Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Pro Se Litigant Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox filed Federal RICO Complaint. Cox Vs. Randazza; Racketeer/Corrupt Organization Jurisdiction: Diversity Case Filed by Pro Se Plaintiff Crystal L. Cox, Connected to District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL

District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL, Randazza V. Cox, Docket Entry 89 States, “Defendant's Counter Complaint is STRICKEN. Defendant may only file her Counter Complaint as a separate lawsuit. Signed by Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 2/22/13.” I, Pro Se Litigant Crystal L. Cox / Pro Se Defendant, Filed a "Separate Lawsuit As Per Court Order.

Here is that Filing, Racketeer/Corrupt Organization Jurisdiction

District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-NJK Civil RICO Complaint, COX vs. Randazza. Racketeer/Corrupt Organization Jurisdiction: Diversity Case


Plaintiff's Opposition to Docket Entry 91 / Opposition 

to "RICO" Complaint Filing, Says;

"Defendant Cox’s request should be disregarded, as she has not properly filed her motion
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. This Court already has held the above-captioned case to be
unrelated to Defendant Cox’s separate racketeering complaint and ordered that racketeering
complaint stricken from this suit. (ECF 89 at 3).

Cox’s filing the Motion serves only to waste Plaintiffs’ and this Court’s time, providing
further support that this Court should grant Plaintiffs’ Motion to Revoke Cox’s Electronic Filing
Privileges. (ECF 69) Cox has consented to the motion. (ECF 88) Furthermore, given that Cox is clearly now demonstrating herself to be a vexatious litigant, this Court should consider stronger corrective action beyond the motion filed in ECF 69.

Because Defendant Cox improperly filed her Motion for Leave to Continue In Forma
Pauperis, Plaintiffs respectfully requests the Court deny Cox’s Motion."

"Dated: February 25, 2013

Respectfully submitted,
/s/Ronald D. Green
Ronald D. Green, NV Bar #7360
Randazza Legal Group"


Pro Se Defendant Crystal L. Cox's Reply to 

Plaintiff's Opposition to Docket Entry 91,
Opposition to "RICO" Complaint Filing.


Reply to Response in Opposition of Document 91


February 26th, 2013 Court Ruling to Allow Opening of New Civil Action

"Document Number:94

Docket Text:

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Judge Gloria M. Navarro, on 2/26/2013. By Deputy Clerk: AMW.

Pursuant to the Court's Order (ECF No. [89]) Striking Defendant Crystal Cox's Amended Counter Complaint and for good cause appearing, the Court hereby finds that Defendant's Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. [91]) should be construed as a request to commence a separate civil action. Thus, the Court hereby directs the Clerk's Office to use Defendant's filing, ECF No. [91], to open a new civil action."

New Case Details


Cox vs. Randazza, et al.,
Assigned to: Judge James C. Mahan
Referred to: Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe
Demand: $100,000,000,000
Cause: 18:1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act

Date Filed: 02/24/2013
Jury Demand: Plaintiff
Nature of Suit: 470 Racketeer/Corrupt Organization
Jurisdiction: Diversity




Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act Defined for Readers


"The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, commonly referred to as the RICO Act or simply RICO, is a United States federal law that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization. The RICO Act focuses specifically on racketeering, and it allows for the leaders of a syndicate to be tried for the crimes which they ordered others to do or assisted them, closing a perceived loophole that allowed someone who told a man to, for example, murder, to be exempt from the trial because he did not actually do it.
RICO was enacted by section 901(a) of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 (Pub.L. 91–452, 84 Stat. 922, enacted October 15, 1970). RICO is codified as Chapter 96 of Title 18 of the United States Code, 18 U.S.C. § 1961–1968. While its original use in the 1970s was to prosecute the Mafia as well as others who were actively engaged in organized crime, its later application has been more widespread.
It has been speculated that the name and acronym were selected in a sly reference to the movie Little Caesar, which featured a notorious gangster named Rico. The original drafter of the bill, G. Robert Blakey, refused to confirm or deny this.[1] G. Robert Blakey remains an expert on RICO;[2] his former student Michael Goldsmith also gained a reputation as one of the nation's leading RICO experts.[3]"

United States District Court
District of Nevada (Las Vegas)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-NJK

