Re: Brinks v Jim Rojas New Motion

["Crash Gordon" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Wonder if they know what/who Nomen Nescio even is - actually they should
right?





--
Crash Gordon
-------ouch------

<I feel like I'm diagonally parked in a parallel universe>
"Nomen Nescio" <nobody@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:974cbe429c4a0d0a946142b19d261dc5@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| You just don't seem to get it, Jim.  Every word you write here will be
| quoted back to the judge in an attempt to make you look bad.  The more
crap
| you sling at Brink's, the worse it will make you look.  If you're going to
| piss people off, at least wait until after a judgment is entered against
| you.
|
| You're playing a game of poker, only you think you're playing blackjack.
| The judge doesn't care what you write here, except insofar as it makes you
| look like a bad person.  She doesn't read this newsgroup.  She only reads
| what people put in the motions they send her.  You're not sending her any,
| so she's only reading Brink's side of the story.  That's your fault, not
| Sableman's.  It's not his job to present a fair and balanced view of
| things.  It's his job to represent Brink's.
|
| You're in the fix you're in because you didn't answer the lawsuit when you
| were supposed to.  The judge has given you an opportunity to make one last
| legal challenge before you get hammered, and you are apparently wasting
it.
|
| In short, Brink's is following the rules of the litigation game, and you
| are not.  All the bitching and moaning here and on your website won't
| change the outcome.  You have about one week left to file a good legal
| argument with the court on why a Texas court doesn't have the authority to
| enter a judgment against you.  Don't blow the opportunity.  See if you can
| hire a lawyer for the limited purpose of preparing this motion; he doesn't
| have to represent you for the entire case.  The money you spend on lawyers
| now is money Brink's can't take away from you later.
|
| For the benefit of the Brink's lawyers who are reading this:  there are
| multiple Nomen Nescios posting messages here.  This one, I assure you, is
| not Jim Rojas posting under an alias, and your assertions that Jim is
| posting under aliases are not only without foundation, they border on the
| ridiculous.
|
| Let's see you quote that to the judge.
|