A blog focused on things eternal and related to the heavenly realm based in Colossians 3:2 -- "Set your affections on things above, not things of the earth."
I was at the gym on the treadmill yesterday and happened to see Dr. Phil's son Jay McGraw present his new book Life Strategies for Dealing with Bullies. I began to think about the prevalent theme I've encountered with problem people has been their bullying me. Bullies started for me way back in grade school and, to make matters far worse, my mother was a huge bully.
Here's an example. Let's say a bully gives you a hard time a very long time in school. You finally stand up to them and they end up running crying to the teacher! They make it so any resistance you offer is destined to get you in trouble one way or another. That's the level of mentality I'm referring to. They don't see their behavior as a problem, as in their mind everyone loves or should love them, and it's all nothing but a game to them.
The game extreme bullies often play with me is always trying to make it look like I'm victimizing them in some way for standing up to them. I noted Cyber #1 tries to make it look like everyone on the Internet's victimizing him all the time. I have evidence he put up an extremely vicious anonymous blog on me claiming I'm a forger, criminal under investigation and all sorts of crazy false stuff. This, while he's hiding behind this "victim" image he fabricates on a USENET astrology forum. He's playing the role of a victim as if everyone's stalking, impostering and is out to get him due to his great importance.
Bullies are prevalent in our society at all levels, especially in government. They lie, cheat and most always manipulate reality to suit the outcome. The bottom line is they don't care what you think or how you feel, while attempting to dominate your life on any level available to them. The worse bullies are sociopaths and/or pscyhopaths unwilling to acknowledge the bottom line is you don't like them and don't want them in your life. They make your rejection of them a huge issue they must win to show it's you, not them, who has a problem.
My 50th Birthday will be spent pleading before a Small Claims Court Judge over a greedy attorney's attempt to steal my money.
I'm going to take this opportunity to complain here about a greedy attorney, M. Pamela Lauser in Martinez, California, who has attempted to steal a lot of money from me for non-representation. I paid a $2,500 retainer for representation at two hearings, one in Walnut Creek and the other in Concord. (I had one case transferred to Concord originally from Walnut Creek.) I'm writing this after having asked for a partial refund only to receive a rude letter from Ms. Lauser full of lies and misrepresentations to justify her stealing my money. This case was initially about someone from Vancouver Washington sending a note to Cyber #2 letting him know he had his name change legal document and was going to take appropriate action for their on-going dispute. I was summoned to court over their dispute for the convenience of Cyber #2 who could not do so for someone out of state. Here is the basis for the nature of the dispute I was summoned to a Court out of my jurisdiction for:
This lazy in pro per (self represented) individual scribbled some note submitting it to his small community judge about something post marked from Vancouver Washington he accused me of sending. He had no police reports, no evidence whatsoever to justify his claims I harassed him. I have never contacted this man nor emailed him but once in 2006! Since he couldn't file it against that man due to out of state jurisdiction, he chose to make me a scape goat costing me $2,500 in attorneys fees among many other fees.
Ms. Lauser failed to represent at either of the hearings, didn't perform any litigation, nor did she or her assistants fill out any forms on my behalf, except a substitute attorney form over someone who didn't represent me. I submitted all the paper work and pleadings to the Court. One day I will upload the pleadings with redacted names but I'm not quite ready to disclose the information yet.
I had asked for a partial refund for non-representation and Ms. Lauser responded she wrote off $4,000 in her attorney fees for simply reading through my pleadings and evidentiary materials! Before my full disclosure of this matter, I'd like to point out what went wrong to allow this mishap to occur so others might learn from my errors:
ATTORNEY CHOOSING TIP: Prior to choosing an attorney, don't just assume because they have a State Bar Number that gives them a stamp of approval for ethics or that they are automatically good attorneys. It simply means they are good at passing law exams and nothing more. Neither should their having no complaints against them posted on the California Bar Association's site be any reliable confirmation of their being good attorneys.
