Housing is a Civil Right

Housing is a Civil Right

Thursday, March 23, 2017

KingCast and Mortgage Movies See Rude White Wells Fargo Lawyer Grab Courtroom Camera and Assault Black Reporter to Cover up Forgery, Mortgage and Foreclosure Fraud.

26 August Update:  1. Hearsay is still inadmissible. 2. False accusations about racial antipathy and 3. apparent lie from Attorney Terry Johnson, or at least on his letterhead.....

From Complaining Party's Surreply (I am having a difficult time loading up the revised updated document to Scribd so for now this is what you get):

Q:       Hearsay: Should the OLR effectively strike any Hearsay or notion of Complaining Party being disbarred or that he "moved from state to state for the purpose of shamefully manufacturing incidents that he unsuccessfully tries to parlay into lawsuit and disciplinary actions"

A:        Yes. First of all it is sloppy, sleazy and bad lawyering. Citation to what a police officer said about what Complaining Party allegedly said when said officer was derelict in his duties and never filed any report is completely irresponsible. Further, Complainant is not disbarred nor has he ever been disbarred. He is suspended but unlike Wisconsin attorney Richard Kranitz who committed wire fraud and served 18 months in Club Fed, Complainant has no criminal record WHATSOEVER.  See Case No. 2013AP2128–D. (2014).


          Second, Hearsay is not admissible in the Ohio Bar Disciplinary proceedings that Respondent uses        
          to deflect attention away from his own conduct. To wit:

                  In Disciplinary Counsel v. Frost, 122 Ohio St.3d 219, 2009-Ohio-2870, a white female Civil Rights lawyer from Complaining Party’s hometown of Cleveland Heights, Ohio received stern rebuke for relying as Hearsay.  Respondent stands in the same exact shoes, unless of course Hearsay is now admissible before the OLR but not before Ohio. Now honestly, THAT would be interesting, n’est-ce  pas?  From Frost:

{¶ 39} Moreover, respondent seems unable to understand fundamentalsevidentiary and procedural rules, a problem manifested by her disjointed efforts to present her case before the hearing panel. 

When questioned about the firsthand knowledge she claimed to have of the improprieties she had alleged, respondent referred to having learned the information from “someone else” or by “looking at documents,” thereby erroneously implying that unreliable hearsay may serve as competent proof.

Third, the Record now reveals that Complainant was and is clearly a functioning member of this society with Mayoral awards and agreement with NH City Attorney’s office during the time period in which the bogus criminal complaints against him were being DISMISSED.


Again, Petitioner moved from state to state because he was a WIRELESS ZONING PROFESSIONAL and a LICENSED TITLE INSURANCE PRODUCER – thereby learning much about the mortgage industry that led him to this Deposition, ab initio

Q:  Would it matter if Complaining Party were prejudiced against White Males?

A:          No. For the Record however Complaining Party told one of his sisters she should marry a white male who loves her and she did, and now 25 years later he’s still a great guy, fancy that.  What is truly comical about this argument is the FACT that a white male himself stated that racism and reactionary politics played a role in Complainant’s suspension from law, and that is a FACT.[1]





[1] See also a letter written by Chris Hookway, a Republican white male who was Complaining Party’s business partner before the bogus criminal charges were brought. He hates bigoted white males as 
much or more than Complaining Party does because negatively reflects on him. See Appendix A.



Q:        Is the fact that Litchfield, Cavo settled the sexual harassment case of Klein v. Litchfield    
            Cavo relevant?

A:        Yes. Not only because it goes to show how PARTNERS at a law firm conduct themselves but because Respondent’s sleazy lawyer Terry Johnson tells a lie:[1]  

“What King has done is to cherry pick press accounts and allegations that the plaintiff made in the lawsuit, the accuracy of which Litchfield Cavo is contesting, and the accuracy of which King knows Litchfield Cavo is contesting.”

Bullshit. This case SETTLED as noted in the PACER screen shot below at the end of this  very Q & A section. So Attorney Johnson -- who lent his letterhead to his brother Mark Rattan so he could lie in this proceeding -- is condoning Fraud Upon this Court after falsely claiming that Complaining Party was so doing.  They throw around the word sleazy at Complaining Party well these men are as sleazy as it comes, attacking journalists and abusing their own white women, yet they expect the OLR to protect them.
Now then because of that apparent lie, here is precisely what is going to happen next:

Respondent and his Counsel – who are particularly fond of trying to implicate Complaining Party in fraudulent commentary – will now, within the next seven (7) calendar days, provide any and all official documents that prove their allegations referenced above using Attorney Johnson’s letterhead , again, i.e. 

