Monday, March 21, 2016

Case 8CA10541- The misdemeanor of the Century - Amy Shumer and Tig Notaro beef included

Note: June 14 2016 - Due to Tig Notaro's statements in a Guardian Article, this post is getting tons of hits. I imagine most people do not want to read the whole messy thing, so I put together just the part that relates to Amy Shumer's current agent and Notaro's ex agent - Heidi Feigin. I recently saw a few comments related to this Schumer beef that suggested that Notaro is a genuine and honest person, and Schumer is the phony...Judge for yourself after reading this:



http://henypire.blogspot.com/2016/06/amy-schumer-v-tig-notaro-tig-notaro.html




This is a story (backed up by ample corroborating documentation and smoking gun evidence) of how an LAPD unit named,The Threat Management Unit, a certain famed entertainment firm named, Lavely and Singer, a few comedians, the city attorney's office, and others -- conspired to protect the interests of "cancer comedian," Mathilde "Tig" Notaro AKA Nick Kroll's "best and oldest comedy friend."



It started with Notaro lying and defaming me one day in early April of 2008. When I took (not remotely illegal) measures to have her stop doing this, she called on her friendship with a Nick Kroll (Son of Jules Kroll. We'll get to him later) and he hooked her up with a corrupt LAPD unit, and Marty Singer's notoriously connected and ruthless law firm - Lavely and Singer.

Then, due to the power and influence of Marty Singer and an "Elite" LAPD unit, that has connections to Nick Kroll's father and brother, she was able to secure malicious and unwarranted temporary and permanent restraining orders -- using the mentioned police unit out of court(calls to the judges involved) and in court - perjury, subornation of perjury and fraud on the court.

When I filed an appeal of the restraining order, and then sued Notaro for abuse of process and defamation, the stakes got higher for her, and as you will soon see - this unit and this law firm began taking extreme and lawless measures to make sure that Nick Kroll's professed best friend didn't have to face the consequences of her actions: lose a lot of money and reputation if the civil suit was able to proceed without interference from them.

 In retaliation for the lawsuit, Detectives in the LAPD famed "Threat Management Unit,"(TMU) pressed for a criminal charge. It started with TMU Detective John Gregozek, pretending that all the false statements made to him by Notaro, were investigated, and proven to be founded in fact. In fact, had he investigated he would quickly learn that every thing she said was not only false, but five witnesses existed to prove how false it was. Not to mention that every  statement she would them make or her "Witnessed" would make over time would show that they wall were lying like crazy and there was incentive for them to lie.

 One witness  turned out to be Notaro's own talent agent, Heidi Feigin, and one witness turned out to be an  LAPD officer named Officer Jaqueline Montalvo. We'll get to them later.

On August 12 or 14th or August 25th 2008 (even the time of the filing of the first charge  is in dispute as you'll see) A city attorney named, Phyllis Henderson, would file one criminal charge - "violation of a restraining order." The allegation being that on July 14th 2008 I had spoken to a Martha Kelly at a comedy club,  and had said "Tell her to stop doing this it's killing my mother."  I'd said said " She should stop doing this it's killing my mother." I was refering to the fact that Notaro was doing everything, in her considerable power, to destroy any chance I had at a comedy career by slandering me - trying to impart the ugly and life destroying g lie that I was somehow was her "Scary stalker."

I say somehow because no one in their right mind would say that about me considering that I'd never goine to her shows or had anything to do with her until after I learned she was dis on Apirl 7th 2008 that Ms. Notaro was deadset on ruining any chance I would have at a career in comedy. Before tha tday I had never though of he rmuch less visited her or had anything to do with her or her ex -Stef Willen. This was never in dispute. The only time I did make efforts to speak to her where only after she refused to stop lying about me in way that basically would ruin my life if the lies were to continue.

Over the following two years, despite overwhelming evidence of my innocence and overwhelming evidence of the frauds of John Gregozek, Allison Hart Sievers(the Lavely and Singer lawyer) Notaro and her false witnesses, these forces, using tax payer money, worked together to make sure that Notaro won whatever it is she wanted to win, or didn't lose what she was supposed to lose considering the choice she'd made.

 Detective John Gregozek, actually admitted to my mother, that the criminal chargess were  was retaliation for the defamation claim. To be more exact:

 After we learned of the criminal charge and how he had used long known lies to press for charges, my mother called him and asked him how he could do this " when you know that girly is lying". Gregozek replied in a plaintive tone, "What could I do? You sued her. didn't you?"

This prompted my cop trusting mother to get so confused she asked me in a serious way, when she got off the phone - "Is it illegal to sue somebody now?"

Very soon after the city attorney agreed to file one charge on the "bad faith" information Gregozek brought them, an offer of "informal diversion," was offered by the prosecution, and refused by me.

Soon after that, an Internal affairs complaint was filed, and a detective from the same unit, a Susanne Lopez, told me by phone, "Now that you went to internal affairs we can go into your computers."

And "go into my computers," they would - seven search warrants in all. But not just my computers and my accounts - the accounts and computer of my sister and mother.

 All search warrants were requested by Detective John Gregozek, and then James Hoffman,  on the orders of Lavely and Singer (documents below - January 13 2009)and then issued on the basis of John Gregozek's  and then James Hoffman's perjured affidavits, and long known to them as false - "statement of facts"

And, it wasn't bad enough that the search warrants would be issued, without any probable case, and based on statements Gregozek and Hoffman long  knew to be false, it would  turn out that six of these seven search warrants would not just be regular old search warrants, but special circumstance warrants AKA exigent circumstance search warrants - extreme measure warrants - usually reserved for pedophiles and terrorists.

And, though those search warrants would produce no evidence of any crime, that didn't seem to concern John Gregozek, or his supervisor, Jeffrey Dunn, or the Lavely and Singer lawyer that was directing them behind the scenes.


Later,  we'd figure out that no evidence of any crime found in thecourse of the search warrants - did it concern the city attorney contacted by Allison Hart(the lawyer at Lavey and Singer. )This city attorney - Kelly Boyer-- would refuse to add any charges despite this report that  says otherwise



That part ( From January 13th- March 23rd 2009. see documentation etc)  becomes extremely confusing and strange. Two more charges are added on March 23rd 2009 - based on what Gregozek brought Boyer on January 27th 2009,  but no reports of these charges, and what evidence was present to justify their addition exists or maybe such reports weren't handed over. As you will see so much exculpatory evidence wound't be handed over during the course of this prosecution.

On the ninth day of a 12 day trial, that would take place from March 9th 2010 to March 23rd 2010 - the two charges would be acquitted when the trial judge, Randolph Moore, would grant the defense's motion to acquit. A very rare form of acquittal. He would state on the record that the charges (two facebook posts) were not linked to me or anyone.

Strange and confusing because Boyer was there in court the day Gregozek says she was supposed, and did not add any charges. To make sense of how strange and confusing, and how indicative of malicious prosecution this all was, you'll need  to read the chronology below. Please find the part that starts, January 13th 2009, with a letter from a Lavely and Singer lawyer, and ends on March 23rd 2009.


By all evidence, we have to presume, that after they failed to intimidate Ms. Boyer - into adding such flagrantly baseless charges- they felt they had to handpick a prosecutor that wouldn't be bothered by adding charges that made no perceivable sense.


This resulted in them handpicking that kind of a prosecutor. In this case it would be city attorney Jennifer Waxler, who would be amenable to adding not four bogus charges, but two  bogus charges -  charges added, based on absolutely no evidence of any crime. 

Later, I would be told by public defender, Alissa Malzman, and another male public defender(whose name I never learned) that Waxler was notorious in that court for her lack of ethics.

 These were charges that made no sense - nothing found in the 4 "exigent circumstance" ( two more would come a few months later) search warrants led to any proof to substantiate the allegations made by Notaro's civil attorney or as you will see " Notaro's hunch" that the Facebook comments were made by me.


When I said those words, "these charges make no sense," on the record, and off the record to assorted prosecutors and defense attorneys, well... you will see how that sensible observation would be used against me a year and a half after the criminal prosecution began.


Then more plea deals rejected by me and then when in mid 2009, my sister filed a defamation suit against Notaro and I hired a private attorney, Nick Kroll, Notaro, Lavely and Singer, the police , prosecutors et al- appear to have decided that they would do absolutely anything to win and anything to punish me for daring to want to hold Nick Kroll's best friend accountable for her defamation and abuse of process.


Next came the let's jail her based on fabricated non-evidence part ( see July 2009 in the chronology) Again, this is all documented below, and the documents and notes will add the context and visuals necessary when making such seemingly outlandish allegations.

When that,"let's terrorize her by trying to get the Mayor's sister to jail her based on absolutely no evidence of any crime, " cheme seemed to have fallen apart on them too, the let's her get her forcibly medicated and committed to a state hospital for the criminally insane scenario came to pass, on August 12th 2009.

When that scheme, that you'd only expect in totalitarian regimes part, fell apart too, they planned and then executed a blanket search warrant and a raid using eighteen LAPD officers to, we have to guess,scare me into submission, and have me returned to the mental health court to close the deal that they said was closed on October 14th 2009 ( please see chronology.)

So they conducted an 18 man raid to terrorize me into submission before the illegal and malicious arrest and raid. A spectacle that included me being  handcuffed and un-handcuffed repeatedly ( I'll explain the reasons for that soon)  before being arrested, dragged off to an unmarked car, and then taken to the Van Nuys jail. The reason I was given is that due to me leaving the mental health court a warrant was issued and now that they co


At home, my mother and sister were detained for hours, as the EIGHTEEN men and women in riot gear took our modems, computers, phones, letters to lawyers and many more things they had no legal right to search or remove.

With no charges brought, and no viable legal reason for any search warrant, arrest and jailing, I was hauled off to jail for 33 days. As I suffered there, and my mother and sister suffered even worse at home - Judge Maria Stratton, following no law - repeatedly denied me any bail, as efforts were made to close a deal that was supposed to have been closed a month before, but was foiled by a chance encounter with the supervisor of the public defenders - a Robin Ginsburg.


The impossible to believe deal:


Stop any trial that would expose that there had never been a valid reason for not only the charges but the restraining order. Get me out of their hair - stop me from suing them and/or exposing what they were doing- by having me locked up in Patton(state hospital for the criminally insane), where I'd be forcibly medicated for that indeterminate time that it might take to have an already competent person,"restored to competency." In other words, Stalin would smile.

But that too did not come to pass due to the intervention of a Dr. Ronald Markman and a Dr. Suzanne Dupee, and I was lucky enough (luck being really really relative) to be returned to the criminal court.


After I withstood the 33 days in jail (where oddly enough, I was refused my anti depressants - when the shtick was that I was too insane to even stand trial, and had to be forcibly medicated,) the newest prosecutor, Martin Boags, decided that adding four charges(that not only made no sense but had had run the statue of limitations months before) was a wise strategic move in his quest to win win win something he had no business wanting to win.

Then more strangely small plea offers(considering the 7 charges and more serious allegations that existed at that point.)

When those all plea offers were also rejected, and trying to subvert the trial using cruel and unusual means had fallen apart, Martin Boags, cornered my sister and  mother in the hallway, and said, "last chance,"when they stared him down he said, "Oh well it's all wrapped up," followed by a smirk and the all wrapped up hand motion. Give Martin Baogs a google to see how he unbenched his own father and what kind of morality problems he's had for many years.



Soon all those witnesses, Id' been talking about for nearly two years, and even had smoking gun affidavits from,started showing up and agreeing to take the stand in my defense. And, as you will see - it didn't turn out to be as wrapped up as Martin Boags assumed it would be.

A month and two weeks after adding the four charges,Martin "It's all wrapped up" Boags was off the case, and the four charges were dropped "in the furtherance of justice."

On that same day, March 4th 2010, my public defender called me up and said this,

"Martin Boags dropped the four charges. Martin Boags is off your case. And, Jacqeline Montalvo is dead."

We will get much more into detail about all those statements, and who Boags was, what he did, and who Jacqueline Montalvo was( and what she did and then was not able to do cause she died in a mysterious car accident right before trial.)

So nearly two years after Notaro began her series of malicious lies - It was going to trial. Three charges. In the court of Judge Randolph Moore.

And by all appearances,we'd get one of the few half decent judges in that courthouse. I say half because against Supreme court law - he denied  me the one thing that could have cleared my life up , once and for all.- A collateral attack on the validity of the restraining order. And though it was clear that the pubic defender was not doing all she could by a long shot, he would not allow me to represent myself. He said on the record, he did not want to open up "The Pandora's Box":

But since all things are really really relative, half decent judge  in that courthouse was a miracle.  A twelve day trial would actually come to pass - where the public defender would make political choices throughout - basically, and according to compelling  evidence- Alissa Malzman tried to throw one charge to the prosecution,


But that to didn't succeed either, and the surreal spectacle, that was that half kangaroo trial, ended in spectacularly rare dispositions. The "facebook charges" were "acuitedd" by the judge after presentation of the states case,and upon an oral motion to acquit from Alissa.  Then the case proceeded onto the first, and now last surviving charge. Witnesses for the prosectuion were flown in from Austin and Maryland to testify against me to the amazement of Alissa Malzman. When  they sat in that witness chair and began their lies, Malzman said, "You are being railroaded. They have been coached.


But her attesting that I was being railroaded, and her repeatedly telling me this was a malicious  prosecution didn't spur good old Alissa to do anything but proceed to not even cross examine the witnesses, in any significant way, when if she had - their whole case would be shown for what it was,and my life and name would be restored.


Malzman acted all along as if she was very conflicted about making that happen. And judging by the moves and non-moves she' make during her representation,it is clear that in the end, she decided that serving my best interests was not in her best interests. Again, please read the chronology below to see why and how I am able to make all these outlandish seeming allegations.

Who am I?

Well. that's a long story, but I'll try my best to sum it up. Considering the first section, let's start with- I'm a sane person, a law abiding person, a very mentally competent person, a non delusional person; A not paranoid unless people actually against me person.  I'm a female. a writer. a reader, a native New Yorker, a college graduate - who before all this - did not even have a speeding ticket on my record.


 In late 2006, I moved to L.A  Mostly because I'd  been told over and over again that I had the goods and should pursue comedic fame and fortune. Partly because the weather and the cost of living was better than New York, And, partly cause why not...What's the worst thing that could happen?

Until 2008, I was one of the many who'd mentally point my forefinger to my temple and twirl
( the Universal hand sign of cookoo) when I heard someone talk about,"conspiracy."  The world doesn't work that way, I'd thought. Doing bad things was very rarely a group activity.

Back then, I was sure that if you did nothing illegal your chances of being charged,jailed, having your home invaded by 18 officers in riot gear, and then having judges and doctors at the  ready - to have you forcibly medicated, and put for an indeterminate amount of time in the state hospital for the criminally insane - were slim.

And I was sure that if just one of those things happened- not to mention all of them(and more), Journalists and the public would not just find it interesting but outrageously newsworthy.
As a lifelong sane person, I was not oblivious to the fact that making these claims would inspire the universal twirling finger sign of insanity

But enough about me. I have in excess of a thousand documents obtained over 4 years in hard won "discovery." Nothing I will allege will be without documentation and corroboration.

This is quite literally a hell of story. Unfortunately, others have gone through it too, and might still have to go through it, if something doesn't change.

This blogger indicates that as of 2013, this not only has been continuing, but many know about it.

https://losangeleslessconfidential.wordpress.com/



Sadly, it appears that the rumors of this Unit’s highly questionable approach to law enforcement are well founded. By all indications, the LAPD’s Threat Management has functioned as the law enforcement arm of Martin Singer’s growing empire.  I am guessing that after Anthony Pellicano was sent to federal prison, celebrities, and their lawyers, had to look elsewhere to close such high stakes deals.
Please refer to my last post for some perspective on Martin Singer and his lawfirm, Lavely and Singer. In other words, Viramontes, Martha Defoe, and a  Jim Gregozek. are working under the guise of public servants
However, the reality is that they are not acting as public servants at all. Rather, these sworn officers are working to assure that Mr. Singer is able to sell his 800 dollar an hour services to desperate and very well compensated celebrities. I have information that convinces me that other TMU detectives are involved, as are Detectives from the Hollywood Division, but I’ll save that until more evidence is presented me
When such celebrities fear that their reputation is worth millions, and that the multi millions are at risk, it isn’t hard to imagine that a few hundred thousand dollars in retainer fees is a wise investment when trying to insure their brand.  Enter Martin Singer and those of similar disposition.

Here is a a non exhaustive list of Lavely and Singer's clients

Arnold Schwarzenegger,  Charlie Sheen, Bill Cosby, Sylvester Stallone, George Soros, John Travolta,Paula Abdul ,Kim Kardashian, John Travolta, Tiger Woods, Bryan Singer, Jennifer Aniston, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, Demi Moore, Bruce Willis .....


AND Tig Notaro?

There are many more. Lavely and Singer also worked for the Juilus Baer Bank , based in the Cayman Islands. Lavley  and Singer sought and succeeded in getting a restraining order against Wikileaks and even to get them shut down for a while, on behalf of this Julius Baer Bank.

In 2006, Lavely and Singer represented a Robert Martin too. Robert Martin is the former head of the Threat Management Unit,  and the suit was against a writer named David Waddel and his publisher - Penguin.


 The gist of the suit was that Waddle had written unfavorable things about the Threat Management Unit and  certain private security firms that claimed to specialize in security and "threat management" for celebrities and VIPS. Gavin Debecker and a few less famous names were also suing. Very soon in, Marty Singer had taken the steps to have Penguin and Waddel, printing all sorts of apologetic retractions online.

In my case(s), by all appearances the client in question, Mathilde" Tig" Notaro, was not rich, famous, or powerful. For a a long time me and many who witnessed, just some of the case, were mystified by her seeming ability to not only afford such services, but according to lawyer Howard L. Williams  to "commandeer the legal system," ( letter included in chronology)

It took until late 2013, to realize that  the answers lied in one of Notaro's alleged witnesses-  a guy named Nick Kroll. I say alleged because he did not witness what he said he witnessed, and I now know that he used his influence and connections in the courts and comedy to assure that other alleged witnesses also were willing to agree to bear false witness.


Who is Nick Kroll?

Those who follow "alternative comedy" might have heard his name, but as of yet he hasn't found the mainstream success he seeks. I do not think I would have heard of him had he not shown up in my case. But the fame he might have gained from his ensemble work on the FXX channel's "the league' or from his self produced show on Comedy Central, "The Kroll Show," had nothing to do with the power and influence he would wield in the various court cases involved here.


Here is a very long( and yet not exhaustive) blog post about the Krolls

http://henypire.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/review-of-kroll-show.html


But for the purpose of this particular story, Nick Kroll is the son of Jules Kroll and Lynn Kroll, and the brother of Jeremy Kroll.

Here are just a few reasons why this is significant - when it came to the civil restraining order, then the civil suit for defamation against Notaro  then the criminal case, and then the civil rights cases that followed the resolution of the criminal case.


1) Kroll does reputation management and litigation support for celebrities and VIPS . They often work alongside Lavely and Singer to assure victories for their wealthy and powerful clientele.


2) At the time my case was in the courts, and handled by the LAPD unit TMU- Jules Kroll was the boss of the LAPD 's chief of police - Bill Bratton and the employee of the former head of the Threat Management Unit - Robert Martin.

3)At the time of my case a Jeffrey Dunn was the supervisor or head of the Threat Management Unit but the the former head of the Threat Management unit was a Gregory Boles. Today, and soon after retiring from the LAPD, and his post as the head of the TMU- he got a very lucrative position at Kroll.

Kroll scouts the L.A courts for prosecutors and judges, and the police department - to find those suitable for a high paying jobs with Kroll.


.This article in Business Weekhttp://www.businessweek.com/stories/1998-11-08/jules-kroll-danger-is-his-business  gives a compelling overview: 


In the late 1970s, he(Jules Kroll) helped create a new market for corporate investigations. A onetime Manhattan assistant district attorney, he realized that corporations would pay big for an investigative firm that could dig out employee fraud and other malfeasance.He recruited a savvy coterie of former CIA spies, FBI agents, and prosecutors by paying them as much as twice their public-sector salaries.


But there's more to Kroll's success than waving big paychecks at top talent. He has long inspired loyalty among his staff by remembering the names of even the lowliest clerical workers. He once even lent one promising young investigator the downpayment for his house. The personable Kroll is an avid schmoozer, too.


4) The Krolls and Marty Singer are very cozy with judges and law enforcement. Marty Singer is known to have picked a few of them for his very satisfied client - Arnold Schwarzenegger. In my case  judges( 12 in all) were recent Schwarzenegger appointees



www.businessinsurance.com/.../aon-consulting-forms-threat-managemen...

Jan 4, 2007 - Gregory S. Boles was tapped to serve as a director and leader ofthreat management for the unit. Mr. Boles, who will be based in Los Angeles,  ...

[PDF]

www.lapdonline.org/home/pdf.../5596

Los Angeles Police Department

Boles currently serves as the head of Kroll's L.A offices 

http://www.kroll.com/en-us/who-we-are/kroll-experts/gregory

All things being really really really relative, I was one of the lucky ones. I walked out of court after 12 days of trial, and after soldiering through two years of cruel and unusual punishments, without being convicted on any of the seven charges( brought over the course of two years.)

 I can't say I beat any charges, since none were legitimate. I still don't yet how much it cost them but let's estimate that at least a thousand potholes were left as potholes in the City of L.A.

Before we get into a date by date, event by event chronology, 

let's get this out of the way-


What did they say I did? Did I do it? Did they think I did it? Did I commit any crime in the course of what would become a now eight year odyssey of  injustice?

Were any of the allegation of a Mathilde "Tig" Notaro true? Was a Stef Willen telling the truth when she decided to corroborate the lie that I'd pushed Notaro at a coffee house on August 29th 2007. Did anyone saying I did any of the things I did that underlay the requests for restraining orders and then the criminal prosecution- tell the truth?


Did I ever confront Notaro and attack her, in August of 07, then and then again "confront her" nine months later at a comedy show at Largo? Did I then hurl terrible words and threaten  her in any way in the course of this all?

Did I ever attack her verbally or physically. Did I stalk her or anyone? Did any of my actions warrant a restraining order, and after she  succeeded in obtaining one by fraud, perjury, and malice( and by using Lavely and Singer and Nick Kroll's strings pulling- ) did I break the order?

I know the answer is no. My witnesses knew the answer was no. Soon into her false accusation it was overwhelming evidence that the answer was no: Extreme inconsistent statements and eyewitnesses that stood inches from the alleged "scenes"

 The truth is that every allegations she made was invented by her, and kept alive by those who saw opportunity in lying for Kroll and Notaro. It took a long time to realize what kinds of incentives were offered and by exactly whom.

And, I submit that the chronology I've put together( below) proves that the police and prosecutors knew that they were proceeding in "bad faith" very early on this malicious prosecution - since so much evidence would be presented to them throughout by e-mail and by phone, and in court-  but they had to please certain masters and so the facts and evidence were insignificant time after time after time after time as you will see during the chronology(below)

I'm an unsure what exactly the more than the dozen judges, that would sit on this case, knew, but I know that way too many( Judge Gerald Rosenberg, Dennis Landin, Mary Lou Villar, Georgina Gricz, Samantha Jessner, Karla Kerlin, Robert Vanderet, John Martinez, Maria Stratton, Micheal Mooney, Judge Jaqueline Connor, Judge Elizabeth Grimes, and then a federal judge(whose name escapes me now and then Judge Richard Fruin and Michael Mooney broke many laws and denied justice time after time)

As a non- insane person,I know that alleging that so many judges, police officers and prosecutors acted lawlessly,sounds nuts, I know that few could easily believe the allegations I've made.  So,  please read the chronology to see the documentation. The part with the civil court cases (redress for grievances part 10) and  judges involved is not yet ready. But will be

When facing an onslaught of false allegations, it becomes very challenging to convince anyone that none of it was true.They invented a false narrative of some confusing love triangle. I suddenly was some jealous lover sort when the truth was that this didn't resembling anything that was going on in my mind or reality not to mention the fact that this Notaro and Willen were not even together for five years.

 How to disprove my state of my mind? I don't know. I just know that I've never been jealous in my life. It's not in my make up. The whole narrative came from the twisted minds of two mentally deranged women.

 And as a law abiding person, who never would do or say the things I was accused of  it is very painful to have to defend myself again when the truth was out there long ago and it should have cleared my name, long ago but as you will see it got suppressed over and over again.

So, yes, while it's impossible to prove my state of mind and very hard to prove innocence when faced with so many lies, I do have overwhelming evidence that from the start all this was founded on lies and then that the lies were known to those who had the power to use them to help me, but would not choose to.




But, I think what you'll find in that link - more than shows how many lies were made, and coupled with the chronology  - you will see not just how they were lies but how such lies were allowed to stand due to the unholy alliances that were formed in this case.

