eHam.net - Amateur Radio (Ham Radio) Community

Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net



[Articles Home]  [Add Article]  

EX Ham At It Again!

Mark Christian (KB6SRT) on October 13, 2003
View comments about this article!


EX-HAM AT IT AGAIN

October 10, 2003

Bell, Ca. This won't be the first time this pest has graced the airways of So. California repeaters. 65 year old Former Amateur Radio Operator Jack Gerritsen (formerly KG6IRO) who's license was “set aside” on November 14, 2001 due to malicious interference, death threats and jamming other hams and local Police agencies, was arrested on Jan. 29, 2002 and served 1 year of a 5 year sentence. On Jan 29, 2002 Again

L.A. agents participated in a pre-dawn arrest of Mr. Gerritsen and a subsequent search of his home where they found 20 radios, eight which were capable of operating on frequencies in the Amateur, Marine and Land Mobile Public Safety Bands. “He had a Marine radio hidden in the closet with batteries connected to it and a length of coax running outside his residence,” an FCC spokesman said Friday to this reporter.

He was sentenced to 3 years in prison for interfering with L.A.P.D. radio transmissions. You would think that all that time in confinement would make one just a little wiser…. But NOT Mr. Gerritsen.

He is at it again! Jamming and slandering are his weapon of choice. Using his old call letters that the FCC's Reilly Hollingsworth set aside, He has a prerecorded message that he plays at an increased rate of speed attempting to disguise his voice. It talks about President George Bush and Monica Lewinski. Now, the last time I recalled the names, it was Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski. Maybe he knows something we don't. Either way, his crusade is futile because the first amendment doesn't cover malicious slander and libel.

A group of 10 repeater owners and club board members in the Southern CA. area are taking action with a restraining order to stop Jack's incessant actions on local repeaters that are in direct violation of his parole and tainting the atmosphere of local Amateur Radio Repeaters.

A local resident in Bell, CA. an Amateur Radio Operator and repeater owner, Joe Parrino (N6WZK) said Friday, “Jack rides by my house regularly on his bicycle jamming the output of my repeater, saying things that are causing the repeater user-group to shy away from the repeater because of his increasingly belligerent attitude on the air.”

Another Ham in the area, Mark Christian (KB6SRT) a friend of Joe's, and President of a large Ham Radio group in Orange County, has decided to assist Joe with the effort to stop Jack from his futile crusade. When asked what his thoughts were on this issue, Mark's comment was, “I think they let him out too soon. This is not what Ham Radio is all about. He's 65 years old. Shame on him” Court proceedings will go forward as this article is being printed. For more information on the complete story and extensive history, go to the FCC Website:

Comments and questions can be directed to: kb6srt@juno.com

Story by:

Mark Christian KB6SRT

-- 30 --

Member Comments:
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
 
EX Ham At It Again!  
by N6TGK on October 13, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Well, a restraining order is all and well in theory but it's nothing more than a piece of paper. If the FCC has been unsucessful in stopping this guy, a restraining order won't be either. Hey, if I saw him ride by on a bike and jam my repeater I'd run out and grab the radio and smash it on the ground. That's just my opinion... I could be wrong.
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by N6AYJ on October 13, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Tell the radio club not to file suit against him. Under the doctrines of federal supremacy and pre-emption, only the Commission has the authority to regulate amateur radio. The club's lawsuit will just be dismissed and then the ex-ham will be able to sue the club's plaintiffs for malicious prosecution and abuse of process. Beware. The same thing happened to the 40-meter WESCARS net in the 1970's. They sued the so-called "jammer"; their case was dismissed under the doctrine of federal pre-emption; and the "jammer" then proceeded to collect a large judgment against the WESCARS plaintiffs.
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by WA4MJF on October 13, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Actually this is not the first time this
has happened in CA. The suit is to stop
the person from tespassing on private property
(the repeater). There is no Federal
Premption for this and the CA Superior
courts have in the past issued and enforced
court orders not to tespass on the
private property. It is also used in
other states. I don't know that a
Federal District Court would have the
power to do this, unless maybe the
repeater were located on land that is
in exclusive Federal Jurisdiciton. I'm
not a lawyer and I
don't play one on ATV.

