Judd v. Obama (Orly Taitz)

Seems Orly is about to dispatch her flying monkeys to find Obama supporters who have mentioned and sort of digital manipulation on teh interwebz.

Crazy Cat Lady Orly said:
I got quotes from Obot sites, where obots were making admissions that there were changes to Obama’s BCs. Please, send me the quotes and IP addresses if you can
Click to expand...

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=360508

I have no idea what she plans, but I'm guessing that mentioning 'optimisation' means alteration in Orlyspeak.

Watch out, Jay!
 
Straw Man said:
I have no idea what she plans, but I'm guessing that mentioning 'optimisation' means alteration in Orlyspeak.
Click to expand...

Probably, in the sense that neither she nor any of her pseudo-experts seem to understand the first thing about PDF optimization. Or copying.

As I said, she's stuck back in the Birtherism of two years ago. Modern Birthers have conceded that at least some of what they originally attributed to forgery is more likely the straightforward result of scanning, quantization, and optimization. They still say some of it must be a "digital forgery," but they haven't yet decided what's what.

Fogbow are still laughing about how she can claim that artifacts in a digital copy, which can only ever appear in a digital version, are somehow proof that the original paper copy was forged. I wonder how many court cases she has actually prepared and litigated with any great success. If she thinks that redaction in the normal course of legal document preparation, amongst rulings in limine and discovery motions, is a cause for action, she's even less a lawyer than I thought.

And one thing I forgot to mention is that while her new pseudo-expert lists the "alterations" in great detail (i.e., the differences between one copy and another), none of those "alterations" seem to alter any material data. Hence they have no effect in the legal context of probative value. The rest of the world accepts that "alterations" (i.e., insignificant differences) occur in the normal course of copying and transmitting documents for ordinary business purposes, and that if, say, an original receipt has a blue stripe, and it's copied on an ordinary xerographic copier, it's going to show up gray in the original. You don't get to challenge it as evidence on that basis.

No wonder none of the other Birthers want to have anything to do with her.
 
And now poor Orly has been hit with $4000 sanctions for dragging up her old Taitz v Obama case out in California. Apparently Occidental College, who Taitz was dragging into the case to try and have them pony up Obama's college papers, has had enough and put their attorneys to work. Which is only fair enough, as her correspondence with them has to be seen to be believed.
 
Last edited:
KDLarsen said:
And now poor Orly has been hit with $4000 sanctions for dragging up her old Taitz v Obama case out in California. Apparently Occidental College, who Taitz was dragging into the case to try and have them pony up Obama's college papers, has had enough and put their attorneys to work. Which is only fair enough, as her correspondence with them has to be seen to be believed.
Click to expand...

I seem to have missed this, KD. Do you have a link? Cheers.
 
Straw Man said:
I seem to have missed this, KD. Do you have a link? Cheers.
Click to expand...
The hearing is still ongoing, but the Fogbow has some some friends on the ground. The Oxy lawyers will be sharing their documentation once they return to their law offices sometime later today (PST).

Edit: And just to turn this thread into a "Birther litigation thread" completely, some guy in Alaska has been trying to get the Alaska Superior Court to understand that sending a tweet to @barackobama with a link to a blog post with a complaint, is perfectly fine as service of process.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/110757099...of-Motion-to-Use-Twitter-as-Method-of-Service

Of course, Twitter and Facebook has been used in some extreme cases (where all else failed, and where it was ascertained that the recipient was aware of the case and using those mediums actively), but all of those were cases outside the US.
 
Last edited:
KDLarsen said:
The hearing is still ongoing, but the Fogbow has some some friends on the ground. The Oxy lawyers will be sharing their documentation once they return to their law offices sometime later today (PST).
Click to expand...

Excellent news. I look forward to this being known to the wider world! Hopefully it won't be too long before she's declared a Vexatious litigant, and some stringent sanctions are placed upon her.

KDLarsen said:
Edit: And just to turn this thread into a "Birther litigation thread" completely, some guy in Alaska has been trying to get the Alaska Superior Court to understand that sending a tweet to @barackobama with a link to a blog post with a complaint, is perfectly fine as service of process.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/110757099...of-Motion-to-Use-Twitter-as-Method-of-Service

Of course, Twitter and Facebook has been used in some extreme cases (where all else failed, and where it was ascertained that the recipient was aware of the case and using those mediums actively), but all of those were cases outside the US.
Click to expand...

:eye-poppi The crazy is strong in this one.
 
Bwahahaha, this judge pretty much hammered home what Orly has been struggling to understand for years now. It went something like this:
Taitz: That's what discovery is for. Let's hear the witnesses, have trial.
Court: We aren't hearing witnesses. That why we have pleadings and briefs.
Taitz: You have the voter roll information.
Court: Do I? You are a lawyer. You should know that evidence is not stuff printed from the internet.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Orly is in meltdown, if her website is anything to go by. There is a HUGE all-caps rant, in cyan, no less, about her day in court trying to get records from Occidental college and the fact her 'trial' has been dismissed in Indiana. Plus being hit with $4000 in sanctions.