I think it more than demonstrates that

1.  no restraining order was warranted, and
2. that no criminal prosecution should ever have been allowed to start, and then stand for two years.
3. there can be no plausible deniability on the parts of many of the players, considering how they were informed of the "inconsistencies" and the witnesses from early on.


Then it can be deduced that since no restraining order would have been granted absent perjury and fraud on the court, and no criminal prosecution was ever warranted, and I was put through a malicious fraud restraining order process, then a malicious criminal prosecution, and then a sinister and terrifying competency to stand trial scheme that led to me being jailed for 33 days based on no known law, 

and that I   made to come to court month after month for 2 years, and that I had stand trial for 12 days due to fraud and the unholy alliances that underpinned this case -   that I was due a lot of compensation for these damages. How that was denied us due to the same forces that caused the damages, will be discussed at the end of THIS




Chronology

On April 30th 2008,  LAPD Detective, John Gregozek 











wrote out this report, after being contacted "via phone" by a Mathilde "Tig" Notaro.Displaying april 30th 2008 redacted report.jpg










Displaying april 30th 2008 redacted report.jpg


The document would be redacted and then  altered to dismiss the original report - where Gregozek listed  Stephanie Willen as a witness. 

Note: no mention by John Gregozek of the many witnesses that were present. No mention of the witness named by Tig Notaro as being present on the night the report references- April 7th 2008.

Notaro mentions Heidi Feigin as being involved. goes as far as to say she stood right there as I screamed "cunt. dyke. bitch" and got into both Heidi and Notaro's faces'. Or as Gregozek would put it " Verbal Threats"

There was never any dispute that Willen was not present yet Gregozek still put that in. I'm guessing that as of 8/14/08 when they intended to please Nick Kroll and by proxy - Tig Notaro- they added that this wasn't true when they submitted it to prosecutors because the prosecutors made calls and found out that Willen was not present on that evening.


 Please take note of that date of "rejected info"- August 14 2008. The defamation  lawsuit was filed on August 11th 2008 and served on Notaro on August 13th 2008.





 It is very significant, and alone shows that the charge was filed after Notaro knew of the civil suit, and not before as would the narrative Lavely and Singer and Gregozek would need to maintain


Here's the whole page.

l 30th 2008   











pg 2 is the report Gregozek created after Notaro called him by phone on April 30th 2008:




Note: None of this was true and none of it was verified. In fact not only did Gregozek not investigate these claims but he willfully fabricated a police report to make it seem more legitimate
Pg 3








There had to have been videotape, but they would not turn any over to us, after we requested it. There should have been signed witness statements.  None were ever produced till this day. There were many witnesses to these alleged incidences in packed clubs where the allegations were in packed clubs or outside with lines of people that down the road would be pushed. Also lock down for hours of popular clubs on a Saturday night at Largo with police called and coming... so many witnesses. so many statements could have been taken. 


The  allegations in John Gregozek's "investigative report," were not only false, but very early on John Gregozek knew they were false. Very early on he had no plausible deniability, as you will see very soon.


WE told him about witnesses when he came to our house on May 7th 2008.  I even sent him emails about witnesses and various emails that proved Notaro and Willen were lying to them. I sent James Hoffman and Jeff Dunn evidence that showed that all of this was a fraud. (will be included)
From the minute Gregozek drafted that report, according to evidence(the fact that he inserted a false incidence number when no incident number existed in this case) and the fact that real names are omitted and only those he knew were complicit( Nick Kroll and Mark Flanagan were named) Then a few city attorneys would also know these allegations were invented by a  malicious woman with the unbearably inane name - "Tig" Notaro.




This paragraph alone says so much- 









We will break down every sentence of Gregozek's report, in a different blog post(and show you that not one of these allegations would stay consistent and that witnesses for me would show it all a complete lie and that these lies would be repeated as gospel in the next two years and beyond.) but for now, note how Gregozek is not naming the "friend." No naming of "security" names. Not even a naming of the officers who somehow concluded that there was no crime despite the serious allegations Kroll and Notaro would later make about this "incident,"- violence, trespassing, disorderly conduct etc. As you'll see the court minutes will soon say that these nameless officers concluded their was no crime but hey they arrested me on that date... No named of the officers who allegedly showed up to either Largo on teh 12th of April or the Improve on April 29th 2008.


Only Nick Kroll is named. I would like to reader to understand, right now, what kind of fraud was taking place here. Because as a law abiding person it bothers me a lot for anyone to think these things to be true.


What if I told you that Gregozek invented an incident report number for the occasion, because no such incident report was every made by those yet to be named officers who did show up on April 29th 2008?

What if I told you that despite what Mark Flanagan, Mathilde "Tig Notaro, and then Michael Griffee would say as to April 12th 2008-  and then what Gregozek would write in the coming two years as occurring - that they called police and police came that . this never happened. What if I told you Michael Grifee was a key witness in the restraining order hearing and that Mark Flanagan refused to talk to any investigator cause he knew he'd lied. What if I told you Nick Kroll has given a lot of funding to the Largo Theater/Music and comedy club?



What if I told you that under oath the manager of Largo would tell the judge that the police came that night after a 911 call and due to my sister and I supposedly causing a popular club to be on lockdown 
for three hours on a Saturday night. What if I told you not only was there no police arrival but no 911 call?
Then the owner of the club would also lend his voice - yes indeed everything alleged by Notaro and then Griffee was true and yes Mark Flanagan saw the police arrive that night. What if I told you that a witness at the Restraining order hearing, Mark Griffee,swore that there was a 911 call and police arrived- under oath.












So the same guy who Notaro and Griffee said called the police now says he wasn't present at all and only heard about the "incident"


Then Michael Griffee - doorguy or manager of Largo. Notaro called him both


















As you can see(if you do read these statements) Griffee completely changes his statements and even now claims that we came to see Management that night to find out why I was kicked out of no reason. And, that is exactly why wed did go to Largo that night.

Here are his statements at the restraining order hearing:





















Notaro stayed consistent about almost nothing throughout, but she did stay consistent in her five statements about how Mark Flanagan made that call to the police.


Police report-



Affidavit -


\Here are the other statements regarding April 12th 2008 for easier readi





A year and a half after Gregozek wrote that report, 9 months after Gregozek used those  those allegation under oath, a Martin Boags





 (google him for a gasp) took over the "case" from Jennifer Waxler, and the five others that preceded Waxler. Apparently Gregozek didn't give him the heads up...


Boags


 sees that incident report number. He sees in the minutes and maybe elsewhere - an arrest made on April 29th 2008,  (even when the report says the officers said there was no crime) and he sees a 911 call alleged and police coming to the scene on April 12th 2008:






Ok, so we can guess that when he orders the records, Boags is going to get a goldmine of evidence for April 12th 2008 alone:


Notaro is running inside a night club after being lunged at, and unnamed security are locking doors in the front. In the back. And me and my sister are pounding on doors closed for over and hour, and yelling   hate crime types of things like "we're going to get that dyke" and security is locking in a Saturday night audience at the Largo theater FOR OVER AN HOUR. A few of Notaro's subsequent versions would have the lockdown with terrified audiences inside at 3 to four hours!



The owner of Largo made the call. Saw the police. The manager was called by Notaro as a witness for the restraining order hearing. Under oath he confirmed for Judge Rosenberg that indeed police intervention occurred. Judge Grimes would use that exact police involvement to dismiss my sisters defamation suit by Granting Lavely and Singer lawyer Allison Siever her Anti- Slapp motion. These accounts would be repeated in 6 exigent circumstance search warrants and then one blanket search warrant, and  then a trial brief.



Of course, of course under these horrifying conditions  



 the police would have to be called. And they were, according to this, and they came too. But this narrative has these crazed Spitzer (sic) sisters fleeing after causing such mayhem, and no one going to get them  - even though Notaro knew where they lived, and they lived maybe 2 miles away from Largo....



So let's see, so far, according to Gregozek, we have police called and officers somehow deducing no crime ,but arresting me and Gregozek putting to paper in a police report that he has the incident number. We have witnesses to this - security, Mark Flanagan, Notaro, and Gregozek will in the next tow years submit that all these claims have been duly investigated and are true. As you will see he will swear to them, under penalty of perjury beginning in January of 2009 and then in July of 2009 and then on November 4th 2009 as he uses search warrants as a means to win a conviction against me while all along knowing this is was all a Nick Kroll directed fraud.

and when it comes to April 29th 2008, Boags is going to get those arrest records- that the minutes of the court mention. Sure, the officers deduced there was no crime, according to Gregozeks' report but those minutes don't lie.  At least I'll get that incident report Gergozek writes about, Boags must have thought. 


On September 10th  2009, Boags ordered all the documents associated with the the alleged arrest and with an "unknown" incident number. 




We have to assume he wondered why Gregozek hasn't provided him such a number. But Gregozek does provide one incident number that he claims the unnamed Officers have supplied.



Request for arrest report and any reports associated with April 29th 2008 -




three days later he orders all the documents that must exist for April 12th 2008 and April 29th 2008.

Request for the 911








call that Notaro and Griffee would lie to under oath AND the REASON a Judge Elizabeth Grimes would cite as the reason she would grant Allison Sievers her Anti Slapp motion(we'll get to that)




What does Boags see when his request is fulfilled?

































So, Boags discovers these things on September 14th 2009 ( a year after the prosecution started - if you consider the arraignment of September 25th 2009 as the start of the prosecution.)




1) There was no arrest though the minutes says there was
2) There was no 911 call ever made by Mark Flanagan or anyone on the night on April 12 2008. There was no incident number produced as to the night of April 29th 2008. In other words,Notaro Mark Flanagan and then Micheal Griffee were lying about making that call (further documents where they claim they did) and they and Notaro were lying about not just the call but that police arrived at any scene. 
3) There was no incident report or number in existence in this case. In other words, Gregozek invented one and had to have known that no such report existed when he drafted his reports, and then search warrants that included this number and allegations.
4) John Gregozek has been fixing reports to try and railroad someone. He has invented a fake number! AND Notaro is the kind of liar who makes up lies that could have been easily shown to be lies.
5) Mark Flanagan and Micheal Griffee  have all agreed to lie for Notaro for whatever reason, As you will see that all those three had claimed to either have called the police themselves or to have witnessed the call or the arrival of these nonexistent officers of the law.



Let's get back/flash back to the chronology.


What Martin Boags would do in response after discovering this INFORMATION, and lasting till March of 2010, is incredible and hard to believe. We'll get there in detail when that part of the chronology comes up, but in a nutshell when he found out that the whole case was build on easily verified lies and that Gregozek was falsifying incident reports and then using such lies to have search warrant  issued - Boags would choose to do everything he could to not only not  make it right, but to win at all costs using methods only familiar to oppressive regimes - stop the trial by pretending she's insane. When that got foiled he'd add four charges as a means to win. We'll get to all that when September of 09 arrives but lets' get back to the date by date chronology






On May 1st 2008, Notaro, or someone else files this in the Santa Monica Courthouse. Considering how their other paperwork for Jennifer Aniston http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdesk/tmz_documents/0720_aniston_2.pdf , is seems hard to believe that Lavely and Singer would file it or would have been the ones to draft it.





May 2 - Only at the arraignment - On September 25th 2008- after a charge was brought would we have any indication as to the actions of Gregozek or anyone in the LAPD's Threat Management Unit for April 30th and the month of May.
Here's May 2nd 2008 blown up.







On May 2nd 2008 Detective Hoffman Serial Number 30708, Defoe Serial Number 27180, and Gregozek(no serial number included) Responded to Notaro's residence. Notaro identified Spitzberg by photograph.

Note: Beyond skimpy on detail. Three Detective from an elite LAPD Unit drive from Downtown L.A to Santa Monica to respond to a residence? Since when do residence's speak or identify people, by one photograph? Was one witness statement ever taken of Notaro? No. What about those three roommates she listed on the Restraining order. We'll get to those three roommates very soon.


While Three Detectives ponder why a residence is the one to speak to in such instances-

Notaro or her lawyers or someone else, had filed this with the Santa Monica Court.



Whne you are Nick Kroll BFF and a Lavely and Singer client no need to even provide one reason for this emergency ex part order. You see, Mathilde "Tig" Notaro doesn't just want a restraining order. She wants a special one. The ones reserve for cases so extreme that even the due process benefit of notice be denied the soon to be restrained. But she is not required to fill the required information out because....


This too appears to have been filed on May 5th








There is a lot of stuff going on this page. But it would take me nearly six years to understand that the most important few lines were these. More exactly - on the  who was there part -  the name, Nick Kroll.
page 3






page 4







Page 5 









pg 6




It is not shocking that a judge would grant such an order since temp orders are notoriously rubber stamped( In L.A, at least) but to grant one without notice to me based on these two documents- Where absoltely not one reason is given... Well, how to explain that.

 the earlier one has a case number while the later one does not - which I just don't yet understand


















So whomever this judge was granted it to Notaro, and we must assume due to the documents- her representatives at the Lavey and Singer Lawfirm



Temporary order pg 1







Page 2







page 4 temp  


Vs






And why no judicial officer stamp like here


OK, no due process. No hearing. Not even notice. Based on violence and stalking. Filed by her lawyer. Wants lawyer fees.  because she claims stalking she doesn't have to pay the filing feel.


Not just against Notaro but Notaro wants me to be restrained from three men I've never heard of.and no detail is supplied as to why they too need protection from me.


 She will claim these three men -- Kjell Bjorgen, Chris Fairbanks, and Thomas Sharpe-- are her roommates. Implicit in that is that I somehow without any such allegation- pose a threat to these people who reside in her home.
 But there is a hearing to make this CLETS order permanent.
Please note this the entirety of the file when it comes to the request and then the granting of the order. only Notaro's affidavit. No affidavits from the many witnesses she'd then list. 
We found this later, on the back of one of the pages.
But, nothing but this. No police reports. 
If you look at this, which involves the same Police Officers, John Gregozek and the same Lawfirm, Lavely and Singer. Well, you'll see that somethng is not right here.
Ok, so unbenowst to me on August 30th 2008, Notaro contacted Gregozek and he filled out the report seen above. Then on May 2nd 2008 he, Detective Martha Defoe and Detective James Hoffman went to a residence and spoke to it. Somehow Notaro identified me by one photo.  
Here's that again-  
What did this crack team of "Elite" Detectives do next?
No evidence of any other activity pursuant to the "Investigation" for May 3rd or 4th or 5th, but on May 6th 2008, I'd learn much later(because none of this was to be found in the file in the Santa Monica Court) In other words, I was left completely in the dark.
Here we see that Gregozek  interviewed Notaro via telephone and completed an investigative report.
That was not an investigative report. It was the claims of malicious liar, made by phone,  and no investigation was ever conducted by Gregozek as to those allegations. That would be confirmed in Gregozek's own words when the civil sui








Evidence: NONE ETC.





Then, Gregozek put in this report of August 12th 2008 - that he,
 "obtained printed out emails and online forums written by Spitzberg about Notaro from Notaro's attorney, Alison Sivers (note his tendency to misspell her name repeatedly, as you see, even though he knows her very well)



Note: not one of these alleged "emails and forums" were ever presented as evidence. Emails I gave gregozek were exculpatory.
That is  all that Gregozek did in order to "investigate" Notaro claims of stalking or any of her claims. It would turn out that he and Hoffman would actively refuse to talk to anyone but Matilde "Tig" Notaro and Stef Willen by phone, over the course of the entire two years that would follow Notaro's phone call to Gregozek. And he would submit the phone report as gospel, over and over and over again.
According to him, by now he interviewed Notaro "via telephone" then drove to the offices of Lavely and Singer. Then once again he did the via telephone thing and spoke to a Stephanie "Stef" Willen by phone
This is the entirety of what he'd write about May 6th 2008





On May 7th 2008, Gregozek and Hoffman came to our door. Read more about it here.
Insert link to Misdemeanor of the Century or cut and past the part about May 7th 2009





In subsequent search warrants, he'd tell the assorted judge under penalty of perjury, this:
Please note that these statemenst made by Gregozek are lies He is making things up and he is pretending that he has investigated the claims made to him by Notaro and Willen, and that they have been proven true. In fact, they weren't just false, very early on he knew them to be false.


As do his notes which very mysteriously omit my mother completely. Since my mother and sister, though put in separate rooms retold the same set of facts apparently it was't relevant to his assisting Marty Singer and Nick Kroll's friend in having whatever they wanted accomplished.
I



Insert misdemeanor of century and how the "interview" went down.
As of May 7th 2008, there is no indication in any record, that any member of the LAPD's Threat Management Unit engaged in any form of investigation related to Notaro's desire to press charges for stalking.
Later though we'd see that John Gregozek or Hoffman or Martha Defoe did nothing regarding any follow investigation of Notaro's allegations.

 But John Gregozek did do something between May 7th and May 28th of 2008. He filed this with Judge Gerald Rosenberg's court. This and nothing else




Of course I was going to respond to these allegations. Allegations that I, my sister, and my mother(and many potential witnesses)could prove wrong.
insert statement by Gregozek and Hoffman 
But was tracking down these witnesses necessary. according to these detective it was not and so I was sure my response was enough.
write about our meeting and phone call with lawyers etc. Write about how Notaro went out of her way to post to her myscpace that she would not be in town on the date of the hearing. paste the original webpage screenshot.
May 28th 2008
 makePDF "Hearing..


































































Minutes of that "hearing" 


page 2




Note these things,- substitution of attorney. judge made it last case. . sister was key witness. removed from court. the record has omitted this very important fact. one of Rosenberg's sherrifs told my sister that she had to leave till she testified though this same thing did not apply to Notaro and her "witnesses." When my sister tried to return to court the door was locked. So this was a set up from the begginning.
And, here's the void order granted by Judge Gerald Rosenberg. As you can see Notaro not only listed herself but three roommates, Chris Fairbanks, Thomas Sharpe, and Kjell Bjorgen. For this day Notaro 


Notaro crosses out Stephanie Willen's name. but for no reason that is completely clear she wants these men who are never mentioned in the heairng or the hearing or her affidavit - KJell Bjorgen, Chris Fairbanks, Tom Sharpe to have restraining orders against me . We'll get into that later cause that real interesting. 



Please Note how it says LAPD and not TMU. Please refer to Jennifer Anniston/Lavely and Singer/threat management unit to see how strange that is. Please also note the date at the bottom. November 7th 2008. it is very relevant as you'll see.
So now Judge Gerald Rosenberg  





 had granted Notaro want she wanted... later Notaro and her attorney would describe it as "awarded." He'd done so by fudging the minutes to make it seem as if a key witness wasn't present, and he did so without making any effort to notice that Notaro's affidavit and court testimony made it clear that she was doing this maliciously,  and her statement and those of her "witnesses" were wildly inconsistent. She could not keep one sentence of her affidavit straight. Her "witnesses" were not listed in the affidavits and they all contradicted each other. None were separated as required by law. But then we just had two of her statements. Soon we'd have many more.
Next step- Appeal...




What other remedies? What do you do when you suddenly have a ruined record. And worse than that the reason for your moving to Los Angeles has been destroyed by one stranger who has set in motion a character assassination based on nothing but ... you don't even know. You just know that Notaro had decided to turn me into a violent stalker that she feared and needed protection from
 We'd find out later about Motions to Reconsider and Void Judgement, but at that time... we were told an appeal was the only remedy. It also seemed obvious that Notaro had defamed me, had commited "fraud on the court. Soon with some research it was clear that Malicious prosecution" " Abuse of Process" and Infliction of Emotional harm applied.And so that process began.




On June 29th I filed the notice of appeal.





You had to serve the defendant with Notice of filing so In early July I took the measures required to serve Notaro with "Notice of Appeal," 


 So on July 15th the process server sheriff deputy gave up.



Can't remember the exact details, but judging by the record, she was served and the appeal process was started a short time afterwards.

Next step was the defamation suit and doing whatever it took to clear my name and not to have a malicious and illegal restraining order on my record. There was plenty to do it seemed because Notaro had been reckless with her lies and she'd gotten


From May 28th 2008 on I was sure not all was lost. I knew she'd taken measures to have me banned from Largo and The Improv but I imagined that her malice and hatred knew some bounds.


July 14th



So as far as I knew as of July 14th 2008 I was about to serve her with a defamation suit that would not just pave the way to clearing my name, but  make her face the consequences of what I knew to be her fraud, malice and perjury.

I had even paid a laywer 5K to help me with the complaint. His name is Richard Fine and what became of him is too strange to easily believe. But in my case, he ran off with the money and later on due to incredibly bizarre circumstance we were able to get it back...

On August 11th the suit was filed and on August 13th 2008 the civil suit for defamation, infliction of emotional distress was filed.



There would be no logic to me breaking a restraining order period. But considering that I was working on the civil suit which I paid 5 K to a laywer for and had filed a notice of appeal

 You'd have to flash forward a month and five or more days to know what new scene Notaro had created to retaliate for the civil suit and the notice of appeal. Or more exactly, what her Law firm Lavely and Singer and her friendship with Nick Kroll could invent to win at all costs.


On September 25th 2008, at the arraignment, A public defender, Anan Desai would make me aware of this but not give me a copy.











I did not "redact" the first page. And the second page was also full of "redactions" but eventually a clean copy was handed over. There is no legal basis for such redactins but Lavely and Singer and Gregozek new that presenting such redacted documents gave the impression of threat and menace to witnesses etc.

Interestingly this document would show up in the midst of the criminal prosecution to come


Vs, the original



Remember this? 





What changed? Well, the redactions remained, but now they slip in James Hoffman's name.  You wonder why Detective Martha Defoe doesn't show up at all. Though she'll show up later in a few spectacular ways.



Also the inked in part with certified docket?




Let's stop here and try and summarize-





So on August 1st 2008 John Gregozek is contacted by "Tig" Notaro.



According to any record, as of May 27th 2008(When Gregozek filed the proof of service with the court) the Threat Management unit did not show up to the restraining order and according to all papers handed over , they did not take on her case AKA vendetta.





Now, on August 11th 2008, Notaro is served with a civil suit that will, if allowed to proceed, hold her accountable for the mounting damages towards the target of her vendetta is what really was taking place.
But wait according to this .... Notaro didn't contact Gregozek  until after she was served with the civil suit. 




Let's blow some of this up


As you can see - date and time of occurrence 7/14/08

Date and time reported to PD - 8/01/2008

so who reported it to the PD SEVENTEEN DAYS later?


In this "updated report" that we know is updated due to Hoffman and the "court docket thing"






Susp contacted Vict through Win in violation of court order. 
Check out the person reporting box... no one. That would become a another thing that none of the defense lawyers would exploit.


So we have to assume someone contacted PD 17 days after a crime, and no one saw fit to write who reporting said crime? One report is only signed by Gregozek the next it's Gregozek and Hoffman.


Now looking at this ...



 it would take a lot to see what it wrong with this alteration to the original report. And it would only strike me as wrong,  2years later, when I considered this document that I was only given- after trial was over.


And that is confirmed here:






Note the date on the bottom of the order- It was three months after the criminal charge was brought.

So a police report is altered or plain updated for the same date - August 1st 2008 and as that above document shows Gregozek and Now Hoffman submitted the certified Restraining order and proof of service to the court to start the prosecution.

Well, first I was never served with the order. This maybe was a technicality or it was legal. I've never figured that one out still and none of the defense lawyers that would be involved would try to make anything of it.


And throughout the 19 months that would follow, this would be the only report made as to this first charge.


Ok, so on the next page we are told of the crime that underlies the criminal charge to be filed come August 25th 2015th 2008. The charge charge that Gregozek would tell my mother was added due to "What could I do you sued her didn't you" a few months after it was in the court.








But Gregozek is not going to admit that. And he's going to make sure to fabricate the real reason behind his actions. He will date the report August 1st 2008 and not make any note that the person he long knows is no victim called him after she was served with a civil suit.







And based on that, this would all begin in a different court - the criminal courts. I will show you (later on in this uh PRESENTATION) that once again nothing in these reports were true. Martha Kelly is lying. Notaro is lying and John Gregozek and others at the TMU are involved in a railroading as retaliation for the viable defamation suit filed against Notaro.

Sometime after August 19th 2008, I'd get this in the mail






After receiving this in the mail a lawyer I had been speaking to told me to call the city attorney's office to get any details as to the allegations underlying this s since I had no clue due to the fact that I hadn't broken any laws and I hadn't broken any restraining order. The letter also indicated that further charges might exist so I called and asked to speak to anyone handling the case. A man got on the phone and I asked him the questions Richard Fine told me to ask. The man asked me the number of the case and I told him. The man took a minute or so and then said, " I can't wait to get you."
That sounds like something no one would believe and I could not believe it. I said, " Did you just you can't wait to get me" and the man said, " Yes. Of course I was in a state of disbelief and horror and all I could think to ask was his name. "Ed Gaultier" he said, and hung up. I'm not a crier but after this I became to cry somewhat hysterically.... I got on the phone and called the same number and told the woman answered what this man just told me and she laughed a kind of unhappy laugh and sad, "That's Ed for you. " I called whatever number I could think of and kept getting told that this was common behavior for City Attorney Ed Gaultier.