“….the accuracy of which Litchfield Cavo is contesting, and the 
accuracy of which King knows Litchfield Cavo is contesting.”

                  If Complainant does not receive that information by next Sunday evening he will file an ethics complaint against Terry Johnson not because Complaining Party is prejudiced against white males, but rather because he will have earned it.  Done.


[1] Query, is it Johnson or is it Rattan?  Rattan signed off on the filing but Johnson lent the letterhead so when Complaining Party goes to make his next YouTube videos he is directly holding Johnson accountable.

***************

15 July 2017 Update: Oh, great. Racist AND Sexist, nice.
The simple fact of the matter is that Litchfield, Cavo have been sued in Federal Court for being sexist pigs so that fits perfectly into this puzzle, along with Wells Fargo hired Counsel walking around calling people who look like Petitioner “niggers.”

Klein v. Litchfield, Cavo 15-CV-03646, Cavo as reported by Above the Law, here is my email to the Office of Lawyer Regulation, Johnson and others:


Yah if we want to play that game let's talk about a Name Partner and his sexism shall we?http://abovethelaw.com/2015/05/so-i-cant-tell-my-associate-to-do-more-to-satisfy-her-husband/ 


On that subject, another way to get to know your employees is to spend some time with their family. Defendant Eckert also discussed Plaintiff Klein’s sex life with her husband and said 


“I feel your pain, I don’t know how you’re married to Bari.” 


While each day the conversation would begin relating to work, Defendant Eckert would inevitably bring the conversation to relate to Plaintiff Klein’s personal life. Those conversations included questions about how often Plaintiff Klein had sex with her husband, how it felt to have sex in her parents’ home, why Plaintiff Klein did not have sex more often and asking if plaintiff Klein would ever cheat on her husband. 


 ********* 

Apparently, Klein didn’t appreciate all this alleged great advice and asked her firm to do something about it. As Law 360 reports: Klein regularly told the firm’s partners about Eckert’s behavior, saying she felt she was being treated differently because of her gender, but nothing was done to improve the situation, according to the complaint. 

Klein had a “severe” panic attack one day in the office, but the firm did not call for an ambulance until Klein’s mother, who learned what happened, called one of the partners and demanded that her daughter be taken to the hospital. By firing Klein only five days after she returned from her FMLA leave, it will be difficult for Litchfield Cavo to argue that the two are not connected, her attorney, Jesse Rose, told Law 360 Tuesday. 


***********


But see, it wasn’t retaliation, the firm just thought she needed more time to recover and… yeah, I can’t push this pretense any more. Klein seeks compensatory and punitive damages of an unspecified amount and Litchfield Cavo and Eckert have a pretty dismal set of allegations to overcome. 


........I suppose this is all my fault as well? The fact of the matter is, in my 52 years on this planet as a black man sensitive to the concerns of all minorities and people of moderate to lower-incomes (including many white males) I have come to know the presence of Hegemony, Racism, Sexism and that progeny of social anathema. Consider it as parallel to the Miller Test for obscenity, 


"I know it when I see it." 



And so it should come to pass that with a few key strokes in PACER I uncover this gem, fomented by another PARTNER. That corporate sickness trickles down folks, and it trickles right on down the tops of the heads of people like Mark W. Rattan, but not on my watch it doesn't. I have a history of exposing corruption and it is not about to stop now. Apparently I should have been spending more time in PACER to learn about nasty white men and the nasty white men who defend them. This one is going up on the blog and into the public SCRIBD document later today. 

 The effect a cameraman has on a subject is completely irrelevant. There have been video depositions for ages on end, and Petitioner has run video at them and publicly posted them. Petitioner has a right to take pictures, pure and simple and he never has had to ask permission to take a few stills but yet and still that is what I did. I had not violated any rules yet the Hearing Officer is treating me as if I am the problem, which is complete nonsense. 

Referee Winiarski then proceeds to browbeat Petitioner with the notion that he is illegally leaving his camera on but this is yet another red herring as Petitioner had already explained to him that he always turns his camera off during recesses as he has for literally hundreds of other occasions except for ONE TIME when there was an equipment malfunction because of a loose mechanism on the record on/off button. 


The way that Referee Winiarski and the Respondent treated Petitioner was abusive and patently ABSURD.

 But prior to this explosion the Referee had begrudgingly outlined the ambit of Petitioner's authority in this video.

"We will call him the press in this case...." Well that's good because that is exactly what Petitioner is. He worked for large daily and weekly press and now he is his own press. Welcome to the 21st Century.  


"Stop taking my picture, he is not allowed to take my picture." 


Again, FALSE. 


"I ask that this man be removed." 