District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-NJK Court Docket February 24th 2013

District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-NJK Court Docket February 24th 2013

District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-NJK 
RICO Research Links

Civil RICO: A Manual for Federal Attorneys
http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/civrico.pdf

 Posted Here by
Pro Se Plaintiff Crystal L. Cox

Posted by at No comments:

Friday, February 22, 2013

Pro Se Defendant / Pro Se Counter Plaintiff Crystal Cox Further Denied Due Process of Law and Constitutional Rights in District of Nevada. Pro Se Defendant Crystal Cox's Answer to the Complaint is Stricken. Pro Se Counter Plaintiff Crystal Cox's Counter Complaint is Stricken. Judge Refuses to Sign Conflict Disclosure and Refused to Recluse. I, Crystal Cox have never EVER Had Equal Rights or ANY Rights in the District Nevada and Neither do Any of YOU. No need to Disqualify? Are you Kidding? Never FORGET, Randazza Legal Group, the Porn Industry, the Mafia, Liberty Media Holdings, OWNS the District of Nevada and if they want your Online Sites, your Domain Names, your MONEY, they will Damn Well Take Them, and if you Fight Back, they will STRIKE your Answer. There is NOTHING you can do about it. The Law and the Constitution ONLY applies to the Attorneys who get Special Privilege to Flat Out Lie, Defame, SLAPP, Harass, Threaten and Intimidate who ever they please.


Folks if you Think you Have ANY Rights in the District of Nevada Think Again. 

No matter how much you speak the Truth, the Plaintiff Flat out Lies. You Lose, why?

Because the District of Nevada Court is Conflicted and the Laws and the Constitution of the United States of America is Moot in the Judge Gloria Navarro's Court in the District of Nevada.  Attorneys are Above the Law, this case should prove this to you, read the documents, if you can't find them, eMail me at SavvyBroker@yahoo.com or at ReverendCrystalCox@Gmail.com .  This Nevada SLAPP suit was in PURE Defamatory Retaliation, Riddled with Lies and Judge Gloria Navarro protects the Plaintiff, and NOT just in this case, Do your Homework. Righthaven, ViaView and more... see whose Paycheck was the most Important.. Pattern and History? In my Opinion, YOU BET!


Justice, in my Opinion, NO Way and NO Chance of It.


Mob Money, Porn Money, Organized Crime, Thugs, Bullies and Above the Law Attorneys RULE the District of Nevada and You have NO RIGHTS, Period.

Judge Gloria M. Navarro Strikes my Complaint Answer, Strikes my Counter Complaint and Now I have to file an "Amended Answer" to their unjust, unconstitutional, bullying, flat out lying complaint?

Judge Gloria M. Navarro sure seems to be protecting massive Tech Companies, Big Media, WIPO, Porn Companies, Big Law Firms, and more in one SWOOP of simply Striking a MAJOR legal action with VALID Conspiracies. Dig Deep Folks, if you Want the TRUTH, you will have to Read Massive Documents and Find it.  You could be THEIR Next VICTIM.

It's all about the ATTORNEYS Pay Check and Your Life, your Domain Names, your Business, your Livelihood, that is all simply collateral damage to the VERY Important Life, MONEY, and quality of life of the Las Vegas Elite Attorneys who are ABOVE the Law and are the Gatekeepers of who the Constitution of the United States Applies to.

"Notice of Electronic Filing 

The following transaction was entered on 2/22/2013 at 2:34 PM PST and filed on 2/22/2013 
Case Name:Randazza et al v. Cox et al
Case Number:2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL
Filer:
Document Number:89
Docket Text: 

ORDER Granting [48] Plaintiff' Motion to Strike Defendant Crystal Cox's Answer. Defendant must file her Amended Answer no later than 3/11/13, to prevent a default judgment. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that [48] Plaintiffs' original Motion to Strike or Dismiss the Initial Counter Complaint is MOOT. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that [63] Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike Defendant Crystal Cox's Amended Counter Complaint is GRANTED. Defendant's Counter Complaint is STRICKEN. Defendant may only file her Counter Complaint as a separate lawsuit. Signed by Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 2/22/13. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - mailed order to Defendant Crystal Cox - EDS)"


A Nevada Attorney Completely Violates the Rights of a Defendant he Targets. Completely Ignores the Constitution of the United States of America, Defames Her, Threatens Her, Harasses her and gets his way. And they call this JUSTICE in the District of Nevada. 

Look at this Opposite Defense, Yet this Attorney, the Plaintiff in My Case RULES the WORLD, and Does as he Pleases, he is Above the Law and that is a Fact.

Posted by at No comments:

Eliot Bernstein of the iViewit Technology Company talks about how and why the IDEA for the iViewIt Video Technology came about, who was involved in the creating of this amazing Life Changing Invention and How it was STOLEN by powerful and rich Tech Companies, Media Companies and Law Firms. Eliot Bernstein of the iViewit Technology Company is a named Defendant in District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL, Plaintiff's Attorney is Las Vegas Lawyer Ronald D. Green of Randazza Legal Group and in District of Oregon (Portland) Civil Case 3:11-cv-00057-HZ, Plaintiff's Attorney is David S. Aman of Tonkon Torp Law Firm. Eliot Bernstein of iViewit Technology was named, Allegedly, to harass, intimidate, defame, discredit and SILENCE Eliot Bernstein and the Investigative Blogger who had been reporting on the iViewit Technology theft for over 3 years, Crystal L. Cox who is also a named defendant in both civil cases in order to suppress information regarding the biggest technology theft in the world.

Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, February 21, 2013

Open Letter Sent to INTC, Intel Corporation, Auditors, Shareholders, Insurance Carries, Executives and more... to Give Notice of Liability Regarding District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL. Sent by Pro Se Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox disclosing INTC, Intel Corporation massive, undisclosed liabilities regarding District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL and the undisclosed liability of iViewit Video Technology Infringement by Intel, INTC.

"Crystal L. Cox
Pro Se Counter Plaintiff
District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL
Crystal@CrystalCox.com

Thursday, February 21st 2013

Steven R. Rodgers
Vice President of Legal, Corporate Affairs and
Deputy General Counsel of Litigation, Licensing & Patents, Intel Corporation

Douglas Melamed
Intel Corp. General Counsel

Regarding: Complaint - NOTICE of Liability; Notice of Claim Regarding Intel Corporation and Possible Trillion Dollar Fraud on Intel, INTC Shareholders and Others.  Notice to all Intel Executives, Shareholders, Board Members, Insurance Providers, Auditors, and all financially connected to Intel Corp., INTC in any way.

Douglas Melamed, Steven R. Rodgers and Whom It May Concern:"

Open Letter Sent to INTC, Intel Corporation to Give Notice of Liability Regarding District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL by Pro Se Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox. INTC has massive, undisc



This Open Letter Will Go to ALL Intel Corp. Board of Directors, Shareholders, Insurance Carriers and ALL Government Agencies Involved to serve as YET another Warning of what will happen to Intel Corp. Shareholders. Just as in the Madoff Scandal, they CANNOT Say they Did Not Know. There is a Whole lot of Fact, Proof that they Did Know and DO Know RIGHT NOW.
Please Forward this Letter to ALL Intel Corp. Investors, Shareholders, Directors, Executives that
You Know of. This is a VERY Big Deal Financially. It is NOT a Hoax, Look at the Fact yourself,
read the documents of the case and Warn Others.

The Stolen Iviewit Technology will Cost Intel Corp. Investors, Shareholders Billions.
CEO Paul Otellini of Intel Corp. KNOWS of this Massive Shareholder and is NOT Disclosing
to Intel Corps. Board of Directors, Shareholders or Insurance Carriers.

It is Your Money, You Have a Right to Know that Billions will be Paid By Intel Corp. in
the Iviewit Technology Theft. It is not a Matter of IF, the Proof is ALL there. 
It is a Matter of When.

 Here is Proof that Intel Corps. CEO Paul Otellini and then Intel Corp. General Counsel Bruce Sewell
knew of the Stolen Iviewit Technology and have Yet to Disclose to Intel Corps. Board of Directors,
Shareholders or Insurance Carriers to this day.