The minutes of Case 8CA10541 begin. Minutes as misnomer.




The minutes of the court would evidence an arrest and a bail amount for this charge but that is completely false. LAPD hollywood or Threat Management Unit did not arrest me and there would be no bail amount other than Own Recognizance.


Why they would put this info on the minutes and never correct it is mystery. My theory is that this mght have impart guilt or "probable cause" that did not exist and this could influence the opinions of judges, prosecutors and even defense attorneys who didn't know better.




As you will see there was no bail appearance date on January 13th 2009 or any date. Another mystery where all I have is speculation. So bail posted in december of 12/4/09 but appearance date on January 13th 09. As you will see when January 13th 09 comes.... this entry makes no sense.

Note that the these minutes were the last one's I picked up from the court so no one can make the argument that these were typos or innocent mistakes that were cleared up at any point.


Anyone looking would think an arrest took place that relates to the initial filing of the charge or any charge. In fact no bail ever would be given based on any charge but get back to that later because it requires a lot of context to explain how false these minutes are.
Let's skip the top part -  but please note that the arrest and bail listed are dated a year and four months after the first charge. I'll just say that there was no arrest or bail set(other than own recognizance) related to this charge or any charges to come. That sounds confusing and it is, but will become clear much later on.



Ok so how does any criminal prosecution start? When a prosecutor agrees to file a charge based on what the police bring them.

So,





 Case filed:
 August 25th 2008- one count- 273.6(A) - Violation of a restraining order. And this document evidences that such a filing took place on that date 







Well, this is the document that arrived in the mail to tell me that such a file was charged.... UH.... after the letter was sent.





As you can see a charge is filed but a letter sent predates the filing - Not sure if that makes sense to someone familiar with procedure - i.e is it normal to sent a letter before you file?


And in light of the mention of bail and arrest, let's just look to see if any arrest took place subsequent to filing of the single charge: As the minute show the arrest and bail reference a date

These are the only documents handed over, over the course of this 23 month prosecution related to that-

Note how it says that this was filed on August 25th 2008 and "executed" on August 12th 2009








Yet on the next page of the same document it says that some warrant was submitted and executed   on August 19th 2008










So after the fact of the filing of the charge we would guess that John Gregozek has applied for an arrest warrant even though this was a misdemeanor - which he did not witness and where no stalking charge was granted him. Plus, we see that no attachment or any detail is given to support the granting of such an arrest warrant. We know no such warrant was allowed him because there was no arrest made.


And on August 4 2009

NOT August  2008



 Gregozek drafts this... It is only turned over after the trial was over and discovery was requested for the civil case that followed the criminal trial. Later too we'd be told by a police officer at the Hollywood station that "Webster rejected the stalking charge on August 22nd 2008" I'd gone to the Hollywood police department to find out the names of the two officers who'd come to the Improv on April 29th 2008 and the cop sitting there would not tell mee there names but apropos of what seemed like nothing he said, " webster rejected the stalking charge on August 22nd" After hearing this my mother called Gregozek and said how coudl you try to press such charges? You know that girl i sa liar" and Gregozek had responded with only, ' What could I do. You sued her didn't you


After hearing that " Webster rejected the stalking charge on the 22nd" I'd also tried to contact this Webster and I left many messages for him but he never returned the calls.




Please take a LOT OF note of the date  of that document - August 4th 2009-and wonder why a year later, he'd draft something like that.. Why not a year before?My theory is that considering my powerless vs the power of Marty Singer and Kroll, there was no anticipation that I'd do anything but plea when innocent and so Gregozek didn't even bother to write up a report but when August 4th of 2009 came and they had corrupt judge and Mayor's sister, Mary Lou Villar, setting a hearing on reasons to remand me with zero evidence existing with any crime on my part- they decided to derail the trial and all the exposure that should have re resulted, Gregozek was told they needed to supply certain documents to satisfy what would become the most insane episode of this malicious prosecution - the attempt to have me buried in a hospital for the criminally insane,  and so Gregozek came up with the above for the purposes of THIS -
 Note: there is no date on this document and though I have efforts to find the date when this was drafted I was stonewalled repeatedly

And Gregozek had to keep up the pretense to close the deal but what they'd started on July 29th 2009(we'll explain that when that date comes... was foiled in a spectacular way once and then Twice and Judge Maria STratton was forced to cross this out in a huff. We saw her cross it out so that is not conjecture





 Le'ts crop the bottom part for a closer look to the done deal of December 1 2009.





But that would happen a year and two months after the criminal prosecution began. And how it would start, continue, and the details of how it all went down will have to wait .... cause that demands a lot of detail and context.
Where are we? Let's forget about what was to come and get back to Page 1 of the minutes.... September 25th 2008 - An arraignment court on Bauchet Street in Los Angeles, California.

page 1 of the minutes involves that  arraignment, and another order of some sort being granted the "Victim," in this case..by Judge Dennis Landin.


Here's a crop from the first page of the minutes-





Ok, the date change from October 1st 2008 ( as seen in the summons letter of August 19 08) is due to me realizing that the arraignment was scheduled on the first day of Rosh Hashannah, so we found out you can go in and advance the date so that's what we did and so the October 1st date was vacated.

notable things that happened at the arraignment. Desai asked me " is this a joke." And then he told me and then he made his business to tell my mother, "I'd be happy to take this case to trial." He read me from the police reports that were NOT filed in the Santa Monica Court in order to get the temp or permanent restraining order and I was thrilled that now we had three versions that would prove far and above any shadow of a doubt that this was all a fraud on the part of Notaro et al.



At the same arraignment something else happened, that I didn't know happened till many months in.


Without Hearing or notice and based on no demand heard on any record, by any prosecutor or police or anyone present in court - Judge Dennis Landin took it upon himself to sign off on  a Domestic Violence Criminal Protective order. Landin did so without the benefit of due process - a hearing of any kind- and despite the fact that it has never been in dispute that notaro and I did not know each other much less have a domestic partnership of any kind.


The public defender assigned that day, Anan Desai, did not see it has part of his job, we can assume, to fight such a clear violation of what was right and lawful. Such an order would meet with a spectacular future, during trial, a year and a half after Landin signed off to it.


The order:




As you can see, from the minutes and these documents no hearing or even forewarning(notice) of any kind was made prior to Landin's rubber stamping a domestic violence/family violence order. also very notable that the judge dd this without any request from a prosecutor on any record. it was just signed by him and put into the record with out me being informed it existed.
Add caption




Note the notes on the bottom of the green paper - FV= Family Violence DV- Domestic Violence

So " FV DV etc"

It has never been in dispute that me and Notaro were strangers. Not even acquainted much less family or domestic relations. This order granted to the prosecution(or more exactly- Lavely and Singer and Gregozek) was not legal in any way.

The public defender present and representing me was very nice and very on my side but he did nothing to protect my due process at the time, and much much later- In March of 2010, this lawless and baseless order would return in a spectacular way. We'll get to that when March of 10 comes, but Katie Ford, Alissa Malzman Sterling and Judge Ronald Moore know what I'm talking about.



Next Pretrial - October 16th 2008


 October of  08 was not uneventful- 

On October 12th in the course of working to appeal Notaro's restraining order and now another thing I'd learned " a motion to reconsider for void order, I stumbled upon this....

I put it together in a separate link


http://henypire.blogspot.com/2015/12/ben-pomeroy-and-thomas-sharpe-showing.html


You can read the whole thing or just the comments but the GIST is that Thomas Sharpe ......was not living with Notaro at the time of any of these allegation and he never lived with her at any time.


Thom Sharpe.- Remember him ?


Well if not I'll refresh ---





Here's Thomas Sharpe in both the temp order and the order after hearing(though he is not mentioned in any way in either other than being one of her three roommates)



He's listed third - Age 39- Yes marked off when asked "living with you?" and relationship - Friend

Here just listed as now of of four "Protected people" for Notaro's ex parte restraining order.




Here Thom Sharpe shows up again when Rosenberg signs off to Nick Kroll and Tig Notaro's demands.











So Notaro is claiming, under oath, that Thomas Sharpe is her friend who lives with her and Chris Fairbanks and a Kjell Bjorgen as of May 5th 2008 and as of May 28th 2008 all these guys are still living with her.




Here's the comments made by Thomas Sharpe on his article for City Beat Magazine

posted by erin on 10/09/08 @ 08:41 a.m. 
Tom,
great article about your roommate. You should mention that you live together.

posted by hogre on 10/09/08 @ 05:23 p.m. 
Hogre, 
There is an insinuation in your comment. Allow me to clarify:
Tig and I have performed in several shows together and I consider her a friend. While we've exchanged the occasional email and phone call, I haven't seen her in person in over 10 months.
 We have never been roommates. There was some talk a number of months ago about a group of comics renting a house together-- I was one of those comics. While Tig and a couple of other comics did move forward with that plan, I've never even set foot in the place. Curious to know how you could possibly have heard about any of this, or where you got your erroneous information that I was currently her roommate. 

Here's who I am: 
I'm a standup comic who's been at it for well over a decade-- this past year and a half I've been inactive due to illness. I know and am on friendly terms with probably half of the comedians in Los Angeles. No exaggeration. Hundreds and hundreds of them. I love comics, from big shot headliners to first year open mikers. You can't do comedy in LA for as long as I have without becoming friends with your fellow comics. (Not unless you're antisocial. Which I'm not, Erin, even though I was a bedwetter and one of the best.) When the editor asked me about writing about comedy for citybeat from time to time I expressed concern. I could write about some brilliant comics, but many of them might also happen to be my friends. It was unavoidable. That's the circle that I run in. Was that a problem? 
She thought I could work it out. Here's my promise: If I write about a comic, they're going to be relevant and excellent at their craft. If there's a relevant relationship, I will disclose it.
posted by tomsharpe on 10/10/08 @ 12:34 a.m. 

Down the road we would learn from Chris Fairbanks himself that he too never lived with Notaro and we'll  get to that, But as of October 10th 2008 it seemed a great find- that would lead to this all being over soon.



Page 2 - October 16 2008.Case moved to Clara Folz Courthouse AKA Downtown - First pretrial



Let's go date by date

October 16th 2008 - First pretrial. First plea offer, I see Anan Desai and he is very friendly but he tells me that though he has asked, they will not let him take on my case. Jose Ruvalcaba will be my public defender, but I am told he's "running late."
About five minutes after I get into court, I'm approached by a public defender named Nicky Meehan. Though she said she was not my appointed public defender, she proceeded to tell me that I got really lucky and have been offered the best possible plea in the criminal justice system. "Informal Diversion" is what she told me it was called. 


The offer was "12- 24 anger management classes." She wasn't sure how many hours but " Everyone can benefit from anger management." 
Those classes b and "stay out of trouble for a year" and none of this would show up on my record.


Well, since I was only angry that Id been falsely accused and since I'd never mismanaged my anger in any way that would ever require court intervention, and since Notaro was lying her vicious ass off and since none of this was one bit kosher- I told her that no way would I take any plea.  I also had not gotten into trouble due to my own actions so no way ...Meehan became comically angry at me turning down this "amazing and rare deal."  I asked her why she thought I was the beneficiary or such an amazing deal and she said " Because it's a bullshit case." This seemed to get her even angrier at me,She became abrupt and nasty and began telling me how bad the system was. She was so angry and nasty  that I left that interaction by telling her I thought she could benefit from anger management. 
Soon after Jose Ruvalcaba showed up. We went outside and I told him all I had to prove my innocent blah blah blah and he told me to send it to him by email. I did so almost immediately.



on October 17th 2008-
I was deeply disgusted by now, of course. I now had enough evidence to convince anyone that Notaro had lied about ever paragraph in her affidavit, in court, to the police and instead of profuse apologies I am being offered strange plea deals given by abusive unassigned public defenders? We had sent Greogzek emails. We had caleld him on the phone. Talk about the phone calls with Defoe and Dunn too. I had begged Hoffman to talk to Sam Consuegra to be told in a laughing kind of way., " We are not goint to coffee shops to talk to witness for THIS" But hey maybe this good who played good cop so well. For now, as of October 17th 2008 he at least had to know about Thom Sharpe. And this email was given to us by Gregozek so it wasn't some blind email address I'd just guess at. it would go to that unit and it would get to Hoffman.





(Link to what I knew by now re; how her statements and those of Willen had proven to be strikingly inconsisten and about Lavely and Singer... insert Boxenbaum, Wittels, Ponce online defamation and go into some detail about the assualt by Val Myers.) Show email how fifteen minute spot at comedy show show in Santa Monica Cancelled.
Then, more relevant stuff would happen on October 30th 2008. Something I wouldn't learn till a year and a half later,
A city attorney, named Bernie Brown, orders the restraining order from the Santa Monica court after I refuse the October 16th 2008 plea offer. 
They order it on October 30th 2008, and they claim that since a trial is scheduled they need it by November 6th 2008. There was no trial and Bernie Brown will show up again falsely claiming a trial to come, but I don't fully understand what Bernie Brown sought to achieve by these falsehoods.
 In other words, they added a criminal charge to me without even having the requisite orders and documents in their possession. And with no witness statemenst and nothing more than this John Gregozek's word.

Note: There was never any proof of service. The restraining order was not served on me. A proof of service was never produced till this day and Gregozek would maintain that I was "served by court personell" to hide this fact but no such service occurred.


. .On top of the order being a void order due to fraud and perjury, no service occurred here and yet the prosecution proceeded without it and no defense attorney would make anything of it which didn't bother me too much, because I didn't want to win on a technicality.


I had no idea who Bernie Brown was then and would only learn his name much later when I was told to deliver my evidence to a city attorney named Jennifer Waxler and instead of her coming out, he did. I'd say to him how this has to stop and how Waxler is behaving unethically and he said, "Don't you understand I'm not on your side?"

I had no clue, and was given no clue by any one supposedly representing me, that they never even bothered to have the restraining order or asked to see the non existent proof of service


In that state of still being clueless, I wrote Hoffman again. At this point I don't think, we fully understood who Lavely and Singer were.


(Go into some detail about  how Lavely andSinger represented the former head of this unit, Robert Martin and how the TMU is linked to Nick Kroll and famly.)

So here I plead with Detective James Hoffman




Please look closer at these paragraphs.






 Completely ignored by Hoffman, And a large filed was attached to this email. During this time period I'd called the Threat Managment Unit's ofice agan and asked to take to Grgozek or Hoffman and instad Martha Defe got ont he phone. She souned extremely pleasant and listened to my evidence and complaints and then her voice filled with digust before she said, " You shoudl get a restraininng order on HER"



I'm also being completely ignored by my assigned public defender.Jose Ruvalcaba.  He' requested that I send him my evidence  by email. I sent it immediately but never heard back from him but I  never heard from him and he wouldn't  answer the messages I leave at Public Defender office.  after mor ethan a month of this I called his supervisor and am told that Jose has been transferred, but Jose told me that might happen so no big deal.


November 6th 2008. 
So Desai and Ruvalcaba are gone. Nicky Meehan is still in that division but her role as plea deal broker has failed so she is not on the case anymore.

 I'm greeted by Franica Tawn, who tells me she's to be my assigned PD.  A few minutes in she asks me, " Do you see Notaro in court?" I say "no" and ask why, She tells me "the subpoenad notaro to court today" 
The court dates comes and goes and no Notaro.




What isn't known from these minutes is that behind he scenes the high powered civil attorney for Notaro, the purported victim in this prosecution, was communicating by phone and email  to the city attorney's involved (Carlos Ramirez, in this instance) 
This is all I was given evidencing those communications between a Deputy CA Carlos Ramirez and Allison Hart Sievers of the Lavely and Singer law firm. the date in Sharpie-12/11/08 might be the date that my public defender received this info or not, because I never was told that Notaro was let out of a subpoena due to this "communication" by Tawn. 



Then the second page is the only statement of any kind given by Notaro to the the prosecutors as to this charge, and as you can see it is not under oath etc. They would let her out of this subpoena on Lavely and Singer's lawyers requests. And, my public defender, Franica Tawn, did nothing to remedy that.






Also of note: at this stage this discovery was handed over -which will become significant when another city attorney, Jennifer Waxler, is put on the case and does not hand over communications from Lavely and Singer from the time she is given the case till the end of trial. 


Only during the civil case would we become aware of further communications between Marty Singers' right hand woman, Allison Hart Sievers, and the TMU and prosecutors. And as you can see there were phone calls that we don't know about.



What else went on .. talked to Franica. Sent her evidence etc.
Oh yea, what about the defamation suit we'd filed on August 11th 2008, against Mathilde "Tig" Notaro? The one that I have no doubt was the reason for Gregozek pressing a city attorney to file a criminal charge.
Well, the defamation complaint's  fate is a massive tale in itself - the short version: We'd hired some lawyer named Steven Low as an "of counsel" Meaning we didn't have enought money to to retain him but for 1,500 he agreed to give us advice and assist us with the lawsuit -
Almost immediately his only assistance would consist of him urging us to have it dismissed due to the criminal prosecution. Basically, he told us we could not win against Lavely and Singer as pro pers especially considering that so much of our energies were being squandered with this criminal prosecution- 
So as this  proof of service would show that we took Steven Lowe's advice
Let's blow that up a bit: 
I'd picked this up from Lowe's office and his secretary Samantha Jinson handed it to me... The handwriting of we had to guess had to be Samantha or Lowe or someone at Lowe's office struck me as strangely familiar.
HMMMMM- we'll go into the handwriting later... but in the course of this we'd hire two handwriting experts. One  - a Kurt Kuhn- decided to do it for free - to waive his going fee of 600- and he did not show us any work product . so we hired Michael Greick - he to would not provide any work product and so when my sister asked him to return the money he did 



Next court date December 11 2008
Not too eventful a date except for the fact that on that day after a lot of urging on my part, Franica Tawn, agreed she'd get me an investigator for the public defenders office and she told me to get her the names and any detail I knew of potential witnesses. 


I'd trusted Gregozek and Hoffman when they counsled that Notaro wouldn't even show up for the hearing. I'd fallen for a trick. But now it was time to stop waiting on luck or justice or ...



I'd gone to the  Tsunami coffee shop before and I'd been lucky to right away to be met with the manager of Tsumami. And right away he told me that "no offense I don't remember you" and I've been at every open mic since we started it and I was there that night" I told him what Notaro was saying had happened
instert what she said and what Stef Willen said,
Sam seemed amazed and said "that never happened. nothing happened that night. 
But that was before the criminal charge. This was done for the "Motion to Reconsider" To win that motion I had to show it was all a lie and so while in the area I went there. Sam added, " not just me. I can get you a lot of people to confirm that nothing happened."
A customer came in and I didn't want to impose more so that was that.
But now a criminal charges was brought. It was a very rainy night I remember, but me and my sister braced ourselves and drown from our West Hollywood Apartment to Silverlake.
We asked Sam to fill out the form that another lawyer had sent me by email -
And this is what he wrote on December 17th 2008
and Sam would maintain this observation a year and four months later when this all ended in a trial 
On December 19, Sister and I hauled ass again - The bouncer outside the Dime. If we did what Notaro and a few others were saying, he'd see it all. We even talked about what was happening and he was disgusted by how Mark Flanagan and Michael Griffee treated us.








I have a better copy somewhere but in the meantime, let me make Julius's words clearer.

I am the door guy at the dime which is no more than 16 feet away from where Largo once was. I remeber the day in question and remember nothing happen(sic) I even talked to the ladies for a minute or two and invited them inside the dime for a drink. These ladies are good people to be around and everything that this woman said is a lie.

I gave this all to Franica Tawn and maybe that got her to get the  public defender's office to agree to an investigator.


Next court date 27th of January? I never noticed that till now but the scheduled date was the 27th.. . according to Franica Tawn in the the above document
So  on December 22 according to the stamp on the right hand corner (above), public defender, Franica Tawn, was making efforts to assist in my defense and had gotten me an investigator,. But as far as I was told, the investigator was the entirety of her efforts. But that was good enough. Cause that would in any normal situation - have been enough as you will see... OVERWHELMINGLY
And, on that same day this document reminds me that I'd filed a complaint with Internal Affairs.




I'd  filed a report with Internal Affairs. Three in total over the course of this(go into detail about what the third IA agent had told me.)My sister and I had also gone twice to the FBI building in West L.A too, but we just don't have evidence of that though I can tell you that a woman agent looked at my evidence and told me that the Santa Monica court house is full of "Tin hat dictators" She told me that obvous this Notaro woman is a liar" The second guy, was not nice at all and seemed apprised of the case beforehand.



But no documentation as to the two meeting with the FBI, at their offices in West L.A ,is in my possession 
So here's the next scheduled pretrial"
 But to be able to move forward to the rest we have to go back to what happened in between the December date, and this date....and all without me being told a thing by anyone.





The first month of 2009 was a very busy month for John Gregozek - when it came to his role in this case...

and it was a busy month for Neil Spector ( the investigator for the public defender)

And, no one would tell me what either was up to for a long time to come.


Here is the documentary evidence of what John Gregozek was up to in chronological order



On January 13th 2009, Gregozek got an email from "Tig" Notaro's Lavely and Singer lawyer, Allison Hart Sievers. So did City Attorney Kelly Boyer....













Here's his January 2009, in his own words as of February 3rd 2009, Please note the date of the report











Very curiously Gregozek would submit the same exact  report with a different date, and when we get to August 4th 2009 we'll get into that.











So this is Gregozek chronology of January -
January 13-  Gregozek was notified by Allison Seavers that Notaro receieved 4 postings on her Facebook online Profile by Facebook Profile ID "Ingrid Good." the Posting occured on January 7,2009. Due to the content of the messages, Notaro believed that the postings were created by Spitzberg
Then, we have these emails from Marty Singer's right hand woman, Allison Hart Sievers, to a city attorney by the name Kelly Boyer and her emails to John Gregozek.












Let's look at Lavely an Singer Lawyer, Allison Hart Siever's letters,  a little closer
















Ok, so we see that indeed Gregozek and Kelly Boyer were contacted by one of Marty Singer's lawyers and urged to begin taking steps to execute search warrants and then to add charges in relation to we must presume-- the evidence such search warrants would return....


Did John Gregozek obey such commands/requests/call them what you want?

Well, Gregozek says he did-








And who granted him that warrant, and what he found are complicated since these judges were 1) lied to by Gregozek in his affidavit and in his "statement of facts"  Also these same judges would show up later to act very suspiciously.

In a separate document you can see that John Gregozek has repeatedly perjured himself in order to please his masters - Lavely and Singer or Jules Kroll's son, in this case.

(insert all related sworn affidavits and search warrant documents and show how dirty Gregozek is)


But for now, here we see that search warrant he mentions here, According to this and his associated " Supplemental of February 3rd 2009- Judge Samantha Jessner not only granted Gregozek a search warrant but sh'ed grant him one usualy reserved for terrorists and pedophiles - a no notice exigent circumstance search warrant . And the same day it was granted, oh Greogzek was in contact with Facebook.














In case you missed it -










































Indeed based on Allison Sievers allegations, and Notaro's assumptions, Gregozek  got busy- went and got Judge Samantha Jessner to not just grant him search warrants, but  no notice exigent circumstance search warrants reserved for Terrorists and Pedophiles, and he kept going back for more and more-  I'll paste those here but I can't make sense still


































So on the prosecution side we have John Gregozek and James Hoffman steadfastly refusing to talk to  any witness I tell them about and only repeating in reports and then search warrants what Notaro and Willen told them "via phone" on April 30th and May 6th 2008. We have no written statements by either. No signed statements. We are told that on May 2nd Gregozek, Defoe, and James Hoffman drove all the way from downtown to Notaro's Venice residence and what can they show for it? 


Only this -

Bad enough that Gregozek refused to investigate. Refused to make any effort to discern the truth - Refused to listen to us when we told them to talk to Sam Consuegra. Julius Quinn Roberts, Jaqueline Montalvo and Janell Bader, and Heidi Feigin and the many others that could have shown this all to be a big fraud on teh court and us.... But now Gregozek has chosen to revive these now long disproven lies to obtain the rigth to invade our privacy and and to claim that exigent circumstance warrants are a valid requeest becaust notice to me or my famly will impede his investigation and put witnesses and "victim" in danger



Gregozek and Defoe and James Hofman would not come to court for the restraining order hearing. but now Gregozek is swearing under oath to the lies told him by Willen and Notaro. And he is claiming there is not just probable cause for prosecution but for special search warrants and he is granted whatever he wants by Judge Samantha Jessner 
Judging by the search warrants Gregozek coudln't even pretend that comments on a message board such as these were illegal but he for whatever reason thought if he can connect me to these things found on Notaro's Facebook  well.... he can please Marty Singer and Jules Kroll's son Nick.