ERROR NUMBER ONE: During her initial consultation, Ms. Lauser told me there were prejudiced postings about her on the Internet due to her being a kick ass take no prisoners attorney who stood up for her clients. As a result of her claim, I didn't bother to check the complaints. I do not generally take what's been written on the Internet about someone as genuine in this day and age after having suffered at the hands of cyberstalkers myself. However, had I read what appear to be genuine complaints on LawyerRatingz.com, I would have reconsidered retaining her services.
Ms. Lauser has no range in court. She rubs the Judge the wrong way and ends up getting scolded which is painful to watch. As a result she lost a crucial and costly case for her client that should have been a slam dunk. I can only assume that she went in assuming she would win and thus didn't prepare. The other lawyer ended up walking all over her. It's basically the lawyers who win or lose a case for you. Just ask O.J.
I have read all of the comments on this site even the ones that were written by her staff to counter the honest ones....take it from someone who knows her intimately, if she likes you she will be tenacious but there has to be something in it for her ..... she trained with albert turnbaugh who is a major billing machine .... pam charges as much as gloria alred neither are worth that rate .... well pam isn't worth that billing rate .... judges do not like like her because she is pushy ..... be all things to all people pam and leave your ego at the door, the far door.... ego (edging God out) .... lastly her paralegal is a wiccan (pagan) and pam is a christian? .... that in and of itself is enough to hire elsewhere, hypocrisy before God means bad fruit for the client .... this the truth ... can a tree bring forth good and bad fruit and be good, no way ....
I would NOT recommend having Ms. Lauser represent you in a court of law. Her lack of experience mainly works against her!
Highly recommend to NOT use this lawyer. It cost me $400.00 for 1 hearing, she was schooled by the judge and court clerk how to fill out an after hearing judgement, used the wrong date on the form and put down the wrong name for my soon to be ex-wife. I have left a message everyday this week for her and she got back to me today and told me it is a little error and I should appreciate the work she has done and just look over these small facts. I think it might be time to go back to law school for her.
This poor woman does not understand the legal system and can cause a client great grief. She attempts to compensate for her lack of skills with a obnoxious loud performance in court. It doesn't go over well with the Judge. Do yourself a huge favor by not putting your legal problems in her hands.
She took a lot of time to understand the case, but brought witnesses to testify at a case managemet conference!!! The judge would not allow the testimony. She seems to not understand the legal process.
In over her head. Her case was dismissed because it was filed in the wrong court. She was scolded by the Judge. That's not good at all.
She is new and does not know what she is doing. Judges cannot stand her
ERROR NUMBER TWO: I assumed Ms. Lauser was a seasoned attorney since she was a partner at her own law firm, had a nice office and several employees. She had also mentioned wanting to be a judge one day. This was an "illusion" since I later learned Ms. Lauser as a 50+ woman had only been an attorney since 2006 making her very inexperienced.
Here's another attorney tip:Law schools don't teach attorneys how to deal with the real world in their practices, only how to pass law exams. Most good attorneys are trained and seasoned at major law firms who learn from seasoned veterans. Ms. Lauser appears to have went from law school directly to her own law practice thus missing early apprenticeship from veterans. What Ms. Lauser charges and expects for non-representation/non-production is indicative of her being delusional about her status as a three year attorney.
ERROR NUMBER THREE: I neglected to check on the nature of Ms. Lauser's education, which was at relatively low level university and law school for her field.
ERROR NUMBER FOUR: I believed Ms. Lauser was bound by the terms of her retainer agreement. Ms. Lauser did not follow her own retainer agreement to notify me of any major expenses, such as her claim of spending $4,000 worth of her time reading through my submitted litigation materials and evidentiary information. In her not following the terms of her retainer agreement, I have to take Ms. Lauser to Small Claims Court to prove she violated its terms.
ERROR NUMBER FIVE: Ms. Lauser initially introduced herself as someone who a particular judge hated and initially declined to take my case. I did not follow through to check other's on-line comments that it wasn't an issue with just one judge but others as well. After the case was transferred to a new jurisdiction, Ms. Lauser accepted the case and a month later failed to appear leaving me to represent myself with two witnesses, one who had flown out all the way from Vancouver Washington.
Here's the problem. Ms. Lauser's short notice of her forthcoming non-appearance gave me no real choice but to represent myself. Because she wanted to charge me, Ms. Lauser had an associate attorney call me with 24 hours notice prior to the hearing. This was unacceptable as I did not feel comfortable, nor did I believe the attorney was competent or knowledgeable to represent me after I spoke with him on the phone. I only agreed for him to attend the hearing in case there were any technical law issues and as moral support.
One Hearing - Non Legal Representation
The associate attorney showed up one hour prior to the hearing and sat for 1.5 hours awaiting other cases to finish, then spent another hour standing next to me in court with my witnesses, but he did not represent me or present my case! I agreed to pay him for his time, but later learned Ms. Lauser still wanted $300/per hour. He didn't have the answers to some of my questions, including a particular statute I requested that governed my case. As he sat for 1.5 hours, the associate attorney didn't bother to call the home office to provide me with the language in the statute.
When this associate attorney spoke at the hearing to the judge to claim Ms. Lauser had an emergency and couldn't attend, he introduced me as a self-represented person. When the judge said something to him, his response was "that's news to me" about a particular statute governing another issue. For the rest of the hearing this associate just stood silent before the judge the entire time as nothing more than silent moral support. Ms. Lauser's law firm wants $300 an hour for that?
Maxed Out Retainer After One Non-Represented Hearing
After this associate attorney hinted my retainer had been maxed out prior to the second hearing, I terminated Ms. Lauser's law firm's representation. Ms. Lauser hadn't even bothered to arrange for a meeting to discuss my case. I had only a 20 minute initial consultation with her and a few minutes with her on the phone of her arranging for me to pay her and sign her agreement.
In my Small Claims Court case, I agreed to pay this attorney $200/hour (6 hours), as well as to read through my case even though he didn't represent me. I agreed to pay for the copying and case management costs, etc. I believe I was very generous in offering to pay $1,500 for non-representation, non-production to this law firm at one hearing. This wasn't enough for Ms. Lauser, she wanted to keep my entire retainer.
After I terminated her law firm, Ms. Lauser had the audacity to send me a rude letter claiming she was kind in waiving $4,000 in her fees. She didn't even bother to formerly apologize for overbooking her schedule causing me the emotional trauma of being without representation.
My 50th Birthday To Be Spent in Small Claims Court Pleading My Case Against Attorney Pamela Lauser Before a Judge
A Small Claims Court case has been filed in Concord against Ms. Lauser I have to appear to plead before a judge on my birthday in February.
So you might wonder, what is this all really about? To reiterate, my being chosen as a scapegoat for Cyber #2's mental problems and dispute with an out of state person. He admitted at a deposition to be on medication, to having memory issues due to being a diabetic who was once in a coma. He was obviously just looking for anyone to blame for the problems he believes he's had on the Internet.
The restraining order was issued against Cyber #2 in Concord, California after pure hell of what Ms. Lauser put me through to only steal my money. This is an example of how greedy attorneys work with a corrupt court system to make money for the local legal community over extremely petty non-case First Amendment Rights issues.
Voila! After much strenuous prodding and pulling of Google's legal department, I finally got the partial results from my subpoena request for its malicious anonymous blog poster I've referred to throughout this blog as Cyber #1. It's about the now defunct blog at cheryl-merrill.blogspot.com. The person was writing extremely malicious material posting hundreds of articles and copyrighted infringement photos of me since 2007 accusing me of being everything under the sun.
