K1MAN Fined $21K for Willful Interference

K1MAN's license is due to expire on 10/17/05, and I would bet that the F.C.C. will not renew it.

 

I said that the FCC has a pretty serious case against K1MAN.


What will actually make him stop? That is a completely different question.

Jon

 

Hello, Mike.  Pardon me, if I turn down the 'mike gain' a bit.

I don't think people are ranting and raving here with the idea that what is said would somehow be more evidence.

And, he really has no chance at all of prevailing at a hearing or in federal court.  The charges weren't heresay.

His broadcasting, for example, was specifically charged as a pecunicary interest, general public activity.  Not simply his usual restatements of ARRL's news bulletins, and such.  Doing legal amateur broadcasts interspersed with clearly illegal stuff just won't cut it.

Sorry, but he's nailed, at least with charges.  If he ignores the 'meter maid', put-your-money-in-the-envelope approach, well, he will find himself in court, if not in jail first.

If you want to contribute to his defense fund, have at it.

73,

Lee
W6EM

 

K1MAN seems to show a willful disregard and blatant defiance of the rules governing amateur radio. Boradcasting is NOT permitted, especially if, as stated, he is speaking on manners in which he has a pecuniary interest. I would like to see the FCC do the following:

1. Permanently revoke his license to transmit and operate ham equipment

2. Prohibit him via court order from owning or operating equipment capable of transmitting on the amateur bands.

3. Increase his fine to that of Jack Gerritsen

4. Some time in prison might cool him off too.

Whatever they do, it has to be bad enough to send a message to him and those like him that malicious interference will not be tolerated.

 

Founder, QRZ.COM




Group: Super Administrators
Posts: 290
Joined: June 1992
Posted: June 18 2005,14:30 QUOTE
Thanks for all the comments and interest in this topic.

We didn't post this article to give him a forum, but rather to show the public, using his own words, just how divergent his views are from the mainstream.

K1MAN remains banned from posting at the QRZ website.




ok I'm confused is he banned or not??? Yep should have thought twice I guess...

 

Hey Fred,

I tried to open a new topic and found that I wasn't allowed to do that.

Was I one of the folks that you said were on the edge of getting banned from posting, perhaps because I expressed my opinions about the ongoing Pactor fiasco ?

BTW: That's a nice Skylane on your QSL !!

73, Bernie / KF4FHS
.
.

 

ok wait I"m not the one that said he's banned. The founder of this sight said that when he closed the other thread. Perhaps he'd better think twice not me. so is he banned or not??? Fred says he is, you the staff??? (whomever that is) says he's not.

 

It is indeed a nice skyline...I'm not sure if Fred knows what's going on on this sight. He says banned, staff says not. Perhaps you'll get an answer though. Good luck and 73

 

Truely Pathetic Commentary K1MAN. Not even a good spin. You have caused countless QRM with those idiotic broadcasts for years and now it is more obvious you have a mental condition. Take a sabbatical, like 7 years worth. You do need help sir. Does Baxter Ass. provide you with an "EAR" program for psychiatric observation? TAKE FULL ADVANTAGE OF IT IF IT DOES.

Good riddance and stay off the air. You should have been fined at least $100,000 for all the damage you have done over the years. You sir are an imbecile.

 

Why is life so complicated below 50 MHz

 

Brian: While I support in concept your efforts to file such a petition, procedurally I have a few questions.

First, virtually anything asked of the FCC, formally, is done via Petition as I'm sure you know. But, not a petition in the usual sense, as in what I think you mean here, where you seek many signatories. In the FCC case examples, individuals or individual entities file Petitions as a formal means to address the FCC, seeking commission action for any number of procedural actions.

Quickly looking over 47CFR Part 1, I couldn't find procedurally where your approach is permitted. I did find, however, under 47CFR1.223, a way to intervene in license renewal proceedings where renewals are designated for hearing. Its called a Petition for Leave to Intervene. Any interested or affected parties may file after the Public Notice for Hearing is released and if accepted, the commission will allow material for consideration to be submitted into the hearing record.

If your petition is submitted now, assuming that they decide to pend K1MAN's license renewal for hearing, will your submittal be procedurally untimely? I don't know, but I think it might be.

Also, I don't know if you can move to deny a renewal application with a Petition, since there is a hearing process, which they have established, that allows all interested parties including the applicant to be heard, if desired.

While I support what you are doing in principle, I would hate to see the FCC not accept it, or, procedurally be forced in some way to ignore those whose names that were part of the filing.

Perhaps you have already addressed this, and I missed seeing it.

My interest is in supporting your desired outcome. And, at the same time, not in any way risking having it quashed procedurally by the commission itself or on someone else's Motion.

And, I'm not an attorney, and this isn't legal advice. Only my reading.

73,

Lee
W6EM

 

Actually, I believe there are no earplugs in hell.

 

If he is convicted and sentenced, maybe he'll get Jack Gerritsen for his cellmate!

 

YOU PLAY YOU PAY