Official complaint

The following is an official complaint that was filed with the Court and was completely ignored by the system.

Plaintiff )
Vs. )
Ramin Dunford )
Defendant )

I Dean R. Whisler, attest to the following and state:
This Affidavit is based upon personal observation, witness testimony, and Dunford’s own words as recorded in
Grand Jury documents. (attachment A)
On February 25, 2009 while testifying at a Grand Jury hearing, Trooper Ramin Dunford did commit perjury with his testimony. Having been duly sworn in, Trooper Dunford did give a false statement to the members of the Grand Jury. He did this of his own violation and with full knowledge that what he said was a lie.
Trooper Dunford told the Grand Jury that on the early morning (0110 hrs.), of January 24, 2009, he was having a vehicle towed from the parking lot of the North Bowl in Wasilla. During the process of this act the owners, Dean and Tina Whisler did show up to retrieve their vehicle. The vehicles were parked in approximately the positions shown on attachment D. Tina Whisler was trying to get into the vehicle and was in discussion with Trooper Dunford, whom had not shown anyone any type of identification to this point, so she was not even sure he was a Trooper. They were in approximately the positions A and B on attachment E. The tow truck driver for MTR, witness 1, was approximately in position C. Dean Whisler was approximately at position D.
Trooper Dunford then told the Grand Jury that Dean Whisler got in between himself and Tina Whisler. That Dean had his neck muscles tensed and shoulders forward and would not let him get to Tina. He testified to Dean’s hostile attitude and that he would not move until Tina told Dean that he had better move before he got attested. All of that statement is a lie and known by Dunford to be a lie. He could not have observed these actions on the part of Dean because it did not happen. Dean never even got on the same side of the vehicle as Dunford and Tina. Dean in fact remained in the position D. Dean Whisler has testified to this, see attachment B. Tina Whisler has testified to this, see attachment C. Tow truck driver witness 1, has testified to this, see attachment D. Witness 1’s testimony was recorded and observed by his boss at the MTR office in Palmer on June 10, 2011. Witness 1 was very clear and certain in his testimony and testified that Dean never came to the side of the vehicle where Tina Whisler and Trooper Dunford, and Dean in no way interfered with Trooper Dunford. As such Dunford’s Grand Jury testimony of Dean Whisler’s position, actions and appearance are a complete and conscience lie and needs to be dealt with to the fullest extent of the law.
Signature of claimant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this _______ day of ___________20___

Notary Public for Alaska
My Commission Expires

Show me the report

One of the things that I wonder is how on earth these cops keep getting away with making claims of things that they claim to have found out, yet don’t have to show the discovery. Here is one that really gets to me. Now Trooper Dunford claims that he was investigating this case and he looked on APSIN and found that back in 2003 there was an alligation of rape listed. That would be by A1. Now this brings up a huge list of problems. First and most important is, if this is true then where is a copy of the report. No where in any of the reports, court paper work or anything is there evidence of this report. Nothing to show that this actually is there. If it was there and is important enough to be mentioned in his report then where is a copy of the APSIN report to prove it. By the way that would be called (evidence). Now first trouble is, how did it get there. We know that after a date in 2003, A1, started spreading rumors around school that she had been raped. So we made a report to PPD Officer Anthony. Now according to Officer Anthony within a day or two in came A1 to file a report. Officer Anthony later told us that she agreed to file the report if A1 could pass a lie detector test, if not she would be charged with false accusation, at which point A1 left in a big hurry. I am inclined to believe that side of story because if she had filed a charge then there would have been an investigation, and there wasn’t. Also if that had been added by Officer Anthony then she would have been lieing to us. Still I have seen no evidence of the report. Now Zeb’s attorney had her investigator look into it and she found nothing about the report. Now Zeb looked into going into the military. Two background checks were done by the military and they found nothing of the kind. By the way Dunford also claimed that he had found another such entry in 2006 or 2007. Anyhow, neither was found by his attorney or the military. Also the state did a background check so Zeb could be a caregiver for a person that is bedridden. Now when the state does check for that type of work, they dig very deep to keep special needs folks safe. The state found nothing. We had two separate background/criminal checks done and found nothing. So where is the report. Dunford must be some kind of police magician. He seems to be able to come up with things no one else can. By the way, in another entry I mentioned that Zeb didn’t have a drivers license in 2003. The background check also verifies that fact. So the bottom line is: if there was entries in APSIN as to rape alligations, then where is the “evidence”. Why couldn’t anyone else find these entries. You know Dunford and the DA seemed to think that a pair of DICE found in the pickup, which did not even belong to Zeb, was important evidence and included them in the court case and in the evidence inventory, then why wasn’t prior alligations supposedly entered into APSIN important enough to include in the inventory and court case? I really think that the DA and Troopers will have a lot of explaining to do before long.   Troopers don’t “investigate”, they “build a case against someone”.  It’s not about truth or justice, it’s about “convictions”.

