FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
SOUTH DAKOTA DCI SEEKING INDICTMENT OF SIOUX CITY ATTORNEY JUDITH HUITINK FOR IDENTITY THEFT
MIAMI, FL - 20 DECEMBER 2014
South Dakota DCI Agent Brian Schnabel of Vermillion, SD, reports that the SD Department of Criminal Investigation has opened case 1407032 investigating identity theft, a felony, committed by Sioux City, IA attorney Judith Huitink of Dakota Dunes, SD.
Agent Schnabel stated on 3 December 2014 (CORRECTION: 10 December) that he had opened the case, and was pursuing a grand jury indictment. Agent Schnabel completed his collection of information necessary to subpoena the USAA credit card account files Wednesday 3 December 2014 (CORRECTION: 10 December).
Judith Huitink opened an account in her son, Graham Garnos' name in 1999. The account only recently was discovered to exist when it appeared on her son's credit report this fall.
Agent Schnabel stated that his investigation was confined to the crime of identity theft, however the importance of prosecuting this crime is that it reveals premeditation and motive on the part of Doug and Judy Huitink in a 15 year long effort which includes, we believe the evidence shows, at least two attempted murders against Judy's son Graham Garnos.
The joint credit card account was opened in 1999 with Graham Garnos as primary account holder, which may have been intended to establish apparent financial interdependence between Judith Garnos and her son Graham Garnos.
In addition the Iowa Supreme Court Disciplinary Board has opened an investigation into the same matters. Judith Huitink is a member of the Iowa Bar Association.
It has been with some difficulty that this case has been opened and pursued. The details of the ordeal can be read in the article:
Union County States Attorney Corruption and Credit Card Fraud and Identity Theft of Judith Huitink
YOU CAN FIND THE INDEX OF THE ARTICLES I HAVE PUBLISHED THIS LAST YEAR ON A WIDE VARIETY OF TOPICS:
Articles on Spirituality, Politics, Society, Health, Wellness, Nutrition, and Detoxification
AS WELL AS ALL THE COLLECTED INFORMATION ON THESE CRIMINAL ISSUES.
CONTACT: GRAHAM GARNOS
Updated - 1/21/15. SD DCI investigation reveals that the USAA credit card application from 1999 does not have Graham Garnos signature on it. It was signed by Judith Huitink, and by Judith Huitink FOR Graham Garnos.
Additionally further intent to deceive was revealed in listing Doug Huitink's address prior to cohabitation with Judith Huitink as Graham Garnos' home address.
This case has led to the opening of a number of other investigations into crimes associated with it directly or indirectly.
The SD DCI and Attorney Generals Office, the U.S. Attorneys Office and SF FBI have been provided hundreds of pages of documents, images, emails, my original investigation notes and narratives. They have received notices of the hours of publicly available statements I have made and the articles I have written and have provided support of these efforts. They have watched and read in some cases. Lawrence County States Attorney and Deadwood SD PD have also been supportive in their part of the investigation.
Additionally IA DCI, IA Attorney Generals Office, the Department of Justice, FBI have all received notice of the primary statements and narratives.
But perhaps most importantly of all, the Minnehaha County Sheriffs Department, the Sioux Falls Police Department, the Union County States Attorney, Union County Sheriffs Department, Brandon, SD PD, Lyman County Sheriffs Department have all either ignored reports, actively suppressed investigation, attempted to incriminate me, attempted to discredit me, conducted false investigations into me, arrested me on false charges, or supported civil matters brought solely with the intent to obstruct justice.
The Second Judicial District of SD has acted through its court officers to officially obstruct my first amendment right to petition the government, and has officially violated my sixth amendment rights to due process including intimidation and threats from behind the bar in open court by county officers and denial of examination of a witness against me and the presentation of refutation.
Three documented cases of suppression of core political speech have occurred in the publication of these materials and video statements.