have had with Attorney Nick Heimlich and others.  You accepted my case several weeks ago, as I have recorded in my notes.  Furthermore, you agreed to speak about the timing of completion of your brief today at 2 pm.  It seems that it is my request for written confirmation or denial of your communications with Attorney Nick Heimlich that has occasioned your sudden desire to depart.

So, I would ask you once again -- have you or have you not had communication with Attorney Nick Heimlich, please?

If you have, I would like to know the dates and times of your phone calls or Zoom meetings, please -- and I would like to know whether any of these communications overlapped with my calls to you.

Ethics in a matter such as this, in which collusions between law enforcement and organized crime is a possibility, is an extremely serious concern, Peter, as you well know.

Please clarify for me your communications with Nick Heimlich over the last several weeks, in addition to anyone else who may have any connection whatsoever to the San Mateo County Sheriff's Office and/or xxxxxxx xxxx.

Thank you for your detailed follow up.

This matter must be addressed with diligent concern.

Most sincerely,

Lane MacWilliams

***********************************************************************************

Sent: February 12, 2021 at 3:06 pm From: lanemacwilliams@gmail.com To: peterinla@aol.com

Peter, this is to confirm the contents of our phone conversation moments ago.  You stated to me that you are withdrawing from this case, because you have been "worried" about collusion.  You declined to answer my direct question about whether you have had recent communications with Attorney Nick Heimlich or with any others who would represent the opposing side in this matter, specifically members of the San Mateo County Sheriff's Office, such as Scott Berberian, or others connected with my stalker, xxxxxxx xxxx.

I requested again that you reply to my questions regarding any such communications in writing.

After I made this request, you hung up the phone precipitously, clearly fearful of the substance of my questioning.

I would appreciate your diligent follow up regarding this matter.  Please see my previous email, below.

Thank you,

Lane MacWilliams

**********************************************************************************

Sent: July 29, 2021 at 7:00 p.m. From: lanemacwilliams@gmail.com To: peterinla@aol.com

Peter, this is to extend a third request for information about any communications you may have had with Attorney Nick Heimlich specifically concerning the import of SMC Case Report #19-11840 to my legal complaints toward Dr. David Lieberman and any others.  Please see my emails below expanding on questions pertaining to this important issue.

I would appreciate your prompt response to these questions in writing.

Thank you very much,

Lane MacWilliams

********************************************************************************

On July 29, 2021, at 4:03 p.m., Attorney Peter Schlueter sent me a long letter denying any contact with "Nick Heimlic."

I was under the impression that the misspelling may have been intentional.

**********************************************************************************

Sent: July 29, 2021 at 5:03 p.m. From: lanemacwilliams@gmail.com To: peterinla@aol.com

Thank you for reaching out, Peter.  In the interests of accuracy, I do not know of an Attorney Nick Heimlic, referenced in your letter.

I am asking specifically whether you engaged in any communication of any kind with Attorney Nick Heimlich in January or February of 2021.  And we can disregard for the moment the subject of that communication.

Most sincerely,

Lane MacWilliams

**********************************************************************************

Attorney Peter Schlueter failed to reply.



No comments:

Post a Comment