Question for legal beagles

Isn’t it the law that you are to be represented by counsel when you go before a judge. Well Zeb was given the oppertunity to stand before the Judge twice before he received any assistance of counsel. In fact the first time, the next day after arrest, we didn’t even know that he was going before a judge till afterwards. In most states that is enough to get a case dismissed. Oh but not here in Alaska. They believe that they are above the law and that federal laws don’t apply to us. How interesting.
On a side note: one of the female troopers that are in the video got in a little hot water in the court room. As I hear it her testimony and the record weren’t quite matching up. So I hear that the head DA told her to take a copy home and get her story straight. That sounds way out there to me. Of course her story would be the same if she has the report to study, or tape or whatever it was. So now which is the truth. The version she told in court or the one that she went home to memorize. Inquiring minds want to know. Hey Roman isn’t that some for of coaching the witness, or tampering or something. There were coments in the Fronteirsman suggesting that Roman be retired or fired or whatever. They are valid points. Especially since Roman is the one that allowed Trooper Dunford to commit perjury in the Grand Jury in Zebs case. Now he’s giving a cop the story that she is expected to tell. NICE

More twists in the Grand Jury

In the Grand Jury on page 56, A1 said on line 20 that, referring to Trooper Dunford, “He finally ended up calling my mom to get my phone number, and it took him talking to me for two or three weeks before I was finally trusted him enough to be able to tell him everything.” OH really. In the police report on pg 278 it says that the first interview was on Jan. 28th, which is only 4 days after the arrest. Then on page 283 the second interview and final interview was on Feb. 4th, which is only 11days after his arrest and only 7 days after the first interview. Who is the one with the lie here????
Read A2’s Grand Jury testimony. I can not find her telling him no or resisting in any way, in fact she says that they went out and had sex 3 more times and with her consent. There are text messages where A2 admits to friends on the phone that she never said no!

The Trooper never has talked with Billy, or Mr. Winter or any of the others and I can tell you why. He knew that if he did he would have to turn that over and it would go to the grand jury. This stuff would show that it was all lies and there would be no indictment and that would lead to a false arrest and he would be in trouble for arresting to quickly and falsely so he tried to cover it up.

One for the Record

The following is something that I put together for his attorney. She never used one single thing that I gave her. Not from this or from anything else. The first is from the Trooper report and the second is from the Grand Jury. I had them side by side but this program won’t allow me to print it that way so it will be one after the other.
Trooper Interview
January 28, 2009
A1 told Trooper that we came up here from Oregon and spent time in Cal. and Kentucky. We spent no time in Cal. and no one in our family has ever been to Kentucky.
A1 says she was good friends with Zeb’s ex-girlfriend, Stacy Begely. We had not been here long enough to have an ex-girlfriend, and he has no idea who Stacy Begely is. He has never heard of her. So there is the second lie.
A1 says that she gave Zeb a ride home from the church prom. No mention of the fact that she gave him a ride to the dance, which was in Eagle River. Doesn’t mention that she actually dropped Zeb off and left in a hurry because she was late getting home and was going to be in a lot of trouble from her dad. Her mom told Zeb’s mom that earlier in the evening. She was not there long enough for Zeb to walk around to the driver’s side and try to get her out of the pickup. Had that happened we would have seen it as we were home. It was 2300, which was the time that she was supposed to be at her house. She does not mention that she had actually picked Zeb up for the dance and came in and met us at that time. We have a picture of her and Zeb in their dress clothes standing in our living room. Why does she not mention that little FACT?
The following Monday she started spreading the lie that Zeb had tried to rape her at our house after the dance. Again we were home.
Page 278, 8th paragraph she said she went into our house to meet “Tina Whisler”. Again, no mention that she met us the night of the dance as the picture proves!

