• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Law suits, petitions, and private investigations

Scott Sommers

Illuminator
Scott Sommers
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
3,866
We all know that Lawyers for 911 Truth has collapsed in the abyss. But there have still been a number of lawsuits launched by Truthers, as well as the petitions. What have they all been? And what about that tribunal, or whatever it should be called, that Jones and his gang were involved with?
 
scott.in.taiwan said:
We all know that Lawyers for 911 Truth has collapsed in the abyss. But there have still been a number of lawsuits launched by Truthers, as well as the petitions. What have they all been? And what about that tribunal, or whatever it should be called, that Jones and his gang were involved with?
Click to expand...


the only thing I can give the "birther" movement credit on is that individuals have gone on to file lawsuits challenging the eligibility of Obama. 67 of them filed in 2 years (and all 67 dismissed due to standing).


The birthers have outdone the 911 truth movement 67 times...not one lawsuite, filed in 10 years.
 
Arus808 said:
the only thing I can give the "birther" movement credit on is that individuals have gone on to file lawsuits challenging the eligibility of Obama. 67 of them filed in 2 years (and all 67 dismissed due to standing).


The birthers have outdone the 911 truth movement 67 times...not one lawsuite, filed in 10 years.
Click to expand...

Do you happen to have a citation for that number handy?
 
The Wood-Qui Tam case? I think she filed directly to the Supreme court (and in her case it was her AND the United States of America as plaintiffs), but it was dismissed unilaterally (it was about DEW weapons) - I really wouldn't count it as a "court" case because for one thing, SHE cannot file on behalf of the US.
 
Didn't Rodriguez file one? I know it was dismissed but they still tried, right? Or did the Birthers ones actually get to court?
 
Edx said:
Didn't Rodriguez file one? I know it was dismissed but they still tried, right? Or did the Birthers ones actually get to court?
Click to expand...

many were able to get to court and actually stand in front of a judge (Orly Taitz lawsuits, Mario Apuzzo, Phil Berg, etc) to argue their merits. some were dismissed just based on the claims of the filings; still Birthers got farther than any 9/11 truther have.
 
HannibalGroup said:
Didn't Judy Wood and Jerry Leapheart file a suit or two?
Click to expand...


Yes, Leaphart represented Wood in a failed lawsuit that didn't make it past a motion to dismiss at first instance, and subsequent appeals were summarily dismissed as well.

Leaphart simultaneously represented Morgan Reynolds in a similar lawsuit, which also didn't make it past a motion to dismiss at first instance, and Reynolds (whether recognizing the futility of it or whether recognizing that Leaphart's acting for both of them at the same time had actually undermined both of their claims - who knows?) did not appeal.

In any event, both of those ludicrous and factually baseless lawsuits were dismissed with prejudice at the same time (June 26, 2008) because (a) the plaintiffs were not entitled to bring the actions as pleaded, and (b) even if jurisdiction had been established, the pleadings drafted by Leaphart were so lacking that they were wholly insufficient to ground the claims made within them. Much like the insufficient pleadings in the recent April Gallop claim that was dismissed, the pleadings on behalf of Wood and Reynolds failed to even make sufficient factual allegations to support their claims, even in light of the low threshold on such a motion to dismiss.

[There was also another action related to the Wood and Reynolds actions with a plaintiff named Edward Haas, which was dismissed at the same time as the Wood and Reynolds actions, but I can't recall off the top of my head whether it was Leaphart who acted for him, and I can't be bothered to look at the moment.]

Edx said:
Didn't Rodriguez file one? I know it was dismissed but they still tried, right?
Click to expand...


Yes, Rodriguez filed a complaint in 2004. His claims were different than (but just as ludicrous as) those later made by Wood and Reynolds. You're quite right that Rodriguez's lawsuit was dismissed, despite Rodriguez's dishonest claims to the contrary. And prior to Rodriguez's failed lawsuit, Philip Berg (who acted for Rodriguez) had brought another batcraptastic claim on behalf of Ellen Mariani, which also failed miserably.

There have also been some other one-off lawsuits by various and sundry other delusional truthers, but none of them have ever made it past motions to dismiss. Just like the birther claims.

orphia nay said:
Don't forget the spectacular failure of April Gallop's truthy lawsuit.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=170182
Click to expand...


Indeed, and April 1 would have been the perfect day for an announcement of the filing of an appeal of that particular piece of nonsense but, alas, it didn't happen. Too bad, really, but one can always hope that further Legaltainment™ will ensue. :D
 
Arus808 said:
the only thing I can give the "birther" movement credit on is that individuals have gone on to file lawsuits challenging the eligibility of Obama. 67 of them filed in 2 years (and all 67 dismissed due to standing).


The birthers have outdone the 911 truth movement 67 times...not one lawsuite, filed in 10 years.
Click to expand...

Apparently about 45% of Republicans believe that Obama wasn't born in the USA. Just demonstrates the adage about repeating a lie enough times, don't it?

That's why these truther claims need to be resisted. Trouncing them in court is one great way.
 
alienentity said:
Apparently about 45% of Republicans believe that Obama wasn't born in the USA. Just demonstrates the adage about repeating a lie enough times, don't it?
Click to expand...

and its really funny how the Republican candidates in several states, who made comments on Obama's birth eligibility one moment, retract their statements the next.