Comparing this to using the radio spectrum
(the 40 meter case), is like comparing
fruits, nuts and flakes, a term you 6 landers
are familiar with, I know. :-)

Although a lotta hams don't realize it,
a repeater, node, BBS, etc is a station
licensed to someone. Just as you have the
right not to have any ham barge into your
home station and use it, you have the same
right with these stations.

73 de Ronnie
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by N6AYJ on October 13, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Ronnie, there is not a single reported case decision in which a court (as distinguished from the FCC) has ever prohibited any ham from operating on a repeater on the ground that it represented a trespass to private property. Yours is a creative theory, though.
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by RobertKoernerExAE7G on October 13, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I sure sympathize with the repeater users.

One very lost human can create a lot of problems.

Bob
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by WA4MJF on October 13, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Well, it was widely reported in
the ham mags that The Civil Superior
Court of LA County did that very
thing a few years ago.

I've never heard of the Federal
Courts enjoining a ham from operating
on a repeater, but there a lotta Federal
District Courts and it coulda happened.

However, I'll leave it to the lawyers to
figger it out.

73 de Ronnie
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by WA9SVD on October 13, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
It appears to be a case of unlicensed operation and malicious interference, as well as violation of probation. WHERE IS THE PROBATION OFFICER and WHERE IS RILEY?
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by KE6I on October 14, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Where are the men in the white coats? This guy is obviously severely depressed or alchoholic or sociopathic or brain damaged.

The only logical explanation I can think of is just that he misses prison. And wants to commit some kind of crime so he can go back.
 
EX Ham At It Again!  
by KE4ZHN on October 14, 2003 Mail this to a friend!

Not that Im trying to justify illegal activity, but in this clowns case, it sounds like hes due for an ole fashioned a**whoopin! If a joker like this rode past my house on a bike jamming the repeater I was trying to use, Id not only take his HT away from him and smash it to pieces, but Id also probably knock a few of his teeth out as well. (probably using his own HT for a dental tool) This clown is obviously mentally disturbed and needs treatment. Since the FCC or law enforcement isnt successful at stopping this idiot, I bet a size 12 boot up his hind end would. Perhaps if not one, but several hams beat this clown to a pulp for this kind of behavior, it would stop. Once again, I dont condone this kind of thing normally, but with some people, there is simply no other way to get through to them, so a good a**whoopin is in order here. Its pretty obvious that spending time in prison for this sort of thing hasnt stopped him, but after nursing a few bruises and replacing a few missing teeth, maybe he would think twice before doing it again. He'd look awful stupid trying to jam anyone with an HT shoved up his arse. Come to think of it, hed be the "jammee" instead of the jammer! ;-)
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by N2MG on October 14, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Quite the character, this guy.

Folks, please refrain from discussing physical attacks, revenge, etc., or I feel I must pull the article.

Thanks!

73 Mike N2MG
webmaster
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by KE4ZHN on October 14, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Sorry, what was I thinking? Heaven forbid anyone has a backbone in these politically correct times we live in! We must coddle criminals and jammers and do everything in our power to protect their civil rights above everyone elses at all costs....even their victims.
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by N2MG on October 14, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
KE4ZHN wrote:
<<
We must coddle criminals and jammers and do everything in our power to protect their civil rights above everyone elses at all costs....even their victims.
>>

Yeah, like THAT'S what I said.

Mike N2MG
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by N2MG on October 14, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I guess he views himself as some kind of activist...