Grand Jury
February 25, 2009
Note: all the DA’s questions are leading questions. I thought that was a no-no!
The DA calls her attention to March of 2003. Then asks “Did you give Zeb Whisler a ride on that day?”pg. 48, lines 17 thru 20! What day? Where did she give him a ride from? Sounds like from school. She never mentions the Dance at all in the Grand Jury. Why is that? That’s what she mentions first in the trooper interview. We have a photo of them dressed up.
Pg. 48 lines 7 and 8, she says she went in the house to meet his family. Again she did not mention the FACT that we had already met and the picture proves it! That was the night of the dance and she never mentions the dance at all to the Grand Jury.
A1 says that Zeb put her in a chair and sat on her while he took her shirt off. How could to people that big both sit in the same chair and he could still get her shirt off? She says she started yelling at Zeb. Then his brother walked out into the garage. But she was in shock and didn’t say anything to him. I thought she just said that she was yelling at Zeb. In that small house his brother would have heard!!!!!
She tells the Trooper that Zeb had his pants undone, but still on and she wiggled out from under him, grabbed her blouse and ran out the side door. The side door was blocked with a dresser so that the kids couldn’t just sneak in and out!
On page 278 she says that a couple of weeks later there was a big wind storm. The windstorm was before the dance so this statement is incorrect.
She says that she told the secretary and the principal at high school what happened in the school and that the principal told her not to worry about it. The principal has no knowledge of it. He would have been required by law to do something.
pg. 279 she says that Zeb accused her father of assaulting him and officers responded and that the accusation was proven false. Where is the police report on that load of crap? The fact is that her dad told Zeb that he would kill him and his whole family and I, (Dean Whisler), tried to file charges against him for Terroristic Threatening.
On page 279 midway she states that her mom pointed out that Zeb was in the middle of the highway holding up traffic and staring at them in his car. Then he followed them in his car.
Please describe the car.
pg. 48 line 11. She said that no one was home except his brother. If she had given him a ride home his brother would not have been there yet as he rode the bus and it didn’t get there for a while. His attorney and investigator know it was actually his sister that came into the room.
pg. 48 line 16 she still mentions the chair but then the story changes. pg. 49 line 1 she now says that he undid her belt and pants. Then in line 5 she says he raped her. No mention of rape in the first interview. She told the Trooper that she ran out the door. That’s a mighty big change. What happened to his brother coming into the room and her using that time to get away?
Now she says that she had given him a ride home a few times because of the storm. So which was it?
No mention of telling the principal at the grand jury. Why not? Did she realize that the grand jury would want to hear from the principle and that her lie would be uncovered?
No mention of this to the Grand Jury. I guess she couldn’t remember that part of the lie.
Pg54 line 15 – 18. He parked his car in the middle to the road. Do I need to say it again? He had no car or driver’s license.
pg. 279. She tells the Trooper that Zeb parked in the street in front of her house for hours. She says that Officer Anthony of PPD was called and just told her to get a protective order. First, again, he had no car and no driver’s license. So how could he park in the street? If you check with officer Anthony I think you will find that we actually went to her about the accusations and when A1 came in a day or two later she ran out of the building when Officer Anthony suggested she take a lie detector test.
pg. 279 she says that he ran Billy Schumacher off the road with his car. Again no car and no license. He and Billy were buddies. Your investigator asked Billy the wrong question. She did not say that Billy ran her off the road. Please get the facts straight.
On the bottom of page 279 she says that she and Tina were called in to the Bishops office. Well we were in different wards so they would have seen different bishops. Why wasn’t Dean also called in? That statement about messing with Wyoming girls is pretty stupid. Why I thought that she said we came from Oregon, via Kentucky, which none of us have ever been to. Then the Trooper says that A1 gave him the names of several other girls. WHO? She moved away so whom would she know. In fact this interview was on the 28th and she supposedly says that she did not know A3 or A4, who were not interviewed until the 2nd of Feb. So if she didn’t know them then how did their names even come up? In fact her brother hung out with A4 the summer of 2008, not a long time
pg. 53 line 13 on. She says that he was just sitting in the street for about 3 hours. When asked if she was home she said for part of it. Asked if he just left she said, “he must have because he wasn’t there when I got home.” If she wasn’t home then how did she know how long he was there? She never mentioned to the Trooper that she had left the house. She tells of him stopping in the middle of the highway. Need I say it again, NO CAR NO LICENSE!!!
On page 55 he asked her if all this was done without her permission. I thought that was already insinuated.
On page 56 she talks about being afraid of us and that we might hurt her or her family. Where did she get that idea? We made no calls and had no contact with any of them. We did go to the bishops, and to PPD and let them know that she was spreading lies in church and school. But we did not contact them. In fact on page 283 of Trooper Dunford’s report he states that “neither Dean nor Tina Whisler had contacted her”.
Pg. 56 lines 20 – 23 she states that it took Dunford two to three weeks of calling her before she trusted him enough to tell him everything. Dunford’s report shows that she told him what happened on the 28th of January, which means one of two things. Either she perjured herself on the Grand Jury or Dunford started calling her somewhere between the 7th to the 14th of January, which would mean that his testimony is a lie and that he was in the middle of a conspiracy to falsely
ago. She says that Zeb bragged about us having money. Not at that time we didn’t.
Now on page 283 Dunford says that he did another interview with Amanda on the 4th of February. Interesting how the recorder didn’t work right, OK LET’S HAVE A LISTEN TO THE RECORDING!!!!!The Troopers seem to have had a lot of trouble with recordings during this case. Since as it states that we never contacted her then why would she be afraid of us? Maybe because we can prove what a lying piece of trash she is?
The stories of what happened in the school don’t match up. Then she says that at the school there was no one in the hall between periods. OH FOR CRYING OUT LOUD
On page 283 and 284 Dunford says that he reviewed what he had learned in the previous interview with A1. On 284 he says that A1 told him that Zeb rubbed her vagina with his hand and put his fingers inside her. Then he put his penis inside her. She never said either of those things. In fact she said she got out from under him and ran out a blocked door. He supposedly said “oh come on I know you like it” and “what’s wrong with you know you like it.” That is not in the first interview or the grand jury testimony. She’s not sure how she got from the chair to the bed, oh please!!!!! Now she names Zeb’s younger brother, or did the Trooper just make that up. Next she states that she did not want to talk to the trooper about what had happened the first time he called. She told him a whole bunch of stuff and he just reviewed it on this page. The second call was only 7 days later. What happened to the 2 or 3 weeks. .
prosecute Zeb. Those are the only 2 options. CONSPIRACY OR PERJURY
The DA says tells the Jury that the touching in the school is count X but doesn’t mention it’s also count XI.
None of this is in the Grand Jury testimony. Only that he raped her. Not a thing about his fingers.
On page 49 line 16 she says “not more than five to seven minutes”. Interesting but the same phrase is used by one of the other girls.
This second one is not a new story, just a repeat of the previous one with a couple of changes. Who’s idea was that hers or the Troopers? Anyone that had been attacked by someone would not go out with them again, especially to the same place.