That's why these truther claims need to be resisted. Trouncing them in court is one great way.
Click to expand...

we've already had a court case; Mossaoui. that is the only court case that should matter.

Like birthers, Truthers would only clog the judicial system with frivolous and merit-less cases.

If birthers are told 67 times that they have NO STANDING and they keep on filing cases anyway, what do you think the truthers would do (not that they've been doing anything anyway), even when they are told "the govt was not involved, get a freaking life"
 
LashL said:
...And prior to Rodriguez's failed lawsuit, Philip Berg (who acted for Rodriguez) had brought another batcraptastic claim on behalf of Ellen Mariani, which also failed miserably. ...
Click to expand...

While searching ae911truth.org for the string "legal team", I happened upon a somewhat older story, where, in Oct 2012, Gage supported a call for donations to Ellen Mariani's legal team - attorney Bruce Leichty.

The history of that fund and legaltainment is documented here:
https://marianilawsuit.wordpress.com

The story has been mentioned in at least one other thread.

I can't summarize at this time what Mariani's appeal was all about. Just browsing a side issue:
On April 19, 2012, Mariani's counsel Leichty submitted this "motion to supplement the record with new evidence showing significant conflicts of interest on the part of Judge Hellerstein...". New "information" implicating a conflict of interest because the judge's son has business ties to Israel are listed particularly in items 6.-10. (pages 6-8).
This lead to a court ruling in May 2013 that was a major smack in Leichty's butt:
Hall and Carney said:
We have now reviewed their submissions , as well as the totality of their behavior in this case, in particular with respect to their Motion to Supplement the Record (the “Motion”). For the reasons set forth below, we invoke the inherent power of this Court and impose sanctions in the form of double costs jointly and severally on Appellant Ellen Mariani and her counsel, Bruce Leichty.
...
In deciding Mariani’s second appeal, we became deeply concerned by two aspects of the case as framed by Mariani’s counsel Bruce Leichty. First was its apparent frivolousness. ... In appealing once again to this Court, Mariani persisted in making arguments that we had clearly rejected, and others that were irrelevant.
Our other concern with Mariani’s second appeal was the disturbing manner in which she and her counsel prosecuted it. We noted, in particular, the “discreditable tone” of her filings. ... We also wrote that her briefs featured “an escalating series of ad hominem attacks on opposing counsel and bombastic challenges to the integrity of the district court,”..., which culminated with the particularly offensive Motion to Supplement the Record to introduce “newly-discovered evidence” of the district court’s alleged partiality. ... This purported “evidence” consisted of little more than a series of offensive insinuations, unmistakably anti-Semitic, about Judge Hellerstein, his family members, their professional work and some of their personal charitable activities.
We therefore ordered Mariani and her counsel to show cause why they should not be sanctioned in the amount of double costs.
Click to expand...

In the Analysis that follows, the judges reference the Gallup vs. Cheney lawsuit, which resulted in Attorney William Veale being fined a substantial amount of money.

They sum up Leichty's "new evidence" nicely:
Hall and Carney said:
Leichty’s main argument is, in sum, that Judge Hellerstein is partial to defendants and must recuse himself because his adult son, an attorney, at one point was employed by a law firm in Israel that at some time represented two companies that might have an indirect connection to some of this case’s defendants. He also makes reference to certain religiously-oriented philanthropic activities of the family, which he says evince partiality. ... Leichty’s argument that such an attenuated chain of relationships calls Judge Hellerstein’s impartiality into question is patently frivolous. In filing this motion, Leichty had to know that he was proceeding “without the slightest chance of success.” ...
In fact, on closer observation, Leichty’s real argument is that Judge Hellerstein cannot be impartial because he is Jewish. The papers filed in support of the Motion reflect anti-Semitism in a raw and ugly form. For a private citizen to make such spurious and offensive suggestions is bad enough. For an attorney admitted to this Court to make them in court pleadings is unpardonable.
Click to expand...

Wow!

You will certainly not be surprised to learn that Leichy is a buddy and fan of Christopher Bollyn.

Gage calling for donations to fund an anti-semitic lawyer? What a bad bad world this Truthdom is!
 
Resurrecting an old thread because I stumbled, belatedly, on an organisation devoted to legal action on 9/11 and doing a petition: I am talking about the "Lawyers' Committee for 9/11 Inquiry", tax-free 501(c)(3) incorporation. I have yet to figure out how long this outfit has been around. I found them as I came across a new petition on change.org, which I will follow in another, more appropriate thread (URL to follow).

Of the Board members, I recognize the name William Jacoby, who has been mentioned by AE911T sometimes.

They are trying to collect a whopping US$ 800,000 - I shall watch them fail. At fundraising, I mean.


Overall, it is rather unclear what they will fail at, for their goals and strategies are too all-encompassing and vague. No specific course of action proposed, as far as I can tell from a quick glance.


ETA:
The domain for this group has been created in July 2016:
http://whois.domaintools.com/lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org

First time archived on archive.org on Nov 01, 2016:
https://web-beta.archive.org/web/20161101055423/www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
 
Last edited:
DGM said:
At least they're realistic. They set the petition goal to 1000. :D
Click to expand...

No, they didn't. That's an automatism set by change.org. Once a petition exceeds 1000, the system will automatically assign some next near goal (2000? 1500?), and so forth, to always make it look as if the petition is on a good course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom