Indiana ballot challenge (smackdown for Orly)

[borealis]

8 Responses to “Letter was sent to Joseph Vigil, attorney for Arpaio and Zullo, advising him that his clients will be in contempt of court and there will be a warrant for their arrest if they do not show up in court on Tuesday. Write to Arpaio and Zullo and demand that they testify in court. Demand refund of all donations, if they do not testify to their findings on Tuesday. They took your money under false pretenses. They have no intention to prosecute Obama, if they do not show up to testify.”The PhoenixJune 9th, 2012 @ 3:01 pmYEEEESSSSS! Way to go, Orly! Now this is what has been needed the whole time! Can you send the “show up” subpoena to: Corsi, and others that have been giving you a hard time and not cooperating to help you, help America!And could that also include: anyone from Hawaii? anyone from Mississippi? Ga.? N.H.? D.C.? Ca.? Florida? Judge Land? etc.? I think you’ve got them cornerd!~The PhoenixJune 9th, 2012 @ 3:08 pmAlso: can you (from now on) go to the same court in Indiana…to be able to keep that option open, to have people you need in court, to be required to respond to the subpoena?Could this also include: Obama? Holder? Anyone from the DOJ? Anyone from Congress? The Mainstream Media? Etc.? Great job, Orly!"The Phoenix"? Obot? GG, are you playing with Lena again? [-X Try a bird of a different feather?

[Mark]

Assuming for a moment that the first thing the Judge in Indiana does is hear arguments on whether "lead plaintiff" Orly Taitz has standing and rules that she doesn't, then what will happen if no other plaintiffs are present? I can just see Orly lose it and start arguing that she is authorized to argue the case for the other plaintiffs. For now she's careful about not crossing the line by emphasizing that she's not acting as counsel, but with all the recent stress from the election loss she may slip.Would that make the case for unauthorized practice of law any stronger?Does anybody think that the AG has already discussed the case with the Marion County DA's office about Orly's ULP? Could there possibly be a warrant for her arrest waiting to be executed after the court hearing in Indiana? Or am I just daydreaming too loudly?

[SuzieC]

ULP is not usually a criminal offense but there could be a whopping $$$$$ fine.

[Sterngard Friegen]

Assuming for a moment that the first thing the Judge in Indiana does is hear arguments on whether "lead plaintiff" Orly Taitz has standing and rules that she doesn't, then what will happen if no other plaintiffs are present?http://freeemoticonsandsmileys.com/anim ... toilet.gif

[A Legal Lohengrin]

Does anybody think that the AG has already discussed the case with the Marion County DA's office about Orly's ULP? Could there possibly be a warrant for her arrest waiting to be executed after the court hearing in Indiana? Or am I just daydreaming too loudly?Possible but highly unlikely. There is a criminal offense of UPL in Indiana, but it is generally used against people who have no law license at all and hold themselves out as attorneys, rather than those who practice without an Indiana license. The practice of notaries using the term "Notario" to attract Hispanic clientele--which is intended to indicate to the victims that the person using the title is authorized to perform services only generally performed in the United States by licensed attorneys--is an example that has resulted in criminal prosecution in many states including Indiana.It is more likely that the court would issue an order prohibiting Orly's continued illegal practice of law. Violating this order would then constitute contempt of court, triggering civil and criminal penalties.This is separate from the issue of bar discipline over unauthorized practice of law and also separate from a criminal prosecution. If the Indiana Bar Association took disciplinary action, some response by the California Bar Association in the nature of reciprocal discipline becomes almost automatic at that point.

[TollandRCR]

...If the Indiana Bar Association took disciplinary action, some response by the California Bar Association in the nature of reciprocal discipline becomes almost automatic at that point.Loh, is this a hope or a fact? It is hard to see the California Bar Association doing anything almost automatically. They blithely ignored $20,000 worth of sanctions.

[A Legal Lohengrin]

...If the Indiana Bar Association took disciplinary action, some response by the California Bar Association in the nature of reciprocal discipline becomes almost automatic at that point.Loh, is this a hope or a fact? It is hard to see the California Bar Association doing anything almost automatically. They blithely ignored $20,000 worth of sanctions.That wasn't bar discipline.Reciprocal discipline is what got CEL3 disbarred in California. It really is nearly automatic. Since they can't actually disbar her, I'm not sure exactly what form it would take, but there would be something, even if we didn't become privy to it.Sadly, if you read bar discipline on attorneys who have actually been disbarred, the temporal length and scope of the misconduct in question is often absurd. It takes a lot to add up to something that you see. IMO California has been especially slothful, but discipline by another state would, I believe, have some result. Not wishful thinking. It is what I have seen occur in practice.

Edit: The wishful thinking may actually be whether the Indiana Bar Association does anything in the nature of sternly worded public findings and conclusions. Should that happen, though, it will have consequences.

[Sterngard Friegen]

I agree with Loh. Some other state or federal court is going to have to act first. Then California won't be able to ignore it any more. Maybe Taitz got a pass on the $20,000 worth of sanctions in Georgia, but as a repeat offender I don't think California could avert its eyes any more.Of course, I could be completely wrong. Maybe the lawyers who run the state's discipline system don't mind that we're the laughingstock of the civilized world.