We will refer to this accuser as A1.  A1 started this back in 2003 while they were in high school. One day A1 invited Zeb to a dance. It was being held in Eagle River. Since Zeb did not have a llicense or a vehicle, A1 drove. After they had left A1’s mom called Zeb’s mom. During their conversation A1’s mom mentioned that A1 better not get home late or her dad would have a fit, as she had trouble with boys before. Later we learned that at least 2 boys had quit Palmer High School because of her. Well guess what, they arrived at our house at the time she was to be at her house. That meant she was late. Next day she has a rumor going around school that Zeb tried to rape her at our house and that was why she was late. We took action and went to the church leaders and then to the Palmer Police to let them know what was going on.  Sure enough within a few days she tried to make a report at Palmer police. She happened to get the same officer that we talked to. This officer agreed to place the report if A1 could pass a polygraph.  A1 and her mom left the police department in a hurry, according to the report we got from the officer. Other than the rumors at school and her dad making threats to Zeb and coming to morning church seminary we didn’t hear much more until after.  A1 made a claim and Trooper Dunford talked her into making a report with him. The police report is all over the place.  Since we were home the night of the dance, the Spring of 2003, she could no longer claim that an attack happened at our house that night.  She claimed that Zeb tried to drag her out of the pickup. We didn’t see any of that as we were watching out the window.   Next she claims that she gave Zeb a ride several times and at one point she claims that she never met Zeb’s mom and did not come into our house on the night of the dance. Then how did we get a picture of her and Zeb dressed for the dance standing in our living room. She goes on to tell of Zeb talking her into coming into his room and then how he attacked her. Then in one statement she says that Zeb’s little brother came into the room and that stopped Zeb. In another statement she says it was his little brother Joshua. We don’t have a Joshua in our family.  But the fact is that it wasn’t his brother that came into the room it was another member of the family and at that point A1 was sitting on top of Zeb, giggling.. However she tells it that Zeb was on top of her and when his “brother” came into the room she was able to wiggle out from under Zeb and escape out the side door of the garage. Not possible since we had a freezer in front of that door. Much more to go but I’ll let you digest that for now.

A twist in the tale

The following comes from the audio and police reports. When the father of one of the accusers, the same one that lied on the witness stand, was being questioned by Trooper Dunford, he talked about the alleged drive bys. The father stated that Zeb had “driven by the house several times that summer”. Dunford asked, “which summer”. The father stated, “I’m not sure”. Then in Dunfords’ written report he says that the man told him, “the summer of 03”. Now Dunford has altered a witness statement. I believe that is tampering with testimony. What laws does that viiolate? You decide this one. Do you really believe, as does the system, that it is ok for cops to lie. For them to alter testamony to BUILD a case, rather than investigate one and get to the truth? Because folks thats the way they do things here. Does not make it right. Isn’t it time to put a stop to all the crocked ways. As a side note to this, the father and mother could not even agree as to what kind of vehicle Zeb was driving. But remember the DMV and insurance records that show Zeb had no car and no insurance. The mother told of Zeb stopping his car in the middle of the road and just stareing at her and her daughter. She said that cars were honking their horns at him. If that were to have happened then why wasn’t he stopped by Palmer Police. Simple, without a car in was impossible for Zeb to do that. Wow, more lies. Tune in next time and we’ll discuss this accusers made up story. Thank you for reading

Grand Jury

During grand jury Trooper Dunford took the subject away from the items with Zeb and moved the topic to me, Zebs’ dad. One might well ask why, as I was not under investigation. Dunford rattled off a bunch of lies about me and what he knew about me, which he had never met me before that night. When my wife and I arrived at the bowling alley to get my pick up a tow truck was starting to connect up to it. We did not see anyone else around. My wife ran over to let the tow truck driver know that we were there to get the pickup. We assumed that the owner of the bowling alley was haveing the truck towed. Then out of the dark came a man dressed all in black and started yelling and did all but touch her. As I was saying, Dunford began telling the grand jury all about this. He made himself out to be some kind of nice guy, which he wasn’t, and then he told the grand jury that I stood between him and my wife with my arms crossed and would not allow him to deal with her. It even got to the point that the whole conversation turned to pressing charges against me and trying to get that before the same grand jury. But here is the interesting part. They were on the drivers side of the pick up and I was on the other side. Now my wife says I did not get between them, I say that I not only did not get between them but I never even got on that side of the vehicle. The most interesting part is that the tow truck driver states that I never got on that side of the vehicle. That means that 3 of us say I never got in between them, in fact did not even get the same side of the vehicle as Dunford and my wife. Oh, my, that means Dunford committed perjury again. Does anyone see a pattern here. Just to make it clear, all the things I am putting on here are from the court transcripts or the police reports. Next time see how Dunford twists statements to fit his own agenda.