So on January 21st 2009,  he begins to take great measures to link me to these allegations - allegations that I have illegally made statements about Notaro on her facebook.


Allison Sievers would claim that Notaro was met with "disturbing and frightening statements' and that a crime surely occurred due to these posts on notaro's facebook page. 


Seivers and Notaro have "strong reason to believe" such chilling and harrowing statements such as she'll do well in jail for sure and "falsely testifying will win her over and get you gigs" have been made by me and thusly I need to have those very  special search warrants where due process can be discarded,



 and if  there is confirmation as to their strong beliefs, more charges must be added.
Here are  the "terrifying and disturbing statements" in their entirety- left for comedian (who may as you know) Notaro on January 7th 2009


On January 7th 2009 at 11.24 - For someone who claims to have a stalker you seem pretty unscared. Shame on you!

On January 7th 2009 at 5:17 PM  Is it true that you're going to be prosecuted for perjury and that your career will really suffer I heard you will get rid of competition and you have done some really ugly things? What's side(sic) story

On same date a few minutes later - She'll do well in jail that's for sure

a minute later - falsely testifying will win her over and get you gigs. that's the story



And, we know that Gregozek knows I live with my mother and sister. So even if he links it to my home IP it is not indicative of my guilt.  

 Let's not even get into the fact that the order  is void on many levels and will not survive any motion to set aside or a collateral attack on the validity of the restraining order. Let's pretend it's a valid and legal order. Let's pretend that those facebook messages constitute a crime....





 here are the accompanying documents
Gregozek isn't done there is still January 26th 2009 - and this is how he puts that into ink-




And these are the documents made available to the court and prosecutor and then much later to the defense- re; his finding as to January 26th 2009















So Gregozek did find a link to these "terrifying and disturbing" messages... On January 7th 2009 at 11.24 - For someone who claims to have a stalker you seem pretty unscared. Shame on you!

On January 7th 2009 at 5:17 PM  Is it true that you're going to be prosecuted for perjury and that your career will really suffer I heard you will get rid of competition and you have done some really ugly things? What's side(sic) story

On same date a few minues later - She'll do well in jail that's for sure

a minute later - falsely testifying will win her over and get you gigs. that's the story



But get this...one of these messages and one only - was linked to an email account in Forest HIls NY- owned by Lauren  Spitzberg,,, The other three  were linked to a Patricia Brummer in Orange California-


Small quiz

 in light of these findings- findings that none these facebook message are linked to me, what does John Gregozek do

1) go talk to my sister and try to make the case that I put her up to this
2)tell Allison Sievers and her malicious liar that he is not their errand boy but a poice officer and now he's sworn to Notar's lies to get exigent circumstance warrants.
3) act like he's on the tail of Los Angeles's premier serial killer and submit his findings to City Attorney Kelly Boyer.


We have Gregozek's own words














And, no attempt was made to say ask my sister if say she was pressured by me to do so and thusly you know.... they could present some rationalization as to why by me doing so I'd breached this already void order.... In other words, these two charges made no sense.


And get this without one bit of logical or legal reason, this uh smoking uh gun causes Gregozek and then Jennifer Waxler and then Felise Kalpakian and then Martin Boags and then Katie Ford to rationalize that due to Gretozek discovering that my sister indeed wrote these things to Notaro-- I should face four or two or then four again(during trial something happened where Katie Ford wanted to add two more charge cuz she saw the illegal domestic violence order in the file and now wanted the judge to help her win at all costs by using that till now ignored illegal order to double up charges that had no basis to be brought in the first places. We'll get to that. But quickly- the trial judge did not take kindly to Katie Ford's newest dirty trick and not only refused to consider adding charges mid trial but had the order expunged NUNC PRO TUNC)

Now we have no choice but to guess that though this all looks confusing and not indicative of any evidence of guilt much less a smoking gun.... we are forced to assume that John Gregozek has, as of January 26th, found the goods on this Alisa Spitzberg person. No longer can she just refuse plea bargains for one charge. Now she will face five charges. What a dumbass. rejected the lowest plea bargain possible - informal diversion- and now busted on four more charges.


Gregozek we can imagine can contact Notaro and or her civil lawyer- Allison Sievers and tell them that Notaro was dead right.... Gregozek now has solid evidence to bring to any trial .


Even if it's not solid enough for a trial this document makes implicit that Noaro was right in her hunch. Then Gregozek made those hunches into viable and convincing evidene of guilt.


How do we know all that-

Well, Gregozek is merely a cop doing a public servant's job, right?

And, as of January 27th 2009, he is not alone in his professional opinion. Though most of us, including me, cannot discern from what he wrote in this February 3 2009 report.... Kelly Boyer can and





And here we have it reconfirmed on that day, and then in many subsequent reports - Kelly Boyer added four charges on January 27th 2009.







So where are we?

Gregozek has written in an official police report, dated February 3rd 2009, that says Kelly Boyer was shown his finding and she was duly impressed enough to be ready to hit me with four more charges when  I come into court on January 29th- the next scheduled pretrial.

And what a shocker cause since the search warrants were "exigent circumstance,"-- I have been toiling under the impression that I will come into court on January 29th 2008 to be given or told about the progress made by the Investigator for my defense - Neil Spector. And, I'd be facing just that one charge.



But according that report,  City Attorney Kelly Boyer will  have a bad surprise in store for me.











Wait till this Alisa Spitzberg person finds out.she'll be ruing the day she turned down that offer for "informal diversion " made to her on October 16th 2008. Now five charges...


January 29th 2009 -

Another quick quiz-

What happens when I walk into Division 40


A) I am met by Franica Tawn - she tells me that four charges are about to be added. They've executed a bunch of search warrants and boy am I in trouble
B) Franica meets me and says that they've broken tons of laws but have found evidence that I am linked to four facebook postings and kelly boyer has now added four charges but hey since the warrants are illegal and the order is void... well, she'll fight it but hey I might have to come up with a lot of bail in the meantime
C)nothing of any consequence and I'm not told of any charges, search warrants, and Franica won't even tell me what their investigator has discovered in the course of his investigation. And I am not told of any motions or work done on by behalf by Franica. instead, Franica mockingly tells me " you want your little trial" and urges me to take their informal diversion offer.



The answer is C

And the minutes bear that out.
And you can't say y hey maybe Boyer wasn't there and so they didn't add it then. Note that before this, we have Phyllis Henderson adding the charge. Then we hear of a Webster rejecting the stalking charge from an officer at the Hollywood Division. Then we have Allison Sievers communicating with a Carlos Ramirez. 



Then, we have Tasha Penny crossed out to be replaced with Bowers (sic)



Not the best handwriting but I can make some of it out.... first line - Boyers


Second line: Wants to proceed pro per. Nothing about Boyer adding any charges etc.
It's true at this point Franica would say strange things to me and she chose to keep me in the dark about filing that motion on January 28th and so I did feel as if I couldn't stand being kept in the dark in this way.

After trial was over, and I made a copy of the court file, I was amazed to discover this:
















There are three more pages that I still can't find but the gist is that Franica Tawen did write a great discovery motion and she di even set it for hearing.


Yet, for whatever reason, Franica Tawn, chose to keep me in the dark about his discovery motion that she not only filed but set for a hearing. I'd looked at the court file during the case, but it wasn't there. 
I had no idea that Tawn had drafted it much less set a hearing. For whatever reason, she did not tell me and left me with the impression she was doing nothing. There was no hearing and I have no idea if the prosecution was ever served with this motion.


Had I known....Now if you note the minutes. The minutes would echo what I was told.... nothing about a filing or a hearing. I was told nothing by Franica Tawn about such a motion, at no time. I only became aware of it after trial in March of 2010.... more than a year later.
Let's look at the minute orders. why is their no evidence of this filing and when it was set for hearing. no mention of any motion. 
and then the next page starts with January 29th 08
Why is there no mention of this motion, and why did Franica Tawn urge me to take plea offers despite her knowing very well that I could not be convicted if any law was followed. Why was she refusing to tell me what the investigator had found?


I'm not sure of the exact date but one day she agreed to meet with me in a room of the public defender's office and we talked and I told her things and she seemed bent on me taking a plea. I told her about what Anan Desai had told me- and then had repeated to my mother- I'd be happy to take this to trial. She'd responded, with " Very interesting. He told you that?"

That night guess who called my home? 

Anan Desai. And he sounded like a man with a gun to his head as he urged me to take the plea. Like Nicky Meehan before him he hinted of a system where I had to just submit despite the law or the facts
Why did Tawn tolerate the fact that the filing of the motion and date of the hearing was not entered into the minutes and did she get pressured into dropping the motion? We know there was no hearing. Who pressured her to drop it. Why did the hearing date come and go and not just not happen, but why isn't there any evidence of it or it's eventual cancellation in the minutes.  


As far as I knew the only thing that was being done was that an Investigator had gone to talk to all sorts of friendly and unfriendly witnesses . Franica would no fill me in how that was going, but I knew of two that I'd already gotten affidavits from  2- 











But a lot of interesting stuff was happening.  between December 11 2008 and January 29th 2009

1) A Neil Spector(an investigator for the private defender had begun speaking to just a few of the witnesses who I suspected would assist in my defense. my defense being that none of this had happened. And that the restraining order was a "void judgement" since it was entirely based on fraud and perjury. As of January 29th 2009, there was ample evidence and statements I'd acquire and then Neil Spector would acquire that showed this all to be a fraud/ set up.



2) This is a strange one because for whatever reason, the public defender on the case during this time period- Franica Tawn- chose not to inform me that on January 28th 2009 she'd gone into court and filed a -motion for discovery(long overdue in this case since it was now 4 months in on a one count misdemeanor) She never told me she did any such thing and when I looked at the minutes they confirmed that Franica Tawn like those who preceded her would just not file the most basic and expect motions to fight what they should have long known was a malicious prosecution. It was only after this case would end in a 12 day trial that I'd see this in the court file









In other words, for the first time the public defenders office was asking this prosecution to pony up and since some of the witnesses I'd given franica tawn were supposed to be prosecution witness who I knew couldn't keep such false stories straight... the prosecution was well aware that an investigator was on the case and talking to witnesses they would assume were favorable to their case - Martha Kelly, Stef Willen, Kevin Seccia, Michael Grifee, Mark Flanagan. And, most importantly - Notaro's agent - Heidi Feigin.

So in other other words, they were being challenged and Lavely and Singer was being challenged since it was being revealed that this case could not survive any "collateral attack on the validity of the restraining order.. Not only did they not have a case but it would be exposed that from the start, there was no case and John Gregzek and then the city attorney were caving to the demands of certain entities. In this case, Nick Kroll, and Marty Singer.


We'll get back to how from start to finish the court and clerk was fixing the minutes. at no time would they enter one defense filing into the minutes and there were many motions filed over the coming year and few months since January 28th 2009 when Tawn's motion was omitted from the official record.



Let's go back to January 29th 2009-  Can there be a good explanation for the omission in the record. Maybe Kelly Boyer didn't show up that day. Maybe absent her presence they chose not to add those four charges

Well, she was there

So for the first time we see Kelly Boyer. It will also be the first time we see Judge Mary Lou Villar but not the last. Judge Mary Lou Villar would be seen many times before this criminal case would be over and it might or might not be important to note that Mary Lou Villar is the the sister of the mayor, Anthony Villargrossa. They do have different names but there is no dispute that the then mayor of L.A is the brother of Judge Villar.
Ok, so how to explain not just the omission of the defense motion from the minutes, but the omission of anything related to the addition of four criminal charges- as seen in John Gregozek's police report
Here is judge Villar's notes of that  pretrial -



Let's blow that up a bit - 



In the right hand corner it says that I face one count - 273.6 then violation date - july 14th 2008
Bail- OR(same as before)
And though they seem to have spelled the name wrong Bower is Boyer and she is there instead of Tasha Penny.


Now, let's look at this closer at what Judge Villar wrote relative to January 27th 2009 












So January 29th 09 has come and gone. I can't know what Franica Tawn knew but all I know is she has told me nothing. Not only do I not know of the initial search warrant but I don't know about the four return to search wrrants granted to Gregozek by Jessner and insert judge name.










So after being present for what appeared as an uneventful pre trial hearing, I go home and basically try to find out how the investigator reports are turning out and during this time Neil Spector called and would not tell us anything but "These people really hate you. Not just your sister but you too. you'd be wise to accept the plea."



So, from January 29th 2009 till the next scheduled hearing (March 12th 2009) I looked forward to the investigator reports, and was sure that any minute this would all be over, and I'd be able to get justice.


While I anticipated an end to this madness, John Gregozek and James Hoffman were taking great measures to .... to.. please Tig Notaro and by proxy- Marty Singer and Jules Kroll's son. James Hofman had actually snickered when I begged him to go to Tusnami and talk to the manager there or anyone present on the night of August 29th 2007. " Were not going to go to a coffeehouse to talk to witnesses for THIS"

And he wouldn't even talk to his fellow cops in Hollywood - Montalvo and Badar. No mention of trying to fin out who the cops that were called by Mark Flananagan( or was it Michael Griffee) were or what reports they could produce. After all, cops came and arrived at a scene where accoring to Notaro(an then Griffee and Flanagan) an then Gregozek - a famous club a famous L.A intitution- Largo- was on lockdown for 3 hours. Two women shouting hate slurt and making violent threats. When we told the doorman at the dime what these people were now alleging. he told us he was there till the early  morning and never saw any police... He then just said, " BULLSHIT."


 They wouldn't talk to Heidi Feigin or Sam Consuegra or Julius quinn Roberts or the many named and unnamed "friends' or security" or "door people" in their police reports.

They sure weren't talking to me... asking me if I'd written those facebook posts.  And they sure weren't contacting my sister or my mother or anyone that might help them make the case that it was I who had written those uh terrifying facebook posts and therefore adding four criminal charges that many any semblance of  sense

Instead,  Gregozek and Hoffman(and their supervisor Jeffrey Dunn and Martha Defoe) were  using tax payer money to 






But to try and stick o the chronology, le'ts just focus on What Gregozek was up to in February of 2009. A report dated June 9th 2009 gives us some confusing insight.




 What  they are trying to do? They are working with that famed "tunnel vision" thing but not tunnel vision cause they think I'm some criminal. That doesn't make sense in light of the manufactured incident number. Their refusal to speak to one witness or one police witness. The request for exigent circumstance warrants and the lies that Gregozek was willing to swear to under oath. 

The tunnel vision consisted of what opportunity awaited them at the end of this. Marty Singer and Jules, Nick , and Jeremy Kroll's apporoval. And that kind of approval got Robert Martin and Gregory Boles very rich.

And so they were working hard to  protect the interests of Tig Notaro. And not because they were fans of this then obscure comedian's comedy. Notaro had become bigger than say Barbara Strisand in their eyes. - She was Nick Kroll's "girl." not just a reputed best friend of Jules Kroll's son but her friendship with Nick Kroll has afforded her the services of Marty Singers' firm. The Threat Management Unit is working as muscle to protect the interest of this  glaringly malicious and dishonest Mathlde Notaro person.  Not only did I sue her. But my sister did. 

Go into how l


But despite all this activity we are privy to only retroactively - March 12th  2009 -- was nearly as unexceptional as January 29th 2009. Here is the minute entry for that date- but again the minutes were acting strangely. 

So according to the minutes, and my recollection, 
nothing of note occurred on March 12th 2009. As far as I knew and as far as these minutes would tell me, the prosecution had not mutated in any significant way.
I stilll faced one count of violating a restraining order . 
But again something very wrong was going on with the minutes as evidenced by this "motion" that the minutes  say was dated March 10th 2009, and filed and set for hearing for March 12th 2009.


What is this about?





Let's make that bigger so you can better decipher If I have lying eyes or NOT-








And on that date - March 12th 2009- a hearing is also set for a motion dated March 10th 2009 and conformed by the clerk










And these documents also showed up, down the road,  and I still cannot make sense of all them
On March 9th 2009 was an arrest warrant sought. no signature here and no arrest or any notice of charges as of March 12th so...









But these are the minutes of the court printed out a year and a half later. I mention the date of the minutes to make sure this can't be chalked up to a mistake that was soon (or ever) remedied-


Then another mysteriously dated document emerges much later on in the case - Defense counsel, Franica Tawn, in this time period- is being given  alleged witness- Jackie Kashian's- criminal record. 


Let's forget that for no legal reason Jackie Kashian's criminal record is redacted. Well, there is a reason bu no legal reason-  The reason: there is the constant attempt to case me as a woman so dangerous that much had to be reacted because this is someone who is so dangerous to the victim and witnesses that Judge Samantha Jessner and judge Edmund Wilcox and (and then three other judges) would grant Gregozek exigent circumstance search warrants. 



Under the pretense that all faced grave danger from ME?! With what set of facts? Only that Gregozek says so(without believing it for a second,)


But let's get back to these documents. Please note the dates.









So someone in the city attorornye office is complying to Franica Tawn's motion, even though it was not put in the record.  BUT they are redacting all the relevant information. And not only am I not told of anything but until the bitter end, no one who did know of this made any effort to 1) get the unredacted information 2) use this information in any way when it would be useful.


But more importantly, this documents the fact that with no legal hearing and no crime on my part, as of March 11th 2009, the prosecutors were alerting Tawn to two charges that no one knew existed. 






Yet, when March 12th 2009's pretrial arrives, no one tells me a thing about this. 

How can this be explained?

I sensed that something was very very lacking/wrong when it came to the public defender's office. No matter what Franica knew, she pushed for a plea. She'd said, " you want your little trial" even when knowing that if I got any representation, I couldn't lose at trial. She or someone at the public defenders office had pressured Anan " I would be happy to take this to trial" Desai "She not only refused to tell me what the Investigator, Neil Spector, had found but the investigator had called my sister and evaded her questions about his finding and only would say, "If I was you I'd take their plea. You don't sem to understand ... these people hate you. I don't mean just your sister. they hate you." 

he'd even read these letter and said, It sound like Willen was trying to making her jealous.


This started on April 7th 2009, and should have ended long ago, but now it was March 12 - nearly a year and something was very wrong and no one would do anything to stop it.

I'd heard the "fool for a client" thing about representing myself. I didn't want to be without a legal professional, but I couldn't stand being kept in the dark any longer.  I couldn't stand this pressure to plea amidst overwhelming evidence of Notaro's malice and lies, Gregozek's up to no goodness, and my innocence. And, I felt I had to look at this "discovery" and the only way to do that would be to be on my own.


So that is what happened on March 12th 2009. I signed a farretta in front of Mary Lou Villar. And this led to be beign given a huge stack of documents. For the first time in this prosecution I was shown anything
and what an anything it was. 

I went home to look at it all. 


Wow. 

But the thing I'd waited so long for wasn't there. The investigator reports. Any witness statements from the other side. I called the public defender's office and after lots of phone tag, Franica got back to me, had to come to the office and sign for the reports. So my sister and I dragged ourselves from West Hollywood to the downtown court


In the elevator down-- More WOW. Here's a link to to them all, but one in particular. The agent. Heidi Feigin. Wow. Wow. Wow. My idealist everyone can lie this much and get away with it, and not everyone will be willing to lie theory had worked out big time. Their game? Over.

Tose who had lied in the restraining order heairng had completely forgotten their initial lies and created a whole new set of lies. Busted. 

And the agent. The agent































First we have Gregozek's report dated February 3 2009, where he asserts that after submitting his findings Kelly Boyer saw evidence that impelled her to add four criminal charges on January 27th 2009, but hey... that didn't  happen. 


And even though Boyer was present in court, to add such four charges of violating a restraining order, and she did not, Gregozek would still write a report saying she did.




Now on March 12th 2009, we have another date where the minutes do not in any way - comport with the motions being filed- a motion to add two charges and a hearing set and then the farretta motion I filed.
Absent the extremely mysterious omissions and how grossly inaccurate the minutes are and have been before - there are other things that are not indicated by the minute entry for March 12th 2009. 



As you can see that the way the public defender is noted as present is different from the other orders and there is a reason for that. I was not defended by this Kratu Patel or Franica Tawn or any lawyer. In that hearing I felt that in order to have any fighting chance against this malicious prosecution- I had to represent myself.
As mentioned, so far only pressure to plea on Nicky Meehans part on October 16th 2008 and then the missing Jose Ruvlcable. Then, Franica Tawn and her efforts mixed with her resentment that I should want "my little tria" And though she did file a motion that could have cleared me as early as January 28th 2009, she never told me she did so and though the minutes would not reflect any such filing she either knew his or didn' but she made no effort to tell me that hey someone is messing with the minutes or she'd tried her best but... She did tell me "the private lawyer keeps contacting the office." and she followed that with "interesting" but when I asked her to elaborate she clammed up and would tell me know more.



So on March 12th I came in. the prosecutor knew this was my intent and so the discovery due me was to be brought to court.



And so I was given a huge batch of papers by a city attorney and went home to look at them...
And what did I see in these documents. Something that made me feel as if I had to advance the case from April 14th to asap and Kratu Patel made the effort to oblige me as I requested this to him by phone. but that was not all Kratu Patel would say, when I felt so under seige by what I saw and asked him if he unlike Franica would assist me with what clearly was a baseless prosecution that now involved things way way over my head or the heads of most.... Kratu Patel told me this, " There is a conflict of interest with you and the public defenders office and if I was you I would not use us."
This sounded intriguing... Because I had failed to please them by pleaing. I remembered Franica Tawn's words, " you want that little trial of yours" and all along aside of  Anan Desai... and despite the undisputable evidence that something was every wrong with John Gregozek and then the city attorney's actions in this case.... 
Later I'd realize that the statement made by Franica, " Her private lawyer keeps calling the office. Interesting" did not refer to the private attorneys - The infamous Lavely and Singer law firm- being in unusual contact with the prosecution but with the office of the public defender... 
How that discovery was realized will come later. I wrote these notes at the time but I can find the farretta and the transcript that shows againt hat the minutes are not representing what is occurring in ourt.
 3/12/09- The farretta hearing is granted very swiftly and the judge is not
     pleasant. I ask for a mardsen hearing and she impatiently says- only if
     you wait till the end of the day. I can't afford to wait till 4 P.M so I
     go home. For the first time I am given access to discovery. TCIS entry
     from notes by J. Esparza A woman approaches me after the Farretta and want
     to talk to me as " a friend of the court." She tells me she is an
     alternate public defender and I should go to court another time and get
     this mardsen hearing. I take her words to heart and plan to do so ASAP.
     0
So here are the next minute entries.
Then the last entry on page 3 is this


This will show that a farretta was granted on March 12th 2009, but again the judge or her clerk failed to enter this into the court docket





So we have established that as of March 12th 2009 a motion was filed and set for hearing but was not entered into any minutes and no such hearing took place. The fact that such a filing and then cancellation took place is not evident on the the court docket and no one tells me about any of it.


This document found much later on indicates that there was no need for any pretense of a hearing because as of March 11 2009 the prosecution already were advising anyone who might see this( Franical Tawn in this case)




But Franica Tawn nor anyone,  seemed to pay attention, and if they did notice this addition of charges that were not in any record, or mentioned in any court-  they sure didn't tell me.



so March 23rd comes and I now see pages upon pages of "discovery"  I know there have been search warrants of special kinds granted on the same false accusations made by only Notaro and Willen. and yet by all indications I still  face the one charge filed on August 25th 2009.   A charge where John Gregozek does writes up a supplemental a year after it was allegedly filed?????
But let's not flash forward years later, when that very strangely dated supplemental pops up for the first time ,when it's handed over in discovery for the civil suit filed against Gregozek et al.