20%20Signed%203549l.pdf

Click Below For FTC Investigators Reports on MORE Cover Ups by Intel Corp.
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/51737284/Proof-Of-Intel-Cartel---RICO-Proof

Links to Documents proving this massive Liability to INTC, Intel Shareholders, Auditors, 
Insurance Providers, CEO’s, and all companies and people connected to INTC, 
Intel Financially for any reason.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100206%20FINAL%20SEC%20FBI%20and%20more%20COMPLAINT%20Against%20Warner%20Bros%20Time%20Warner%20AOL176238nscolorlow.pdf

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/nda%20violators.pdf

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/130695905/iviewittv_CompanyDocs_United-States-District-Court-Southern-District-NY_20090306-Intel-Demand-Letter-_-Liability-Exposure--Signed-3549l

http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?tag=intc

http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=498

http://www.rayfordwilkins.com/2012/10/intel-corp-intc-refuse-to-disclose.html

http://intelcorruption.blogspot.com/2010/10/intel-general-counsel-bruce-sewell.html

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090306%20Intel%20Demand%20Letter%20&%20Liability%20Exposure%20%20Signed%203549l.pdf

http://federalricolawsuit.blogspot.com/2010/01/judiciary-committee-reviews-iviewit.html

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/RICO%20CRIME%20CHARTS.pdf


Liability Notice to Be Sent out to all CEO's, Shareholders, Board Members, Managing Attorneys, Auditors, Liability Carriers, Insurance Providers, and all financially connect to Counter Defendants of District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL, Coming Soon.

Pro Se Counter Plaintiff
Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox
Whistleblower Media
Crystal Cox News
Anti-Corruption Media
Crystal Cox PressCrystal@CrystalCox.com



Posted by at No comments:

Monday, February 18, 2013

District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL; Nevada SLAPP Lawsuit, Nevada Retaliation Lawsuit, Chilling Effect Lawsuit, First Amendment Threat Lawsuit, Freedom of Expression Suppression Lawsuit. Transparency and Accountability DEMANDED in the Courts. Equality of Law and the First Amended DEMANDED.


        Judicial Rulings, Order by Judge Gloria Navarro
District of Nevada Docket Entry 14 Regarding TRO, Preliminary Injunction
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/146014867/District-of-Nevada-Docket-Entry-14-Regarding-TRO-Preliminary-Injunction

Docket Entry 41District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL Judge Gloria M. Navarro Ruling Granting Preliminary Injunction to Plaintiff.


District of Nevada Docket Entry 76 Deny Powers to Order Investigation of Plaintiff
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/146014868/District-of-Nevada-Docket-Entry-Deny-Powers-to-Order-Investigation-of-Plaintiff


For More information regarding Nevada SLAPP Suit, Chilling Effect Lawsuit, First Amendment Suppression Lawsuit, Freedom of Expression Suppression Lawsuit, Click Below



                     District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL Docket Entries
                                         Where Judge Gloria Navarro Made a RULING.

Docket Entry 11
ORDER Granting 9 Motion for CM/ECF Access. Ms. Cox must provide certification that she has completed the CM/ECF Tutorial on or before 1/11/13. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 12/11/12. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - EDS) (Entered: 12/12/2012)


Docket Entry 14
ORDER Granting 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. Motion Hearing set for 1/7/2013 03:00 PM in LV Courtroom 7D before Judge Gloria M. Navarro re 2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Responses due by 12/28/2012. Replies due by 1/4/2013. Signed by Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 12/14/2012. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR) (Entered: 12/17/2012)


Docket Entry 27
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Judge Gloria M. Navarro, on 1/4/2013. denying 22 Motion to Request This Court Investigate Plaintiff Marc Randazza. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR) (Entered: 01/04/2013)


Docket Entry 35
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS - Motion Hearing held on 1/7/2013 before Judge Gloria M. Navarro. Crtrm Administrator: Michael Zadina; Pla Counsel: Ronald Green; Def Counsel: None present; Court Reporter/FTR #: Araceli Bareng; Time of Hearing: 3:49-4:09 a.m.; Courtroom: 7D;

The Court makes preliminary remarks and hears representations from Mr. Green regarding the 2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. IT IS ORDERED that 19 Motion for Judges and Clerks to Sign a Conflict of Interest Disclosure is DENIED; 20 Motion Requesting the Recusal, Removal of District Judge is DENIED; 31 Motion to Strike Defendant Cox's Reply to Response is DENIED; and 2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction is GRANTED. Mr. Green shall file a proposed order consistent with the Court's ruling.
(Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MJZ) (Entered: 01/08/2013)



