jaF0
Moderator
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2009
- Posts
- 39,168
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crim...ed-to-distance-himself-from-it-all/ar-AAM3QMh
The Kraken aren't doing well at all.
The Kraken aren't doing well at all.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Days before the hearing, Judge Powell denied a request to seal the names of “Kraken” team’s witnesses. Powell had claimed that they included military and intelligence officials whose security would be put at risk if their names were exposed. The Washington Post debunked at least two of those claims.
One such witness, alternately code-named “Spider” and “Spyder,” was revealed by the paper to be Joshua Merritt, who was touted as a “military intelligence expert” but was actually an army vehicle mechanic—and reportedly never worked in military intelligence.
Another witness, Terpsichore “Tore” Maras-Lindeman, was billed as a secret intelligence contractor but was depicted by the Post as a small-town fraudster because of her civil prosecution in North Dakota that led to more than $25,000 in penalties and attorneys’ fees for allegedly duping donors a supposed Christmas fundraiser. A pro-Trump podcaster, her Navy experience reportedly lasted less than a year.
Detroit argued that instances like these showed that the “Kraken” team had perpetrated a “fraud upon the court.”
only the best people, right?
from that link:
"I would just briefly say that this was a complaint. We had good faith to attach exhibits ... and I simply am confused as to the standard that's being applied when it comes to filing a complaint, because this was not a verified complaint. I'm a little confused at the standard, we did not submit falsehoods and we have not had an opportunity to have our witnesses examined," she said.
Judge Parker replied: "The standard is that I'm applying here ... is that plaintiff's counsel submitted affidavits that the court may believe should have been, obviously questionable, if not false on their face."
Late in the hearing, Parker again clashed with Campbell after he took issue with the
questions that he and others were being asked.
She (Judge Linda Parker) told him, “I would caution you to not question my procedure."
"I’m here to question what you’ve done, sir.”
(Donald) Campbell shot back angrily: “But I am not a potted plant. I am not a potted
plant. I will represent my client.”
Hope the judge burns them so badly that no lawyer tries this Trumpian frivolous and ridiculous court case dump scheming ever again. Put them all out of business.
In the USA do courts, either federal or state have the concept of a 'vexatious litigant?' In most English speaking jurisdictions the court has the option to declare a litigant or group of same, vexatious, if they constantly file cases which have no substantive evidence or basis in law.
Such matters then never waste the courts time. The so called election disputes would have been dead and buried 8 months ago with such a ruling in place
We have it, but it hasn't come into serious play before the Trump circus business. It's moving into being applied now.
Thanks, once one judge makes that decision, I suspect others will follow. An un-looked for benefit in other jurisdictions is that lawyers suddenly become very reluctant to represent such people. Better quality lawyers have already deserted Trump, the rats still on board will follow.
In the USA do courts, either federal or state have the concept of a 'vexatious litigant?' In most English speaking jurisdictions the court has the option to declare a litigant or group of same, vexatious, if they constantly file cases which have no substantive evidence or basis in law.
Such matters then never waste the courts time. The so called election disputes would have been dead and buried 8 months ago with such a ruling in place