Let's go back to the minutes of March 23rd 2009:




Notes I took at that time:
Mon 03/23/2009Judge: Georgina Rizc Clerk: Susan Rios Reporter: Karen
     Algorri Prosecutor: Jennifer Waxler Judge Ricz will not allow me to be pro
     per for this sudden(instant?) hearing and I comply as I don't know how it
     works. Mr. Patel is forced on me but he allows me to speak. Advanced from
     4/16/09 to 3/23/09 because I am fed up with it taking so long and I don't
     want Mr. Patel because Mr. Patel has told me that "there is a conflict of
     interest" I have complained to them about Nicky Meehan and chose to be pro
     per rather than having Ms. Tawn. I now know for sure that the PD is not
     there for me. I only allowed Patel because the discovery said that four
     new charges were filed on .... and Georgina Ricz ordered that I have him
     to fight the two new charges that arose in an instant motion.   0
     

Mon 03/23/2009There I say before initialing two parts of the farretta that

     indicate I'm not sure I know my charges. I say that according to the
     discovery 4 charges have been added by a Kelly Boyer. This prompts Waxler
     and another Unnamed prosecutor to scramble and they say (get trancscript)
     that they indeed have new charges. Ricz says that she will not grant the
     farretta until I am done with Judge Bork on this hearing. The Prosecutor
     offers that this can wait till 4/16/09 but I want it over with and to see
     this new discovery that is shown me by an unnamed prosecutor(black curly
     hair, would recognize) Go to court 50 - prosectution gets granted what it
     wants - no genuine argument(get transcript from Gail Davidson) "The
     defendant waives further arraignment" Don't believe this happened.
     "Ordered back for further hearing" go back to court and have farretta
     granted. Get Discovery and it is identical to the discovery shown by the
     prosecutor with the curly black hair. Faretta is submitted and filed No
     stipulations to what judge or if ok to have different judge. No mention of
     TCIS entry. No true sense of what happenned and how they plan to prove
     such charges.   0
     
    
 now it's March 23rd 2009 and I go into court now with discovery in hand, and in that discovery I saw this:






  
and the search warrants. Exigent circumstance search warrants?
past PDF of all the warrants for this time period
And all along I know something very wrong is going on, but now that more is wrong going on and I'm very very confused. When I go into court on March 23rd more things are really wrong-

Mary Lou Villar is not sitting on the bench and in her place is another  judge-Georgina Ricz. And this Judge is telling me that there is no evidence in the minutes that I filled out and was granted a farretta motion 11 days before - on March 12th.




I am told I have no choice but to fill out another farretta motion if I want to go "pro Per" and as I'm doing it I notice that one thing I must initial says that I know my charges but since I saw this 


Action Taken: As you can see - four counts 273.6 PC filed by CA Boyer
Cleared by arrest? No charges added much less an arrest



So after finally having access to the discovery I say to Judge Griczk - " I can't initial this part cause this document(above) says that Kelly Boyer added four charges on January 27th 2009, but here we are nearly two months later and nobody told me anything about these charges.



Insert both farretta's. show the part where It says "must know their charges"



What does this statement provoke....


Well, I then watch Jennifer Waxler, and another city attorneys whose name I don't know, ruffling loudly through a bunch of papers. 


After what seemed like a long while, Waxler holds up a bunch of papers in her hand and says, "Yes, your honor. we do have charges to add but we'd be happy to wait till the next hearing to add them."

I sense that Waxler wants to have this wait till April 16th, for no good reason, and so I sense my best move is to deny her such a delay so I say , " No. your honor. I don't want this to wait."Gricik rules that I can't be pro per for this and Kratu Patel accompanies me to Terry Bork's courtroom. There Kratu says you can't do anything about this. Just plead not guilty. And so I did. 

Later in discovery this would be produced as the paper work behind the addition of not  4 but now 2 charges. And, different charges than those listed by Gregozek as added by Kelly Boyer.
Remember this- 















and this after standing before Terry Bork with Kratu Patel by my side(against my wishes) and telling me 'just say not guilty"



















 Please note the date to the left - March 12 2009




Drafted on the 12th but for whatever reason brought to life on the 23rd of March.

And here is Judge Mary Lou Villar's notes from that day:






"Court grants  motion of amend complaint to add counts 2 and 3 . Some triangle we have to assume means defendant waives arraignment and pleads not guilty to amended complaint. Which is interesting on many levels considering the charges but I never waved any arraignment.
And so instead of at the January 29th 2009 pretrial or at the March 12th Pretrial - and only upon my statemnt that due to recent discovery I see I'm somehow facing four more charges does Jennifer Waxler(not Kelly Boyer) add TWO charges.




Two charges now amended and approved by Terry Bork,  Did I wave arraignment? Well I sure don't remember that. Note that there is no discussion of raising bail considering the addition now of two charges. As usual, the public defenders office refuses to challenge the prosecutors.
Le'ts look at those two charges, added only when I brought it up....
The series of events.
1) letter from Seivers to Gregozek and Kelly Boyer urging them to begin getting search warrants and to add charges
2) Gregozek does exactly what Sievers requests
3) Gregozek begins to submit 4 search warrants that are premised on fraud and perjury. He will repeat the now long disproven lies told to him by 





 First Allison Sievers commands John Gregozek and Kelly Boyer to add charges and begin a series of search warrants. Then Gregzoek follows her commands and puts in this report
That he did this and that and vague this and that and upon viewing his discoveries(obtained by search warrants reserved for pedophiles and terrorist) Kelly Boyer is impressed enough to add four criminal charges of violating a restraining order and as of January 29 I am facing 5 charges and can face up to five years in jail and by all logic- should be given a much higher bail situation than Own Recognizance.
But none of that happens and Jennifer Waxler wants to wait for April 16th even to add whatever it is she sees fit to add when I bring up the fact that I read this document and am very CONFUSED
So now with absolutely no fight on Kratu "You have a conflict of interest with the Public defenders office' I now face uh.... three charges
These are the two new  charges.
(explain the charges and how they make ABSOULTEY NO SENSE.)
But let's try and analyze them from the prosecutions point of view in light of what we know from the new discovery
What can we guess at since what exists makes no sense by what I or anyone viewing the discovery can see-





Let's look at the first one -
1st new charge-  



So what do I do. I go home knowing that not only is something very odd with the minute orders (due to the farretta I didn't know of the other "oddities" till much later but that John Gregozek is now lying to judges in order to get exigent circumstance search warrant and 3 o rmore have been executed. )I did not know of Allison Sievers letters to him and kelly until four years later but I knew that Gregozek was trying to frame me in some way and that something was very wrong with his connection to Lavely and Singer. I knew that without any possible evidence of a crime somehow Waxler saw fit to add two charges. It also took me a long time to get it that Kelly Boyer must have refused to add any charges based on Gregozek's "evidence." 
I also knew that my sister just sued Notaro for defamation and Lavelya nd Singer were back in the pitcure. Now I suspect that the reason they tried to add meritless/bogus/lawless charges was retaliation but we'll have to get to that in more detail later.
I can say and I feel very confident you will agree, these two charges or those four charges never added by Boyer, make no sense.  The fact that Jennifer Waxer was brought in to add them when she was known in that courthouse as dirty ..And, I made that clear to anyone who would listen, including the judges I saw or the prosecutors. " These charges make no sense."
Remember that, please, as that sensible statement, "These charges make no sense" would set the stage of the most malicious(and insane) stage of this already very malicious prosecution.
It was clear that facing special circumstance search warrants and charges that made no sense- we were over our heads. I say we because I am very close to my mother and sister and we do and experience almost everything together. So we got into gear and realized we had to shell out money for a private lawyer. We called around and settled on Howard Williams. Howard Williams asked for a meeting.
At that meeting, in order for him to close the 4K deal. he told me these kinds of things. Her'es just a one email -In a message dated 4/13/2009 4:20:17 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:
Hi Alisa,

I understand your frustration, I really do.  These people are obviously commandeering the justice system for their own petty purposes and it needs to stop.  Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that the system knows it's being commandeered, and it comes down to your word against hers and the DA and cop who inexplicably believe her.  
I will walk in on the 16th a motion, probably the Pitchess and the discovery motion.  I will bring the motion to dismiss once we complete those motions, as we will perhaps have more information to support the dismissal at that point.  In fact, I foresee bringing the motion to dismiss on multiple occasions before and during trial.

As far as depositions are concerned, we're going to have to wait on that.  We are not entitled to a deposition in a criminal proceeding, only to have her on the stand to confront and cross-examine at the trial.  The deposition is for the civil suit, which must necessarily happen after the criminal case is over

So as of April 16 2009 scheduled hearing, I felt very lucky to have a private lawyer who wanted to sue them the minute he freed me from this .... And his partner Stanley Leiber was brought in to close the deal- big damages they said. Not only will this be dismissed but you deserve to be compensanted for all this time and misery. It will be 4K well spent. And Howard williams told me he was a public defender before he got into private practice and they just don't have the will or the rescources to give me the defense I deserve.


What was it exactly. Well, Howard felt that people were commandeering the legal system and he told me " There is something very wrong with Gregozek All I knew was that no law was being followed and no one would stop it.
Howard L. Williams






April 16th 2009- Hand over 4K to Howard Williams - pay the cavalry and watch them come




I'd just learned that when you have a lawyer, and it's a misdemeanor, you don't have to even go to court. of course no public defender told me this.  I'd been to court now how many times... including the restraining order hearing.... May 28,. september 25 october 16, november 6, december 11, january 29, march 12, March 23-
eight 
and so I stupidly would take advantage of the luxuries I was now afforded and hoped to get the defense I read about and saw on TV and in the movies - zealous. Stupidly because Howard L. Willams did not represent me in any zealous way as you will see.



These are the back and forth emails predating Howards first appearance in the case - 




From: Alisaspitz@aol.com
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 11:28:19 EDT
To:
Subject: protective order, trancript of trial,trancript with commentary
HI Mr. Williams,
I decided that I'm going to mail you everything today because I'm feeling that the scanning is taking too long. I'll just send you things that are in microsoft word or things I don't have copies of for now and send the rest by regular mail.

1- the dv order
2- the transcript-some of it got deleted by accident and I put it back verbaitim so any problem is format related.
3- transcript with our comments- Done a long time ago, just a small sample of what's wrong with the "hearing." Discovered more along the way and please note that my sister was removed before I testified for no apparent reason and the way the judge makes  non stop leading question sand just put in the word "They" in find, and see how they are not even differentiating between my sister and me etc.




















Re: protective order, trancript of trial,trancript with commentary
I'm going to call you today but I want you to see this and tell me what you think?

There are actually many more lies I can find but I need you to see this already.

Regards,
Alisa

Attached file the lies.



Subject:
This is the informal discovery i requested from the prosecutor on March 25
Date:
4/3/2009
From:

Reply To:

To:
Howard@Lieberlaw.com


In a message dated 3/25/2009 8:42:22 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:
Here's a list of witnesses and or more documents, surviellance footage, 911 calls,  I'll need , and a short reason


Subject:
handwriting
Date:
4/9/2009
From:

Reply To:

To:
Howard@Lieberlaw.com

Hello Howard,

Good to talk to you. I'm slowly unfurling from the fetal position and trying to keep my bile levels at a manageable level. Please, do not get AT $ T u-verse service! Stick with Time warner if that is the case in your cable  situation. As bad as they may be this At & t u verse is obscene. I never was rude to customer service in my life until yesterday when I truly just cursed out a strange machine like man in the philipines.


Back to law and "reality."
There is so much to this story that it is overwhelming(and that you don't know yet) and I appreciate your understanding on the phone about things that I can't even feel comfortable talking about here --because I seriously am not getting e-mails I should have been getting --and I'm rightfully paranoid. Putting anything past almost anyone at this point is not smart.

But, I'll put my paranoia aside because I don't have much of a choice.

Please tell me what you think of this as it would indicate something very big and valuable both criminally and civilly  if correct. Please tell me if you think two different people wrote these things. I'll send the one that is supposed to be from a different person here and the other ones in a following e-mail.

And here's what I sent the prosecutor on March 25th 2009
I want them to get some subpeona Deucum Tucums whatever soon.

Informal Discovery requests:

Please, forward to me at any and all investigation, or documents when possible.
1)mentioned in court(Judge Bork) and in the amended complaint in regards to the alleged new "violations."
Any phone records or tape of me calling Notaro would be much anticipated.  Any information about how Gregozek intends to "link" me to something I didn't do etc. Exact times they were said to occur(alibi evidence-- see above) and what was allegedly said in these alleged communications.
2) I understand that since the Threat Management Unit tried to file stalking charges on me they by all rights must have an extensive file on me and I want to see all of it. I've researched and they really go all out in these stalking investigations and by all means should have done a major investigation and have tons of stuff to justify their search of my sisters and mothers accounts and just in general a large file must exist.  I imagine some work product is privileged but in general I am entitled to it and will need it for my defense.
3) Any and all signed statements by any witnesses for the prosecution that are mentioned in the police reports or investigation,  or of course for any exculpatory witnesses that you've become aware of.
4) Since I was tape recorded(without my knowledge or my families knowledge- but hey that's fine too.) any tape recorded statements by Notaro, Willen, Sievers(as she is mentioned many times and seems to be effecting this case tremendously and gave documents and statements to the tmu and prosecution), Kelly, Klinger, Kashian, or anyone for the prosecution.and any exculpatory tape recordings.
5)The identity and reason for the inclusion of a "Patricia Brummer"in the discovery. The meaning behind all those numbers in the discovery regarding the alleged facebook communication.
6) The "threat" gregozek is referring to in order to search my sister and mother's accounts without notice.
7) The reason there is a "domestic violence protective order" against me when It has been well established that me and this Notaro have only crossed paths on two short lived occassions. This one really is getting to be a major curiosity.
8) a copy of the witness list from dept from A on  may 28th 2008. As my sister signed in as a witness and then was removed without mention in the transcript or minute order.
9) A recording of that proceeding.
10) Gregozek mentions that I was served by court personnel on that date. This isn't true. I was never served. Please, show a proof of service.
.





Subject:
supposedly different handwriting from the last e-mail
Date:
4/9/2009
From:

Reply To:

To:
Howard@Lieberlaw.com

There are about 25 more examples but this should give you an idea.Also, I just got the message today on the voicemail that you wanted to have the meeting at 11 or 1 last time so just so you know that was I had no idea about that at the time.

talk soon,
alisa


Subject: please respond asap.
From: Alisaspitz@aol.com
Date: Mon, April 13, 2009 3:32 pm
To: Howard@Lieberlaw.com
Dear Howard,

I don't know what I can send right now that would be the most help. But, I really need a motion or for you to "paper" them a bit and I think they should be served on the 16th,. They have dragged me to court so many times since Sept 25 and this notaro has not had to come once and now she has won a slapp suit against my sister despite the fact that only a corrupt judge would possibly grant it.


What did you think about the handwriting??


Notaro was even subpeona'd once by the prosecution and she didn't come and her private lawyer made it ok. She needs to be questioned or her witnesses need to be questioned or deposed and the dates should coincide with the dates she goes on tour or they are away or whatever so they can be put out for once. How easy it has been for notaro to do this and how she has truly just gone her merry way is unbearable.

 She has ruined me for a year now and has ruined my name or prospects permanently if something isn't done soon.  Can't you get her to be deposed beforehand as there is no signed statements from anyone and I'm dying of frustration already. Or this needs to be dismissed and then I can sue the hell out of all of them. Like you said, this is harrassment plain and simple and I would like you tell me if you plan any motion for the 16th.
 The cops tape recorded me and my sister and mother without consent. Went into my mother and sisters accounts under the guise of me being a threat and for no good reason and this can't be allright. My sister now lost a civil suit ( notaro was granted an antislapp despite zero evidence that it was a slapp) and because of the fact that the lies of her vile lawyer, You can't imagine the bullshit that went on there.

I am in limbo and notaro hasn't felt any sting from the evil that she's done and so  please have something ready by the 16th.

For instance:

Pitchess- the cop is lying under oath and he is only doing everything to please lavely and singer, Something very funky is going on there and should be noted and a pitchess should be brought.
motion to compel(the discovery is now way overdue), and all the brady material is not being handed over.the big file for the "stalking" must exist and must be full of exculpatory material.
Motion to dismiss- might as well and I'm sure there are plenty of reasons for it.

And, the subpeonas for all the witnesses should be given in on the 16th

Get them to have their investigators investigate- they've done no investigation. I qualify as indigent and so let them harrass the tax payers some more. There's   a good 10 more witnesses that could help my defense.

Or please tell me how to get notaro at least prosecuted on perjury or sued already.

As a pro per I could at least give them some grief but now I feel as if I can't and it's worse. So, please respond to this letter and give me some clue before I explode.

thanks,
Alisa

In a message dated 4/13/2009 4:20:17 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:
Hi Alisa,

I understand your frustration, I really do.  These people are obviously commandeering the justice system for their own petty purposes and it needs to stop.  Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that the system knows it's being commandeered, and it comes down to your word against hers and the DA and cop who inexplicably believe her.
I will walk in on the 16th a motion, probably the Pitchess and the discovery motion.  I will bring the motion to dismiss once we complete those motions, as we will perhaps have more information to support the dismissal at that point.  In fact, I foresee bringing the motion to dismiss on multiple occasions before and during trial.

As far as depositions are concerned, we're going to have to wait on that.  We are not entitled to a deposition in a criminal proceeding, only to have her on the stand to confront and cross-examine at the trial.  The deposition is for the civil suit, which must necessarily happen after the criminal case is over.

I'm not sure what you're talking about with the SLAPP motion.  Has your sister sued her?

 He did none of this –not even by July 29th 2009 when he withrew from the case.
 Dear Howard,

Ah, thanks,Howard,  I didn't even check my e-mail in fear that you'd fled the country or something. My very last marble seems to have rolled away .

I literally fell asleep after writing that to you and I've been averaging a good 15 hours of sleep a day for the last week. I'm not one to tell anyone my problems but this miserable situation has caused me to have to get a psychiatrist and a lawyer. I generally don't believe in psychiatrists but I got a very decent one and she put me on xanax and I have been popping them or my body sort of shakes. Gross, but true.
Mind you, I've reached almost 40 without getting addicted to anything despite having lousy nerves and always being surrounded by nervous people who have pills for their nerves etc, and this psychiatrist doesn't believe in giving out pills easily -- xanax became a necessity because I am a mess due to the fact that my family and I are  being smashed by some vicious imbecile and ... the government.
 This (my sorry emotional state) will come out in the civil trial and I am only boring you with it for those reasons.
It is now 5;59 a.m and I've been up since 4 a.m  looking up how I can oppose this granted anti slapp. My sister sued notaro on jan 22, 2009,  when she found out that this notaro was sending out faxes with her picture to every club and warning people about her and then we heard this from people and it's been confirmed. It's also mentioned in the investigator reports.  So, she sues for defamation and notaro's bovine (she's seriously bovine) lawyer attaches my restraining order , and   a declaration from the monstrous notaro full of lies about me me me  and how my sister is just doing this to harass her for what she's done to her sister etc, and so after researching and researching we don't even imagine that any judge could grant the completely baseless special motion to strike and will sanction these beasts.
 We write up a decent opposition citing how obscene her motion is and I draw up a 10 pg sanction motion for my sister against this attorney of Notaro .  The hearing was on April 6 and my sister goes in with no thought that this judge could rule against her, and the minute she walks in the court she's handed a  a tentative ruling with statements that are not even included in the papers and that make no sense. My sister starts to argue and the judge is smirking and I gasp once from the galley and the judge calls a bailiff. my sister says "why would you need a bailiff, your honor." And this corrupt crazy judge Grimes says, " i fear what you may do when I make my ruling and you are sneering." Funnily enough the bailiff never comes because I think her clerk sympathized with us but anyway, she grants her the special motion to strike and lawyer fees for no reason other than pure corruption. We got the tentative ruling and proposed judgement in the mail yesterday and off I went to sleep again. The tentative motion says things like, "The sisters assaulted notaro and she sought releif through the courts."
Mind you, this is never  even  stated anywhere by the nefarious notoro or her cretinous lawyer, and now it has to be fought and the last marble is nowhere to be found etc.

So, thanks for getting back to me and for giving me the succor that some motions are being made and someone is on our side.

Talk soon,
Alisa


In a message dated 4/15/2009 9:19:40 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:
Hi Alisa, I wanted to consult w my colleagues on whether I could appear without you tomorrow and nobody sees a reason why not. So no problem, and we'll get together to go over some details. I'll call u as I'm walking out of court and let u know what happened

From: Alisaspitz@aol.com
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 00:16:25 EDT
To:
Subject: (no subject)

Hi Howard,

I think the "mini trial" on the 2 charges idea of yours is terrific and will accomplish a lot.
Here's one of the files that I thought I sent but from what I gathered talking to you I didn't.

The e-mails of "my rage" are at the end. And, it's still only a small part of what can be used to show the lies.

Now that I have some sense of hope that this will not drag on till forever i will get up the energy to get at least one of those faxes. My gut(which I probably have no right to trust any longer) tells me that one or two will be gotten if the effort is made. Or that at the least we will get one good witness who's disgusted and will tell us everything.

Thanks and talk soon,
Alisa




Insert email that shows what he knew and when he knew it.

substanstial assets( The improve Largo, Notaro(on tv), Willen(inheritance rich family etc) Griffee, Whitaker, Seccia-- all suable and some assets. Then, the next part of the story that we haven't gotten to yet and the battery, slander, and defamation by Val myers, Scott boxenbaum, Harris Wittels. Jazz Ponce, william Mier etc-- All with plausible assets and beyond good evidence, in my possession, of their actionable offenses.
When you see it I hope you feel nice and indignant etc.

Notaro doesn't live with either Tom Sharpe or Chris Fairbanks for a fact.

The manager of the place where the supposed violation took place says that despite Notaro saying a huge scence occurred that no such thing happened.

Absolutely every statement of Notaro's is a lie. It's amazing, but true. She simply can't tell the truth. She messes up the Martha Kelly thing and talks to the investigator to the P.D in such a way that absolutely sinks her and she has no idea.

I was never served by court personall as Gregozek said " served by court personell on may 29th, 2008. In fact, I was never served with the final one and this can be shown in court files.. And, it was may 28th.

There's much more and the e-mails that show my "rage" over that weekend  are priceless as they show only that Willen is the one with the rage.




Also, I'll include some of the slander and defamation that some real uglies are having fun with. I won't even editorialize at this point but it's pretty disturbing.

And, I'll include the fact how Tom sharpe doesn't live with her. I happen to know that Chris Fairbanks absolutely doesn't live with her but not documented.

Attach all emails that indicate what he was told and what he ignored. Some e-mails incomplete because too long but all originals are available.

 Attached file: her moronic blog.



Howard spoke with much more confidence and then appeared to do more than Franica was doing, at first. Actually he only did appear to more in retrospect because I was never told that Franica had filed that terrific looking discovery motion. 
Later on when I pressed him he told me he'd filed this. And after the trial was over, and I picked up the file, I did find this there.






So on April 16th 2009, Howard Subbed in with promises of "papering the prosecution"





Subject:
transcript and transcript and transcript with comments
Date:
5/1/2009
From:

Reply To:

To:
Howard@Lieberlaw.com

Hi Howard,

Here's the version as is ,and there's one with comments.The one with the comments was written way before the investigator reports, comparing it to those can be show pure fraud at this point on all accounts, I just now added about 2 new comments that relate to the investigator but there should be many many more but I need you to see this asap.
Please notice things like how he tells me I need to stop talking about irrelevant things like my trip to NY when no such thing every happened. He then starts browbeating my mother for not answering his question when she completely does and then Seccia tells the investigator that we behaved so badly at this hearing that the judge had to call a recess as we were so out of hand. See kevin seccia investigator report, please

. As you can see, that never happened.

Some this could use more context and you should be aware that I attached a almost 40 page statement and I say did you read it to the judge and he says "i have it." He doesn't even pretend to have read it.

He actually grants me a continuance by accident.  There must be something that can be done sooner to end this and start suing because it really feels like it just hovers and life is not resumable.

If looked at closely and comparing to any the other three accounts by notaro and her witnesses --almost every line is a lie.

In a message dated 5/4/2009 12:34:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:
Letter is attached

Subject: appeal letter
From: Alisaspitz@aol.com
Date: Mon, May 04, 2009 11:23 am
To: Howard@Lieberlaw.com
Hi Howard,

It's division 2. Thanks so much.

Divisions 1 - 5, 7 & 8
Ronald Reagan State Building
300 So. Spring St. 2nd Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90013
Tel: (213) 830-7000


Attached letter where howard sends me signature for appeal and tells me not to worry about it being a fake.



Subject: Re: appeal letter
From: Alisaspitz@aol.com
Date: Mon, May 04, 2009 1:29 pm
To: howard@lieberlaw.com
Hi Howard,

thanks a lot for that quick letter. I called the court of appeal and she said that I'll need to get a substitution of attorney thing and then an extenstion of time and I'll need original signatures etc. Mine to release myelf as pro per and yours etrc. She wouldn't give me any more detail and said "ask your lawyer."

She wasn't a helpful type so I'm not even sure she's just not complicating things.

Sievers never filed a substitution of attorney in the RO matter and the judge didn't seem to notice though her name was listed as attorney and notaro then came pro per. Interesting.

Please, get back to me when you can.


I hope this is it.  See attached file.