Docket Entry 36
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Judge Gloria M. Navarro, on 1/8/2013. By Deputy Clerk: Michael Zadina.
This case has been assigned to the Honorable Gloria M. Navarro. Judge Navarro's Chambers Practices, which are posted on the U.S. District Court, District of Nevada public website, may also be accessed directly via this hyperlink: www.nvd.uscourts.gov
(no image attached) (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MJZ) (Entered: 01/08/2013)



Docket Entry 40
ORDER that 16 Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 1/9/13. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM) (Entered: 01/11/2013)


Docket Entry 41
ORDER that 2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction is GRANTED. (See Order for details). FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs shall receive a $600 refund from the Court for the six domain names that were transferred pursuant to the WIPO arbitration decision. The Court shall keep the nominal bond of one hundred dollars ($100) for each of the other twenty-six domain names at issue because the evidence indicates that Defendant will suffer only minimal, if any, damage by the issuance of this preliminary injunction. FURTHER ORDERED that 19 MOTION for Judges and Clerks to Sign a Conflict of Interest Disclosure is DENIED. FURTHER ORDERED that 20 MOTION for Judge Gloria Navarro to Recuse Herself is DENIED. FURTHER ORDERED that 31 Plaintiffs Motion to Strike Defendant Crystal Coxs Fugitive Surreply to Motion for Preliminary Injunction is DENIED. Signed by Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 1/11/13. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF: cc Finance - MMM) (Entered: 01/11/2013)


Docket Entry 76
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS Regarding the Requirements of Klingele v. Eikenberry and Rand v. Rowland as to 75 MOTION for Summary Judgment: Opposition due twenty-one (21) days from the date of this Minute Order, and reply due fourteen (14) days after the filing of the opposition. Signed by Judge Gloria M. Navarro. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MAJ) (Entered: 02/12/2013)


Posted here by 
Pro Se Defendant / Pro Se Counter Plaintiff
Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox
SavvyBroker@Yahoo.com
Crystal@CrystalCox.com 
Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, February 16, 2013

Counter Plaintiff Crystal L. Cox's Motion for a Summary Judgement in Nevada Free Speech Threat, Chilling Effect, Nevada SLAPP Lawsuit, Nevada Vexatious Litigation, Constitutional Rights Threat, Prior Restraint, Nevada First Amendment Threat Lawsuit District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL.

Counter Plaintiff' Motion for Summary Judgement
District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL

Counter Plaintiff' Motion for Summary Judgement in Nevada Free Speech Threat, Nevada SLAPP Lawsuit, Nevada First Amendment Threat Lawsuit District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL




Memorandum to Counter Plaintiff' Motion for Summary Judgement
District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL

  Memorandum to Counter Plaintiff' Motion for Summary Judgement



For More Documents, Motions, Reply's, Prior Restraints, Lack of First Amendment Adjudication, Abuse of Power, Denial of Due Process in the Nevada Free Speech Threat, Chilling Effect, Nevada SLAPP Lawsuit, Nevada Vexatious Litigation, Constitutional Rights Threat, Prior Restraint, Nevada First Amendment Threat Lawsuit  named District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL, Please Click Below.

http://www.crystalcox.com/2013/02/crystal-l-cox-nevada-lawsuit-crystal.html


In the Name of Freedom of Expression and Free Speech, the Plaintiff and Co-Conspirators get my blogs and documents removed weekly, so if there is a document you want to see, and cannot, please eMail me at Crystal@CrystalCox.com or SavvyBroker@Yahoo.com or WhistleblowerMedia@Yahoo.com or ReverendCrystalCox@Gmail.com 


Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, February 14, 2013

Pornwikileaks.com ~ "Pornwikileaks.com is back online… Those who claimed to have brought it down DID NOT."

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.
Posted by at No comments:

PornWikiLeaks.com ~ "It only would have cost $5000 to keep Pornwikileaks offline permanently." Who is Operating PornWikiLeaks.com"


"

MONICAFOSTER FEBRUARY 13, 2013 0
end of TheRealPornWikiLeaksA PornNewsToday exclusive:
Sean Tompkins (the individual who has claimed to have done the majority of the online work to get Pornwikileaks offline and who touts himself as the “Hero of the Porn Industry”) was most likely given an expense account to take Pornwikileaks offline OR was paid an amount of money upfront by what I can only assume to be the Free Speech Coalition considering how Diane Duke has gone on record taking credit for bringing down PornWikileaks as well.
You would think that part of getting Pornwikileaks offline would have been taking ownership and control of the DOMAIN right? Seems like common sense doesn’t it… but apparently not to Sean Tompkins – WHICH IS WHY THE SITE IS BACK ONLINE AND FULLY ACTIVE NOW.
Ironically according to text messages sent by Sean Tompkins, in August of 2011 – either he or the Free Speech Coalition could have acquired the Pornwikileaks.com domain from the owner for $5000 (which truly is only a drop in the bucket considering how much the FSC collects and spends annually).

One would think that Sean Tompkins would have paid the $5000 out of his upfront fee or expense account to ENSURE that the Pornwikileaks.com domain was acquired by someone unattached to Donny Long  - right? Well it sure doesn’t appear that way…
It seems that the “Hero of the porn industry” in actuality didn’t feel that the multitudes of people who were effected by pornwikileaks were worth the $5000 he most likely pocketed for himself…
phone number of TRPWL
Sean Tompkins posts his phone number online fairly often – he did just today so we doubt he’ll have issue with the above text messages being made public knowledge.
"
 Source of Post
http://pornnewstoday.com/pnt/?p=4338
Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, February 10, 2013

Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox, Defamed by David Carr of the New York Times, Files Lawsuit in Nevada Court Against David Carr and the New York Times.

Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox ALLEGES that David Carr of the New York Times Defamed Her, me, with actual Malice, as  David Carr of the New York Times knew, and had access to information that Crystal Cox was NOT guilty of, nor on Trial for Extortion, yet  David Carr of the New York Times published 1 email out of 5 eMails, and deliberately painted Counter Plaintiff Crystal Cox in False Light to discredit ALL Bloggers as having Equal Rights as Journalists.

David Carr of the New York Times published false statements regarding Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox WITH knowledge that the statements were FALSE, and continues to keep that information live, knowing full well that Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox was not under investigation for Extortion, NOT on Trial for Extortion and in now way was associated with extortion.

David Carr of the New York Times has caused irreparable damage to Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox, with actual malice.  David Carr of the New York Times's articles have been used by alleged Co-Conspirators in other cases as "Legal Commentary" and documented proof of Crystal Cox's Extortion, which is Defamation. There was no extortion, no court documents or official records of investigation of Extortion regarding Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox.

Yet David Carr of the New York Times in effort to ruin, defame and paint Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox in false light, deliberately, knowingly printed false statements as fact. WIPO Publications and District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL, plus potential customers, clients and business partners of Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox have used the  David Carr of the New York Times article to further ruin, harass, intimidate, defame, threaten and steal intellectual property from Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox.

The New York Times and David Carr SHOULD not be protected to DEFAME with actual knowledge of the facts.  They SHOULD not be above the Law, nor should they "report" in a manner that violates my lawful, constitutional rights.

David Carr of the New York Times has ruined my life based on an Email sent by Oregon Attorney David S. Aman of Tonkon Torp Law Firm, with actual malice, after he WON a $2.5 Million Judgement Against me. David S. Aman did this knowingly as an act of revenge and retaliation for Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox exposing him and the Tonkon Torp Law Firm in their action regarding the Summit 1031 Bankruptcy based out of Bend Oregon.

 David S. Aman of Tonkon Torp Law Firm knew that eMail was one of 5, as it was beween me, Pro Se Defendant Crystal Cox, in my Pro Se Capacity and him, David Aman Opposing Counsel. It was a string of emails after a threat of a lawsuit and after a lawsuit had been filed. Yet David Carr of the New York Times paints Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox in false light and makes it appear that I was extorting the Plaintiff when the facts of the matter seemed completely irrelevant to David Carr of the New York Times.

David Carr of the New York Times SHOULD not be able to hide behind special "journalist privilege" and ruin lives.