"No." 
"My research shows that this is a public hearing and my research shows that he is allowed to be here. It borders on harassment when he sticks the camera in someone's face" 

....states Winiarski as he states that taking pictures is intimidating and implores Petitioner to stand up when taking photos, failing to realize that he had already admonished Petitioner for standing up.  This led Petitioner to note "I can't win for losing." 


Again, Referee Winiarski's Petitioner routinely runs video Depositions in rooms smaller than this and the proof has been provided. There was no need for the abuse tendered toward Petitioner from Respondent and from Referee Winiarski.  


As to Attorney Rattan Petitioner stated:


"These are the issues of living in a free society.... that is his burden."  

Update: Terry E. Johnson, a Principal at Peterson, Johnson & Murray is to represent Mark W. Rattan, Esq.  You can best believe whenever I come around these blue-blood firms hire the biggest guns they can get, always a "super lawyer." That's fine. I'm a super lawyer too, but without the clout. And without the connections. But there's only so far clout and connections will get you when you have an asshat for a client, caught on video.

So I'm ready. I sent a reasonable settlement Demand in that cannot be discussed and if they reject it, you get to watch it all unfold right here, and courtroom sessions will most definitely occur ON VIDEO, as I have shot in Wisconsin Courtrooms on prior occasion.



Query, as to the new Federal suspension of successful anti-establishment attorney Alison Motta, can anyone doubt that what Mark Rattan did in an open hearing was worse than muttering something under one's breath as she did in Federal Court?  Her comment was not even fucking AUDIBLE but had to be boosted from the sound file. Unreal.

My comment in the Chicago Tribune story.
This is ridiculous. A verbal reprimand at most was warranted. The Court hates firebrands and those who defeat the system. I was an Assistant State Attorney and Federal litigator in the 90's and now shoot courtroom video and settle mortgages.  Establishment judges and referees help establishment lawyers.... watch this video of a Milwaukee Wisconsin area lawyer just two hours away attack me without any punishment from a hearing officer.  This matter is currently before the bar and will be the subject of First Amendment litigation. 

and 





CHANGE.ORG Petition to Fund First Amendment Litigation.



 
Wisconsin is dirty. Watch this arrogant Wells Fargo attorney get away with assault and disorderly conduct last week. They actually ended up throwing ME out!!!! 


Follow the action here:


OK So the Referee is James J. Winiaski Esq. who was in complicity with Mark W. Rattan, Esq -- the jerk who traversed 10' of room to attack me about a still-mounted (tripod) 3.5" Sony Action camera that was "in his face." He did this in direct violation of a specific Court Order because the banks and their attorneys cannot control my media and they are fearful of it. 


The Referee's failure to admonish him for his threatening and abusive actions that clearly constituted a breach of the peace under state and local code represents an unlawful Chilling of my First Amendment Rights and Responsibilities as a journalist. This is particularly true given his consistent "warnings" levied at me for no reason, simply for taking a handful of pictures from time to time. My picture count was low and I kept it that way so as not to offend. 


Ms. Nora has been practicing 42 years with nary an accusation of frivolous or sanctionable conduct. I was an escrow attorney who started Mortgage Movies Journal 6 years ago to document the fraud and unlawful foreclosures that I helped perpetrate and perpetuate many years earlier. The only other time I was denied access was in Maryland where they stole the Recorder of Deeds election from another honest person, a black man by the name of La Mar Gunn. He is the area NAACP president. 


Paul W. Schwarzenbart Esq. is the Office of Lawyer Regulation attorney who is prosecuting Wendy Alison Nora Esq, for being a solid advocate for the people and for exposing robo-signing, forgery and specific fraud upon the Courts. John Willian Verant Esq, is her attorney. 


Other tags include Stafford & Rosenbaum, Litchfield Cavo, Wisconsin Chief Justice Patience Roggensack, City of Madison Wisconsin, City of Milwaukee Wisconsin, Harley-Davidson, KingCast First Amendment, Free Press, Chilling Conduct, Assault, Prior Restraint, ACLU, Racism, Sexism, Mortgage Fraud, Foreclosure Fraud, Forgery, Robo-signing, Standing to Foreclose, ACLU, NAACP #JamesWiniaski #MarkRattan, #PaulSchwarzenbart #WendyAlisonNora #JohnWillianVerant #StaffordRosenbaum, #LitchfieldCavo #PatienceRoggensack #CityofMadison #CityofMilwaukee #HarleyDavidson #KingCast #FirstAmendment #FreePress #ChillingConduct #Assault #PriorRestraint #ACLU #Racism #Sexism #MortgageFraud #ForeclosureFraud, #Forgery #Robosigning #StandingtoForeclose #ACLU #NAACP