Subject:
Re: appeal letter
Date:
5/5/2009
From:

Reply To:


To:

howard@lieberlaw.com

The appeal number is the B one as you know.  I have to get an original signature-from you according to the clerk- can I or should come to Woodland HIlls, today or tomorrow?
 Today would be best.
Thanks so much and please get back to me when you can. It accidentally pasted twice(below) and won't let me delete. So, please ignore the second one.
Trial Court Case:
SS016746
Court of Appeal Case:
B209220


Division:
1
Case Caption:
Notaro v. Spitzberg
Case Type:
CV
Filing Date:
06/23/2008
Oral Argument Date/Time:





Case Summary
Trial Court Case:
SS016746
Court of Appeal Case:
B209220


Division:
1
Case Caption:
Notaro v. Spitzberg
Case Type:
CV
Filing Date:
06/23/2008
Oral Argument Date/Time:






In a message dated 5/6/2009 8:59:50 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:
Ok, Alisa. In court, but first thing I do when I'm done will be to help you. On my calendar

------Original Message------
From: Alisaspitz@aol.com
To: Howard@Lieberlaw.com
Sent: May 6, 2009 8:57 AM
Subject: appeal about the appeal

Hi Howard,

Must get this appeal thing dealt with today so please give me any clue.

thanks,
alisa


Sent on the Now Network from my Sprint
In a message dated 5/6/2009 4:14:35 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:

Hi Alisa,

Sorry, I was stuck in court ALL DAY. Such a waste of time.

Anyway, attached is a substitution of attorney.  If you print it out with a color printer, I've never had a problem with anyone saying it's not an "original" signature.


Attached spitzberg pdf substitution of attorney.



Subject:
appeal about the appeal
Date:
5/6/2009
From:

Reply To:

To:
Howard@Lieberlaw.com





Subject:
Re: subst of atty
Date:
5/7/2009
From:

Reply To:

To:
howard@lieberlaw.com



Thanks Howard!



Subject:
court date tomorrow
Date:
5/13/2009
From:

Reply To:

To:
Howard@Lieberlaw.com



Hi Howard,

I found the tape. Which is good, and I think it's more exculpatory than anything.  I wish I could know why it's included. Do you have any idea . Do they have to tell us why it's included?
I've been just too anxious to get justice already and I wish I could inspire the same sentiments  in lawyers but so far no dice. I'm praying for a miracle so I can get enough money to get you to be my own at beck and call lawyer very soon. Please, tell me what is going on with the motion to traverse or anything that might happen tommorow.

 I'll call you today but in the meantime my sweet sister came up with this file(attached) and wants you to see this. It involves what she found about traversing and the rules of getting the warrant and then some appeals stuff(Which hopefully can also get done.)

It's an obscene case, really.  Notaro really must be prosecuted for perjury.
I think once you really have the time or inclination to see it all you will see that this could be a substantial civil suit when the criminal thing ends well. I just read some book about being "co-counsel," and how the defendant was able to do that. Can we do this?

I understand that you are busy and I'm very aware about money and payment and will be willing and able to pay for the appeal or the void(motion to set aside) or you  helping with perjury or anything by the end of the month.

Regards,
Alisa

Attached appeal and traverse doc


Subject:
very good link for motion to traverse
Date:
5/13/2009
From:

Reply To:

To:
Howard@Lieberlaw.com

http://legalupdatesonline.com/4th/335#cont338




May 14th

















and later we'd find out what Gregozek was up to as Howard Williams was in court and postponing the filing of this traverse motion 







Subject:
traversing etc.
Date:
5/14/2009
From:

Reply To:

To:
Howard@Lieberlaw.com

Hi Howard,
I don't think I'll come today. I'll save my energy for filing your motions etc.
 I really have no real idea but I really believe that just bombarding them with motions will be the best way to stop this. I appreciate that you have an eye out for the trial -- which a lazier lawyer might not-- but I think discovery demands like you mentioned:having the expert say what he'll say-- and then couple that with a motion to traverse might do the trick. I think a motion to traverse is very very important because they just don't have and haven't shown any valid probable cause and they are supposed to be in possession of a huge file on me if they really thought I was a threat. I'll send you those links again but all indications say that this threat management unit rejects most cases and if they take a case on they spare no expense to compile some huge file on the suspect with my mental and criminal history, interviews with tons of people, and just so much that can be exculpatory.
 I think forcing them to explain the search, and the supposed threat (that was so dire that any warning could not be given )will open it up in a way they can't afford and that will help the civil suit.

So traversing and coupling that with as many motions as possible will spare me(and you) the trial.  Then hopefully we can sue lavely and singer and the others and we both can retire.

Again, I'm more than happy to do anything to make your job easier . And, not because I'm such a sweetheart... but because I need to beat this already and I am very familiar with every angle of this case.. Notaro is not your normal lousy person. I'm going to be forty in 10 days and I'm the most ungrudge holding person possible. I forgive and forget very easily but she and Willen and the others just trespassed so soullessly and for what reason??? It's just not tolerable to let this go though I've let tons and tons of things go...

Plus, a motion to dismiss couldn't hurt. I really don't fear a trial and even think it can be a good thing but it is such a waste and I think they might buckle already if they see that you are willing to file motions etc. Till now, not one motion has been filed and they probably figure that I'm poor and can't afford a good lawyer etc.


 We have the grounds for traversing or quashing : omission of material facts, double and triple hearsay, no probable cause( none that can be deciphered from anything available to us), use of hunches("notaro strongly believers that's alisas writing style(???!), vague and misleading statements(all statements made by notaro. there is just no truth to any of it.) even perjury and conspiracy can be shown and maybe they will even just settle(for an undisclosed sum-- hee hee) when they realize how much costlier it can get. Gregozek says that he is trained in individuals with abnormal fixations.... they leave gifts, follow certain types and patterns blah blah blah and the judge would be led to deduce(Why else would gregozek go through with the trouble of perjuring himself etc? )  that this "training" gives Gregozek a special insight

. Yet, Gregozek doesn't include one material fact-- anything that I've done --that would lead him to arrive at this conclusion or even a suspicion, and he can only include the lies of notaro and vague allusion to this "training". He not only doesn't include anything that is not hearsay but he omits the humongous credibility problem of his "victim." It can easily be shown that he had access to this knowledge from almost the start.
Let them show the judge what would possibly lead them to conclude that I had any fixation on anyone. There can be no evidence of this and why are they just getting away with this bullshit??

Please, tell me what happened in court today when you get a chance.

In a message dated 5/15/2009 12:32:27 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:
Hi Alisa,

I set the next court date for June 17 in Dept. 40 for pretrial conference and Motion to Traverse.  I filed my discovery request for a detailed statement of anticipated testimony from their expert, but not our motion to traverse.  I'll have to file that by the end of next week.  In the meantime, I'll figure out a way around the "standing" issue and if you could send me your thoughts on what material omissions Gregozek made in his warrant declaration based on facts he would have known at the time, that would help bolster our statement of facts.

Regards,



Subject: (no subject)
From: Alisaspitz@aol.com
Date: Fri, May 15, 2009 11:18 am
To: Howard@Lieberlaw.com



Can you just drop me a note telling me what happened yesterday and what's next.



Subject:
Re: (no subject)
Date:
5/18/2009
From:

Reply To:

To:

howard@lieberlaw.com

Hi Howard,

I can't wait till June. This needs to be dropped and they need to be sued. If you saw the slander and ugliness on the internet and now a whole year of this is just not right. Seccia, Grifee, Notaro and Whitaker all commit perjury. No doubt about it. Willen lies to the police and that too is a crime. Please read this(attached) carefully and see how obscene it is.

There is literally hundreds of omissions. All this material included is material fact and it's omission is beyond suspect I got tired at the end because it is too ridiculous that I'd have to keep going after the first "incident" even.  It is obvious that this is all a lie. Sam Consuegra, says none of this happened but even without him Notaro and Willen's testimony and statements don't stand up to the barest scrutiny.. Absolutely none of what is sworn on the affidavit is true and proof was long available to them.

I've put some comments and then highlighting pen to show rank inconsistencies but there is much much more. Every word is a lie and it can be shown by just looking at what I've attached.

Also, in the civil suit with my sister Sievers says that Notaro never met either of us till April of 2,008. They are getting away with murder.  I'm ready to go to the press or just paste this all over the internet. Please, understand that waiting for another pretrial in mid  June is unacceptable. They are calling the shots for so long and this can't go on any longer. my whole family will drop dead by mid june, I am not kidding.

Talk soon,
Alisa



Subject:

Re: (no subject)
Date:
5/18/2009
From:

Reply To:


To:

howard@lieberlaw.com

Hi Howard,

My blood is really just going to boil over and flood my apartment. I don't understand how for a year I'm turned into a lesbo stalker and these vicious liars are completely going about their merry way.  You have to understand that I came to L.A to pursue comedy and was encouraged to do so for years and this is devastating. I am stuck here in L.A and everywhere I go I get creepy stares. I don't go anwhere anymore. Notaro is true Evil.

Gregozek has made no effort to get at any truth.

I want to go to trial already! I think they need to be told that trial must be started because they don't seem to care either way and are just hoping I give up.

The fact that everything in so many files is redacted means (according to what I read) that I am violent and  a threat and that is a slanderous and obvious lie to anyone who looks at anything.

Then gregozek even says that the order was granted on May 29th and was served by court personell. it was may 28th and I never was served in any way shape or form. He just writes whatever he wants.The original order is missing from the files and from what I can tell one time my age has been alterred from when I saw it.

Then , we have the tape that shows that I never said, " The sarah silverman show sucks." and that I never insulted notaro for a "half hour." and that there were no "angry outbursts" and my

mother is completely missing for some bizarre reason. His whole account of that over an hour interview is skewed and perjurious.

Gregozek goes on to say that he thinks I feel an injustice took place and that is why ...
Now... doesn't that go against his "must do search without contacting anyone" because of threat to "victim and witnesses." how can he justify that statement that is in BOLD?


He knows that I left these 4 messages, he says, based on Notaro being "familiar with my writing style. " What writing style is Notoro familiar with and how????  Let them show samples of "my writing style"  I do not know Notaro nor she I and how would he take her word that she "knows my writing style" as evidenced by those 4 lame messages.  Don't I call her Dyke cunt bitch all over the place and isn't that my "style."

He knows that I live with my mother and sister and that anything coming from this house could be any of us and then when the accounts are not in my name he needs to stop there..  He knows this because Notaro tells everyone about me living with my family  as she finds it so WIERD. And he says to a judge that he can link it to me???? Illogical and bogus and offensive when California is bankrupt and I'm going to have to go bankrupt too because of this because of how much this is costing me on every level. I want you to see that with minimal effort this could be a huge civil suit as 2 major comedy clubs ,8 people with assest, and others are involved and we now have more witnesses to subpeona to show defamation as Emily Mills and another from another comedy theatre admit they saw this fax and are aware that Notaro is "being stalked" by me and my sister and mother(according to Reeta Piazza)..... and that the gruesome Notaro,  just a month ago had to come in the back door of the UCB Theatre. Is this not nauseating?

Notaro says to the investigator that I constantly break the restraining order to "her face"  She is totally stupid and totally insane and over a year of this is unbearable. Please, get back to me when you ca




Subject:
void
Date:
5/18/2009
From:

Reply To:


To:

Howard@Lieberlaw.com

Maybe this could be the best defense: That is just null-- all the lies and the judge etc. Please scroll down.

Attached: void order and laws of setting aside order.






Subject:

one of two emails sent to det. hoffman. will send other soon.
Date:
5/20/2009
From:

Reply To:


To:

Howard@Lieberlaw.com





From: Alisaspitz@aol.com

To: TMULAPD@Gmail.com
Sent: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 11:57 am
Subject: A bit of evidence for Detective Hoffman


Hello Detective Hoffman,

 Yesterday, I was given the offer to take anger management classes and the charges would be dropped. Alas, I know that my "anger." is really righteous indignation and does not require management.

I look forward to trial. I know you are busy with real stalkers so I just want to drop you a note to thank you for your show of decency, and to tell you that I'm waiting on the lawyer to get me copies of everything alleged so I can send you a final show of what went on.

I saw some of her initial statements ,quickly, at the arraignment and I was pleased to see that all three versions of the  their  story contradict each other and there is flagrant perjury in the testimony, affidavit, and in the order itself.  She makes statement about my "motives." that are completely invented and can be proven with many e-mails.
I'll just send you the testimony with comments for now and I hope you take a look and see that notaro is not the victim here but a very dangerous and criminally dishonest person. The transcript with comments is about 20 percent of the evidence. there is so much more that will show that this is all a vicious lie.

On the final order I am restraining from Tom sharpe who Notaro says lives with her. On the TRO it says so too.
 I got this from Citybeat magazine. I'd be happy to send you the link to the exact page etc.
great article about your roommate. You should mention that you live together.
posted by hogre on 10/09/08 @ 05:23 p.m.
Hogre,
There is an insinuation in your comment. Allow me to clarify:
Tig and I have performed in several shows together and I consider her a friend. While we've exchanged the occasional email and phone call, I haven't seen her in person in over 10 months. We have never been roommates together--
posted by hogre on 10/10/08 @ 08:10 p.m.
Hogre,
Your comments and my initial response may have been inadvertently removed along with some targeted comments, which were removed due to their similarity to a glut of comments left on Tig's videos and website and in emails over the past year by a stalker. This person has been court ordered to refrain from all contact with Tig..
Posted by Tom sharpe.
Again, I am not Tig's roommate. But, I would call her a friend. I have not spoken to her face to face in over 10 months, although we have communicated occasionally by phone and email. As you can see in the interview, I indicated in the question regarding the crackpot tour that I have collaborated with Tig in the past. I was contacted by Tig a number of months ago when she learned that I might have been looking for a place. She and two other comics were concurrently looking for a 4th roommate in a houseful of comedians. I did not move in with them.

Posted by tom sharpe.




Subject:
a small amount of the defamation
Date:
5/21/2009
From:

Reply To:


To:

Howard@Lieberlaw.com

Hi Howard,

I imagine you're too busy to contact me but I hope soon you'll just give me a sense of what is going on.

This is one tenths of what I have and there is another about 40 posts that are relevant .
Scott box is scott boxenbaum - an untalented weasel who once bummed a cigarette from me , otherwise he has no idea who I am nor does he know anyone that I know.. So yesterday I decide to google him and for some reason this time I get the information that he is the son of  multi-millionaire( Charles Boxenbaum- almost positive.) That can be very very good as what he wrote and the fact that he is 43 years old would cause any jury a lot of disgust and anger.

How is the traverse going?

From: Alisaspitz@aol.com
To: Howard@Lieberlaw.com
Sent: May 26, 2009 9:41 AM
Subject: inquiry

Howard,

You told me that you were going to traverse at the pretrial and then you told me that you'd have to get in the motion by last friday. Now, you are not answering calls or e-mail.  What is going on?
  Alisa



In a message dated 5/26/2009 9:51:22 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writ


Hi Alisa, Sorry, was gone for the weekend. Motion to traverse is still in process, actually needs to be filed by end of THIS week. Motion is the next step, then it's full steam ahead for trial.


Sent on the Now Network from my Sprint® BlackBerry

Alisa

Subject:
info for traverse and dismissal
Date:
5/26/2009
From:

Reply To:


To:

Howard@Lieberlaw.com

Hi Howard,

Maybe we can do something like a co-counsel thing because I want to speed this up and I feel that the city attorney needs to be shown this and it needs to be dropped and perjury filed against Notaro. A year of just such bullshit and evil is way too much. I will file things and even do them with your okay ,if that's what it takes.

For the traverse or for a motion to dismiss:

Please, look at this. I've gone through every sentence and tried by best to make it clear , but basically these are the question that need to be asked and the discovery that needs to be provided immediately. Attach e-mail where I do all the work for him and he does nothing but hurt my case.


The rest I sent to you  in the lies file and the abestversions file. Please, send me the traverse motion before  you file it.



Subject:
no particular subject
Date:
5/28/2009
From:

Reply To:


To:

Howard@Lieberlaw.com

Hi Howard,
I really think this trial can last weeks if done right and I don't think you got paid enough for that so I really think that just papering them with valid discovery motions will make them realize that no jury will side with them. I really need to know what kind of "investigation" they still are doing or not doing because twice this week when I saw police cars right behind me I got paranoid and I never write e-mails without wondering if they are reading it.  From what I gathered, it looks like they have the power and rights(if not contested) to do anything to me when the are investigating stalking,  and discovery needs to be done to know the extent already.  Waxler said to the judge that granted the 2 new charges: "An investigation is being done on behalf of the LAPD and our office, ongoing, etc."
 I know you are busy but I  now believe that Notaro didn't even sign her restraining order or it was prepared by seivers before because they knew for a fact that the judge would grant it. The original is missing from the files, and two of the people don't live with her. Then, the domestic order crap was also apparently prepared way beforehand by her lawyer and it is just very wrong. I wasn't supposed to be there on that day and yet it's prepared already???
On those "technicalities"  alone I can't see how they think they can win. Please, call waxler and ask her about this investigation she mentioned and to get all discovery. I would love to but now am not allowed now.... also, getting handwriting samples from sievers and notaro would seem wise because there is something very fishy going on there. Please, also, show me the traverse before it's filed so I can make sure I told you all the relevant stuff.
 I will call you today,
Alisa
 the Schmidt discovery rules should be granted:
“… a party must show (1) the material sought is evidentiary and relevant; (2) the material sought is not otherwise reasonably procurable by the exercise of due diligence in advance of trial; (3) the moving party cannot properly prepare for trial without such production and the failure to obtain the materials sought may tend to unreasonably delay the trial; and (4) the application is made in good faith and in is not intended as a general fishing expedition.” (Ibid)  Considering the relevance of evidence, there is other case law that provides cause for appeal if the subpoena of and use of evidence by the defense at trial is prohibited by the court:
“Evidence concerning acts which are so closely and inextricably mixed up with the history of the guilty act itself as to form part of one chain of relevant circumstances is admissible.” People v. Olivias, 354 N.E. 2d 242, 41 Ill. App. 3d 146.

“For suppression of evidence to involve a violation of right to due process, it must be shown that he evidence was suppressed after a request for it by defendant, that the evidence was favorable to him and that it was material.” People v. Jordan, 69 Ill. Dec. 777, 448 N.E. 2d 237, 114 Ill. App. 3d 16, affirmed in part, reversed in part 82 Ill. Dec. 925, 469 N.E.2d 569, 103 Ill. 2 192, habeas corpus dismissed by U.S. ex rel. Jordan v. Detella, 1995 WL 76913.
 “Evidence having a natural tendency to establish the facts in controversy in a criminal prosecution should be admitted.” People v. Jenko, 102 N.E. 2d 783, 410 Ill. 478.

“Defendant is entitled to all reasonable opportunities to present evidence which might tend to create doubt as to his guilt.” People v. Johnson, 355 N.E. 2d 699, 42 Ill. App. 3d 425.It would be a violation of Defendant’s due process rights if she was denied the use of relevant evidence and witnesses pertaining to affirmative defenses which are material and favorable to the Defendant. The above case law suggests that a judge has the discretionary authority to order recalcitrant witnesses for the defense to come to court and submit to interview by defense counsel so that defendant may prepare defense, and even to order them to submit to interview by deposition.
 In a message dated 7/2/2009 3:22:51 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:
If you fear a trial than you just haven't digested that there is no way in hell they can present what they have to a judge much less a jury. . Look at the searches they've done when they supposedly had no warrant for AT and t and Aol or facebook or peer 1 network for anyone but me. Yet,  there are in all these accounts and they are desperate but they find nothing of value. All they have is there hope that I drop dead or leave the state! The longer this takes the better chance they think this could happen and that is all they can count on.

What happened with patricia brummer? how is that explained??  Where is that discovery. is it maybe very exculpatory and if why not why isn't there?


Just ask them that and see them crumble. Ask them what they mean by "my writing style' and how Gregozek "plans to link me" to those facebook posts. He cant and even if he could the jury would be ininspired and not see how Notaro's "hunch" made those warrants legal.Ask them for anything involving their investigation and what I sent them and see them collapse.What writing style and how would she know my writing style period???? Have them lay the foundation for that!  If rather than you preparing and filing any more motions you make them produce any of what they need to produce just by asking them on the phone,  they won't keep this up. Why? Because the potential costs are enormous and the press might find this interesting especially with what a mess California is in. In the end the only decision that really needs to be made is how much do they want to pay me and a lawyer down the road. The sooner the better for them, really.


 There is impeachment times 5 with some dates. I still haven't typed in Griffees because that is non stop impeachment squared plus. His testimony begets that of Mark Flanagan and that demands a whole new investigation(the bartender, the workers, the performers, the patrons) Missing Julius demands a new investigation as does patricia brummer, the new description by griffee that flanagan and he were both in back and up front on April 12, 2008.  Then, seccia is a fraud and clear perjury. Then, we haven't even gotten into the fact that in a sworn decleration involving the civil suit with my sister Notaro says she only met me for the first time in April of 2008. The violent push that got the restraiing order granted(if anything) is now said not only not to have happened but that she never if met me on that date. Do you see what I am getting at? And, we still haven't covered the other entities that conspired to let this get that far(improv, largo, what I saw online, city and lapd etc, judges, PD's office)

I told you in the beginning that i am indigent and let the prosecution take care of more investigation. You said you'd be happy to make that argument on my behalf.. Now that no doubt exists that the PD sold me out completely I think it's time for that argument-- I'll need a whole new invesigation and Julius and whitaker, and wolf and kroll and all those the investigator didn't try or just didn't get around to. plus a reinterview of all as the investigation is tainted.


This is my point: Let them figure out how to convict me and manage to deny me all my due process rights. Put them on the defensive.  Waxler is upset because she has no right pursuing this with the information she has and with those illegal affidavits . And those affidavits are completely illegal.

I'm concerned about statutes of limitations and witness availablity not to mention just the emotional toll of this and I have the right to more revenge on these corrupt idiots than calling them "bozos," and that's not guts or recklesness talking, that's me seeing the big picture at this time rather than later.




Howard never told me of any discovery given him in response to this form letter style discovery motion where he crossed out Stanislaus County and wrote in Los Angeles. 
And as far as I know or what I was given or what can be found in the file. 






June 17th 2009
As you will see these had to be ordered later. when Howard's began making too many statement that made us question all his other statement. Please note that in his email he said he'd filed the traverse motion a month after he first told me then two weeks after he told me it was had to be filed.

And though Howard for whatever reason was lying to me about when he filed the motion, he did indeed file it. 






















In a message dated 7/8/2009 12:24:00 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:
Howard,

I plan to be in court tomorrow but please send me the motion to dismiss before then.

Thanks,
Alisa

In a message dated 7/8/2009 12:33:30 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:



Ok, will email it to you later today

In a message dated 7/8/2009 6:44:44 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:

It's the end of the day. Can you please send it.



In a message dated 7/8/2009 6:58:06 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:



I will get it to you when I am able to., as my schedule permits.  Also, my partner jason lieber will be in court tomorrow. The city attorney sent me a 35 page opposition to our motion today. We have no choice but to request a continuance of the motion to properly research and respond. I will let you know the next court date by email tomorrow afternoon or evening.



In a message dated 7/8/2009 9:27:48 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:

You must have just gotten their 35 page motion this evening. Are they allowed to just send it to you a few hours before the hearing? Why would that stop you from sending the motion to dimiss you
promised in a previous e-mail?


In a message dated 7/8/2009 9:32:57 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:



I did get the motion this evening. They are not permitted to send it to me the night before, it leaves us unprepared. That is why we are entitled to a continuance. Regarding the motion I promised; you are not my only client. Other things come up. If there was some reason the motion needed to be completed this evening other than a desire to have and read it tonight, such as a court-imposed deadline, it would have been done. There was not so it is not


In a message dated 7/8/2009 10:28:35 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:


So is your partner not going to say something to the judge that she had no right to send you this 35 page motion this evening? Sanctions?  I could talk to the judge and Waxler and make it clear that such tactics are unacceptable. It seems a wasted opportunity in that she was complaining about it going on so long.



In a message dated 7/8/2009 10:34:14 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:






As long as I represent you, you will never speak to the judge and will only speak to the prosecutor during cross-examination. Sanctions are not an appropriate remedy for filing a late motion under these circumstances - a continuance is the only remedy. Have a nice evening. I will update you on progress tomorrow by email


July 9th 2009


And the next morning me and my sister decided we finally had to face the fact that Howard was screwing us. he spoke of all these motions but wouldn't send it to us. He spoke  of a 40 pg motion delivered by fax and how he now could not be ready to fight it. Now his partner was going to court not him. He'd never told me about his partneer comign to court.   It would require a month continuance? And he wouldn't send the motion to dismiss, the motion to traverse, he wouldn't send any discovery, and he ......


So we felt we had to go and see what was up ?Was he telling us pure lies? And if so..... why? My sister had a hard time waking up so early, but I didn't  rush her too much . I'd always waited there all da or many hours to so I figured if we were a little over 9.A.M We'd make it in time. So we drove down to the downtown courthouse which we'd taken to calling Clara Foltz, cause it sounded more amusing,

We got there about 9:50 and when we walked into court someone told us that our case had already been called.