http://www.wirelessweek.com/index.asp?layout=article&articleid=CA5177

and he's listed on

http://www.fija.org/state%20coordinators.htm#California

and

http://www.ibiblio.org/fija/contacts.htm

 
EX Ham At It Again!  
by KC0LCS on October 14, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
That's terrible. How much you wanna bet this guy started out as a CBer? All kidding aside, I definitely think what the guy did is wrong. And apparently arresting him does no good. But what can you do? What can the FCC do? I don't know what to think, so I'll leave it up to you guys. Since I'm only 13, I'll let more intellectually advanced guys figure it out. Just thought I'd put in my 2 cents worth.
73, Nathan KCLCS
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by KB6SRT on October 14, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
by N6AYJ on October 13, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Ronnie, there is not a single reported case decision in which a court (as distinguished from the FCC) has ever prohibited any ham from operating on a repeater on the ground that it represented a trespass to private property. Yours is a creative theory, though.
--------------------------------
Might I respond to this comment? You are quite wrong. There IS a case - and it set a precident in So. Ca. It was The Claremont Amateur Radio Association vs. Timmothy Seawolf. It was a bout that lasted almost 2 years. In the end, the Ham Radio operating Judge presiding over the case told Tim what he thought of his pathetic practices and threw the book at him. I was only a member then. Now I am the 2nd V.P. and I am going to refer to that case. I just wish we had the legal councel we had back then-Sid Radus was my mentor and a great Ham (N6OMS). I think We'll be alright. (GRIN)
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by WA4MJF on October 14, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Tnx, for the backup. I thought it was
in LA County, but at least I had the right
parta the state.

73 de Ronnie
 
EX Ham At It Again!  
by NA6Z on October 14, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Clarification of the George Dubya and Monica reference: Jack is saying we got all over Clinton for lies about Monica, so why aren't we getting all over George Dubya for lies about weapons of mass distruction in Iraq?

He's quite a problem case. He's even been thrown off the infamous "435" repeater!

The least he could do is change his recording every so often.
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by W3JJH on October 14, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
WA9SVD:

The following info is from the ARRL website--

"Imprisoned, paroled and imprisoned again after breaking parole for allegedly having and operating radio equipment without a license, Gerritsen was released early due to jail overcrowding.

"Hollingsworth said the FCC continues to work the case, but he expressed frustration that Gerritsen was let out of prison again with no conditions or restrictions 'even regarding radio, which is
what he was in there for in the first place.'"

Where is his parole officer? Gerritsen apparently hasn't violated the terms of his release!

Where is Riley? Riley is doing his job and try to get the jerk put back in the slammer.
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by WA9SVD on October 14, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Thanks for the clarification. Too bad the "three strikes" law doesn't apply here. After all, he IS a repeat offender.
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by N6AJR on October 14, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Or would that be a REPEATER offender.. hi hi
 
EX Ham At It Again!  
by AC7DX on October 14, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
He needs his 65 yera old ass whipped
 
EX Ham At It Again!  
by K7LA on October 15, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
The next time that crank decides to ride his bicycle past the repeater location for jamming purposes, may we suggest that may be an opportune time to exercise the pet rottweiler or any other large dog.
 
EX Ham At It Again!  
by WA2MZT on October 15, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I'm Tired
Tired of playin' the game......

The FCC cannot enforce itself let alone frequencies. People by their very nature are going to do what they want anyway. Look at all the proliferation of easily moded gear out there. Anyone can transmit on any frequency they want. The Cops and fire are under attack because a dope with a moded 706 wants to call breaker breaker on their repeater system. You can buy, without restriction, any type of MOTOROLA, Bendix King, etc. and get on your local PD repeater today. God forbid the police would complain. Some lawyer would argue that you were hampering the defandants "free speech" by taking away his radio. Now would someone please explain to me what is going on here?
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by W3JJH on October 15, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
WA2MZT:

The FCC just suspended KC9DCP's license for two years for deliberate interference with police radio in Indiana. Three other hams (one in NY, two in NC) have just had cases opened up on their interference with local law enforcement.

In the NY case, local deputies interviewed the ham who confessed to what he was doing. The complaint and confession were forwarded to the FCC, and the Commission is going forward with an inquiry.

The hams are also facing local charges in all of these cases. Interfering with a cop is a chargeable offense in every state. Using a radio to do it just adds the possiblity of a federal charge as well.

Because the malicious interference regs have been upheld in court many times, none of the lawyers have wasted any time trying to make a free speech defense.

That's what's going on.

73 de W3JJH
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by BUFFOON on October 15, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
One of younger posters wrote that arresting him does no good.

This is the problem with the entire "justice" system. Throwing them in jail does NOT work.

So...what does that leave us?
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by W9WHE on October 15, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
"Jack rides by my house regularly on his bicycle jamming the OUTPUT of my repeater"

Huh?