Counter Plaintiff Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox ALLEGES David Carr of the New York Times is liable for the damage he has caused, and with malice against Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox.

David Carr of the New York Times needs to NOTIFY his liability carrier as he certainly did seem to deliberately attack a blogger in revenge to all bloggers NOT having equal rights in the law as traditional journalist such as David Carr.

David Carr of the New York Times SHOULD Not Be Above the law.

David Carr of the New York Times has created a massive backlash and done irreparable harm to Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox AND should not have SPECIAL PRIVILEGE to RUIN LIVES.



Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox, Defamed by David Carr of the New York Times, Files Lawsuit in Nevada Court Against David Carr and the New York Times
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, February 8, 2013

Ronald D. Green, Alleged Intellectual Property Attorney, LIES to Nevada Courts Deliberately to Defame, Harass, Intimidate Counter Plaintiff / Defendant Crystal Cox. Why is Randazza Legal Group Above the Law? Why Do Counter Defendants of District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL use the courts to intimidate, harass, threaten, and attack who ever they please? Who will Stand up to Ronald D. Green and Randazza Legal Group? No One Can, as they Allegedly have Mafia behind them, which is said to include MASSIVE Porn Industry MONEY. Add that to the BILLIONS that Liberty Media Holdings have Backing them, and fighting to STOP The iViewit Story, and there you have it. Attorney Reign of Terror, Internet Mobbing, Gang Stalking and NO Accountability in SIGHT.

Note to Reader: You have my FULL Permission to Re-post my Blog Posts Exposing all ALLEGED Co-Conspirator on any Blog and in their Entirety.
Ronald D. Green, Nevada Attorney, Deliberately lied to Nevada Courts, AGAIN, this time claiming that over a thousands Blogger Blogs cost at least $10 a year, 
knowing full well blogger blogs by Google are FREE.

Ronald D. Green, Nevada Attorney,has Yet AGAIN committed Fraud on the Courts in order to Harass, Intimidate, Defame, Lie about and Paint in False Light Counter Plaintiff / Defendant Crystal Cox. And Yet Ronald D. Green is above the Law as is the Plaintiff, his Boss, the Owner of Randazza Legal Group.

Randazza Legal Group has LIED over and over in the Documents of  District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL, yet claims I am using the Docket to Defame them.  I guess Ronald D. Green, Nevada Attorney, thinks that if he repeats the LIE over and over and files it with a federal court, that the Lie becomes the Truth.

Ronald D. Green Lied FLAT OUT, about something so easily proven, and yet has NO ACCOUNTABILITY. Ronald D. Green, Nevada Attorney lied about a Federal “supersedeas bond”.  The court docket easily shows the FACTS, yet, Above the Law Nevada Attorney commits fraud on the court and flat out lies about a “supersedeas bond”.  This was a bond to STOP Counter Defendants / Alleged Co-Conspirators, David S. Aman, Multnomah County Sheriff's Office, Daniel Stanton and Marshall Ross from STEALING, selling of my "Asset", which was / is my "RIGHT to APPEAL".  And this Bond had NOTHING to do with my REAL Assets, Income or anything connected to such.

Yet Ronald D. Green of Randazza Legal Group Flat out lies to the Nevada Courts, and there you have it, must be True Now, because LIAR, Ronald Green says it is. Ronald D. Green of Randazza Legal Group has been an attorney for a long time, surely Ronald D. Green of Randazza Legal Group knows what the court dockets say and what the “supersedeas bond” was actually for, YET he deliberately LIES. Why DO These Attorneys Have the Power to Commit Fraud on the Courts and have no Accountability?

Why do they get to SUE who ever they want, then demand the court make their victims pay their Outrageous $10,000 a Month Legal Fees.

This case was only 2 months In when Ronald D. Green of Randazza Legal Group filed a Default Judgement Against Eliot Bernstein and Demanded $23,000 for his paycheck. WOW, talk about a Racket.

And on top of that, they sit around and decide who gets to own what, and if they can stretch any law, or get away with any lie, well then the will ask for $100,000 for every Free Blog, or Domain Name you even attempt to mention them on. Meanwhile their Internet Mobbing Group is "ALLOWED" to use their company name any ol' time and that PESKY $100,000 and domain name seizure game just don't apply them. GEEZ, seriously? Sure seems to fall under Racketeering, RICO Laws and Flat Out Torment of innocent Defendants, to me. IN my NON-Attorney Opinion.