While I’m on the subject of the pickup let us go a bit fruther. First off it is a Ford Ranger. That is a rather small pickup. In order to drive it he had to have the seat all the way back and it leaned back. Even then his knees were still pressed against the steering wheel. Now the one accuser claims that he did what she claims he did in the front of that pickup. If you are not familiar with the size of a Ranger then go take a look at one. Anyhow he is 6’8″ and 300 pounds. She is 5’6″ and 252 pounds. How on earth could he have done what she claims in the front of that pickup.(we’ll cover her story later). For right now though I’d like to go over the “search warrant”, that Trooper Dunford got for the pickup. Keep in mind that when getting a warrant the cop is under oath, just like in a courtroom. He has to justify the warrant to a judge. In his application for the warrant he justified it by saying that he saw a cell phone in the drivers seat and a laptop case amoung other things, but these are the two important items. Now when a warrant has been served the inventory and a copy of the warrant is to be given to the owner of the property, or if the owner cannot be reached a copy must be left at the scene and a copy returned to the judge. The judge is then suspossed to verify that the warrant is good. Well to start with I never did get a copy of the warrant or inventory and I own the pickup and am unable to get to the pickup as it is custody at MTR. By the way the taxpayers are picking up a 4 year storage tab for that. Your dollars at work folks. The returned inventory sheet did not have a LAPTOP or case on it. At that point the judge should have stopped things and asked what was going on. Dunford used the laptop case as a reason to get the warrant, yet its not on the inventory. The reason is simple. The laptop case didn’t exist. We never had a laptop, neither Zeb or us, so there could not have been a laptop case in the pickup. Why didn’t the judge ask that question. Maybe because the judge didn’t want to do his job, or maybe it was all part of a setup. You figure that out. Maybe the judge was just to dumb to know his job. Now the cell phone. The phone that he claims that he saw in the drivers seat, and was on the inventory, was indeed Zebs’ phone. However I’d like to know how it got into the drivers seat for Dunford to see it there. I was there when they placed Zeb under arrest. Dunford reached into Zebs’ right vest pocket, he was wearing a black carhart vest, and pulled out that phone and the pickup keys and set them on the hood of Trooper Leventry’s patrol car. So how did that cell phone get into the drivers seat of the pickup? Only one way, and that is that Dunford had to put it there! That’s tampering with evidence at a minium. Now when we went to get the pickup, Dunford was having it towed. We didn’t know this at first. My wife went to get the pickup and stop the tow truck driver. At one point she actually got into the drivers seat. Now if there had been a cell phone in the seat she would have either picked it up or knocked it out of the seat. Either way it would not have been in the seat. So again Dunford lied to the Judge. That is no less than 2 counts of perjury and 1 count of tampering with evidence. All felonies. So why is Trooper Dunford walking around and not in jail for perjury. Because the system here promotes the cops lieing. You see they don’t investigate a case, they build one, by any means necessary. Why didn’t his attorney bring this up? Good question, I wish I had a good answer. We gave her that information. She had knowledge of it. Just like the lieing dad. But she chose not to do a thing. We’ll deal with that later. So for right now, we have the Dad committing perjury in court, Dunford with 2 perjury counts to the judge and 1 count of tampering with evidence. Next time I’ll get into Trooper Dunford’s perjury in front of the grand jury.