The IP address Google provided is within 350 miles of the defendant's home and smack dab off the main highway artery in between the defendant's other home in Los Lunas, New Mexico. This isn't exactly a smoking gun, so I had to really sit down with Google Earth to figure out what really happened. The evidence shows the major artery highway that hooks up with La Mesa, CA, is one of two and the most logical highway path to get to Los Lunas, New Mexico, the other home of the defendant. On that day I'm alleging Cyber #1 took the most logical route while stopping in Tuscon Arizona for a possible overnight stay or perhaps lunch. There he planned to create his vicious blog, hoping the IP address wouldn't implicate him should any lawsuit be filed.
So, I guess I should show the map of Cyber #1's little trip in which he stopped on the way to start his vicious anonymous blog:
The latest defamatory post I show was in June, 2009 prior to the lawsuit that was filed. I'm also asking Google to provide that IP information as well through a Motion to Compel because they've given me some excuse.
This evidence, when combined with accumulative and other corroborating evidence, is strongly convincing. The defamatory postings in February, March, April and June 2009 fall well within the Statute of Limitations about my having allegedly forged documents as a public official among other things.
I wish this person would just sign my Settlement Agreement and agree to pay his own legal costs. I'm not asking for a cent (but if it gets as far as to trial I certainly will)! I would gladly then convert my blog to a new format. All I want is for this person to leave me alone and not post anything more under my name. He insists he's innocent and that I should pay his legal costs, something a court would never grant for a non-contract case.
For now, I'm celebrating because it is convincing evidence that falls within the Statute of Limitations of postings in 2009 since I have evidence of recent defamation in June. The slam dunk is straight up ahead set to come from the new subpoena I served on America Online on December 23, 2009. That subpoena asks for the sub accounts of the defendant's admitted main account in 2007. This will be the slam dunk case sealer for sure if my hunch is right sub accounts were used from the main account in 2007.
All you have to do is show a jury or judge that the guy lied several times under oath and that he omitted relevant facts. Certain conduct can be analyzed such as "if someone was impostering you, why wouldn't you want to know the identity of such person who caused this lawsuit to be filed against you? Instead you, such and such.
I love the convenience of having brand new model cars within a block from where I live, while not having to pay for gas, insurance or parking, all thanks to Zip Cars!
Zip Cars are now located across the country in many major cities. Zip allows you to do small errands around town for as low as $8.00/hr and have hybrid electric cars available if you're green. Their service agreement only requires a $50/year fee and use of hourly rates all year with no minimum requirements.
Aside from not worrying about gas and insurance costs, the convenience of using Zip Cars is they provide an assigned scan card to access the vehicles for immediate use. You can be in one of their cars within 30 minutes of needing to go somewhere! I have several Zip Car stations available in my area so there's no problem accessing transportation. Zip's on-line system enables you to reserve a car of your choice instantaneously. My experience is there is no problem booking a car on the weekday within 30 minutes of requiring one.
I've used Zip Cars several times now and have only needed to fuel up once due to a low tank. Zip car provides a gas card to use.
Cars used to be a problem for me, not any more thanks to Zip Car.
What a shocker, a lady jumped the ropes and practically tackled the Pope to the ground! For those who don't think highly of the Catholic Church, this is a nice Christmas Gift the world has rarely seen.
The Church has been a source of much oppression of the world throughout history. It's done more harm then good in many people's opinions.
Geez, I sent someone to file a small claims court case on my behalf in another county and she came back with my birthday as the date I have to go present my case. It's not fair!
These attorneys are such scum sucking criminals. They're greedy and will keep your entire retainer if you let them. They'll concoct ways to get to your retainer even when they never represent you!
What sleaze! I did all the work, the attorney didn't even represent me in court and she took $2,500 of my money.
So, for my 50th B-day I'll be spending it in Contra Costa County before a Judge pleading my case against a sleazy greedy she devil lawyer.
I've been waiting for electronic paper a while now. The LiveScibe Pen system appears to be the closest thing to it for now. I'm very busy but I thought I'd drop this information into a quick blog post. This pen is packed full of innovation. Check it out.