Keep in Mind Randazza Legal Group, as far as I know, conspired with, advised David S. Aman of Tonkon Torp Law Firm in attempting to steal my APPEAL. Now they lie to a federal court and say that a “supersedeas bond”, was to stop execution of my assets, when in fact it was only about my right to appeal. They KNOW This.

Randazza Legal Group, Randazza Legal Group DOES not have to obey the law, obey the constitution or even tell the Truth, no accountability what so ever, flat out lies and still allowed to practice law.

They Sue, they Lie, they Commit, Fraud, they Ruin Lives and have No Accountability.

Ronald D. Green, Nevada Attorney, flat out lies about his targets, distorts laws and makes things up purely to intentionally harm his victims, and has no accountability, in fact it seems the courts REWARD him for it, by giving him whatever he asks for.

They Sue whoever they PLEASE. They Pick a Mark, and force their own paychecks in court. Nothing Defendants can do about it, unless they pay BIG money for an Attorney. And that's the luck of the draw, because many in that Circle are connected to each other.

Ronald D. Green, Nevada Attorney, is above the law and uses the court Docket as his personal Whistle Blower Retaliation Revenge, and to intimidate Defendants, then charge them for his $10,000 a month fees to write up fraudulent court documents.

Ronald D. Green, Nevada Attorney, Formerly with Greenberg Traurig who was involved in the iViewit Technology Scandal ( http://www.iviewit.tv/#Evidence ), knows full well what he is LYING About, and continues to LIE with Actual Malice.

Don't Believe Me? Read all the Documents pertaining to District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL. Read where he sues a guy, (Eliot Bernstein), then does not even serve him, but looks to have served a 15 year old instead, then charges the Guy $23,000 in fees for himself. Then charges $500,000 for 5 domain names the man owned and never wrote a word on, claiming the guy infringed on a Trademark that doesn't exist.

Read all the Documents, and Exhibits of District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL and see if you don't think something fishy is going on. And that these attorneys, simply pick a mark and SUE, then they get a pay day by ordering a Judge to give them a Default Judgement, Judges seize accounts and Attorneys make money on top of money in fraud on the court and abuse of power.

 Ronald D. Green Files Fraud on the Courts and Flat Out Lies About Crystal L. Cox in a Motion to Claim that I am not a "Pauper", and therefore it is not the COURTS Duty to Serve all the Counter Defendants of District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL, when clearly he has falsified the FACTS in many Ways. Really, he is LYING. He is an Attorney, and KNOWS that he is deliberately painting me in false light to further Defame, Harass, Intimidate Me.

Ronald D. Green Files Fraud on the Courts and Flat Out Lies About Crystal L. Cox


Counter Plaintiff /  Defendant Crystal Cox Replies to Ronald D. Green's Motion to STOP the Courts from serving ALL the Counter Defendants in District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL.

Counter Plaintiff / Defendant Crystal Cox Replies to Motion of LIES Filed by Ronald Green



More Regarding the "Bond", the Attempt to Steal My Appeal Rights and the Court Documents Involved. Ronald Green LIED about my Judgement, as it is RECORDED in the County I live in. He lied about the Bond and more, yet has no Accountability.

http://www.crystalcoxcase.com/2013/01/david-s-aman-tonkon-torp-lawyer.html

http://www.crystalcoxcase.com/2013/01/eugene-volokh-ucla-professor-and.html

http://www.crystalcoxcase.com/2013/01/january-2013-obsidian-finance-group-llc.html

http://www.crystalcoxcase.com/2013/01/motion-to-stay-to-stop-david-aman.html


..more coming Soon on this massive Issue Concerning the Public at Large and ALL victims of Ronald D. Green Nevada Attorney, the Legal Satyricon, the Philly Law Blog, Popehat.com, Eric Turkewitz, and More.


Also Check Out

 http://www.josephrakofsky.com/

http://www.crystalcoxcase.com/

http://stateofnevadacase212-cv-02040-gmn-pal.blogspot.com/

http://www.ranaankatz.com/




Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)