Oh well... let's not make this a total waste of a trip . Let's look at the court minutes, and the court file. see if he filed anything at all.  See if the minutes say that ths prosecution even filed an opposition Might as well ask them to print the minutes to all the dates Howard was on the case.












 No traverse motion filed.  No motion to dismiss. No motion of any kind. No wonder he couldn't send one page of discovery when I knew there had to be plenty. We were creeped out. I remember feeling  creeped out in a unique way. I remember those feelings as I type,

 What was going on ? we didn't  want to tell Howard Howard he was busted. Let him just keep lying so we'd have  a record.

In a message dated 7/9/2009 1:54:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz write


So is your partner not going to say something to the judge that she had no right to send you this 35 page motion this evening? Sanctions?  I could talk to the judge and Waxler and make it clear that such tactics are unacceptable. It seems a wasted opportunity in that she was complaining about it going on so long.

(But Howard wasn't responding - not with the truth  or more lies

By eight PM it wasn't getting ridiculous . This HOward bastard wasn't returning calsl and so I drroped him anothe remail)

In a message dated 7/9/2009 8:11:45 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:

Where is the motion and the information on what happened in court today?

In a message dated 7/9/2009 9:35:03 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes: 


Today in court the City Attorney gave us yet additional evidence that you or someone in your household has been contacting Tig Notaro.  City prosecutor Jennifer Waxler presented that evidence to the judge along with the emails that you sent dirctly to her.  As a result, the judge wanted to issue a warrant for your arrest.  Despite these extremely difficult circumstances, my law partner was able to persuade the judge to not issue the warrant today, but it was a very close call.  However, the Judge set the case for pretrial conference, Motion to Traverse, and hearing to consider raising bail, on the next court date, which is August 4, 2009 at 8:30 a.m. in Dept. 40 of the Central Criminal Building at 210 W. Temple Street downtown (same court as before).  YOU ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR AT THAT DATE AND TIME.  There is a chance that the Judge will raise bail at that time and, if you are not ready to post bail, will take you into custody.  We will use our best efforts, as we did today, to persuade the Judge not to do this, but there is no way to guarantee that she will not.  One thing is for SURE: if you or any member of your family emails, sends a facebook message or post, or in any other way contacts, directly or indirectly, Tig Notaro, you WILL be taken into custody.  Only if there is absolutely NO contact between you (or your family) and Tig Notaro and/or the City Attorney will we have any chance of keeping bail set at the same level or prevent you from being taken into custody.

Additionally, the trial date, which will not change at any time in the future, will be September 1, 2009.  It should be noted that if Tig Notaro is contacted further and you are taken into custody as a result, it is conceivable that you could be in custody for the entire period between the next court date (August 4) and the end of trial (approximately 3-4 court days after September 1).  Please do not risk this happening.  DO NOT contact Tig Notaro. Tell your family members to NOT contact Tig Notaro, and, for the love of God, DO NOT email prosecutor Jennifer Waxler or any member of the City Attorney's office or, for that matter, anyone involved in this case except for me.  That would include members of the LAPD or judges or basically anyone who is even aware that your case exists besides me.

I cannot send the discovery motion that I filed in April because I am on the road and do not have a copy with me, however I will send it to you when I return on Monday.

I will send you the City Attorney's response to our Motion to Traverse in a separate email.

Regards,
Howard


In a message dated 7/9/2009 9:42:24 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:
Attached is the City Attorney's Opposition to Our Motion to Traverse the Warrant

In a message dated 7/10/2009 11:04:58 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:
I am visting family this weekend and can't even get into anything right now. Will call you Monday.
 Hi Howard,

I need to know what happened in more detail. You are saying that there is "yet more evidence" that I am contacting this Notaro . Where are you getting this and what did they possibly present. No one in my home has contacted her and I need to see what they are presenting as you call "yet more evidence"''

. I don't understand at all what this bail things is about-- please explain. What should I expect in August.

I tell a lot of people about the case  but I promise not to talk to anyone that you mention. If they were ready to arrest me on Thursday is there new charges and if not why not if there is this supposed contact with notaro.

Much more to discuss but please answer these questions very soon!

thanks,
Alisa





A judge was threatening to jail me? Howard and his partners had to put up a fight to keep me from being remanded to jail? I was contacting Notaro AGAIN. All cap commands and talk of Bail. Talk of a trial date that could not be changed?!




In not only had never contacted Notaro post April 8th 008.... and the facebook posting was an obvious bit of insane bullshit. No evidenc eof me or even my sister "contacting notaro in any way .my sister, no one had. Howard was n't doing his job and to CYA he was turning me into tnot the victim of a commandeered system where he couldn't wait to paper them and then sue them.... I was to be turned into a guilty party to cover up for the fact that now 5 months had passed since he got paid 4k for a misdememdanor case and not one motion was field.


He talked of that 32 page motion. Where was it . I wanted to see what necessitated a longer than one month continuance and I really wanted to see what evidence this proseuction had presented for him to write me such an insane letter.

n a message dated 7/13/2009 9:25:14 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:

Howard,

  What do you think of their opposition motion? Plus, I want to know how they responded to your filed discovery motion and to see it?

I need to know this immediately and it's only fair that I am given this information. Please respond ASAP.

Thanks,
Alisa

In a message dated 7/13/2009 10:06:30 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:

Hi Alisa. I will respond ASAP, which will be when I'm back in the office later 2day

In a message dated 7/13/2009 3:51:54 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:

Please, give me a time. This, obviously, is important.



In a message dated 7/13/2009 4:50:08 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:




Attached please find the additional evidence that the City Attorney presented to us in court on Thursday.  Someone obviously connected with your side of this case has been posting on Tig Notaro's account once again.  Please take a look at these documents and have a serious talk with members of your family.




Attached “evidence<” spitzburg documents.

In a message dated 7/14/2009 10:27:46 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:

What are you talking about "additional evidence." You have never discussed any previous "evidence."  Why are you using language like "once again." Do you realize that you are inventing evidence and I haven't heard any denials about you lying over and over again about motions that were never filed. Too many lies and misdemeanors to mention, really.  Your fidicuary duty was not with your client and that is very bad. You have a duty to show this supposed "evidence" and  if you do not send it there is a promise(not a "threat") that all legal measures will be taken to expose what you have done.

Please, send this "additional evidence" at once  and then file a motion  to get off the case. I will do everything in my power to have the unearned fee returned ,and the fact that you stole 4 months and in many senses have obstructed justice is not something that you should expect to go away.

I see you are posting on craiglist and if amends are not forthcoming than I will try to help the public in avoiding being duped by you or your lawfirm. It's the right thing to do when you have a conscience.

My; sister told that "partner" that she'll call the police and he knows that and that is not a threat. It's a promise and you trying to make me appear "threatening" in light of what your role is -- is beyond disgusting. My sister by all rights can report your misdemeanors to the authorities and you trying to characterize that as "threats" is transparent and no jury will tolerate it. I've concluded that sociopaths are not too smart and wrongly presume that everyone is the same. Some victims are very smart and then the sociopath is out of luck.

Please return my files and supply me with any documents you are now saying were not supplied as is the law.

In a message dated 7/14/2009 12:39:08 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:




Additional evidence meant "in addition to the previous evidence of a posting/email to Tig Notaro that ultimately became the basis for counts 2 and 3 in your criminal case."  That "additional evidence" was the two messages that were attached to the email I sent you at 4:50 p.m. yesterday.

I don't know what you are referring to when you said "supply me with any documents you are now saying were not supplied." Please clarify.

My motion to withdraw from the case will be filed shortly.  I will send you a copy and give you notice of the date it will be heard.

In a message dated 7/14/2009 1:01:23 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:



You actually said that it wasn't "evidence". Strange to change your tune in an attempt to collect the money for much worse than nothing.

. Filing that substitution motion will be the first motion you filed and I wonder how the judge (or jury )will feel about that.  I'll be at that hearing as will the e-mails and the unfiled motions.

As for additional documents you suddenly and very strangely started to say "once again" "even more evidence" has come up after telling me on many occasions that there was no evidence. Any reasonable person would deduce that you were somehow in possession of things you didn't share with me or that you were trying to scare me after months of bullshit. The jig is up. You are a con man and your con was so sloppy and your behavior when caught is, I guess, predictable when dealing with a bozo like you.

See you in court.

In a message dated 7/15/2009 8:52:10 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:



You need to file that motion immediately. I want the hearing on record and then I want to be able to compel discovery and really file a traverse.  You have stolen enough already and you need to get off this case so I can start up again where you stalled me.

In a message dated 7/15/2009 11:17:32 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:


will be filing the motion to withdraw from your case presently.  I hope to have it filed by tomorrow or Friday at the latest.

I do not know what you are talking about when you say I have not filed any motions.  Upon entering the case I filed a discovery request and then filed a Motion to Traverse the Warrant.  You received a copy of not only my Motion to Traverse, but also the City Attorney's Opposition, so any information you are relying on in claiming that I did not file any motions is clearly erroneous.

In a message dated 7/15/2009 12:37:49 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:

Howard,

After days of confirming and reconfirming I had to come to terms that you did not file any motions but only stipulated or asked for continuances and that something is very wrong.  Then, with the bail hearing(that too is not in the docket.) If you can show that the clerk simply didn't file any of  motions and did not set the hearing you claimed was on 7/09/-09 and   that this traverse hearing is also not set for next month  or that the city attorney is failing to file the motions( that must be 15 pages or less and that can't be sent by fax after 5 o' clock and that must be delivered 5 days before the hearing, )than that would be great. If this is all due to some very inept  clerk than there is still is the problem of why you'd let her fax an opposition after 5 p.m the day before the hearing and have it be over 15 pages etc and why you would threaten me with jail based on things that have nothing to do with me and call it "obvious." That is not how any advocate would act.


In a message dated 7/17/2009 12:15:13 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:


Please send the filed withdrawal and time of hearing.

In a message dated 7/17/2009 5:22:06 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:


Mr. Williams,

How much malpractice do you think you can get away with? I need you to withdraw so I can resolve this matter. You have stolen my money and my time and caused great emotional distress. The jury will hear this and they will find you more disturbing than tig. I have clear evidence of you committing misdemeanors here and you need to set that hearing for your withdrawal at once .

Alisa



In a message dated 7/17/2009 7:28:22 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:




If you are going to be present at the court hearing to consent to my withdrawal from your case, then there should be no need for a motion.  Instead, I will go into court on Monday and ask the court clerk to put your case on for a date for  me to withdraw in advance of August 4th.  Right now I plan on asking for Thursday, July 23, at 8:30 a.m. in Dept. 40 if the court clerk tells me that date is available.

On Monday, I will inform you of the court date that the clerk gives us.

In a message dated 7/18/2009 1:27:11 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:



Well, I plan to not consent to your withdrawal, actually. I plan to have a hearing so as to put everything on the record and preserve it all for appeal. So, you need to get that motion and that hearing immediately. I will go in on Monday and ask for judicial notice or whatever it takes to get you off the case with the utmost scrutiny from as many onlookers as possible. Your promise to do it by Friday is noted. I know that you feel that the bar is a joke and you can get away with a lot, but I assure you that in this case you won't  and I assure you that I will take all legal measures to try my best to warn others of you and your firm. Still  as you are still on the lawyer of record, I would like you to hear more about what you say happened on July 9th and how the judge wanted an arrest warrant issued and how Leiber went about fighting it. It is imperative that you do so because I am very curious as to why the judge would want that based on some new lie and why you would say that "somebody on your side of the case obviously did it."  What kind of lawyering is that?
Your promises to withdraw by Friday at the latest are noted and your as is your "plan" to have it heard by the 23rd.

Try and have a great weekend beforehand.

In a message dated 7/18/2009 6:07:21 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:


Firing me and/or wanting me off the case is the same as consenting to my withdrawal. If you are firing me and/or you want me off the case then there should be no need for a motion. At the hearing, the judge will ask you if you want me to continue to represent you. If you say "no," then there's no need for a motion. If you say "yes," then there is. If you are planning to say "yes," then I'll have to file a motion Monday. But I'm assuming you are going to say "no," correct? Sent on the Now Network from my Sprint® BlackBerry




In a message dated 7/18/2009 8:05:11 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:


You threatened to quit after being questioned about what I discovered on July 9th. and I agreed for you to quit as I need to file motions and be able to finally try to get discovery after all this time.  So, I need you to file the motion to withdraw already and I plan to contest it in the sense that I wasn't left a choice after what I found out. So, yes,eventually the judge will let you loose, I'm sure, but I want the court to know what you did for your retainer, what you said you did e

 In a message dated 7/20/2009 9:53:56 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:

It is not right that I should not be told what you plan to do and when. You have left evidence of your defrauding me and I don't see how you think this something you can ignore. I have motions to file and the clerk might not take them as you are listed as the attorney. You obviously did a terrible thing and should attempt to make amends. You need to go to that court and get a hearing and you need tell me what is going on because it is more malpractice to continue evading me and causing me even more delay. I do not need a lawyer(as told by leiber) to get my files  etc and I want them all immediately.

  In a message dated 7/20/2009 4:00:23 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:



Per your request, I filed my Motion to Withdraw today in Dept. 40 downtown.  A copy is attached.

The first date the Court had available was Wednesday, July 29, 2009, at 8:30 a.m. in Dept. 40 of the Central Criminal Building at 210 West Temple St, Los Angeles, CA 90012 (5th floor).  I will see you there.

Let me know (via email) if you have additional questions, which I will be happy to answer while I am still attorney of record.

Attached motion to withdraw

In a message dated 7/22/2009 10:35:45 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:


II have written up an opposition to your motion to withdraw and I've included all the e-mails from April 1st to the present as an attachment.

Since you are attorney of record do you file this opposition motion and send it to the interested parties or do I?

n a message dated 7/20/2009 4:00:23 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:
Per your request, I filed my Motion to Withdraw today in Dept. 40 downtown.  A copy is attached.

The first date the Court had available was Wednesday, July 29, 2009, at 8:30 a.m. in Dept. 40 of the Central Criminal Building at 210 West Temple St, Los Angeles, CA 90012 (5th floor).  I will see you there.

Let me know (via email) if you have additional questions, which I will be happy to answer while I am still attorney of record.

In a message dated 7/22/2009 11:48:07 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:
Since I'm still the attorney of record, I should advise you that if you are going to file an opposition that contains emails between us, you are waiving your attorney/client privilege with regard to those emails and the context/circumstances in which they were sent.  Also, you are revealing to the court and the City Attorney important strategies that we discussed about your case.  This is a really bad idea, especially when you consider that the Court is not likely to be interested in any of that.  Instead, the Court will likely focus on a single question, i.e., do you want me to be your attorney anymore or not?  If you do, then those emails are not relevant.  If you do not, those emails are not relevant.  To give away privileged communications and case strategy for what amounts to no reason simply doesn't make sense and works against your interest.

If you still want the opposition filed, you'll have to file it.

Regards,

In a message dated 7/22/2009 1:32:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:
I'm tired of your doubletalk.  If as you say the judge doesn't care about all the e-mails and what they contain then you have nothing to worry about. I would like the judge to tell me what to do in such a situation  where I am forced to go pro per because of your malpractice etc. Surely this can't be acceptable, and I just wanted to make sure I can file the opposition myself.

See you on the 29th.


In a message dated 7/24/2009 8:34:06 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:



Mr. Williams,


Please provide a detailed accounting of what the retainer was spent on and the stamped copies of the motions you and Stanley Lieber said  have said you filed in April and June of 2009. Also, please return to me all the documents I gave you to you in between March 31st and July 24th 2009.

Please also inform me of what legal basis there would be for a Bail hearing to take place on the fourth of August, and what Jason Lieber did to halt the issuance of an arrest warrant July 9th as well as an explanation for your statements in an e-mail that day that assert that "it is obvious...."  Also, please explain why if indeed you or the city attorney filed documents they were not filed or noticed in a  timely fashion and then tell me  when my opposition to your motion to withdraw would be considered timely filed and served.

.Thanks in advance,
Alisa Spitzberg
 In a message dated 7/25/2009 10:37:41 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:
Per our retainer agreement, the fixed retainer fee was deemed earned upon payment to the firm.

The legal basis for a bail hearing is that the Court is allowed to raise bail upon a showing that it is in the public interest or victim's interest to raise it.  This usually, but not necessarily, happens when the prosecutor files new charges.  In your case, the prosecutor has not yet filed new charges, but could.  If she does, the judge may raise your bail.

Additionally, a Judge can take a defendant into custody upon a showing that the defendant has violated the conditions of bail, e.g., contacted the victim when ordered not to.  I'm not saying that happened in your case, but the Judge or prosecutor might believe it happened, and, on that basis, may argue that you should be taken into custody.  This suggestion is what we argued against at the last court hearing.

You can file your opposition on the 29th and I will not argue that it was untimely.

I will return your documents when I see you on the 29th.  Included in the file will be stamped copies of the motions I filed.


In a message dated 7/30/2009 12:31:26 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, Alisaspitz writes:


Howie,

Amazing that you were wishing the prosecutor good luck against me and giggling like a schoolgirl with her.  I hope there is  video camera because that is incredible and suggests even more than I'd even suspected. And, just so you know you didn't hand over discovery to me still- there must be more about the patricia brummer thing that you never mentioned to me as you never mentioned the new discovery at all.

And, since you seemed on bizarrely friendly terms with the prosecutor (when there was zero reason to talk to her as you did  after you withdrew) than I want all notes relating to your correspondence at once.

 Also, I seemed to have left the vast majority of the e-mails in the car and will hand them to the judge(as an attachment to the "opposition") either today or tomorrow, so that will be interesting.

Since you have put me in such rough straits I will make you one offer  at settlement before suing you in unlimited civil court and reporting you and your firm to the bar and all relevant consumer organizations (ie, ripoff report, better business beaureu etc)
You return the retainer plus an additional thousand so I can obtain other counsel and for the pain and suffering and further hardship you've caused. If you do not reply within the next 24 hours I will begin the proceedings and let a jury decide.


our dwindling money would have to take another hit. I had to order the transcripts. Why would any judge want to rememe. Why had Hoard write me such a bizzarere accustatory letter.


You saw the May 14th and June 17th ones I"ll paste them again for context









As far as April 09 went, that was it until trial was over and I found this there. I still can't make sense of what Bernie Brown was up to on April 6th of 09.






But at the time I did not no 
Let's stick to the minutes , must find page 5 but here are the trancripts of those dates
pg 5
Page 5- can't find page five of minutes. will though.. just takes a little extra word . gonna insert this from another post for the time being-
I'll just say that April 16th 2009 was the day the prosecution got Howard William's shoddy form discovery motion and May 14th consisted of promises and promises and lies and lies told to me by Howard by email.
But otherwise April and May of 2009 were the least eventful months of case 8CA10541
Am still searching for page five of the minutes because they are relevant for not what is listed there, but for what is missing from them.
But here is the transcript of the May 14th and June 17th pretrials
June 17th 2009
Out of court I'd just had what I considered to be a very interesting experience. For reasons I can't recall I'd ordered some documents from Yaad Vashem and was intrigued with what I saw. These letters somewhat document the experience but in short a mystery of my mother's experience in the Holocaust was solved. You see, she'd always told us or anyone who asked that she was liberated by the Americans and she recalled a filmic scene of a train stopping and three American soldiers rescuing her and all on the train. But I'd also learned along the way that Bergen Belsen was liberated by the British. My mother is no liar and no fabulist and my uncle and grandmother all confirmed that the Americans rescued them from a cattlecar etc.
And now this came in the mail 
insert emails with Frank Towers and how learned about Farleslaben death train.
and so there's this lovely meeting get together thing that I know I could have gone to had it not been for this unending nightmare
And now Howard is not coming through at all and now it is nearly a year in and
so I wrote these letters to two people that deserved prison for their crimes -




THE TRAVERSE MOTION
As these emails from Howard L. Williams would indicate Howard was promising to "paper" the prosecution and was acting as if somone other than myself would look after my interests.
He spoke of the first step- the filing of a traverse motion. He told me it was filed on May 14th 2008 but then he changed the subject when I asked him about it. After beign so gungo ho at that meeting the minute he cashed the check for four thousand dollars, Williams became evasive or uncommunicative after writing this letter.-In a message dated 4/13/2009 4:20:17 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, howard@lieberlaw.com writes:
Hi Alisa,

I understand your frustration, I really do.  These people are obviously commandeering the justice system for their own petty purposes and it needs to stop.  Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that the system knows it's being commandeered, and it comes down to your word against hers and the DA and cop who inexplicably believe her.  
I will walk in on the 16th a motion, probably the Pitchess and the discovery motion.  I will bring the motion to dismiss once we complete those motions, as we will perhaps have more information to support the dismissal at that point.  In fact, I foresee bringing the motion to dismiss on multiple occasions before and during trial.

As far as depositions are concerned, we're going to have to wait on that.  We are not entitled to a deposition in a criminal proceeding, only to have her on the stand to confront and cross-examine at the trial.  The deposition is for the civil suit, which must necessarily happen after the criminal case is over



Then all communcations with Howard Williams seem relevant to show  that I was not he difficult client they soon would retend to be the case





From: Alisaspitz@aol.comDate: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 11:28:19 EDTTo
Subject: protective order, trancript of trial,trancript with commentary
HI Mr. Williams,
I decided that I'm going to mail you everything today because I'm feeling that the scanning is taking too long. I'll just send you things that are in microsoft word or things I don't have copies of for now and send the rest by regular mail.

1- the dv order
2- the transcript-some of it got deleted by accident and I put it back verbaitim so any problem is format related.
3- transcript with our comments- Done a long time ago, just a small sample of what's wrong with the "hearing." Discovered more along the way and please note that my sister was removed before I testified for no apparent reason and the way the judge makes  non stop leading question sand just put in the word "They" in find, and see how they are not even differentiating between my sister and me etc.





No pitchess. no discovery motion that we knew of. no motion to dismiss.
But we still had hope.
How his representation failed us and how the prosecution tried and succeeded to exploit this is extremely complex but I will try to explain it..
insert all the emails that go to explaining what went wrong




Let's break into down in the seperate days
Let's break that down  
And though the minutes don't reflect the filing (and then the scheduled hearing) later on I would find this 
What would happen between these dates is best presented by the emails between me and Howard Williams
So Howard couldn't prepare cause he got a 34 page motion? This is the motion with the same old search warrants that were the search warrants in question attached,
Note as Howard alleged they were faxed after work hours on the night before the hearing






And we know that the prosecution got in in a timely manner - on the same date it was filed 



Inserts Howard' letters



And something else was happening during Howard Williams's representation


Gregozek was taking impossible to fully understand measures to satisfy Nick Kroll and Marty Singer



Later we'd find this in the court file. Again, never given to me by any public defender or private lawyer.
cleared by arrest - Kelly Boyer added four more charges based on this? There can be no dispute that Boyer never added a sing charge  Well that is what judges would be seeing .....





so now they have discovered what?








So instead of taking an measures in response to the ridiculously "untimely motion" by the prosecution Howard not only didn't fight it but didn't even come to court.


This is what the minutes will say and please note how once again they do not reflect what is going oion the courtroom. This time, they omit any mention of the filing or setting of the hearing or the vacating of any date for the hearing. This omission would cause a massive problem for me, as you will shortly see.








Case called for pretrial hearing but as the transcript show Mary Lou Villar believed there to be a hearing and then she will actually set a hearing and once again the minutes of her court would not reflect what transcripts would confirm occurred
You had the prosecutors in once corner. You had the defense attorneys in another. A judge in the middle.

For the state - Jennifer Waxler.
 For the defense- Jason Leiber standing in for Howard Williams, without notice to me that this would be the case.

In the middle- Judge Mary Lou Villar (newly appointed by Schwarzenegger judge and Anthony Villargrossa's sister)


Image result for mary lou villar

The non hearing in black and white. Two unrecorded sidebars included.




























As you can see see I wasn't there but the record doesn't show that me and my sister were on our way to the court to see what was going on. We got caught in some accident related traffic and by the time we arrived at 9:55 we went into court and were told the matter was over. Since I didn't trust Howard Williams at this point and I told my sister that we should get the minutes. We did and Aha busted Howard had been lying all along about even this motion.


So I was done with him and devastated. He was worse than the public defender, and we had no  money and this letter was a big joke. It was now June 17th 2009. I'd paid him on by March 30th and now three onths later and nothing on a misdemeanor


He'd promised to tell me what went on in court but t was later already and he ddn't get back.


late that night he did get back with this





And since I knew that no one had any contact with this notaro maniac I demanded he sent me the "eveidene" that had now compelled him to write me something like that

take that in...

Guess what, readers, that is no possible for many reasons...