If a bycycle mobile can jam the OUTPUT of your repeater, you need to get a signal. Try using a gain antenna and amplifier. That way, the skumbag will get bored with his ineffectiveness.
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by KE4ZHN on October 15, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I still think making his HT a suppository would solve this problem......... ;-)
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by KE6I on October 15, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Well, sending him back to his buddies in prison will keep him off the air as long as he's there as long as there's no prison ham radio station, hehe. If the guy's screwing around with public safety channels I don't see how there's any other option. Either that or the mental hospital if he's insane (which I suspect.)
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by W9WHE on October 16, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
If hams would move into the 20th (yes the 20th) century and use digital techniques to access repeaters, they could keep much of this QRM at bay.

Ever notice that repeaters with MDC don't suffer from QRM? Why is that? Because MDC codes can be used to individually identify repeater users AND to SELECTIVELY exclude them from repeater access.

So stop whining about QRM and adopt 20th century technology.



 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by KC8VWM on October 16, 2003 Mail this to a friend!

<<<If a bicycle mobile can jam the OUTPUT of your repeater, you need to get a signal. Try using a gain antenna and amplifier. That way, the skumbag will get bored with his ineffectiveness.>>>>

Another good way to display how "ineffective" a jammers attempts are over the air is to get a group of individuals together and start using a local repeater that the jammer wreaks havoc on.

Secondly, arrange in advance to have all the users on the repeater to connect to a VOIP chatroom on the internet while at the same time conducting a simulcast of the same conversation on the local repeater.

You will be able to hear the other side of the conversation even if the repeater becomes jammed by an individual sitting right in front of your house running a KW in your driveway.

Everyone will still be able to carry on a normal conversation like he isn't even there.

This will throw the jammer off guard and they will start to become confused. The jammer will probably start trying everything to try jamming the repeater including dead keying the microphone for longer and more extended periods of time.

This provides an excellent window of opportunity to have a third party with direction finding equipment standing by as the jammer will be too busy thinking of more creative ways to jam the repeater at this moment of time. (like whistling, turning up output power, changing locations etc.) to suspect anything else is actually going on.

There is a risk however that the jammer will become discouraged and refrain his "futile" attempts altogether. Then again, this would be a win win situation.

As many of you probably know, the worst thing you can do is actually acknowledge a jammers attempts or presence over the air. This is an excellent method of discouraging a jammer from achieving their goal.

73,

KC8VWM





 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by K5TED on October 17, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Wow. Not defending this freak, but I am alarmed at the number of posters advocating physical violence as a remedy to a hobby problem. You call the jammer deranged? If he is indeed mentally imbalanced, you support beating his teeth out with a handie? This is the mentality of ham radio? Sounds more like a channel 19 trucker fight to me.

You both seem to be barely clinging to reality on opposite ends of the chasm.
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by KC6NHJ on October 18, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
This lid Gerritsen has jammed my local repeater and me for years. How would you hi-hi old farts like it if EVERY time you tried to use amateur radio, this turd jammed over your signal? This Gerritsen turd calls my house, sends strange threatening letters and jams everyday. Hollingsworth wont even respond to my email complaints about the idiot. The City of Bell police dept wont even do a welfare check on this guy because they are afraid. Jesus thorny-headed christ. I dont want to lose my Federal Firearms License or CCW permit because of this guy, but I am looking up his address on mapquest as we speak. Any suggestions other than dumping a magizine full of .45acp in his wrinkled old heinie? 73 and good luck in the contest de kc6nhj.
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by W6DCE on October 19, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
That isn't true at all.. Tim SeaWolfe was thrown off the CLARA repeater (145.220) in So_Cal by a local judge who not only granted the restraining order but also made him pay for all the court costs...
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by K6LCS on November 27, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I was under the impression that MDC1200 signalling was "proprietary" to Motorola equipment...

Clint Bradford, K6LCS
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by K6LCS on November 27, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Jack's on the air this morning, claiming "victory" in the ill-conceived TRO case brought against him by several repeater owners. Does anyone have first-hand, factual information on that case's outcome?

Clint Bradford, K6LCS
 
EX Ham At It Again!  
by KG6ANT on December 5, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I think the real crime here is:

1). This guy has a real long history of this kind of anti social behavior, and illegal activity.

2). The FCC, (Riley Hollingsworth), has more records, tapes, complaints, and data then any other offender needed logged, to be fined, locked up and put away.

