There is a new sheriff in town. The FCC appoints Laura Smith to take Riley's job.

You mean it's not?

Hard to tell from all the bitching going on around here.

 

Riley had the same title, and although he did have other work, he also clearly had an Amateur Radio focus. Laura has contacted me and at least one other Amateur about enforcement matters, so she obviously has an Amateur Radio focus.

If the job gets done at least to the degree it was done when Riley did it, I am really not concerned about the title. So far, the start of her new job includes Amateur Radio.

Ed, W1RFI

 

Huge fnes, prison sentences and even the death penalty has been imposed in crimimal matters that affect a larger part of society. Fines and jail sentences have been imposed for speeding. Yet serious crime and speeding continue.

Enforcement of the law is important to all of us, even though the deterrent is apparently not perfect.

Ed, W1RFI

 

Her not being a ham may be a good thing. It might allow for a broader and unbiased and professional perspective. Mr. Hollingsworth did a laudable job of dealing with exam fraud. However, many of his other efforts were, in my opinion, petty and childish. He used a network of "snitches", tried to arbitrate on-air disputes, and regularly published enforcement letters based on complaints with no evidence whatsoever; some completely inaccurate.

Will Laura Smith "save" ham radio?
I am continually amused by those who would 'slide on the armband, hoist the banner and march forth' to save amateur radio from the "lids". So much of what is complained about on here does not rise to the level of rules violations.
I guess we really need to have more "knob turning" training.

 

Enforcement of the law, not interpretation of what is written to coincide with pre-conceived ideas of the individual enforcer.

To my recollection, the Jack Gerritsen (sp?) case is the only one that actually went to trial, involving anything RH was involved with. And, it took a felony charge to get the Justice Department motivated to do something with that. I don't think RH's Forfeiture Orders were ever collected from Gerritsen. The rest of the misdemeanor stuff in the Comm Act and 41CFR97 really wasn't enough to get the Justice Department's interest up. And, in one very notorious case, K1MAN, Glenn Baxter is still operating on his expired license since his application has been "pending" Enforcement Bureau action for 3 years plus. RH didn't even take that one to the Administrative Law Judge system. Why not? Has the forfeiture been paid? Probably not.

What RH produced were one-sided threats for the most part. And, not ONE case of prosecution for providing false or misleading statements to him. And, there were at least a few (who) didn't tell the truth in filing complaints. One in central FL where one of his public "Enforcement Letters" vilified a ham victim who was innocent of wrong doing, but the accuser was never himself identified or prosecuted by RH for filing a false complaint. I guess RH didn't want to scare off any future complainants by making an example out of a liar.

Then, speaking of central Florida, there was the theft or involuntary transfer of K4WCF from the West Central Florida Group, the rightful club owner, to the newly-elected ARRL West Central Florida Section Manager. The ARRL VEC system was used by the new WCF Section Manager to do that without permission from the WCF Club, its rightful owner. RH, after many letter complaints, failed to prosecute the individual or ARRL for theft of the call sign. It was NOT a misunderstanding. Swept under the rug.

RH may have done some good at times, but bias was demonstrated. Perhaps Ms. Smith not being a licensed amateur operator will be a good thing. Less likely for "cronyism" or pulling punches for favorites.

 

Case on point:
An amateur was sent an enforcement letter detailing his "iilegal" mobile operation in a brown pickup truck, callsign plates,and EXACT location at the time of infraction; which was broadcasting music on 40 m.
This amateur proved not to have a brown pickup at all, and in fact his call plates were registered to his green Volvo sedan with no hf. This was a holiday and the amateur in question was at home. Interestingly, he WAS on the stated frequency at the stated time in a large roundtable. None of the 15 or so amateurs involved could recall any music or interference that day, nor anyone else using the alleged perpetrators callsign.The so-called location was within 20-50 air miles of at least three hams on the air at the time, none of whom heard anything. The rest were within 50 - 200 air miles..all within the propgation conditions of that day.
When the ham questioned Mr Hollingsworth as to where he got the evidence he refused to divulge his source. When the ham asked for copies of the tapes or transcripts that led to the letter, he was also refused, and even chastised for openly discussing the situation on the air.
When provided with proof of vehicle registration, statements of other hams, and multiple witnesses as to his whereabouts, Mr Hollingsworth then published a followup that the ham had responded to the satisfaction of the commision ..no apology, no retraction.
I know personally of at least 3 similar stories and can absolutely verify the veracity of the one above as I was the ham in question.

 

You and I obviously see things a bit differently. If it were me, I would have gone after him for defamation of character.

There is NO excuse for him to not have demonstrated objectivity and fairness by prosecuting the liars. If he threatened those who he believed were guilty with the federal officer false statement/information statute, he should also have applied that to the same degree to those who provided him unsolicited, knowingly-false or later-proven false complaint information. And, just because there wasn't a clause at the bottom of correspondence to complainants, ignorance of the law is/was NO excuse.