1) we had no idea who "Tig Notaro" was in 2005.
2)We have never remotely gone on a stat counter discussion forum and my sister would not use the name lauren d
3)and are we to assume that we were then fans of Notaro who uh uh... thought we'd get our uh compliment across on a stat counter message board? IN 2005?
4)VERY IMPORTANLY we lived in Austin Texas in 2005 or NY and how would they trace any ip adress. it certainly wasn' the IP of our L.A computer.
5) This is insane... Jennifer Waxler saw fit to delete whatever this Lauren D said on some computer message board that someone was used to transmit illegal messages8
6) of course no one transmitted messages to Notaro but had they in 2005... was there a restraining order in place?
7)Why on earth, on this date, was Jennifer Waxler and Felise Kalpakian with the help of John Gregozek trying to defraud the Mayor's sister some more. They already had defrauded her plenty and would do it againt
7) please ask yourself what became of this and please ask yourself if any of this was put on any record except for the transcript I had to pay plenty of money for.
8)their is no dispute that we had no idea who Notaro was before 2007 and there is not dispute that no orders of any kind existed and there is no dispute that the ip we see there is not our and in no way could be our... And it is not in dispute that my sister's name is Lauren and her middle name is Joy and her last name starts with S....


Take in the fact that Gregozek is clearly falsifying documents that make no sense even. What sort of plausible deniability Waxler can theoretically claim is more confusing than with John Gregozek,
 because she would confirm to the judge on the record(who knows what she'd say in another of those illegal ex parte unrecorded sidebars- that the ip matched up to our house.. Was she told this by Gregozek, and bought it without thought, or did she knowingly lie and lie to the court, in order to terrorize me again with fake allegations and threats of jail as retaliation for me not taking their plea bargains and for my sister filing a lawsuit a month before? A lawsuit where Mathilde "Tig" Notaro was represented by Allison Hart Siever of Marty Singer's infamous, Lavely and Singer.




And since I knew there could e no evidence of any of us contacting her I urged me to send us what the prosecution had possibly shown him or anyone - for me to get such a letter from him... judges intent on jailing me. evidence presented that woudl lead to him to write such a thing....












note the date ... on top of the docket pages related to Howard Williams and Leiber and Leiber's representation -








There is so much wrong with these "Lauren D" documents, that it hurts.

This is the allegation that someone with the screen name "Lauren D" in the year 2005 was was telling notaro on a discussion board this . " me and my sister saw yoru show...." In 2005 I had not heard or Notaro nor did my sister and on top of not hearing about her we sure weren't restraininger from her about  2 years before I'd ever heard the name "Tig Notaro" my sister lauren Joy spitzberg was what.... haunting a stat counter, They matched Ip's to a communication made years before? That is fraud of the ugliest order. Note there never was a hearing on this and no hearing dae was set according to the minute order, which does indicate complicity with the Judge and Clerk in that court.






NOTE how there is no mention of any cancelled hearing or anything to do with the August 4th 2009 hearing that Judge Villar was kind enough to schedule instead of having me jailed for no good reason?



Let's look at those dates separately


Here's June 17th 2009 - Again, something has gone missing from the minutes:



Why is this not mentioned?



The filing dates always come out too light so let's blow that up








So a motion is filed on June 17th 2009 and set for hearing on July 09 2009


But the minutes picked up a little more than a year later still don't reflect either reality: Refer to page 6 and 7 to see. Here's the rest of that motion.




















And here we can see that the city attorney prosecutors did receive this motion.








Howard's letters to me
And after I demanded to see cause Howard was just lying non stop at that point,
He send me this 34 page motion -






There is a little bt more on a fourth page but I'm still looking for it but till tell SUFFICE it to say that Howard William's characterization of it as a 34 page motion is insane. The illegal and malicous search warrant contituted the other 29 pages and williams should have been well awared of that since he had been on this misdemeanor case for nearly five months
Soon after Kelly Boyer took no action based on what Gregozek was trying to sell her, Gregozek was back in action doing things that again led to no evidence of any crime on anyones part- And this time Gregozek had the known to be dirty prosecutors Jennifer Waxler and Felise Kalpakian ready to do his dirty work(with the assistance of a Bernie Brown who I later would be told had a bad reputation)
Here again Gregozek would draft and submit a report that was unsigned by any supervisor and one that again would state that Kelly Boyer had added four charges based on what he was presenting. 
It could be that he just left that in by accident but imagine that when certain judges saw this. We know Maria Stratton was given these- wow now it's 9 charges. This is one active criminal who ..... never had her bail raised from OR(Own Recognizance) Later Villar and Judge Maria Stratton would state on the record that I was facing "serious and significant charges" and it could be that these many(there are more) "Supplemental's declaring that Boyer was adding four more charges over and over again, month after month, succeeding in imparting the impression that on these judges that I was one prolific restraining order breaker. I can't be sure but it couldn't have helped.
but I didn't believe him because by then he couldn't be believed. ( insert emails and other evidence)
Insert emails with Howard and how he told me that he got a 34 page motion that night but how at this point I had good reason to not trust anything he told me. eventually, he'd send me this and I'd see that he was telling half of the truth. It was barely four pages but it was sent to him after business hours the night before the hearing.










Next hearing as we saw was to be August 4th 2009-  Because Mary Lou Villar (Delongoria) had came up with that idea after being presented with the incredibly uncredible "Lauren D" Evidence, she did not submit to the prosecutions request to have me remanded based on clearly fabricated and egregiously nonsensical documents from an internet forum - where the crime in question and the crime that demands I be dragged to jail is this -
July 29th 2009- letters to Howard Williams. no clarification. sense that he not only didn't do as promised but had not even filed the traverse motion(due to the strange omissions in the minutes and him making no effort to clear anything up.)
He files a moton to withdraw  but then it hits me that they will use this against me and I need to have the record reflect why he would withrdraw, I don't know why it couldn't wait till August 4th 2008 but I know that the minutes don't reflect anything about a hearing set by Mary Lou Villar that would require the prosecution to present real evidence to convince Villar that I had to be hauled off to jail.
So what would happen to that August 4th meeting? Mentioned here: insert page of transcript where hearing set-









July 28th 2009


Walxler had told Judge Villar that Gregozek was on vacation. She'd told him that when Eric Leibe had  mentioned that they would like to get Gregozek on the stand. But I actually saw Gregozek outisde my apartment that day. Tell story...






























July 29th 2009
put motions and opposition motion and talk abotu how villar said, " it just means you can't get along with your lawyer. Talk about how Howard Williams was hanging out with prosecution and giggling and looking my way. and how at the end he came and said it's my professional duty to tell you that they are offering you a plea of "informal diversion" and how I told him, " stick it up your ass, howard and then take it out and give it to them and tell them to stick it in their asses.
Only much later - after March 23rd 2010- would these be put in the court files - 


these judges notes ad upon first glance. nothing terribly important but when looking closer..... let's make the first step in what would be come a stalin era type conspiracy a little clearer-
This is what I read- defense attorney says not going to declare doubt . Threats to M Waxler. H only- Can't make sense of the others words- will grave d close
 cy CA CA underline
9/1/9 trial date and then Motion to Traverse double underline by judge Mary Lou Villar (Delongoria)
So instead of preparing for a hearing, where Judge Villar requested a link to me and having to prove that indeed they found even that this Lauren D screename was trying to uh chat up this Tig Notaro n a computer related message board in the year TWO THOUSAND and FIVE and now being challenged by me that their CHARGES DON"T MAKE ANY SENSE. In that hearing Judge Villar was told that this 2005 communication with notaro on a stat counter messageboard matched up to my IP. This is a complete and insane lie. Jennifer waxler is flat out lying. And no such hearing would ever take place because I was fighting back too hard and they weren't yet sure how feckless and lousy Howard Williams was. Had anyone even made an concerted GLANCE at this Lauren D bullshit.....Only I would.
Jennifer Waxler and company has decided to win at all costs - derail any trial- in the most sinister and dirty way imaginable- In Howards Defense- he was beyond incompetent and beyond a lousy and uncaring lawyer but he wouldn't go that far.
Of course I had no clue and was given no clue by Howard WIlliams or anyone involved as to what the prosecution was plotting.
And they were suddenly writing all sorts of "Supplementals" to what.... to hand over to judge ? The end game will become clear soon.
 wouldn't let me set for hearing.... told me too busy and to call her the next day. did and she kept puttig me off- too busy call the next day
Again, much later on we'd learn that the Elite Detectives at the Threat Management Unit were hot on my tail .... or something similar. They wanted me charged and remanded and searched and .... anything
And now Hoffman was entrusted with that plan


v




Called Susan rios to find out what would be happening on August 12th 2008 and she said that the prosecutor still had time to respond I told her well then wouldn't it be wise to set a date and just vacate august 12th 2009 cause it would be a waste of time for all involved.. She seemed to get some order from behind her and sad, You need to come in it will be a "scheduling hearing.. we'll schedule all your motions" Schedule not hear and we'd find a post it that would confirm this but here's a strange form of confirmation in the transcripts of that day .
Martinez-- no scheduled hearing as witnesses by transcripts and then the minutes though the minutes are not reliable in this case
Big problem, reader. Motions were filed by men but they  were  not put on the record and not set for hearing . 
What will happen next is as kangaroo as it gets 
pg 2






pg 6  


































Talk about what happened and how Felise Cohen Kalpakian told me it was an evidentiary hearing and so I did't need to be advised of it.
Show minutes and how no motions were set to be heard. 
Send me back to Jessner- the judge who gave them exigent circumstance search warrants without any law or probable cause to have regular 




































Something else was drafted up that day
September3rd 2009
Filed all the motions I could manage in this time span - motion to have 2 doctors etc.


Go to the mental health court and the judge says that since Judge Jessner failed to appoint counsel - I had to go back to the criminal court


 Enter Judge Karla Karla Kerlin-




No sight of Mary Lou Villar. No Jessner. And she was smiling this new judge.  Karla Kerlin. Maybe this judge with the kind smile and the alliterative name would be the one to make it all right.























What really happened at that unrecorded sidebar?
So they wised up. Jessner gave an order to put a stop to this ..... this what?
Boags. Let's talk about Martin Boags, son of Judge Charles Boags and the boy that got his father unbenched cause he wanted to be popular at Bevery Hills High - insert Martin Baogs links and explain his behavior on August 12th and September 8th




Well, Martin Boags was supposed to be on vacation or maybe he found this out out before vacation-
 



















Fed Ex man comes to the door. Motion in the mail at approximately 8 pm at night - on October 1st 2009- the night  before pretrial Martin Boags,, 








And he was saying that Karla Kerlin didn't know the law and had no right to cancel their competency scheme on word from Judge Jessners court- And he created discussions at sidebar that never occurred.
and I thought we'd go in there and she'd be angry at him but instead Karla Kerlin was glaring at me from the bench 



Well that's a little levity when dealing with Karla Kerlin. She was on a judge's  bench and she was glaring at me and smiling sweetly at the "good guy" Mary Boags
and she was immediately ordering me to another court(can't find page 5)
And as her notes show- With a few fancy words she was ordering me ........to you will see.
 Dept 51 - Forthwith to Judge Vanderet
And as her notes show- With a few fancy words - Fortwith etc words she was ordering me ........to ....you will see.  
vanderet Transcript






But as you saw I wanted Witnesses this time..... I knew by now the empty courtroom thing wasn't right.. So I went to Ginsburg and said get me a witness please and she got me someone. That would be the first time I laid eyes on Allissa Sterling but in a scene we'd expect only in the movies- it wouldn't be the last.
Vanderet 




















pg 14


























Ginsburg. Mallzman. Everman., Phone calls memo
Let's look at that a little closer -
After speaking to me for five minutes minutes 


But I did not see that then. Had I ... I don't know . I just knew that something was very scary and very wrong and no one was trying to right it but me and my family. I wouldn't be given this document either until three years later 
Let me introduce you to Bernadette Everman and Dr. Francisco Velarde
And let me introduce you to Judge Maria Stratton
And instead of being up in arms Ginsburg and Malzman did sound horrified but were in full blown sinister cover your ass mode
Talk about the call to Robin Ginsburg. How Everman Acted. How Velarde acted. 
Need a lawyer again..... Knecht and  the other guy. Then Silverstein












And something odd was going on in the criminal court as I searched for a lawyer and waited on what I knew was nothing good....


What was going on I cant' figure out 7 years later... Karla Kerlin was holding some sort of hearing with 


And as I sought some help with what was becoming an increasing sinister nightmare, the Threat Management Unit wasn't fretting about my mental welfare. Not one bit



They were actually plotting- plotting and planning how to win a case that they should not have wanted to win.


Now the real guns would come in - literally  - The World Famous Threat Management Unit of the LAPD were thinking up ways to make sure known one knew what they did in this case





















find last page











And this young lawyer said that that no matter what he wanted me to know he's not going to take on the judge-


Peter Knecht then James Silversteine


Retainer november 3 2009







And the next day I was doing as I was told by James Silverstien- writing him up a timeleine and I was waiting for that huge sum for a misdemeanor to start the wheels of justice rolling... finally .....


I'm always an early riser but this was going on I'd wake up earlier just to have more time to do what I could to remedy what was happening- and despite this incredible spectacle













Pleas watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKWmLM048bE
















Two officers? Why is John Gregozek lying and who is he lying to?





















SO suddendly I"m an unemployed laborer who if in an emergency situation - contact NO ONE 







 I had a lawyer - a ten k lawyer who not only promised me justice but then media and redress for these now nearly two year grievances and we had Knecht





































... I'd spend one night in jail and what a civil rights complaint these  bastards had created for themselves....
November
5th - night in Van Nuy jail Nuys
mer 4th- What is going on here?


aborer and in cas
November 5th - In jail and waiting and waiting and waiting and knowing too that if they made James Silverstein warok too hard he'd ... Then telling myself to stop listening to my gut. Can't be. He was paid 10 kk. Knecht is on the case too. The media etc.
Van Nuys- took modem, so phone and tv didn't work, Cletus . Lopez. Holding cell no 1
November 6th 2009
And now I had the great displeasure of laying eyes on Judge Maria STratton and my eyes were not pleased. This woman looked angry. vicious even. But as was the case with Kerlin , STraton  too was mad at the wrong people 
But of course she'd let me out. I had a private and expensive lawyer  We didn't cut corners here. . Bernadet Everman was history. Two laywerss a semi famouse lawyer- Knecht who charged 30k for a misdemeanor and his court surrogate Silverssteine
But Judge Maria STratton wasn't impressed. And now a new villain in a more foreboding office- The DA's ofice. Richard Vagnozzi


















and then on page 2, ames S


November 9th 2009



No minute orders and no lawyre as I spoke to Dr. Sharma for 5 minutes. What he said.




November 12th 2009









November 19th 2009
Leventhal
What is going on here. I still don't know and no one would tell me.


November 23rd  2009 - Ginsburg, Karla Kerlin, Martin Boags. No Silverstein






















vlo










December 2 20 Karla Kerlin is still on the bench































January 12th 2009


Knecth and Silverstein meeting with me and Lauren, voluminous evidence. go into a lot of detail



January 13th 2010





Janary 14th 2010








January 20th 2010


Boags -  insert link to  the witness staements












 January 21 2010








James Silverstein is let off the case after an unrecorded sidebar with the Mayors Sister. the same judge who allowed Howard Williams off the case after an UNRECORDED sidebar and a judge who Martinez assured me was off the case .  What he and James Silversteine said n order to steal our money, betray our trust in the worst ways imaginable.



Then we were told it was over. Then thne then...the boy downstairs. Kerlin. transcript. The public defenders. what the guy said to my mother. Alissa Malzman's return. Villar's face.





What is inderlineation.




January 25th 2010









Malzman.  what she said in meeting.
February 22 2010



Montalvo et al




Badar's father was a renowned policeman and so she never would come forth. 


March 4th 































March 9th 2010





Phone call from Alissa Malzman



She had to tell me three big things, she said,


1) boags dropped the four charges
2)boags was off the case
3) Montalvo is dead




Wait. Wait Wait. What.What. What.














udge Moore grants Malzman's motion upon oral motion to aquite- 








































































Still spooked, but not spooked enough: Some wacky correspondence with the Los Angles City attorney

I thought some here would find this interesting.  I wanted to post these nearly a year ago but thought that antagonizing them in such away would be just too reckless.
 I did remove one blog about John Gregozek. I figured I'd assuage her as she looked like Ruth Buzzi crossed with Jay Leno crossed with Medussa.  Plus,  she would bring cop bodyguards to court for no "good faith," reason . Since, I've given up on being spooked and scared by them. The spirit must not die kind of thing.
 18 officers came last time as many of you know. Exactly why and how must still be laid out better this has to do for now. http://open.salon.com/blog/fernsy/2011/12/10/when_the_1_percent_occ...
Let them  come again. The discussion about the city attorney I "met" on a legal message board is true and very odd. Ultimately, she did not want to get too involved . I never told Mitchell who it was. I learned  from this former city attorney about a terrible case involving a Lynn Magnandonovan, and herself -- a case where the system turned on their own. 

That is because I copied it back then and send it to friends and lawyers.  Her clients are named John Gregozek and John Hoffman, but the whole unit should have been sued as well as any police seen in that tape , as well as many others. Unfortunately, I just didn't have the juice.

Written to my email address in January of 2012 by Elizabeth Mitchell, a city attorney who defends the LAPD when they are sued.
Ms. Spitzberg,
During the pendency of this litigation, I am going to ask you to please refrain from posting information regarding the case and in particular my clients. I do not wish to take this to the judge, but will if necessary. If we did not have this ongoing lawsuit, we would be in a different situation.  However, given the fact that we do have this lawsuit, which you initiated, I think it is appropriate to refrain from publishing information thereon. 
Thank you,
Elizabeth
-- Elizabeth Mitchell Deputy City Attorney Police Litigation Unit Los Angeles City Attorney's Office Phone: (213) 978-6958 Fax: (213) 978-8785
*****************Confidentiality Notice ************************* This electronic message transmission contains information from the Office of the Los Angeles City Attorney, which may be confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or the work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the content of this information is prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the original message and any attachments without reading or saving in any manner. ********************************************************************

 I responded to her:
Ms. Mitchell,  
In the past, I was falsely accused and even severely punished(false charges, defamation,31 days of coercive confinement, competeny ploys etc.) for things that were allegedly found online from the year 2005, and onwards. By all indications you clients made no good faith effort to discern who was writing such alleged"postings." Therefore, I would need to be given a less vague account of your concerns before I could even begin to try to address them. If you can cite particular examples of such "postings" than perhaps we can discuss the viability of your request .  
Thanks, Alisa    

 She got back to me with this :
  Sure, no problem.  I am actually referring to ANY and ALL postings having ANYTHING to do with this lawsuit.  Specifically, it was brought to my attention that there was a post dated January 7, 2012, 4 days ago, on your blog  http://henypire.blogspot.com/ regarding my client John Gregozek.  Whether this was written by you or someone in your family makes no difference to me; your mother and sister are both co-plaintiffs and I expect them to abide by the same levels of decorum.  Moreover it was brought to my attention that various still photographs from the search warrant video were posted online.  Again, giving pending litigation, I would ask that you remove any such blogs or postings pending resolution of the case.  Thank you, Elizabeth

  I wrote this back to her after  some nice ex city attorney, a Christine Mc&&&(name omitted because they are all pansies at the city attorney's office)  got involved in a very chance way after I met her on a legal help board called "Avvo."

Ms. Mitchell,  
This letter was drafted for me, by a lawyer, who  saw your e-mails, as well as my response.  I have sought a lot of advice on this from lawyers . The consensus is that your demand has no legal basis and is innapropriate.  
  "I I have read your January 10 letter carefully but with some degree of bafflement. Would you be so kind as to send me a signed and dated or certified copy of any written Order issued by the court that prohibits public statements, photographs,  or writings by me or any other person about the pending lawsuit? I have not been served or otherwise received notice of any such Order, so I am wholly mystified by your case and desist demand.  I would also be appreciative if you would provide me a copy -- or at least the citation -- of any State or Local court rule that proscribes my public comments and enables you to "take this to the judge."  Several experienced civil rights attorneys, including some with lengthy prior service as Assistant City Attorneys and Sr. Assistant City Attorneys for the City of Los Angeles, have advised me that there is no such general prohibition and that your demand is without legal any basis absent a court order. I look forward to your response and to your identification of the legal authority on which your Jan 10 demand is based. I would, in turn, forward you a copy of the legal authority on which I rely, but I am quite certain that there are already any number of sources at your office for your  review of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Very truly yours    
She responded with this:     Elizabeth Mitchell elizabeth.mitchell@lacity.org me
Ms. Spitzberg, 
If you have been seeking advice from various attorneys, I'm not sure why you aren't represented in this case and would suggest that having a lawyer is much easier than dealing with this on your own.  However, I am surprised that any lawyer would write such a letter.  Obviously I have no court order at this point, hence the polite request.  In the interest in attempting to deal with these things outside of the courtroom, I brought this to your attention in the hope that you and I could reach some type of understanding.  That is the purpose of a meet and confer, to discuss these things in a civil manner.
If you are in fact receiving advice from "Assistant City Attorneys" and "Sr. Assistant City Attorneys" who are in any way familiar with civil rights law and you are actually taking their advice, I would be happy to talk to them.  Please ask them to call me.  Otherwise I will be forced to seek a court order.  I am in no way attempting to abrogate your first amendment rights - remember, you are the one who is pursuing the lawsuit here.  I simply think it is an appropriate request that you not publicly discuss this case or disparage my clients until litigation has ceased.
Jan 15 (5 days ago) to Elizabeth    

I wrote this back:
Ms. Mitchell,    
You seem to think I am some sort of  mastermind who would draft such a letter and try to pass it off as one written by a  Sr. City Attorney(who was appalled that you were writing such letters.)   I never even knew there was such a thing as a Sr. City attorney.   Many people know about this case, and  it is in our interests ,and that of the public, that as many as possible be informed. There is no incentive, on our parts, for that to not be the case. If you or your clients believe any posting contains defamatory material than you can sue us for defamation. .   You made it clear that you did not want to engage in mediation, and I overheard you telling Piazza's lawyer to make the mediation 30 days before trial. I imagine the best time to discuss free speech concerns or your client's concerns about certain postings would be at that mediation. But, if you want to seek orders that is fine too.   As a courtesy, I will delete the Gregozek 2012 post. It is all true but it was written in anger . I don't like it much. I actually want to take down that whole blog because the uninformed observer would not know about Lauren D et.c etc.etc, and just not get get it. I get that. I plan  to start up a much better blog.  But, I can't close the old one due to  a stat counter issue, unfortunately.   Thanks, Alisa  

then she came back with this: 
      Elizabeth MitchellJan 18 (2 days ago) Ms. Spitzberg,
I'm a little confused by your response, as it is unclear to me whether you have agreed to refrain from posting information regarding the ongoing litigation and/or my client.  I appreciate your agreement to take the most recent post down.  Please continue to refrain from posting these matters online or anywhere else. 
Regarding your contentions regarding the mediation, I'm not sure where you are even getting this from.  I look forward to mediation in this case because I think it will help you and your family narrow the issues if nothing else.  What you heard was a discussion regarding scheduling, and I suggested that we make the mediation cut-off the same as the final status conference prior to trial.  I encourage you to hire a lawyer because these are things he or she could explain to you instead of you jumping to wild conclusions.   Again, if you are actually consulting with any attorney - former City Attorney or not - I would encourage them to contact me and would be happy to talk to with him.
Thanks,
Elizabeth  

Then, I wrote this back:  
 Ms. Mitchell,   If I am not "actually" conferring with this former Sr. City Atttorney you will really be able to use that to attack my credibility at some point.  If my past and future blog  postings are not accurate you can use that too.    It is actually a woman not a "him"  who drafted that letter, by the way.   I just don't see any possible logic as to why she should call you or why you think it appropriate that I request she call you. I don't intend to impose on someone who has been kind enough to assist me pro bono with this particular free speech concern.   As you know, that is all irrelevant anyhow, and if you want to have proof of such communications you can " take it to the judge,"  It is my impression that though this judge has expressed that he doesn't think a city attorney would be abusive etc, he is a fair man and when faced with the law and the facts he will do attempt to do the  right thing.   If you want us to have representation your clients can start a fund . We will happily hire an attorney with the money they raise on our behalf.   I appears that you know have altered your initial demand and request that I or we or whomever, "refrain from posting these matters online or anywhere else."  It's not relevant, but I'd love to know what you mean by "anywhere else."   As for my contention about the mediation: I got that contention because you said, " I don't see mediation as being productive in this case" on the record at the case management conference.  
Happy Martin Luther Kings Day, Alisa  

Then she scurried off but returned much later with more inane and inappropriate e-mails.
tumblr hit tracking tool





Post a Comment

Alisa Spitzberg,Henya Spitzberg, and Lauren Spitzberg 7513 Fountain Ave #203 Los Angeles, CA 90046 323-378-5801 In Pro Per   ...