Re: What's a Brinks 4000?

[Jim Rojas <jrojas+tech-man.com>]

1. Providing false testimony
2. Claiming intellectual property rights on products they don't even
manufacturer.
3. Claiming ownership on a Arrowhead PGM670 programmer that was made
before Brinks even started peddling alarms.
4. There is no 4.
5. Claiming ownership on programmers Honeywell holds copyrights on.
6. Claiming that panels installed OEM in new homes still belong to Brinks.
7. Claiming that Jim Rojas' Tech Help software contains Brinks
intellectual property.
8. Claiming that Jim Rojas does business regularly in Texas, even though
a service call is only 900+ miles away.
9. Threatening Jim Rojas webshosting company with legal action if they
didn't shut him down immediately.

There's alot more...


Jim Rojas




Nomen Nescio wrote:
>> I am sending letters to all Thompson Coburn offices in the USA just to
>> make sure that each office is fully aware what this jerk is up to.
>
> Just what is it that you think Sableman is doing that is so wrong?
>
> He's a lawyer, and he's getting paid money to represent Brink's.  He isn't
> getting paid to be a judge.  He sure isn't getting paid to represent you.
> If he took money from Brink's and didn't do his best to nail your ass to
> the wall, he'd be a crook for taking money and not doing his job.  He has
> an ethical obligation to do the best job he can of representing his client.
>
> You are supposed to have an attorney who is equally dedicated to
> representing your interests.  You would be upset if you were paying your
> lawyer lots of money and he started sounding like he was representing the
> other side.  Your lawyer has a duty to do his best for you, just as
> Sableman has a duty to do his best for Brink's.  It isn't personal.  For
> whatever reason, you don't have a lawyer.  That's not Sableman's fault.
>
> Getting pissed off at Sableman is like climbing into the ring with a
> professional boxer, and then getting pissed off because he beats  your ass.
> That's his job.  If you think he's hitting below the belt, that's different
> -- tell us why.  Otherwise, your letter to the other offices will probably
> only be taken as an indication that he's doing a good job.  Why would they
> object to him winning a case for a client?
>