 

I considered it. My attorney who was also a ham (now sk) and a friend, was willing but advised me that it could be long and costly; and to achieve a real victory we would have to prove damages, and that is often a difficult thing to do.
He did advise me VERY VERY strongly NOT to get involved as one of Mr. Hollingsworth's "snitches". I was asked to "assist" RH on an unrelated matter after all of this transpired.

 

After reading about your adventures with RH it's beginning to look like we who thought that he was doing a good job weren't being given, as Paul Harvey would say, "the REST of the story!"

From your explanation it's obvious that whoever filed the initial complaint could not simply have been mistaken about things - this was a deliberate attempt to use the FCC for harassment purposes.

RH should have brought the full force of the FCC's Enforcement Division down on the pointy head of the guy who filed the original bogus complaint. Instead he lambastes you for having the temerity to publicly expose this fraud for what it was. The fact that he didn't do anything to the original complainant gives credence to the charge that he played favorites.

The new president has made a lot of noise about wanting "transparency" in government. This would be a good place to start.

 

Do we know for a fact that he didn't?

Duane, n0yai 73

 

Believe me, if Riley had done so we would know about it. There is tremendous deterrent value for the FCC in publicizing something like this.

The fact that N4MXZ couldn't get any info out of Riley pretty much confirms it.

When I say "full weight of the Enforcement Division" I mean something public like formal charges or action against the complainant's license. Riley saying something informal to the complainant "off the record" doesn't come close to the gravity of the offense of filing a false complaint.

Filing a complaint with the FCC on a fellow Amateur is damn serious business and should only be undertaken when you're absolutely sure of your facts. This complaint was harassment, pure and simple.

 

Was RH Two Faced?

I for one don't keep up with the FCC politics. But, I do listen a lot on the ham bands and there are a group of guys that are in TN that often brag about having RH in their back pocket. And I guess they really do by the way they act on the radio. I was listening to a station talk about fixing an old radio one night when these guys just started talking over them. One of the hams that was discussing the radio stated that the freq was in use. He even went on to say join us and we might all learn something. Then this LID in TN started telling him that he was ignorant and didn't know squat. And he was at such low power that he could not hold the freq. (The TN guys run at least a KW ) Just because the Elmer's were running 100 watts they were drowned completely out...The TN guy has been reported several times ( I know for a fact) when RH was there and I have yet to ever see anything about it anywhere on any documents. So I guess he really did have RH in his back pocket and I have no reason to doubt by the way he new RH's family, friends etc. So I guess if you know the Boss you can do pretty much what you want. Or have the money to pad the pockets! Seems to be the American Way now..

So I guess like many others in this world there was a double standard in Ham Enforcement.

So was he really for the best interest of Ham Radio? I guess some could argue that point. He did however do some good things. But was this because "He Had To" possibly to make himself look good?


So as I have said before maybe since she isn't in a Ham "Click" she will be on a level playing ground. I just hope that she understands that 99 percent of Hams and great people and would never cause problems on the bands. After all these bands are what give us hours of enjoyment, friend making and great opportunities to learn.

So lets support her as Hams and give her a chance to help us all. Those of you that insist that she be a ham I am sure she will become one soon. I just don't totally agree that you MUST be a ham for this job. I think since she will be more in the enforcement arena her knowing LAW is more important. I would rather have someone that doesn't have Ham friends in high places that makes her biased toward them.


History will tell and in the meantime lets burn the airwaves...knock the dust off that old radio and put it to use..Enjoy the hobby and always lend a helping hand to someone in need. After all Elmer's are the backbone of Ham Radio.

73 es Troy

 

Virtual certainty that he didn't. EB actions are made public on an fcc.gov link. I'm too lazy to find it, but look for it on fcc.gov

That's where ARRL copies selected letters to post on their website.

It is a serious felony, as I recall. Not more than 5 years imprisonment. Here's the citation from the United States Code.

18USC1001. Statements or entries generally

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any
matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or
judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and
willfully--
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or
device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent
statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same
to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement
or entry;

shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or,....

Much worse than the menial misdemeanor violations in Part 97.

RH used to put a reference to this section at the bottom of his "data request" letters. And, it should have been used, obviously, against those filing false or misleading complaints.

Let's hope Ms. Smith ambitiously prosecutes liars.

 

My original thinking. I approached RH with the theory and, and considering that I am admittedly controversial, it seemed plausible enough.
Mr Hollingsworth did NOT accept that whatsoever, so I emailed him a 'tongue-in- cheek' letter about how it must have been that some ham in a car heard music on 40m, had also at some point heard my callsign(either from me because I was so strong, or someone else calling me), just happened to look up to see a brown pickup truck in front of him; with callsign plates he misread, and then somehow put it all together. Of course this has major flaws, and I didn't believe a word of it. Mr Hollingsworth wrote back that it seemed reasonable enough. This "theory" and the exonerating evidence was the end of it. Go figure.

 

yikes I first thought it said Laura Bush

YIKES, at first I thought it said Laura Bush.

I thought the election as like when Bobby came back to life on the show Dallas, after the dream sequence,,,,,,, AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.
Whew, but it's OK, I just checked, Obama's still there.
Thank God.
Welcome to the freak show Laura.....hope you have Xanax!