I foresee that she's going to take this crazy into court sometime soon, and accuse a judge to his or her face that they are anti-American or corrupt.

KDLarsen said:
Bwahahaha, this judge pretty much hammered home what Orly has been struggling to understand for years now. It went something like this:
Taitz: That's what discovery is for. Let's hear the witnesses, have trial.
Court: We aren't hearing witnesses. That why we have pleadings and briefs.
Taitz: You have the voter roll information.
Court: Do I? You are a lawyer. You should know that evidence is not stuff printed from the internet.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Best line ever!
 
This is the email that cost her 4 Gs

Taitz wrote:
Your opposition will constitute Obstruction of Justice, Aiding and Abetting in the elections fraud in forgery and treason in allowing a foreign citizen to usurp the U.S. Presidency with an aid of forged IDs and usurp the civil rights of the U.S. citizens. I would highly recommend not to attempt intimidating me any further.
At any rate your opposition and your attempt of intimidation and your allegiance or lack of allegiance to the United States of America is duly noted.
Just make sure not to forget to bring with you Mr. Obama’s application, registration and financial aid application. Please make sure to bring the original documents and 2 certified copies.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation,
Sincerely and with great regard,
Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ
Click to expand...
 
KDLarsen said:
...this judge pretty much hammered home what Orly has been struggling to understand for years now.
Click to expand...

Indeed I've come to the conclusion that Orly Taitz practices law the way many pseudo-scientists practice science: that is, they each have absolutely no clue how the daily professional practice of each discpline goes, and believes that their fumbling incompetence should somehow be given a charitable hearing and preferential consideration. I think it's not too strong a statement to say that this woman has absolutely no clue how the law and courts work.

I've concluded she literally believes she can just waltz into court with her downloaded PDFs and her retired typewriter salesmen and pound her fists on the tables and screech away at how everyone is covering up for Barack Obama.

Straw Man said:
Orly is in meltdown...

...the fact her 'trial' has been dismissed in Indiana.
Click to expand...

The dismissal order in that case is a thing of beauty. It summarizes Taitz' most notable gaffes in all her preceding court cases, which should be required reading for all Birthers before attempting to debate anything. And it goes on at length basically saying that Orly Taitz has no clue what she's doing.

Even worse, not only has her complaint been dismissed, the trial has been vacated ex post facto. That means she will be unable to introduce any of its vacuous testimony in any other proceeding, including the testimony of her (non-)expert witnesses.

I foresee that she's going to take this crazy into court sometime soon, and accuse a judge to his or her face that they are anti-American or corrupt.
Click to expand...

I agree with your prediction, and I think the result will not be ugly. While all attorneys hold private opinions of the various judges before whom they argue, there is a decorum and a respect that must attend any official dealings. Regardless of one's opinion for the human being sitting on the bench, the officers of the court are bound to respect the bench. Any who don't, quickly discover just how much actual power can support a judge's wrath.

Alferd_Packer said:
This is the email that cost her 4 Gs
Click to expand...

Yes, when I read that my jaw dropped. The sheer arrogance of that woman boggles my mind. I think it's dwarfed only by her delusions of grandeur. Kudos to the defense attorneys for moving for sanctions. If other attorneys follow suit, Taitz will get hit hard where it hurts her the most: the pocketbook.
 
For those who may be interested to hear Orly in action, she provided a link on her website to an audio recording of the trial in Indiana on 22nd October.

 
Not just the $4,000 in sanctions (which she'll need to report to the Cali. bar, though I suspect she'll 'forget') but $500 to fly in fake black Army captain Pamela Barnett, who didn't get to testify, and $460 for her hotel bill, plus the costs of her flights. This nonsense has cost Taitz upwards of $5000, but the evidence (none of which was probative) has all been stricken, the complaint dismissed and the ruling has been made in favour of the defendants. http://www.scribd.com/doc/111951184/In-2012-11-1-TvDPM-Post-Trial-Order2

Too bad, so sad for Orly. Though she does have yet another loss to cite, and a nice quote from one of her previous cases, Rhodes v MacDonald, in para 52:

In the end, this court is not "Wonderland", and "saying something is so does not make it so"
Click to expand...
 
JayUtah said:
Was I mistaken to think there were no recording devices permitted in the court room?
Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure, but as with everything in OrlyLaw, she will claim to have received it via a third party if it is actually the case. Judging by the sound quality of the audio, it seems to be located very close to Orly and Black.
 
Cameras and video was banned, not sure what the rules are/were regarding audio recording equipment.
 
Straw Man said:
For those who may be interested to hear Orly in action, she provided a link on her website to an audio recording of the trial in Indiana on 22nd October.

Click to expand...

Was I mistaken to think that she has not one *********** clue about how to present herself in an Indiana courtroom?
 
:eye-poppi

Surely this will earn someone a Vex Lit and sanctions?

Keith Judd, Keith Judd, so good they filed it twice.
 
Judd already has vex lit status in various jurisdictions. IIRC in 2002 he was past 800 cases, so he should be up to 900-1000 by now.

It wouldn't break my heart to see some of that vex lit status transferred to Orly, given that she's now creating a vehicle for Judd to continue his abuse of the legal system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom