"Legal Notice to Mr. Kevin Bethune, LPC, OK license #2828
RE: Appeal of NDOK 11-CV-92-TCK-PJC to 10th Circuit Court, 12-5029
You are being served with the Appellant/Petitioner’s Opening Brief at your last known address:
7353 E 50th Street South, Tulsa OK 74145
The previous service to this address returned “NOT DELIVERABLE AS ADDRESSED, UNABLE TO FORWARD”. This is the third address during this lawsuit that has returned this way, the first a work address and the second a home address. You know that you have been sued, but never disclose or leave a forwarding address. If you wish to know the contents of this brief, and for some legitimate reason cannot accept it at the 50th street address, you can obtain a copy from Holden & Carr Attorneys, First Place, 15 East 5th St, Suite 3900, Tulsa OK 74103, or from any other Defendant or Defendant’s lawyer, or by writing to me at my address, which you know from Court documents.
I was wondering – do you by any chance counsel people on personal responsibility?
Please be informed that I intend to write to the Oklahoma State Department of Health, Professional Counselor Licensing, about these matters. I have comments about the “Third Party Statement” you swore out to the Tulsa Police Department on August 3, 2010. They regard selective exclusion of my exculpatory statements to COPES about a dispute with my landlady (such as my determination to stay within the bounds of lease, as interpreted by HUD, and law), bogus “risk factors”, the lack of sworn statements from the accusers you quoted about statements falsely attributed to me, the lack of any questioning of other witnesses (such as my easily available neighbors) to establish the truthfulness of those making allegations against me and the tenor of my comments about them, the lack of any investigation of alternative solutions to the dispute (such as helping me finish moving out of a bad situation into my new apartment), the absence of references to my medical doctors of long-standing, and the misuse of your reports of hearsay as fact by the Mental Health Court and the District Attorney’s Office due to the apparent weight of your position with COPES. In other words, a complete lack of context which would support any other conclusion than involuntary commitment in the mental institution to which you effectively recommended candidates for confinement. An institution of the State with which your employer appears to have had a working arrangement that justified your employer's existence. "