3). The local government points to the FCC, the FCC points to the repeater owner/trustee to stop illegal unlicensed activity on their machines, then turns right around and says they want more data and tapes for "it's" investigation before they will lift the phone receiver. (In other words, "It does not make any money for us to enforce the law against this person, and he is not effecting police and emergency traffic now, so live with it!)

4). Jack feels, (as many egotistic, narcissistic, anti-American, anarchist-loving idiot would), that inaction by the FCC, and stupidity at the state-prison level (that released him without ANY restrictions on radio usage what so ever), is the same as condoning, and approving his activities.

5). Like illegal aliens, (that cross into our country with the intent to occupy our land, and never intending to become citizens), and work here, ahead of those law abiding individuals, that go through the proper legal methods to gain access to our country... Jack has implied he has rights above every other American that carries a valid radio license. He has proven it is far easier to just buy a radio, be irresponsible, deliberately go on the air with the intent to disrupt communications and start verbal warfare, without any apparent action from the once thought-to-be-powerful FCC.

I must say, I am at a loss for an explanation of why the FCC would just 'PASS' on such an idiot that is absolutely BEGGING to be put back behind bars, apparently to be with his boyfriend in prison.

After reading the posts here, and experiencing this idiots daily, hourly, constant baiting for a fight, verbal assaults, cursing and swearing, increasingly aggressive language, re-broadcasting the same old recordings for past 3+ months now I can see how some people may be moved to take matters into their own hands.

If things do irrupt to violence, I put the blame SQUARLY on the shoulders of the FCC! The ham community has done everything but tie Jack up and hand deliver him to the FCC!

VERY FRUSTRATING!

DE KG6ANT
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by KG6ANT on December 5, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
>>> If a bicycle mobile can jam the OUTPUT of your repeater, you need to get a signal. Try using a gain antenna and amplifier. That way, the scumbag will get bored with his ineffectiveness<<<

I am not trying to flame you here, but are you a newbee???

Get a friend with a 50 watt amp to drive ~ 2 miles away, then have him broadcast to you on 2 meters, then have a 5 watt handheld ~ 20 feet away key-up on the same frequency...

You don't see how the handheld would KILL the 50 watt xmitter 2 miles away? At this close proximity, adding a beam and a preamp you will only exacerbate the problem!
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by K6LCS on December 5, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
> ...Riley Hollingsworth...has more records, tapes, complaints, and data then any other offender needed ...

Riley is not handling this case.

> ...such an idiot that is absolutely BEGGING to be put back behind bars...

Please cite for us the California Penal Code Section that Jack is violating - one which may be used to try, convict, and imprison Jack.

> ...I can see how some people may be moved to take matters into their own hands.

There is NO rational for violence or illegal acts by any "allegedly offended" party.

> VERY FRUSTRATING!

Absolutely.

Clint Bradford, K6LCS
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by KG6ANT on December 6, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
>>> Riley is not handling this case. <<<

Precisely the problem. He knows about it, (as a matter of fact!), but has done NOTHING!

>>> Please cite for us the California Penal Code Section that Jack is violating - one which may be used to try, convict, and imprison Jack. <<<

I'll tell you the violation, you can insert the code numbers:

1). Broadcasting music on an amateur radio frequency, that is NOT incidental to Astronauts in space!

2). Transmitting with out a license on a amateur radio frequency,

3). Broadcasting pre-recorded messages to no apparent recipient,

4). Cursing and swearing on an amateur band frequency,

5). Jamming emergency traffic with the continued ridiculous hyperbole about his hate for the president of the United States.

6). Lately he has also been threatening people with using a gun, and other provocative language.

>>>There is NO rational for violence or illegal acts by any "allegedly offended" party. <<<

Sorry, you are wrong. If someone threatens my family, or my life with a gun, I have the absolute right to defend myself.

>>>Absolutely.<<<

Apparently, there are no absolutes, except that Jack is an absolute sick person, whom should be removed from society to protect himself and others around him, and whom needs serious medical and psychiatric help!

>>>Clint Bradford, K6LCS<<<

Just my 2 cents. Dave Reynolds DE KG6ANT
 
EX Ham At It Again!  
by KB6SRT on December 6, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
With ALL due respect to Clint Bradford and his "Instant reverse / Devil's Advocate" stance he takes specifically on this issue. He has consistently taken the opposite side and unfortunately most of the sites he has graced his prasence on (with the exception of ours) he was booted off for not just presenting the opposite side, but going the extra mile and defending Jack and then adding the "dinner garnishment" of '...but I would *never* advocate Jack's activities'. (We just let him leave ours)

Sorry Clintie-poo but you ARE advocating Jack's activities when you ask what law is he breaking.
Is it THAT shrouded to the liberal side of the issue?
Do we need to spell it out?
What you do is look at the letter of the law and not the spirit of it. I know I know, you don't like religious talk-it burns your non-religious stance on all things, but look at it this way, you get to run from here to there and pretend to play advocate to the perp, when I contend this. Your message is not conducive to solving the problem, unless you came up with a solution with your "ACLU-minded" attitude that would actually reveal an answer that the people being imposed upon (by Jack-not you) hadn't yet thought of. But your babble lacks the last part.
Now don't go taking this personally, you're a good guy (wink wink) and this issue isn't going to go away by just talking about it. This issue has to be attacked locally AND Federally simultaneously as we are doing.

Locally, because he threatened Joe Parrino (N6WZK) on his own repeater But I understand that the ACLU doesn't look at threats on one's life as 'illegal' so I can see why you question the legitimacy of the Temporary Restraining Order. And Federally, because Broadcasting on Ham Radio is not legal. Neither is Jamming, Cursing, trespassing (on the equipment that belongs to the repeater users/owners) as in the case of Timmothy Seawolf vs. CLairmont Repeater Association where Timmy went bye bye for a long time for doing the same thing.

But Mr. Gerritsen has committed 42 pages of crimes that have for 1 reason or another seemed to gather on a document called a Rap Sheet. Now this gathering of info gives society an idea of what is inside a person's head by collecting this data and making it available to any law enforcement person who wants to know. So this doesn't actually even NEED a religious position at all. It's a matter of LAW and the collection of his data deems him 'A Bad Person'.

So please don't blame us when we call him a bad person. I am just quoting the non-religious LAW MAKERS of the community. (By the way, the religious agree 100% with the law makers- Hmm, that's a coincidence). (grin)
Respectfully Submitted,
Mark
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by K6LCS on December 8, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
>Sorry Clintie-poo but you ARE advocating Jack's >activities when you ask what law is he breaking.
>Is it THAT shrouded to the liberal side of the issue?

You are the only one who seems to feel the need to "label" posters here - there's no "liberal" argument here.

>What you do is look at the letter of the law and not >the spirit of it.

District attorneys need specific violations to cite - NOT "spirits."

>I know I know, you don't like religious talk...

I have no idea what faction of Christianity you follow - but name-calling and the need to derogatorily categorize those who might disagree with you certainly isn't condoned in the Christianity I was taught.

>...it burns your non-religious stance on all things...

> Your message is not conducive to solving the problem...

Any district attorney would need the information I am trying to gather for any successful prosecution.

> ...your "ACLU-minded" attitude...

Unbelievable.

> This issue has to be attacked locally...

Handling the problem locally would involve identifying the California laws being broken.

The alleged "death threat" with a gun hasn't been formally filed with Bell PD nor LACO Sheriff's department - telling ME that the recipient of this "threat" wasn't truly threatened at all.

> ...AND Federally simultaneously as we are doing.

By "feds" I assume you mean the FCC. What can the FCC do besides declaring Jack unfit to hold a Commission license?

> I can see why you question the legitimacy of the Temporary Restraining Order...

No, Mark - Whatever *I* think about the TRO doesn't mean a thing. THE COURT didn't see any immediate harm being caused, and the COURT delayed action on the request for TRO. As you know, the court can act on TRO requests immediately - or put their decisions off.

> ...Gerritsen has committed 42 pages of crimes...

Doesn't mean a thing in this case.

Gotta go...Need to send more monies to the ACLU tonight. And I see we're having a meeting of the Sacrifice a Virgin Club at midnight.

Clint Bradford, K6LCS
 
EX Ham At It Again!  
by KG6TNU on February 13, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
Please forward this letter to your members and post your web page:

Jack ass Gerritsen has a court hearing to sentence him to probation on febuary 23, 2004 for tresspassing on a federal instalation, to no surprise. His judge in this case (address below) wants to hear from us (the radio community) as to our complaints about mr Gerritsen's illegal transmitions in and around the LA area. She, if enough complaint are filled will make it a condition on Gerritsen's probation that he not even touch a two-way radio, let alone talk on one. I encourage everyone to write a letter to this judge with your concerns. If any questions please contact me at KG6TNU@yahoo.com.

