A New York GMan in King David's Court

[The Observer]

Even the frivpens are missapplied by agents who are misled by the IRS attorneys.

Then that should be even an easier standard of proof for you to cite. Please cite one case where a court overturned a frivpen based on the fact that the suitor had redeemed lawful money.

[David Merrill]

Even the frivpens are missapplied by agents who are misled by the IRS attorneys.

Then that should be even an easier standard of proof for you to cite. Please cite one case where a court overturned a frivpen based on the fact that the suitor had redeemed lawful money.

That is what is crazy about Wserra's approach to this. It is like because he is insane and an attorney, you are all going crazy too! Why would a suitor R4C that? What does forgiveness look like?

Answer: It looks like either nothing in the mailbox or an adjusted statement that has no frivpen.

[Dr. Caligari]

The irony is that you demand here that I would show you case law citations when the IRS attorneys will never prosecute anybody for redeeming lawful money. That is the hipocracy Wserra brings to the plate here. He knows how case law is generated, or is expected to anyway.

Even the frivpens are missapplied by agents who are misled by the IRS attorneys.

Then tell us the names of the people who have successfully obtained refunds. They have nothing to fear, right?

[Pottapaug1938]

Once again, Van Pelt has admitted that there is no substance to his legal fantasies about redeeming lawful money. The only true test of whether or not any legal premise -- not just this one -- is whether there is an unreversed appellate court decision upholding that premise. Without that, Van Pelt has only his unverified claims of success, and an endless stream of excuses, evasions, misrepresentations and inane, irrelevant comments.

[The Observer]

For those who are interested in the meanderings of David, he found another website that is catering to his expository of "lawfully redeeming money"; curiously enough, it appears to be a website that is supporting a return to gold/silver based currency. Of course, David is telling them its not really important to have a fiat metal currency, that all they need to do is rubberstamp their FRNs. I wonder what they will say when they find out that he has said on his site that rubberstamping your FRNS does absolutely nothing?

[notorial dissent]

Considering that they are all equally clueless and living in an alternate reality, I wouldn't hold my breath. They are basically swapping magical incantations with each other and then complaining when they don't work.

[The Observer]

And now David spins the tale of his "banishment" from Quatloos.

[AndyK]

misusing PACER to splash private information around the web

David still fails to comprehend (among a universe of other things) that, unless sealed, documents related to most court proceedings are a matter of public record.

Public -- as in anyone can pay the PACER fee or visit the courthouse to have the documents copied.

Edited to remove attack on someone who is blocked from defending himself. Until (if ever) David has privileges restored here, I will stick to facts.

[wserra]

David still fails to comprehend (among a universe of other things) that, unless sealed, documents related to most court proceedings are a matter of public record.

Public -- as in anyone can pay the PACER fee or visit the courthouse to have the documents copied.

It's worse than that. FRCvP 5.2(a) not only permits but requires that filers include only the last four digits of a SSN and only the year of a DOB. And 5.2(h) provides that someone who includes the full SSN or DOB waives confidentiality.

[notorial dissent]

Comes back around to the fact that if one insists on exhibiting ones foolishness in public, in this instance the Federal Courts, one must be prepared, and in fact, expect a certain amount of laughing and pointing.

[The Observer]

David still fails to comprehend (among a universe of other things) that, unless sealed, documents related to most court proceedings are a matter of public record.

Public -- as in anyone can pay the PACER fee or visit the courthouse to have the documents copied.

It's worse than that. FRCvP 5.2(a) not only permits but requires that filers include only the last four digits of a SSN and only the year of a DOB. And 5.2(h) provides that someone who includes the full SSN or DOB waives confidentiality.

All David is really trying to do here, and miserably failing at, is to get back at Wes by inciting the suitors in these redacted suits to file gibberish law suits.