Re: Brinks Home Security v Jim Rojas

["Roland More" <NoSpamroland@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I certainly hope you have a strategy for fighting this action other than
posting here. As a practical matter you might not want to post that
information on this NG for Brinks to read of course. In case you've never
had the misfortune, I can tell you going into Federal Court is no small
thing. Perhaps you have consulted an attorney and are shocked at the amount
of retainer he or she wants for this case. Just guessing I wouldn't be
surprised if an experienced attorney wants up to 25K as a retainer to take
this on. (I don't think there are many attorneys that would want this pro
bono either). $25K is more than most have in their pay pal account I am
sure. (Guess what? Brinks isn't going to lose this by running out of cash).
If not that then what? You are going to pull a rabbit out of your hat? You
can't show up to court in a bunny suit and hope to hop around the issues. I
know several cop buddies that have been cited for contempt of court (and
served processing time) just for being late to court (with good reason). I
don't know what kind of show this judge runs, but it seems you haven't
gotten on her good side just yet. The Federal Courtroom is a very busy
place. The judge isn't going to slow down and take time to listen to a (pro
se) defendant bumble through an argument to make a point for the court to
act on. That is not how it works. From what you posted so far it is like
watching your execution in slow motion. I hope this thing somehow turns
around for you. Good luck.


"Jim Rojas" <jrojas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:46958a78$0$8006$4c368faf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Multi billion dollar corporation feels financially threatened by a small
> online alarm business located in Tampa, Florida.
>
> Read all about it.
>
> http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-txndce/case_no-3:2007cv00437/case_id-165443/
>
> The court documents are all available for public viewing:
>
> http://www.tech-man.com/brinks.asp
>
> Jim Rojas