Dogwalker digs himself in deeper

[Demosthenes]

06/19/2008 450 MOTION /Petition for Full Disclosure by Daniel Riley. Served on 6/17/2008. (jar) (Entered: 06/24/2008)

http://www.cheatingfrenzy.com/riley450.pdf

06/19/2008 451 Termination of Legal Representation for Cause by Daniel Riley (jar) (Entered: 06/24/2008)

http://www.cheatingfrenzy.com/riley451.pdf

06/20/2008 449 INTERIM CJA 20, Interim Voucher # 1 as to Daniel Riley: Authorization to Pay Sven D. Wiberg, Esq. Total amount authorized/certified: $44,798.31. Amount paid this voucher: $36,211.35. Amount withheld this voucher: $8,586.96. Certified by USDC Judge Singal on 5/16/08. Approved by USCA Judge Howard on 6/16/08. (Original document available in clerks office.) (jeb) (Entered: 06/20/2008)

06/23/2008 ENDORSED ORDER terminating 450 MOTION /Petition for Full Disclosure as to Daniel Riley (1). Text of Order: No action necessary. So Ordered by Chief Judge George Z. Singal. (jar) (Entered: 06/24/2008)

06/23/2008 ENDORSED ORDER as to Daniel Riley 451 Termination of Legal Representation for Cause. Text of Order: No action necessary. So Ordered by Chief Judge George Z. Singal. (jar) (Entered: 06/24/2008)

[Demosthenes]

Apparently his strawman died while Danny was in prison...

4. At this Time, to clear up any misunderstanding the Petitioner/Intervener Makes NOTICE and DEMAND for the following (WHICH MUST EXIST TO HAVE A LEGAL CLAIM):
a) Full disclosure of the amount in controversy;
b) The 1099OID in regard to the "charges;"
c) The 1099R, concerning the taxes on Charitable Contributions taken or Damages (if any) from my decedent's estate;
d) If funds have been transferred already, I demand a check written on certified funds for the amount transferred.

[Nikki]

Since firearms are prohibited in prison, how does he manage to keep shooting himself in the foot?

[Judge Roy Bean]

You have to wonder about who is supplying this kind of drivel to someone who is clearly living in lala land.

Other than a foolish demonstration of petulance and gross ignorance, what do people like him get out of the filing of gibberish?

[grixit]

It's time for a "no more filings without the court's permission" order.

[LPC]

A few suggestions to Mr. Riley and others now in his situation, or who may soon find themselves in his situation:

1. Labeling a pleading "Apology" is unlikely to do any good unless you also change your behavior. In other words, if you're going to apologize for acting like an idiot, you should also plan on stop acting like an idiot. (It's also helpful if you apologize for a coherent offense. Apologizing for "commercial dishonors" committed by a copyrighted fiction doesn't really carry much sincerity.)

2. If you're sitting in prison after all of your motions have been denied, adding more punctuation to your name is probably not going to get you anywhere.

3. Similarly, repackaging the same incoherent crap that has already been rejected by the court, adding meaningless adjectives and adverbs, is unlikely to be helpful.

4. Referring to yourself as "the decedent" and objecting to "probating said estate" can cause procedural problems, such as forcing the court to decide whether to imprison you or inter your remains.

5. Describing yourself as "sentient" creates similar problems and invites unwanted sarcasm from the court.

6. Finally, and most importantly, it's useful for pleadings to request relief that is actually meaningful. For example, if you are sitting in prison, it might be useful to ask to be released, rather than asking for "full disclosure" so that you can "accept with honor the offer to contract and to set-off any claims and/or amount in controversy."

Capisce?

Further the affiant sayeth naught.

[Doktor Avalanche]

Just...wow.

I see he's Danny Riley of the Full Colon Riley's.

[webhick]

Just...wow.

I see he's Danny Riley of the Full Colon Riley's.

I think I just got the significance of calling it a "full colon" versus a colon and that it's not just to differentiate it from the semi-colon. And as such, I've decided to amend the Status Declaration Via Naming Convention clause in the Illuminati rulebook to read the following:

Adding a full colon to your name lets everyone know that you're not only full of shit, but that you're in a position to prove it any time.

[Gregg]

is it just me or is he somewhere in there claiming to be a boat?

[notorial dissent]

What a crock of nonsense.

I personally think he ought to be held in contempt for wasting the court’s time with this stuff.

[Doktor Avalanche]

Just...wow.

I see he's Danny Riley of the Full Colon Riley's.

I think I just got the significance of calling it a "full colon" versus a colon and that it's not just to differentiate it from the semi-colon. And as such, I've decided to amend the Status Declaration Via Naming Convention clause in the Illuminati rulebook to read the following:

Adding a full colon to your name lets everyone know that you're not only full of sh*t, but that you're in a position to prove it any time.

And that's what I adore about you, Webhick.

[grixit]

A few suggestions to Mr. Riley and others now in his situation, or who may soon find themselves in his situation:

Oh, don't go dragging Arlo Guthrie into this.

[wserra]

It's time for a "no more filings without the court's permission" order.

Not likely, in a pending criminal case. In order to justify that relief, a defendant would have to file (for example) papers containing such things as, "Why do judges wear kilts?"

Hint, hint.

[ErsatzAnatchist]

You have to wonder about who is supplying this kind of drivel to someone who is clearly living in lala land.

Other than a foolish demonstration of petulance and gross ignorance, what do people like him get out of the filing of gibberish?

A competency hearing?

I seriously wonder is Dogwalker has gone off the deep end. At a certain point, you have to wonder if he is really capable of understanding what is going on around him.

[Demosthenes]

Anyone else here think that the new Indiana v. Edwards Supreme Court decision is going to come into play here?

Danny is competent enough to stand trial but not competent enough to act as his own attorney.

[LPC]

Anyone else here think that the new Indiana v. Edwards Supreme Court decision is going to come into play here?

I had the same thought, and so I glanced at the opinion and wondered if it might apply to tax deniers, but my impression was that the opinion was limited to state court proceedings.

The Supreme Court usually finds that the standards of the 6th Amendment (and other provisions of the Bill of Rights) that apply to the states through the 14th Amendment are the same as the standards that apply to the federal government, but there are exceptions and I thought perhaps this was another. (I.e., that state courts had more latitude that federal courts.)

But I could be wrong, and I'm not going to take the time to read the opinion today.

[Quixote]

Apparently his strawman died while Danny was in prison...

Judging from the documents, I would say Danny smoked him.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Anyone else here think that the new Indiana v. Edwards Supreme Court decision is going to come into play here?

Danny is competent enough to stand trial but not competent enough to act as his own attorney.

There is a difference between not being able to comprehend a legal concept because of incapacitation and deliberately acting as if you're adhering to nonsense methods to try and appear loyal to the idiot-legal-theory crowd you bought in with.

It's the reverse of 'buyer's remorse'; these people would rather sit in jail and spew gibberish at the court for their fellow sycophants than admit they were stupid when they bought the snake oil.

I fear that until the rest of the judiciary gets on board with the cattle-prod method of gibberish reduction, we'll only see more of it. The least they could do is instead of just ignoring the filings, slap them with contempt rulings for insulting the court's intelligence.

[Demosthenes]

The reason why I think this case might be relevant is that there's some indication that Danny's appellate case will focus on the fact that he clearly stated many many times that he wished to defend himself, but the judge denied his demands.

[Nikki]

The judge was probably also considering "reversable error" in denying Danny's request for self-representation.

Since Danny was clearly not capable of conducting an effective defense, allowing him to do so very well could have resulted in a retrial.