So one afternoon in October, 2009 I'm walking up the street from the store to my apartment. I happen to have a sore ankle because I wore the wrong tennis shoes on the treadmill at the gym. I note a 30's something short blond haired woman walking towards me with a gigantic mean looking unleashed dog trailing 4 feet behind her. When bipedal, I imagine the dog would be taller than myself, that's how large it was, and quite muscular unlike the poor similar critter shown here.
As the lady approaches with her dog following behind, I begin to slightly freak out and say something really polite like, "you should get that big dog on a leash!" My fear in having to pass an extremely large unleashed dog accelerates as I know I'm in a vulnerable position where in a split second the dog could possibly maul me to death.
As the dog passes, I note it has taken notice of the exchange of words I had with its owner. I feel a rush of panic as the dog stares at, then begins lunging after me. I raise my voice in panic asking the owner to call her dog off and she has to grab it to prevent an attack. As she struggles to control the dog it's obviously riled up trying to squirm away to come after me again.
A few moments after they begin heading down the street I express my displeasure over being placed in such vulnerable life threatening position with, "your dog is a lethal weapon and you need to get it on a leash!" Once again, the dog reverses its path and starts towards me again, coming as close as 3 feet. On its owner's command the dog quickly reverses itself on a dime demonstrating this time that it's really a well trained attack dog.
So what do you think the lady would say to me after it's all said and done? Does she apologize since she had her dog unleashed? Nooooo! What this lady says after bringing a few moments of terror into my life was "You're just jealous!" By the time she uttered such ridiculous mind blowing cruel words, she was way down the street at which time I pointed at her and said "you're in big trouble! You're dog's a lethal weapon!!!"
After it was all over did I think about calling the police? It did cross my mind. What prevented me from calling the SFPD is how utterly useless they are. They must be the worst cops in the entire country from my experience. SFPD cops seem to be on the side of the criminals in many respects. After all, without criminals, or the politicians who need limo motorcycle cops, they'd be unemployed. I didn't know if this lady lived in my neighborhood or how I could possibly locate her to file assault charges. Yes, assault charges. I was scared for my life. Visions of my being mauled to death by a big black dog seemed very possible.
Turns out someone had witnessed the little tiff, the street watchman who often stands out on the building patio checking out the neighborhood. I spoke with him shortly after the incident and he said he recalled another incident where the big mean dog lunged and nearly attacked someone. The victim was yelling and scared to death. The watchman said he knew where the lady lived and I found a couple who lived in the building who gave me a heads up to her unit number.
Anyway, back to my dog story. After the lady departed around the corner with her dog, I was still reeling from the encounter. I told everyone I bumped into about it, "this lady with a huge big black unleashed dog nearly attacked me with her dog and then said 'you're just jealous'!! People were truly appalled.
THIS LADY AND HER POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS ATTACK DOG ARE A DANGER TO THE COMMUNITY - SOMEONE NEEDS TO STOP HER!
After I was able to get the lady's address through someone who knew where she lived, I sent her a letter. The letter was about my having witnesses, my asking for an apology while offering release of damages agreement. After 25 days I never heard back. I then decided to enter phase two, does she have a history of attacking people with her dog? I looked up the lady on the Internet to learn she had been arrested in 2002 for siccing her dog on someone it chewed up a little and I knew I was on the right path. The lady sued the city complaining of being tortured by the Sheriff during the short incarceration.
This next part has been lifted from the court briefs of the class action lawsuit filed against the City of San Francisco in 2004. The ". . . ." is the names of individuals which I've redacted.
described how the Asian males had to run inside Geary Street in order to seek protection from . . . and her attacking dog, and that . . .and another had to to seek protection from . . . . .and her dog from entering that building. After . . . . turned away and walked away from the door, . . . went outside. But . . . turned the dog to face . . . shouting "It doesn't matter if your black, Asian or White" and sicced the dog on . . . .. The dog bit . . . in the left hand injuring him.
