In a letter from Maricopa County Deputy County Attorney Heather Kirka she states that "While he was in custody for this offense, his associates maintained a
Free Kevin Walsh
website that also listed how the defendant was wronged by the government"
And implies that the webmasters are associates and supporters of Kevin Walsh.
First the webmasters are not supporters of Kevin Walsh.
Kevin Walsh is a racist who hates Jews.
None of the web masters hates Jews.
None of the web masters are racists
nor do any of the webmasters hate anyone because of their race.
Kevin Walsh is a Holocaust Denier and claims that the Holocaust did not happen.
The webmasters disagree with Kevin Walsh on this issue
and think it was almost certain that the Holocaust did happen,
and that the Nazis killed millions of Jews around the time of World War II.
But even if Kevin Walsh is wrong on this issue the webmasters feel he is entitled to his opinion on the issue and should not be persecuted by the government for his odd beliefs.
Kevin Walsh is a communist.
None of the webmasters are communists,
nor do the webmasters agree with the ideology of the communist party.
The webmasters consider the Communist Party to be just as bad as the
Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Green and other political parties
that currently rule the world.
[I consider myself a Marxist-Leninist, but I have not been a member of the
Communist Party USA since 1989. --Kevin Walsh]
Kevin Walsh denies being a Nazi or Fascist,
but he seems to think Hitler was a great guy.
The webmasters all think Hitler was an evil tyrant, murder and dictator.
In our opinion Hitler is just an evil criminal like the communist
other leaders Kevin also likes such as who Stalin, Lenin, Mao.
And like George W. Bush who is currently murdering thousands of
Iraqi citizens in his effort to force democracy on them.
But even if Kevin Walsh is wrong on this issue that Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, and Mao
are great guys
the webmasters feel he is entitled to his opinion on the issue and should not be persecuted by the government for his odd beliefs.
The webmasters do think that while Kevin's ideas are different then the normal American mainstream ideas he has every right to those ideas which we disagree with.
Nor do the webmasters associate with Kevin Walsh. We only know Kevin Walsh from atheist and anti-war groups which we both belong to.
The webmasters have never actively associated with Kevin Walsh other then seeing him at atheist meetings or anti-war meetings.
Last and finally since Kevin Walsh was released from prison the webmasters are no longer updating this web site.
Any new changes to the web site will be made by Kevin Walsh,
not the people who originally created the web site.
So don't blame us if Kevin Walsh starts adding stuff to the web site about how he hates Jews or how Kevin claims the Holocaust did not happen.
It's Kevin Walsh's web page and he will control it.
The webmasters do believe in the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.
And we feel the U.S Secret Service, the Phoenix Police, and the Maricopa County Prosecutors Office have flushed those rights down the toilet in dealing with Kevin Walsh. And that is the reason that this web site was created.
Not because we love and worship Kevin Walsh,
but because we believe a tyrannical government has flushed his constitutional rights down the toilet.
If Kevin Walsh had committed any crimes against George W. Bush
he should have been arrested and jailed like any other criminal.
But the Secret Service did not have any "probable cause" to
arrest Kevin Walsh for a crime.
So the Secret Service used the lame excuse of calling him "insane"
and jailing him in a mental institution to get him off the street.
That was wrong and unconstitutional.
That's something that happens all the
time in the third world communist governments which Kevin Walsh loves.
But it's wrong and unconstitutional when it happens in the United States.
A letter from Heather Kirka, Deputy County Attorney
Andrew P. Thomas
Maricopa County Attorney
Deputy County Attorney
Attorney for Plaintiff
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA
THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Plaintiff vs. KEVIN WALSH, Defendant
NO CR 2004-022034-001-DT
STATE'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S PETITION TO MODIFY CONDITIONS OF
(Assigned to the Honorable J. Richard Gama)
The State of Arizona, through counsel undersigned, hereby responds to
the defendant's above-entitled motion, and respectfully asks that this
Court deny it in full. The attached Memorandum of Points and
Authorities supports this Response.
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
On August 8, 2005, the defendant was sentenced to Aggravated Assault,
a class 3 felony and Disorderly Conduct, a class six dangerous
felony. He was sentenced to a mitigated term of 1.5 years for the
Disorderly Conduct with five years supervised probation to follow on
the Aggravated Assault charge. The defendant was released from prison
earlier this year.
The facts regarding the underlying offenses are as follows. The
defendant came to the attention of the United States Secret Service
after he made comments about killing the President to a phone
solicitor who had called regarding contributing financially to the
Republican party. Upon investigation, the Secret Service agent
learned that the defendant had a disturbing background mentally and
with prior employers. A letter from the defendant to a previous
employer is attached for the Court's review. The defendant was also
active on the internet and appeared to be a "strongman"-type militant.
