Complaint No. 1784500421 - 922842827

Malik Mitchell-Starks

U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services System

Date of Offense

February 10, 2022

Complaint

Misconduct

Statement

PO Bryce Stark (U.S. Probation District of Nevada) Became an Immediate and Intentional
Obstacle To Dr. Alexis’s License Reinstatement and
U.S. Probation District of Nevada
Facilitated this Interference

[55] The Nevada State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners asked for quarterly reports (that I was, or was not, in compliance) from my probation officer and from my Professional Counselor, Pauline Hildreth, at Evergreen.

[56] I had been dealing with The Nevada State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners for approximately 28 months. Because of this, I was well aware of precisely what they required. So when Bryce Stark took over my case, I sent him a brief Email asking him to provide to The Board a short statement that I was in compliance with the terms of my Post Release Supervision. That Email went unanswered. Approximately 3 days later, I resent the same Email to Mr. Stark. Again, that Email went unanswered. I waited approximately 5 days and sent Mr. Stark another Email asking him to provide to The Board a short statement that I was in compliance with the terms of my Post Release Supervision. Once again, the Email was ignored.

[57] On August 13, 2021 I sent a letter (via Fax and U.S. Mail) to Mr. Stark (Exhibit:21) which clearly states that the “Only outstanding item The Board needs is your [Mr. Stark’s] statement.”

[58] Approximately 1 week later Mr. Stark called my cell. I verbally requested that he send The Board a brief statement so that I could get my license reinstated. I clearly explained to Mr. Stark that this was the very last piece of information which The Board required in order to reinstate my license to practice veterinary medicine in The State of Nevada. And Mr. Stark lied to me claiming that he spoke with The Board and his statement was not the last piece of information which The Board required.

[59] When I explained to Mr. Stark that I was well aware of exactly what The Board wanted and needed in order to finalize my license reinstatement, and that I knew he was not being honest with me and had not been cooperative with The Board, Mr. Stark became upset and stated, “I’m not going to help you.” That ended the phone call.

[60] On August 19, 2021 I filed a Formal Complaint (via Email) against Mr. Stark and U.S. Probation District of Nevada (Exhibit:11). This complaint was completely ignored by Supervisor Ben Johnson and Mr. Stark.

[61] On February 23, 2022 I filed a second Formal Complaint against Mr. Stark and U.S. Probation District of Nevada (Exhibit:12). This complaint was hand-delivered to Ben Johnson and mailed directly to Deputy Chief Mike Mastrangioli.

[62] Mr. Stark retaliated against me in various ways, but was quickly taken off my case by the leadership at U.S. Probation District of Nevada. Mr. Stark went on to retaliate against me on at least 4 separate occasions. This retaliation included:
[A] Mr. Stark intentionally lied to me about The Nevada State Boards of Veterinary Medical Examiner’s requirements for license reinstatement. When I informed Mr. Stark that I knew he was not being honest, he immediately and curtly stated, “Well, I’m not going to help you.”
[B] When I filed my February 2022 Formal Complaint against Mr. Stark, he immediately insisted that I needed to see a counselor at Choices Counseling. This lasted one year, and after Mr. Stark was taken off my case Amberleigh Barajas continued with this retaliation. Ms. Barajas forced me to continue attending Choices even after the Choices counselor stated to me on three separate occasions that I met the therapeutic goal (of reducing anxiety).
[C] The Board had required that Pauline, my Evergreen Counselor, report quarterly that I was (or was not) in compliance. Pauline immediately began this reporting so that I could have my license reinstated (Mr. Stark never did this for me). After approximately six months, Mr. Stark suddenly informed Pauline that she was prohibited from communicating with The Board in any manner. This action intentionally jeopardized my license and was completely unnecessary. Mr. Stark was well aware that The Board was requiring that they receive a quarterly report from my counselor, and knew that his decision to prohibit Pauline Hildreth from doing so would jeopardize my license.
[D] On Thursday February 10, 2022, at approximately 9 PM I received a very odd, unsolicited, text from a Nevada number (702-623-1783) which I did not recognize (Exhibit:13). When I clicked on the text, I was horrified to see a photo of a nude boy in a very inappropriate pose. Others received similar planted pictures, and the only thing we all had in common was the same PO, Mr. Stark. The leadership at U.S. Probation District of Nevada (as well as the U.S. DOJ, FBI, and the Administrative Office of the United States Courts) have completely ignored my requests for information and help in this serious matter (Exhibits:14-20). RemoteCom has the event data (that is precisely why they were being used to monitor my electronic devices). This means that U.S. Probation District of Nevada also has the event data. The reason, of course, why all these organizations ignored my request for this event data is because there was a well-orchestrated coverup to hide the truth from me, and to hide the illegal actions of Mr. Stark and the fact the he failed to follow the policies and procedures of U.S. Probation.

Mr stark intentionally, repeatedly, interfered with my License reinstatement (NV Lic #1109). Mr. stark intentionally sent my cell (via the internet/text) Child Prornography. Mr. Stark (as well as PO Amberlee Barajas [I will file a separate complaint against her]) intentionally retaliated against me when I complained, interfering with my Due Process Rights. Mr. stark failed to follow the Policies and Procedures of U.S. Probation, committed at least 2 felonies, and he failed to uphold the Oath he took to The U.S. Constitution.

I tried to attach more documents and the attach feature would not cooperate. I have many pages of Formal Complaints (and Exhibits to support my statement). These I am happy to mail to you. They include 2 Formal Complaints against Mr. Stark, Formal Complaints to The U.D DOJ, Formal Complaints to The Administrative Office of U.S Courts, a Formal Complaint to Homeland Security Investigations, a Formal Complaint to the Head Judge at the Court, and a Request for Pardon to President Donald Trump (P330417). The above points were taken from my Pardon Request as the system would not allow me to attach the file(s)...

The Court, ausa's, leadership at U.S. Probation, fbi, Administrative Office of U.S Courts, AG aaron ford, and the U.S. DOJ have gone out of their way to create a well-organized coverup in order to hide the illegal actions of Mr. stark.

I am trying to get accountability here.
Mr. stark needs to be on The Brady List. And in prison.

Please let me know if you can help me. I do not use the voice mail on my cell

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Dr. Vincent Alexis
1401 Watercreek Dr.
N. Las Vegas, NV 89032
(725) 251-8369
[email protected]

Location

3000 S Las Vegas Blvd, Las Vegas, NV 89109, USA

36.1320851, -115.1678303

Pennsylvania Right to Know Law

65 Pennsylvania Statute § 67.101 et seq.

The Pennsylvania Right to Know Law is a series of laws designed to guarantee that the public has access to public records of governmental bodies. Prior to 2008, the Pennsylvania Right to Know Act was widely regarded as one of the worst in the country, partly because the pre-2008 law presumed that government records were not public, unless someone who wanted the record could establish otherwise. A new law passed by the state legislature and signed by Governor Ed Rendell "flipped the presumption". This new law went into full effect on January 1, 2009 and it states, in sharp distinction to the previous law, that all documents will be presumed to be opento the public unless the agency holding them can prove otherwise.

The Pennsylvania Right to Know Law defines records as, “information, regardless of physical form or characteristics, that documents a transaction or activity of an agency and that is created, received or retained pursuant to law or in connection with a transaction, business or activity of the agency." Any United States citizen may request public records and no statement of purpose is required. There is no restriction on the use of records and five days is the limit for responses to requested documents.

Brady List Training

Our training resources support everyone involved in the criminal disclosure process, including law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, defense counsel, public defenders and legal aid practitioners, and self-represented litigants.