.........was arrested on July 19, 2002 because her dog allegedly bit a man. She was taken to County Jail 9 where she was booked and instructed to disrobe in the presence of a male officer. When she refused, male and female deputies dragged her into a safety cell, forcibly removed her clothing and left her naked in the cell for approximately 12 hours. First Amended Class Action Complaint, at ¶ 20. She was awakened every 20 minutes by pounding on the door by a male officer who observed her naked.
Yes, the same lady who sued the City of San Francisco in 2004 under a Class Action lawsuit nearly attacked me with her big black unleashed dog, then uttered the kind words "you're just jealous!" The community's at risk as long as this lady continues to disobey leash laws with that kind of attitude. Imagine if a little kid was walking past this dog and made a wrong move.
I've been waiting a long time for electric cars to appear since the mid-1980's because I can't stand the smell of gasoline nor the continual rise of the price per gallon. Other more futurist visionaries have even been waiting for flying cars! Apparently, even flying cars are a strong possibility on the horizon.
When I was a kid in the 1960's I remember being shocked at witnessing a car drive into the lake at Lake Tahoe California. They had driven their amphibian convertible into the water that then became a mini boat! I couldn't believe what I had witnessed at the time. How much fun would that be to take a nice scenic drive at Lake Tahoe then into the lake for a boat ride.
I'm continually getting jolts of culture shock from the fabulous new technologies that have appeared recently. One of my favorites is Sirius Satellite voice activated radio. Though I don't own the technology yet, I've seen it advertised where a driver of a vehicle simply states what they'd like to hear and the song plays instantaneously! The other feature I've noted in satellite radio is the digital display of the artists name, song title and perhaps year the song was released.
These new music distribution systems are all mind boggeling for those of us who grew up with turntable record players, not to mention commercial radio. It's too bad people couldn't have all this fabulous technology back in the 60's when there was a lot more talent and quality music producers. If you really think about it, it's truly amazing how far technology has come within our lifetimes. Why, back when I was in high school in the 70's, they didn't even have VCR's, ATM's or fax machines yet!
Then of course, there are the truly revolutionary Star Trek like beam me up flip cell phones! I had a briefcase model mobile phone way back in the 1980's when I was selling young technology. Back then there were very few cell base locations for the transmitters to signal to and calls were commonly dropped. It wasn't until the mid-1990's that the cell phone technology finally took off. I was one of the few in the 90's to have my own Sprint Cell phone, but it wasn't a flip phone because they hadn't developed to that level yet. Then, I rebelled a while from the cell phone craze until I was forced to get my first flip phone for business needs. I've grown into the technology and use my cell phone quite frequently now. I don't know what I'd do without the convenience of my phone and I'm sure others feel the same way.
Getting back to the topic of cars, I am certain we all could have been driving electric cars by now had the oil and car companies not deliberately stunted the industry. Why, we could have even had solar powered cars by now, or cars that run on other kinds of fuels. As for the potential arrival of flying cars, I honestly don't believe there will ever be a mass market appeal to such dangerous small vehicles.
I was at the court clerk's office today and a nice attorney was standing in line I managed to get some interesting information from. First, he was in pro per because he injured himself at a hotel in Taiwan a year ago. He was on a little push scooter because his foot was injured very seriously and still healing after a year.
What the attorney told me was it is extremely rare that courts ever award a prevailing party the other party's attorney fees. He says it is something the courts just don't do. I mentioned how strange that was since such a threat is always used to prevent frivolous lawsuits from occurring. He said it's a total fallacy. What this means is sue happy people can sue to their heart's content and never be charged another's attorney's fees if they lose. Wow!
There's some strange man who is under the illusion he can possibly get his attorneys fees awarded should some miracle occur and he get his case dismissed or win at trial. Fat chance.
I was at the gym on the treadmill yesterday and happened to see Dr. Phil's son Jay McGraw present his new book Life Strategies for Dealing with Bullies. I began to think about the prevalent theme I've encountered with problem people has been their bullying me. Bullies started for me way back in grade school and, to make matters far worse, my mother was a huge bully. 
s or should love them, and it's all nothing but a game to them.