[neonzx]

Assuming for a moment that the first thing the Judge in Indiana does is hear arguments on whether "lead plaintiff" Orly Taitz has standing and rules that she doesn't, then what will happen if no other plaintiffs are present?http://freeemoticonsandsmileys.com/anim ... oilet.gifA clog in the plumbing? :-k

[neonzx]

Of course, I could be completely wrong. Maybe the lawyers who run the state's discipline system don't mind that we're the laughingstock of the civilized world.Who are these people and how are they selected/elected to serve on the disciplinary board of the bar in CA?

[A Legal Lohengrin]

Who are these people and how are they selected/elected to serve on the disciplinary board of the bar in CA?Apparently they scour the hospitals of California seeking candidates in a persistent vegetative state.

[TollandRCR]

...Who are these people and how are they selected/elected to serve on the disciplinary board of the bar in CA?I would hazard the guess that they are selected based upon their experience in the field of attorney ethics and discipline, i.e., from the ranks of the recently disciplined.

[Mark]

I agree with Loh. Some other state or federal court is going to have to act first. Then California won't be able to ignore it any more. Maybe Taitz got a pass on the $20,000 worth of sanctions in Georgia, but as a repeat offender I don't think California could avert its eyes any more.Of course, I could be completely wrong. Maybe the lawyers who run the state's discipline system don't mind that we're the laughingstock of the civilized world.Here is the form to file with the Indiana Supreme Court: [/break1]in.gov/judiciary/discipline/files/grform.pdf]http://www.in.gov/judiciary/discipline/ ... Apparently, in Indiana anyone, not just clients, can file a complaint against an attorney ([/break1]in.gov/judiciary/discipline/2373.htm]http://www.in.gov/judiciary/discipline/2373.htm).Could the way to get Orly disbarred is for someone, with exceptional knowledge of the History of O and with outstanding writing skills, to fill out the above form and attach all the pertinent documentation?

[ObjectiveDoubter]

orly taitz


June 9th, 2012 @ 12:48 pm


no, i am the lead plaintiff, as I was in NH. Indiana allows elections fraud complaints to be submitted by anyone. I submitted my own complaint and the sec of state and the Elections commission ignored it [/break1]orlytaitzesq.com/?p=102709&cpage=1#comment-208120]http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=102709&c ... ent-208120





Indiana law does not allow that. She never filed form CAN-1 with the elections commission. She sent 209 pages of poo with a HAVA complaint form. That has been ignored.





But she had no standing before the IEC, never filed with the IEC and cannot complaint about anything IEC has done.Well, at least we now know why Orly thinks she has standing.





Am I following this now? In Indiana, she totally inappropriately filed a HAVA complaint along with her "certified copy" of the Georgia transcript (sans findings of course). (That abuse of HAVA alone makes me boil over http://yoursmiles.org/tsmile/rtfm/t2426.gif but I am also relieved that it was therefore ignored and scarce resources spared.)





So she thinks her standing is justified because she thinks they should have allowed her to appear as a plaintiff before the Election Commission? Even if that were her argument, that isn't what is argued in the papers, IIRC.





Oh, she is so in for a surprise. I am still hoping it will be broadcast, at least the audio, but so far it doesn't look like that is planned.

[Jamuhuri]

MARK wrote ...."Could the way to get Orly disbarred is for someone, with exceptional knowledge of the History of O and with outstanding writing skills, to fill out the above form and attach all the pertinent documentation?"





Someone apparently did in April 2009 - The complaint, obviously written by someone with legal training, is a scathing condemnation of her behavior compared to the California attorney standards and law.





[/break1]wordpress.com/2009/04/19/orly-taitz-complaint-to-the-state-bar-of-california/]http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/ ... alifornia/

[neonzx]

[link]http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=102709,h ... /?p=102709[/link]


Responses to “Letter was sent to Joseph Vigil, attorney for Arpaio and Zullo, advising him that his clients will be in contempt of court and there will be a warrant for their arrest if they do not show up in court on Tuesday. Write to Arpaio and Zullo and demand that they testify in court. Demand refund of all donations, if they do not testify to their findings on Tuesday. They took your money under false pretenses. They have no intention to prosecute Obama, if they do not show up to testify.”





Marty


June 9th, 2012 @ 4:10 pm





Sounds like it will give you a big chance, like in Georgia, to present your case.





Will you be using any multimedia for your exhibits?





And will there be a live stream so we on the east coast can watch this trial?





orly taitz


June 9th, 2012 @ 4:25 pm





I will not do live stream


(

[neonzx]

[link]http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=103093,h ... /?p=103093[/link]





Please come to the courtroom, judge Reid, Superior court Indianapolis, Tuesday June 12, 1:30. Emergency injunction and stay hearing to remove Obama from Gen election ballot in Indiana





Posted on | June 9, 2012 | No Comments





If you can, please come to court. We need witnesses, members of the media, cameramen. We have a criminal with a stolen Social Security number and forged documents sitting in the White House. We have to make sure judges are following the law, the facts and the Constitution and remove this criminal from the ballot. We need to hold all of the bureaucrats and judges accountable.

[TollandRCR]

...Someone apparently did in April 2009 - The complaint, obviously written by someone with legal training, is a scathing condemnation of her behavior compared to the California attorney standards and law.The California Bar has long known of the legal shenanigans committed by Orly Taitz. It knew when the referenced letter was sent, it knew from previous complaints, it knew from Judge Land's report, ..., it knows. It has to be the case that its officers know and have known for four years.





The only explanation that I can imagine is cowardice. They are afraid of the backlash from California's extreme right wing, some of whom are inexplicably in positions of power. They may also believe, as I do, that disbarring her will do little to keep her out of courtrooms. That is the job of the judges, which most of them have failed to accept.

[DaveMuckey]

I will not do live streamI don't think she has standing.

[Mark]

MARK wrote ...."Could the way to get Orly disbarred is for someone, with exceptional knowledge of the History of O and with outstanding writing skills, to fill out the above form and attach all the pertinent documentation?"





Someone apparently did in April 2009 - The complaint, obviously written by someone with legal training, is a scathing condemnation of her behavior compared to the California attorney standards and law.





[/break1]wordpress.com/2009/04/19/orly-taitz-complaint-to-the-state-bar-of-california/]http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/ ... alifornia/That was in California where she is licensed. I think Indiana would only be able to look at behavior and events which took place in their jurisdiction. Once Orly loses, she will undoubtedly post a lot of crap about the "corrupt" judge. Together with her behavior in the underlying case, the documents she filed, the subpoenaes she "issued," and other miscellaneous Orlyisms, there should be enough to write a new complaint directed to the Indiana Supreme Court's Disciplinary Committee. Then, if Orly decided to go up the appellate ladder, the complaint could be amended to include additional information. If Indiana acts, then maybe we get California to re-evaluate its position and throw the garbage sink at her, including whatever was lobbed at her in 2009, everything since, plus the Indiana record.

[GreatGrey]

I will not do live streamI don't think she has standing.Makes it hard to live stream on the electric fence if ya don't have standing.

[SuzieC]

The cowardice of the CA bar disciplinary system is puzzling. Here is what Ohio did with a similar paper-terrorism lawyer, albeit on a much smaller scale than Taitz: [/break1]sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/0/2003/2003-ohio-4756.pdf]http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/ ... o-4756.pdf.

[Mr. Gneiss]

Most states have rules in place for their licensed professionals regarding disciplinary actions taken by other states. In Colorado, a licensed professional must report to the licensing board any disciplinary action taken by another state. If the licensee fails to disclose the discipline (it can be unlicensed practice) meted out by the other state, the licensing board has authority to discipline the licensee for both the original infraction and the failure to report it.My experience with Board discipline is that it is very, very difficult to have a license revoked for substandard practice. Most Board discipline is based on very specific objective criteria, because it is easy. Things like practicing with a lapsed license, failure to file "something" within the statutory time frame, use of a control substance, etc. seem to be the norm. Use of controlled substances in Colorado is grounds for immediate revocation. The reasoning being that a professional under the influence of illicit drugs is not minimally competent to protect the public health, safety and welfare. On the other hand, it took the land surveying board in Colorado three years to revoke a land surveyor's license based on overwhelming evidence of substandard practice, failure to record plats, etc. In that three years he never responded once to the board inquiries. He renewed his licence twice during the three-year period! If he had responded in a timely fashion, he would likely have been put on probation, required to take remedial course work and have his plats reviewed by a Board monitor for two years.I am not defending the California Bar, but they do not seem all that different from how other states deal with discipline. YMMV

Edit: The main reasons usually given for the length of disciplinary reviews are due process and not wanting to take away the professional's livelihood.

[bob]

I think Indiana would only be able to look at behavior and events which took place in their jurisdiction.Taitz is not licensed in Indiana. She is pro se there. Any pro se litigant can act horribly, violate rules, etc. It is up to the judge hearing the case to decide what punishment, if any, to impose. (If the judge sanctions Taitz more than a $1000, that must reported the California State Bar.)





Beyond her courtroom antics, Indiana will only be interested in going after Taitz if she practices law (i.e., represents others or hold herself out) without a license. The Indiana AG already has accused Taitz of UPL in some of its papers, so it is well aware of her actions.

[A Legal Lohengrin]

I think Indiana would only be able to look at behavior and events which took place in their jurisdiction.Taitz is not licensed in Indiana. She is pro se there. Any pro se litigant can act horribly, violate rules, etc. It is up to the judge hearing the case to decide what punishment, if any, to impose. (If the judge sanctions Taitz more than a $1000, that must reported the California State Bar.)





Beyond her courtroom antics, Indiana will only be interested in going after Taitz if she practices law (i.e., represents others or hold herself out) without a license. The Indiana AG already has accused Taitz of UPL in some of its papers, so it is well aware of her actions.It is the position of the defendants that this is, in fact, exactly what Orly has been doing.





The Indiana Bar Association has disciplined attorneys who have never even physically entered the state for improper solicitation of clients.