Re: How to Takeover Any Alarm System

["Crash Gordon" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

totally agree

--

Rob Giordano
Microsoft MVP - FrontPage





"Just Looking" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4697ccad$0$20555$4c368faf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|I don't know what Jim will or won't heed. Certainly not advice from anyone
| here it seems. He seems to want to take this case on pro se. It is the
| responsibility of an attorney to control his or her client in the
courtroom.
| Acting pro se removes a layer of protection from the wrath of the court.
| Ignorant and unprotected is not a good place to be in my opinion. I can
only
| guess that Jim has the understanding that all of this actually means
| something to any of these people. Perhaps he thinks they have some
concerns
| about making a decision and whether it is right or wrong. I can tell you
| they don't. They want to win, they want him to be destroyed, and they want
| to use him as an example to others of what can happen if they don't do
| exactly what they say to do and when they say to do it. A successful
| attorney has no conscience. Far to expensive a habit to maintain. He
serves
| the interests of his client. Typically an attorney has no understanding of
| science, it is explained to them in a process called forensics. Think for
a
| moment how utterly ridiculous this "legal" process is when it comes to
what
| society at large has come to rely on to make decisions of fact, versus
what
| a jury has to work with. You are to determine the facts. Okay. You can't
| know any of the parties involved. You can't have any knowledge of the
| situation or any situation deemed too similar. You can't asks questions.
You
| can't have access to any sorts of devices that could give you any
| measurement or any metrics or any sort. You can't know the consequences of
| your decision. If the issue before the court was whether or not a cup had
| hot water in it or cold water, the last things a juror would be allowed
| would be to stick his or her finger in the cup or put in a thermometer. If
| you think I am being silly, ask an attorney these questions. This whole
| "legal" process is out of control and has become a blight and an
affliction
| to us both as a country and a society. It tends to serve only those
involved
| in extracting cash from the system or the process. Jim is just the latest
| uninspired poster child victim.
| I have a feeling this could turn into an awful and expensive learning
| experience for Jim. Of course he may know something he has not shared with
| us yet that makes him less concerned for himself than most here seem to be
| for him.
|
| "Crash Gordon" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| news:46978abf$0$505$815e3792@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > and heed the TRO
| >
| >
| >
| > --
| >
| > Rob Giordano
| > Microsoft MVP - FrontPage
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| > "Nomen Nescio" <nobody@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:e1d3969584b49937360fbc854dc149aa@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | Jim Rojas said:
| > |
| > | >We shall see what happens. I just finished the draft for the motion I
| > | >have to file in a few days.
| > |
| > | I hope this time around you will make the effort to learn what a
motion
| is
| > | supposed to look like.  There are court rules that specify the
details.
| > It
| > | would behoove you to follow them.
| > |
| > | Keep in mind that this motion must not argue the merits of your case.
| It
| > | is a motion asking the judge to set aside the default.   Basically,
you
| > | need to explain to the judge why you didn't file an answer to the
| > | complaint, and promise that from now on, you will play by the rules
and
| > | meet all the deadlines.  It would help if you can tell the judge
you've
| > | hired an attorney.
| > |
| > | If the judge grants your motion, then you will need to prepare and
file
| an
| > | answer to the complaint.  Your "Response to Civil Action" is not an
| > answer!
| > | You really need some professional help with this, because your answer
| must
| > | not only admit or deny each allegation in the complaint, it must also
| list
| > | any affirmative defenses you intend to raise.  If you have any
| > | counterclaims against Brink's, this would be the time to do that as
| well.
| > |
| > | You are playing in the big leagues, against lawyers who have played
this
| > | game before.  I think you are already in over your head, and this is
| just
| > | the beginning, assuming the judge allows you to continue.  It's going
to
| > | get a lot worse.  You may think you can't afford a lawyer, but you
can't
| > | afford not to have one.
| > |
| > | - badenov
| > |
| >
| >
|
|