While he was in custody for this offense, his associates maintained a
"Free Kevin Walsh" website that also listed how the defendant was
wronged by the government. The secret service agent also learned that
the defendant possessed several guns and ammunition and had a
concealed weapons permit. The agent wanted to have the defendant
psychologically evaluated so he could move on with the case but the
defendant refused to cooperate. The agent eventually got an order to
have the defendant involuntarily committed for a mental evaluation.
The agent enlisted Phoenix Police Department's SAU unit for help in
taking the defendant into custody.
On June 21, 2004, SAU officers went to the defendant's employment to
locate him and take him into custody. Three officers located him
almost immediately. When they contacted him, the defendant
immediately held his hands up and repeatedly told them, "shoot me,
kill me." He would not comply with their commands to put his hands
behind his back. Officers approached and a struggle ensured between
the four men. It took the three officers several moments to gain
control of the defendant, who is a large man. The defendant had a
loaded pistol in a shoulder holster which he went for during the
struggle. He also had three magazines fully loaded with ammunition.
One of the officers struggled with the defendant over the gun. The
defendant was able to get the gun out of the holster. The officer
believed he was going to lose his grip on the gun and get shot. The
defendant was tazered at least three times and one of the officers
had a rifle in his gut. Eventually, however, the officer was finally
able to get the gun from the defendant. Afterwards, the defendant
told the officers, "You should have shot me dead there, you could
have claimed I resisted. It would have been of service to me."
Regarding the tazer, the defendant stated, "I was trying to use the
other arm to get the gun so I could shoot myself, you got me in the
The defendant was then transported to Desert Vista Behavioral where
he remained until these charges were brought. A letter from the
defendant's treating psychiatrist is also attached for the Court's
review. It provides the Court of a glimpse of the defendant as a
mental patient. The officer who struggled with the defendant over
his gun also suffered extensive injuries to his knee and was out of
work for several months.
Although the defendant claimed he was only trying to kill himself, he
was obviously in possession of too much ammunition to accomplish that
goal. The amount of ammunition in the defendant's possession at the
time of the offense indicate that he was not going into custody
without a fight. Additionally, based upon the two attached letters,
it is obvious this is not an isolated incident. The defendant clearly
has mental health issues and disburbingly violent inclinations. He is
in need of close monitoring.
Now the defendant is on probation. His probation officer only
reviewed the deffendant's term and conditions of probation with him
last month and he is already disputing several of them. Additionally,
he has already had at least two police contacts since being placed on
probation. Significantly and unfortunately, the defendant is no
longer on any mental health medication. His probation officer is
apparently in the process of getting the defendant back on
There are more letters attached for the Court's review which support
the State's position that the defendant's probation terms should not
be modified. In one of them, the defendant writes his probation
officer to explain why he wants to have contact with other convicts.
Specifically, he wants to communicate with convicted Holocaust Denier,
David Irving. The defendant states that both men share the same
belief that the Holocaust was a myth. Notably, he fails to mention
this reason in his written request to the Court. The defendant
obviously had no intention of revealing his true intentions to this
Court. He only tells this Court that the term is unduly burdensome
because he acted alone in the underlying offense.
That letter also discloses that the defendant has already had police
contact. As a term of probation, the defendant is required to inform
his probation officer of any police contact. The final letter
attached, dated March 18, 2006, also reveals another police contact
in the short amount of time that the defendant has been on probation.
The details of that contact are explained in the defendant's letter.
Regarding the police contact mentioned in the February, 23, 2006
letter, the defendant ate lunch at the cafeteria in the Industrial
Commission Building. He claims that he wen there because he
apparently was working nearby. The defendant had been previously
banned from that building for an incident that occurred there several
years ago. Undersigned is not privy to the details of that incident.
However, it is significant that the defendant is still on the Capitol
Police's radar even several years after this incident. Regarding this
contact, he was escorted from the premises.
Finally, the defendant requests that the terms prohibiting drinking
and requiring drug testing be stricken. The State believes that,
given the defendant's mental health issues, these terms are essential
to his mental health. For his mental health medications to be
successful, the defendant needs to be clean and sober. Further, given
his claims that he does not drink or do drugs, he should not have a
problem complying with these terms.
For the foregoing reasons, teh State respectfully requests that the
Court deny the defendant's Motion in all parts.
Respectfully submitted March 24, 2006.
Andrew P. Thomas
Maricopa County Attorney
By Heather Kirka
Deputy County Attorney
FREE KEVIN WALSH home Page
Kevin Walsh was a political prisoner who was jailed
in a mental hospital
by the Secret Service for his anti-Bush statements.
Kevin Walsh had committed no crimes and the Secret
Service had no evidence to charge Kevin Walsh with