United States District Court
Honorable Carolyn Turchin
Case Number G456104
312 N. Spring ST
Los Angeles CA 90012
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by K6LCS on February 16, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
One wonders why a judge in a trumped-up federal charge of trespassing would want to hear from the amateur radio community about TOTALLY UNRELATED allegations of Gerritsen's mis-deeds.

But "rational thinking" hasn't been too evident in this thread from the beginning.

Clint Bradford
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by KD6SRI on February 23, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
K6LCS said:
"One wonders why a judge in a trumped-up federal charge of trespassing would want to hear from the amateur radio community about TOTALLY UNRELATED allegations of Gerritsen's mis-deeds"

Tell that to Kevin Mitnick (http://www.qrz.com/callsign/N6NHG). His crime had nothing to do with Ham Radio, but they still denied his request for a license for a long time.

BTW, you should be able to receive the 147.435MHz repeater. Why don't you listen to it and find out why the users on that and many other repeaters in the LA area what Jack to get locked up. Jack is a disgrace to the hobby.
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by K6LCS on February 23, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
Jack Gerritsen was sentenced to 30 days in a federal pen - along with a $2500 fine and court costs. He was taken immediately into custody to begin his sentence.

We should be rid of him for thirty days.

The sentence was the maximum that was allowed for the trespassing charge he was facing. Neither the original charge nor the sentence had anything to do with his radio activities.

Now we need to keep the momentum going - and get the FCC to set a hearing date, which is the next formal, administrative step in the process.

Clint Bradford, K6LCS
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by K6LCS on May 10, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
Jack sure has been quiet since early Saturday morning...<grin>

Clint Bradford, K6LCS
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by KG6ANT on May 10, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
I have tapes of him doing his 'thing' on CLARA ~ 10:50 this AM.

Got to hand it to the idiot... He is consistent, even though deluded, narcissistic, and a sociopath.

Besides that he's a great guy!

His boy friend in Jail must be lonely... He's been gone for a whole month already!
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by K6LCS on May 11, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
Was it Jack? Or one of the copy-cats that are documented imitating him?

Clint Bradford, K6LCS
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by KG6ANT on May 11, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
How can I tell??? I'm over on the Riverside side of the hill. Can not listen to/hear anyone on the input.

However, if it is a copy-cat, they are using Jack's recordings, and it is his voice for sure...

Clint, what, (if anything), was supposed to have happened to him Saturday, that would have made him stop anyway???

Dave...
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by KC6NHJ on May 13, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
147.435 Events



Tacos and Jack

When:
Saturday, May 15th, 2004 at 12 noon

Where:
Maria's Kitchen
4800 Randolph St.
Bell, CA 90201

(100 yards from Jack's home in Bell, CA)

There will be a raffle for a new Kenwood radio

Tickets will be $1.00 each or 7 for $5.00

Please Visit the Jack-Ass Gerritson page!
http://www.435online.com/gerritson.htm

Please Visit the Jack-Ass Gerritson Photo Page!
http://www.435.org/Services/Bootleggers/jackass.html

Please Do Not bring weapons to the event (they will be provided at the site)
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by KG6ANT on May 13, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
T.M.I.

I'm sorry I asked.
 
RE: EX Ham At It Again!  
by KG6ANT on May 17, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
Well, what ever was supposed to happen Saturday...

Jack is large, and in charge as of this morning!

Cursing and swearing, and now more jam-proof!

He has a whole new lease on illegal transmitting!

If the stories are true that 435'er(s) gave him the amp and beam... What were they thinking???

Perhaps, if we get Jack on the TV, and have his chest exposed, then (FCC) Powell will do something!

NAA, not likely!
 
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

Other News Articles
FCC Issues K3VR $11,500 NAL:
India's VO-52 Satellite Goes Dark:
Hams and Uncle Sam Grow Closer:
FCC Issues KZ8O $22,000 NAL:
The Inaugural Victorian D-Star Users Group Meeting: