Was just served lawsuit papers

[bigstuff]

Well,
I was delivered lawsuit papers dealing with the issues stated in the "letters" that we all know of. The intent is a civil suit in which I have 20 days to respond or judgment by default will be taken.
I was named in this suit along with several other defendants whom I have never heard of.

"DTV obtained during the course of discovery in an action against Reggie Scullion a portion of the business records created and maintained by his company, Vcipher Tech. Multiple witness interviews and other information confirm the accuracy of the records."


Looks as the next stage is on, I am consulting my attorney today, as I am very upset about these false claims.

[intodeep]

Bigstuff what month did you get your first letter? I receive a letter last week from a texas lawyer had something to do with dtv, if i remember correctly my cousin had a package come to my house i think it were from WV something like that anyway he's gone on to meet his maker bless his heart,now i got to defend myself for something he had me to sign for... I wasn't going to put to much into this but i don't think its gonna go away on its on, from the looks of it their are plenty of people with these letters, keep us posted...

[bigstuff]

The first letter was in August or early September with a 2nd letter shortly after.

This is an actual Summons for Civil Action so you are correct in your thought that it will not go away. Im not trying to scare anyone, only inform. DTV`s lawyers are in my state and this was filed in local court.

[To The Real King!!]

Hi Folks,

There is a TON of information posted that relates to this issue on the legal-rights site at:


http://www.legal-rights.org/DTVBOX.html

You might want to read the info and look at the docket to see how people are defending this and what is happening.

Hope this helpshttp://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrk.gif
A Happy, Healthy and Prosperous NEW YEAR to ALL!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrkhappyday.gif

Thanks & Good Luck,

To The REAL King!!

Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/bllrbanner.gif

http://www.legal-rights.org/images/lrbanner.gif
Now open with lots of useful resources at your disposal AT:
http://www.legal-rights.org

Please REMEMBER OUR WAR HERO’S (http://www.legal-rights.org/remembrance.html) <-- Click here Please!


Please DONATE for the SUPREME COURT BATTLE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html) <-- Click here Please!

Por favor dona para la BATALLA EN LA SUPREMA CORTE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html)<-- Haz Click aqui!

[bigcountry]

Did this come certified mail or was it hand delivered by someone other than your post office?

[bigstuff]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by To The Real King!!
Hi Folks,

There is a TON of information posted that relates to this issue on the legal-rights site at:


http://www.legal-rights.org/DTVBOX.html

You might want to read the info and look at the docket to see how people are defending this and what is happening.

Hope this helpshttp://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrk.gif
[b]A Happy, Healthy and Prosperous NEW YEAR to ALL!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrkhappyday.gif

Thanks & Good Luck,

To The REAL King!!


TTRK:
Please do not take this wrong as I appreciate EVERYTHING you are doing and are constantly doing to help us all.

I have two attorneys (different firms) and I have kept them both updated with not only post you have made here but also all the info from your site. I saw both of them today after getting my lawsuit papers. One was online reading your site when I walked into the office.

I am no lawyer so I cannot quote him or her, if I could I would not need an attorney:) despite this bull$hit lawsuit...... From what I gathered after talking to both, the court cases on your site do not give them any insight as there are no locations posted pertaining to any of the Docket Rulings. The name Judge Manuel L. Real means nothing to them reading this as he is not the Judge here and no president has been set.

Also lack of jurisdiction seems to be a non-issue now as DTV has lawyers set up in most all states now so they are way ahead of this. My papers were filed in my own district even though the lawyers for DTV are half way across the state.

Okay, this does not look good at first glance but there is a common opinion from both......... DTV HAS TO SHOW THE PROOF and an invoice will not prevail in court. If you read these papers it states

"DTV obtained during the course of discovery in an action against Reggie Scullion a portion of the business records created and maintained by his company, Vcipher Tech. Multiple witness interviews and other information confirm the accuracy of the records."

This seems to be a kicker according to both. Did an employee verify that these were real invoices? Did the backdoor crook claim to be an employee? They do not know and these may or may not be an issue.

This I did understand, I did nothing wrong and an invoice cannot prove that I did something I did not. A reply has been sent from my side and a motion for discovery will be filed at the appropriate time and they will have to disclose everything they have as evidence.
My attorneys are contacting the others named in the suit and wants THE MORE THE MERRIER.......

TTRK, I’m not very smart in this area so please do not take anything I said as a negative towards you. Once again, I am just providing information to all, not trying to raise any unnecessary problems. The wording in this paper work has changed and DTV is trying to lie even more, we all know it’s a lie but the Judge does not.

[gunsmoke2]

bigstuff,


I am just curious did they state the amount of damages they are seeking in the lawsuit ?


I fully understand if you prefer not to disclose this.


GS2

[To The Real King!!]

Hi Bigstuff,

No offence taken at all. The purpose is to help, nothing else.

Firstly you are asking for assistance on a website and I don't think you will be able to get more help than these legal-rights.org posts can give you in this entire thread.

While the docket info does not list the court (I just realized this myself) there is a lawyer named who is winning many of these cases. Your lawyers should be able to contact him and get the required info (which I believe is the Central District of California).

His name is posted there and is:

LA TORRACA and GOETTSCH
A law partnership
211 East ocean Boulevard, Suite 400
Post Office Box 21978
Long Beach, California 90801-4978
Mr. Raymond H. Goettsch, esq.
Telephone: (562) 436-1887
Fax: (562) 436-8489
-
E-mail: rgottsch@landglaw.com
-
Web Page: http://www.landglaw.com
-
Contact: Mr. Raymond H. Goettsch


I believe he can be contacted for the info you need.

The second thing is that many defendants do NOT KNOW that an invoice is NOT proof against him. That is clearly stated at several places and is intended to get defendants to go and SEE a lawyer who will explain this. Many people think that an invoice shows their guilt and as you know from your lawyers, this is not true.

My information is not intended to replace a lawyer or present any type of legal defence. It is simply intended to have defendants understand that all is NOT LOST because DirecTV® have an invoice from some vendor which effectively proves nothing since the court does not even know what the named product is or does and may be described differently on different invoices. Without a seizure of the actual goods in action they have little chance of winning a case. In many cases the goods may have been used for legal purpose such as using Microsofts Windows Smart card toolkit described at:

http://www.microsoft.com/catalog/display.asp?subid=22&site=10243&x=38&y=16


This is where contacting other people in your jurisdiction is important to discuss overall what defences will be submitted.

The next thing is that in the California cases DirecTV® have also alleged RICO and judge Real has thrown that out in every case that I know of. If they claim RICO with you then your lawyer will want to contact Mr. Raymond H. Goettsch and get the skinny on that as well.

So don't misunderstand. The info on legal-rights.org is simply to point you in the right direction and encourage you to contact a lawyer and defend your case. Its NOT a simple end all to the case. There is plenty of work to be done but it CAN be done to a win if you are not guilty or they have no proof which an invoice is NOT. DirecTV® will try to show that the invoice shows guilt so you will have to present alternative evidence showing them to be wrong. That is NOT that difficult if you do your homework :)

If you check the various posts you will see that many defendants believe they can ignore this stuff for one reason or another but as I am sure you know that will most often lead to a default judgement which will then HAVE to be faced and that as a LOSS.

That's all my info is intended to do and it requires that your lawyers take the initiative and contact the California lawyer for information and potential jurisprudence. That is not that hard to do and at least you have a name to contact. At least that is a start and as I say I seriously doubt if you will get better info in this thread.

As to any Vcipher invoices they stole or had stolen, their justification is total bull. What they cannot prove is any "chain of custody" since the thief was not an employee and they have been challenged on this . They will try to use generalizations such as "interviews tend to show" etc. but tending to show is NOT proof of "chain of custody". They did NOT obtain these invoices in any lawful way and many more people have denied them than the few who may have accepted them stupidly since they were NEVER sent with any goods.

If you were shown an invoice that was similar to a purchase that you made in 1997 but that you had NEVER seen before, EVER, would you accept it as fact? Probably not, but some people may have done so misguidedly. Remember these are very old and from 1996 and 1997 and people may tend to think that they are legit because they may have purchased something and do not remember the exact details or price. Most of these so called "invoices" are NOT accurate but may be close enough to somewhat reflect that something was purchased. Just how useful is an INACCURATE invoice when even a real one is NOT proof of anything. That they are NOT legitimate is just one additional thing, not the whole case. When they are asked to prove that they are legitimate invoices, what will they say since they are not correct? If your case is about Vcipher, legitimate invoices can be supplied if that will help but you may be better off showing that they have no "chain of custody" to legitimize whatever they do have. These documents are from a crashed program and are simply not what Vcipher ever used for accounting or any business purpose and they do NOT accurately reflect Vcipher's sales. How can they prove that they do??

If they are questioned about WHERE they got them, what answer would they give. After all they are STOLEN, not supplied legitimately and we are suing them for $50 Million (I believe) for that theft here in Canada. Those documents will be filed in January and may help too. Once they are filed they become PUBLIC and I will post them on legal-rights.org. Ask your lawyer if that suit will help show their illegitimacy there. It may not PROVE it until the case is heard but it is certainly as good as their "interviews that tend to show" bla bla bla.

Remember that we have gone up against them many times up here and while the issues are different they are the same people. They will try to prove you guilty even if you are not as that small detail does not appear to matter to them. And you may need an expert from a local university because you cannot expect their experts to be truthful. Its best to know that going in otherwise you will be quite surprised at what your ears hear being said. These are not nice people and "the truth" does not seem important to them. You will be shocked at the bull you hear so like a boy scout, be prepared. You can pretty much see that from their letter.

I hope the info helps youhttp://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrk.gif
A Happy, Healthy and Prosperous NEW YEAR to ALL!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrkhappyday.gif

Thanks & Good Luck,

To The REAL King!!

Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/bllrbanner.gif

http://www.legal-rights.org/images/lrbanner.gif
Now open with lots of useful resources at your disposal AT:
http://www.legal-rights.org

Please REMEMBER OUR WAR HERO’S (http://www.legal-rights.org/remembrance.html) <-- Click here Please!


Please DONATE for the SUPREME COURT BATTLE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html) <-- Click here Please!

Por favor dona para la BATALLA EN LA SUPREMA CORTE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html)<-- Haz Click aqui!

[1 CRAZY CANUCK]

Sorry to sound a little slow here but, DAVE's charging people based on a inventory list that shows their name and product[s] purchased? Were any of these people caught with the "goods" listed on the invoice?
This kind of concerns me to the degree; that if a "handgun" supplier's seized invoice records shows my name and address; and, the handgun purchased, printed-out on this piece of paper. Than, someone working for this supplier "just" has to say that this invoice is correct. And, I can be charged even if I've never seen; nor, heard about this Handgun purchase? W.O.W.!
Kind of like the "TWILIGHT ZONE"......yikes!

[To The Real King!!]

Hi Doug,

Yes I hear what you are saying but there are many big differences.

Firstly there is no employee who is able to confirm anything.

Secondly where did they obtain these invoices? Did the person they hired to steal them do so at their request or did he steal them and then offer them to DirecTV® ? Either way they are not the "real thing." In Canada they would have to PROVE that they were legitimate and not made up or contrived by DirecTV® . Without a proper "chain of custody" that could not be proven here. It seems that in the USA that may be different, I don't know. To use an invoice in Canada in a court case the DEFENDANT has to recognize it (accept it) or they have to bring witnesses to prove its authentic. From what I gather they may not have to prove that in the USA which seems ridiculous to me since DirecTV® printed the invoice and could fabricate it to say anything they wanted it to say. I don't understand how a court would accept that once the Defendant establishes WHO printed the INVOICE that is before the court. When asked directly WHO PRINTED THIS INVOICE ONTO PAPER, They would have to admit that they did. If they say they don't know then they could be asked WHERE DID YOU OBTAIN IT FROM? Eventually they would have to admit where it came from and it did NOT come from Vcipher with our knowledge or approval. It is STOLEN PROPERTY and they can be forced to show how it came into their possession.

This can be done in discovery, before the actual case. Once they are forced to admit that the invoice is stolen, that they printed it, NOT Vcipher I don't see how any judge could accept it as VALID. Certainly not in a Canadian court but courts in the US may operate differently. We have a "clean hands" rule and you cannot use stolen property as proof of anothers theft of anything.

Imagine a plaintiff saying "yes your honour, I stole that from him to prove that he stole a communication from me". No self respecting judge could accept that. It's outrageous here.

And they can be FORCED by a court to SHOW where they got it and HOW it came into their possession. After all, they are presenting it as EVIDENCE of something. Is it legitimate or is it contrived, fabricated and designed to show what they want to show. After all, its a piece of paper printed on THEIR printer, not Vciphers. That is NOT the normal way an invoice is produced, is it? But hey, I can onlysuggest WHAT they should be asked to prove about the invoice, I am not the lawyer. Perhaps he cannot do that, I don't know.

Thirdly what is it that the invoice describes. There are many ways to fill in an invoice and different employees may describe the same thing many ways. What exactly does the invoice describe and is that product illegal. And WHERE is it legal and where is it illegal. And was it used legally or illegally and what proof do they have to show that.

So there are many parts to this issue and only the named defendant KNOWS what he did with the product and if he used it illegally.

Bigstuff says he did nothing wrong so they will have to PROVE that he did. How are they going to do that when he did NOT?

As I said, if they did not RAID someone and find equipment being used illegally they have a real uphill battle. There is no way they can PROVE illegal usage and a court does require proof, not innuendo or allegations. That is what they are dong to try to BULLY people into settling with them since litigation is so expensive in the USA. That is pretty obvious to anyone.

The trick is to NOT let them succeed. Probably one law firm fighting for all the defendants in one state can keep the costs down to a reasonable level and asking the judge to join all the cases for this reason may succeed. In Canada it would but in the USA I don't know. Judges KNOW the cost of fighting is prohibitive and will usually cooperate if the cases are virtually identical up here. But I don't know how the courts think down there. Certainly Judge Real in the Central Court of California seems pretty reasonable. This is in a different state.

That is the problem with justice today, not everyone can afford it and big companies like DirecTV® use that fact to get defendants to give in to them. But if someone FIGHTS when they are not guilty they can usually win. But its costly unfortunately and DirecTV® know that and use it to their advantagehttp://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrk.gif

Some day the people will REBEL from the injustce but until that happens there will be a LOT of injustices that happen by companies using this fact. Its time that some politician came up with a way that is more equitable but since they like corporate money, that is unlikely to happen..
A Happy, Healthy and Prosperous NEW YEAR to ALL!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrkhappyday.gif

Thanks & Good Luck,

To The REAL King!!

Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/bllrbanner.gif

http://www.legal-rights.org/images/lrbanner.gif
Now open with lots of useful resources at your disposal AT:
http://www.legal-rights.org

Please REMEMBER OUR WAR HERO’S (http://www.legal-rights.org/remembrance.html) <-- Click here Please!


Please DONATE for the SUPREME COURT BATTLE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html) <-- Click here Please!

Por favor dona para la BATALLA EN LA SUPREMA CORTE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html)<-- Haz Click aqui!

[gunsmoke2]

While the invoice might not be worth any evidence the problem I see is that the defendents will have to pay lawyer's fees or be faced with a default Judgement.


That's the same garbage we have in Canada. Even though we did nothing wrong we had to pay huge lawyer's fees to prove it. We also found out that their intention was to try to financially destroy us before we got to court. It seems they will try the same thing in the US. ?


GS2

[boneyard]

..

[gunsmoke2]

boneyard.


I don't know US law and I don't know that the lawsuit is bogus as I haven't seen it. I believe that if DTV lost then the court may award the defendents court costs. Then I would think the defendent would have to file for damages.. just speculating


Its going to cost legal fees no matter what unless you just don't contest the lawsuit.


Two others reported the same thing on another site but it was not Vcipher... another company that was taken down.


GS2

[gunsmoke2]

The other company is Vector Technologies


GS2

[1 CRAZY CANUCK]

O.K.! This is the 1 CRAZY CANUCK’s “Silver-Platter” offer to ALL his American friends [and, those who “hopefully” will become my friends. – eh!]

DAVE has been very wasteful [with their stock-holders money! Obviously, because, they figure they can ; and, you can not!”] having their lawyers “dump” those letters, on you, accusing you of having your “name” on an INVOICE LIST; will cost you in lawyer “bills”, alone.. Whether, it be from : “vchipher”; kick-ass clones”; the “shanty”; any and all American Hardware [exposure] sites.
Now, listen up! DAVE has “----” to go on! For starters, go to http://www.legal-rights.org/DTVBOX.html and, READ whatever may fit your issues! If there is a ”NO FIND” here!
Do not give up! – eh! Just realize there is a SUPER DEMAND for unity here! Let’s organize and try the Legal – Rights, in the U.S.A. site; to help UNITE you under one LAW-FIRM..
I being; “CRAZY CANUCK” [the “1” and only!] suggest………….
First things, first! I ask you to e-mail TTRK@legal-rights.org with a copy of your DAVE “THREAT” letter; than, R-E-L-A-X ….and, go watch “MONSTER INC.” ; trust me; the final result will be more “horrifying!” he! he!
Let’s get the word out and see if we at www.legal-rights.org can organize “ONE LAWYER FIRM”……. It’s your call! – eh!

[seymour_teevee]

Originally posted by boneyard
Gunsmoke2,
If Dtv can not prove guilt of wrongful doing and lose the case, then aren't they required to pay for the defedants legal fees & damages? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought most legal systems have these laws in place to prevent bogus lawsuits and the situations that are now taking place.

In the U.S. it depends entirely on the jurisdiction. In some cases, what you surmise is true; in others, legal fees and court costs compensation must be requested prior to trial, or, it and damages have to be taken up in a counter suit; and, in others, legal fees and court costs of a successful defense are not subject to compensation at all.

[gunsmoke2]

Thanks for the replies..it would seem that Canada and the US are similar in respect to awarding damages.



GS2

[EAO]

Originally posted by joke'em


"cost of Defense Fees" are rarely awarded. The Plaintiffs suit must be shown to be totally frivilous, without any legal basis, and brought simply to cause anquish to the defendant. It's really sort of a punative damage. Many states require mandatory binding arbitration on cases of $10,000 or less. Each side gets 30 mins to present case/defense to arbitrator and he makes decision. Can be appealed by the loser for cost of about $75 (the cost of the arbitration). If appeal is not filed within 30 days, arbitrator's decision becomes final. Best thing to do is just let everybody know up front that if you lose, it does not stop there! Make it clear to your attorney and I assure you he will share with theirs. Its all about MONEY. If it costs $10 to get $5, they'll back off.

interpertations of what's frivolous,without legal basis,intended to cause harm or anguish,etc vary from state to state,jurisdiction to jurisdiction.
dtv is on a fishing expedition with there letters and threat's.
on an individual basis,they can get away with it.
but a class action would expose the very weak legal grounds for the letters and cause for action.

they know and invoice isn't proof of anything.it has to be backed up with acceptable proof that the item was in the person's possession being charged and if the mere possesion of the item isn't illegal,EG. A PROGRAMMER,they would Need physical proof you used it illegally.

writing letters that are vague and insinuating they have evidence of illegal activity that is a crime and or punishable for damages civilly and or bringing forth a lawsuit knowing that with any competent legal representation they would be lose, i think would demonstrate an obvious abuse of the legal system for the sole purpose of getting admissions of guilt and the resulting agreements or default judgements from those that,ignore, don't understand or can't afford or seek an attorney to explain.
unless dtv has some other physical evidence of wrongdoing than an invoice,all you have to do is have your attorney respond to there letter prior to a lawsuit being filed or appear with him to defend the charges.

dtv knows that anyone that consults with a competent attorney before responding to there letters would be advised they have nothing to prove or support a successfull legal action.

if someone has successfully defended a similar lawsuit and the details of the record and decision corrobarate that dtv had no more reasonable evidence to support there letters/lawsuit other than the invoice and whatever they used to support there validity,and whatever else they entered as evidence to support there ACTON,and it was found to be without merit and the case dismissed;this establishes a date and time that they were legally aware there legal,methods/strategy/proof weren't valid LEGALLY. continuing to follow thru on there letters and legal actions prior to the decision that were still active and of the same basis from that point forward,would demonstrate any continuing or future action with the same basis would cause uneceeseray and intentional, mental/emotional/financial ,anguish and anxiety .

IF WHAT I'M SAYING IS FOR THE MOST PART AN ACCURATE ASSESSMENT AS A LEGAL BASIS,GET A HUNGRY LAW FIRM IN THE RIGHT JURISDICTION That aWARDS LEGAL FEES AND PENALTIES/DAMAGES . FILE A CLASS ACTION SUIT FOR DAMAGES FOR THERE FRIVOLOUS AND INTENTIONAL ACTIONS,USING ONE OF THE CASES THAT WERE SUCCESSFULLY DEFENDED,TO COUNTERSUE .


well that's my 3,577 cents worth.

[ynot20]

What state are we talking about? I am interested because I was served with the 1st letter from the Texas attorneys. What options were given to you,if any.

[EAO]

Originally posted by ynot20
What state are we talking about? I am interested because I was served with the 1st letter from the Texas attorneys. What options were given to you,if any.

IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD MUCH,DO A WEB SEARCH FOR "LEGAL PLANS" ETC.

THEY COST FROM 5-15 BUCKS A MONTH AND THAT ENTITLES YOU TO VARIOUS BENEFITS. the one i used included 1 letter p/mos to be written and sent by your attorney to whoever . as many free consultations on different topics were also part of the deal.

i know this didn't answer your ? but i thought it might be helpfull

[To The Real King!!]

Hi EAO,

Firstly I want to thank you for using lower case. I have tried to read many of your posts in the past and have great difficulty with UPPER CASE which is VERY hard to read. These posts were much easier than any I have seen in the past and that's pretty important to old farts like myself :)

Bye the way we are over 80,000 members now.

I have to say that I agree with you completely and they know very well that they cannot win with just an invoice. Even if the product that is described (and there are many ways to describe something) is or seems to be illegal that is not proof at all that it was even the person who is named on the invoice that purchased anything. It could have been his wife's boyfriend or anyone including a neighbor who doesn't work when both the person named and his wife do work and so are away all day. Unless the FedEx guy knows you, the neighbor could just sign your name with nobody any the wiser.

Courts don't find someone guilty by innuendo or suggestion, they need absolute proof so if the person in question was NOT raided there can be no proof if he denies the invoice. Some companies (like Vcipher) never send an invoice with the goods at all.

So they know full well and are only trying to get admissions from some people who they bamboozle with these letters.

Anyone who falls for that ridiculous nonsense in the letters and does NOT get a lawyer, really does not care much about their rights. These are the type of people they are looking for, those who are easily bamboozled. Hopefully there are NOT too many of them and that people will SEE a trusted lawyer who will advise them correctly and not just look for a fee. That is the unfortunate thing today and people should get recommendations from people they trust when seeking a lawyer because it seems that there are as many BAD ones as there are good ones The lawyer you choose is VERY important.

People who get a good lawyer will WIN these cases but unfortunately it will always cost a few bucks. There is really no way around that unless you feel confident enough to plead your own case. I have seen it done and done WELL but you have to be a realist and capable or you will lose even a winning case.

Good luck to any who get these DirecTV® dunderhead BS letters. And yes, they are TRUE BULL S H I Thttp://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrk.gif
A Happy, Healthy and Prosperous NEW YEAR to ALL!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrkhappyday.gif

Thanks & Good Luck,

To The REAL King!!

Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/bllrbanner.gif

http://www.legal-rights.org/images/lrbanner.gif
Now open with lots of useful resources at your disposal AT:
http://www.legal-rights.org

Please REMEMBER OUR WAR HERO’S (http://www.legal-rights.org/remembrance.html) <-- Click here Please!


Please DONATE for the SUPREME COURT BATTLE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html) <-- Click here Please!

Por favor dona para la BATALLA EN LA SUPREMA CORTE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html)<-- Haz Click aqui!

[ynot20]

Big stuff what state are you located? If I am in the same state maybe we can work together to fight this. United we stand divided we fall!

[seymour_teevee]

"Class-action" adjudication is reserved for plaintiffs, not defendants. Some criminal cases are tried at the behest of the district attorney with multiple defandants alleged to have been involved in the same crime in a common trial (but each with his own defense lawyer), but this is a civil case.

[EAO]

Originally posted by seymour_teevee
"Class-action" adjudication is reserved for plaintiffs, not defendants. Some criminal cases are tried at the behest of the district attorney with multiple defandants alleged to have been involved in the same crime in a common trial (but each with his own defense lawyer), but this is a civil case.


THIS is an exerpt of the statement i made directly on "CLAAS ACTION" and the basis which i thought makes it doable.

______________________________________________________________

"if someone has successfully defended a similar lawsuit and the details of the record and decision corrobarate that dtv had no more reasonable evidence to support there letters/lawsuit other than the invoice and whatever they used to support there validity,and whatever else they entered as evidence to support there ACTON,and it was found to be without merit and the case dismissed;this establishes a date and time that they were legally aware there legal,methods/strategy/proof weren't valid LEGALLY.
continuing to follow thru on there letters and legal actions prior to the decision that were still active and of the same basis from that point forward,would demonstrate any continuing or future action with the same basis would cause uneceeseray and intentional, mental/emotional/financial ,anguish and anxiety .

FILE A CLASS ACTION SUIT FOR DAMAGES FOR THERE FRIVOLOUS AND INTENTIONAL ACTIONS,USING ONE OF THE CASES THAT WERE SUCCESSFULLY DEFENDED,TO COUNTERSUE . "

___________________________________________________________________

a defendant that succesfully defends a suit has at very least the right to countersue for the legal fee's and court costs. it seems to me that they also are entitled to loss of income due to the days and time needed to take off from there work or business.wether punitive damages can/will be awrded for the perceived affects to the persons,character/credibility/reputation and the pain/suffering/mental/emotional damage,would be baseless conjecture/opinion and speculation on my part.

i tend to think that no one has defended an actual suit they filed.i don't think they'd go forward with a court case because it would expose all of there evidence publicly and they would lose.

if the record shows that there action was filed without a reasonable chance of being successfull by established law, any future court action would seriously expose them and be able to support charges of filing malicious,frivilous,lawsuits.

the successfull defendants and/or those that have been contacted on the same matter and basis, after there is successfull ruling and a court record,would all have common grounds if dtv continued any actions thereafter.

DTV,isn't going to court with this unless someone takes them up on it and doesn't just work out a deal.

from there letters they'll get a few who don't consult an ATTORNEY to admit to something and work out a deal.
from those they initiated court action,they'll get default judgements from a few who don't consult an ATTORNEY .
those that do get an attorney,the case will be dropped when the attorneys talk.

were talking about the average joe,he's intimdated,probably doesn't have or ever needed an attorney. doesn't have the money.

who's going to just show up in court with there attorney preppared to spend the time and money so they'll stop harrassing others,when all they need to do is spend a few hundred bucks to have there attorney tell dtv there bluffing and have them just drop the suit.

it really wouldn't cost much more to kill there game,by telling them your going to defend it,no deals,they'd have to give all there evidence in DISCOVERY and if it's as weak as it appears to be,the defendants attorney would ask for a dismissal and the judge would throw it out .




i'm not a lawyer,consult one if you get a letter or lawsuit.
these are just my opinions. and we all know what they say about opinions.

[Itchy]

I would like to throw my hat in the ring with some thoughts on the civil litigation issue. Please keep in mind that they may be somewhat skeewed as I am speaking about Canadian litigation recognizing these claims are in fact in the USA. I deal in the collections business and specifically legal collections for various clients we represent in Canada. We are frequently involved in litigation for "debt" actions, not usually seeking damages. I do know if there is one thing our company, clients and my lawyers hate it is self represented defendants.

The smaller courts are far more lenient towards self represented (without lawyers) parties. Armed with the information TTRK is offering here and at his web site, you as a defendant could probably do more damage to Dave ($$$$ wise) by filing your own Statement of Defense (these documents are usually available at the court where you are being served), the filing fees are usually quite small and if you were simply to file a defense that said "the defendant denies each and every allegation made by the plaintiff" they would be unable to have default judgment signed against you.

With this filed it would be necessary for them to serve you with some application for summary judgment, more work for them right, they may drop it at that point, if they don't there is not a court in the land that would not allow you to seek legal counsel at that point, and if necessary amend your pleadings and defense. I know this might cost a few dollars more in the end, but it doesn't sound to me like they are going to push this matters so long as the evidence they are relying on is in question and especially if there a precedents against them.

Now this may not be for everyone, lets face it you could still ultimately be facing some costs or judgment against you, but I know I would sure try this before getting a lawyer involved. The courts will usually (especially in Canada) allow a defendant to be fully explained the proceedure and Judges will make exceptions for people who do this themselves, if they become frustrated with your efforts, even the court will advise you to get a lawyer before making some rash decision against you.

Again I would caution anyone in proceeding in this fashion, but I would certainly like to see someone try this, see how far Dave will really go.

[g260823]

bigstuff,
what is the outcome of the law suit? is there any new news on the infamous letter? thanks

[To The Real King!!]

Hi People,

The reply that Itchy made is quite good advice and I have seen this done with success even in a criminal case here in Canada. In fact I assisted a gentleman named Jacques D'Argy do his own case and he won both at trial and in the first appeal. They are appealing again and he will again handle this himself. The court is very careful to protect the defendants rights in this case. But its not for everyone and I would personally rate Mr. D'Argy as more thorough and a better speaker than most lawyers I have seen.
Here below is a post I made in another thread concerning this that I thought might be helpful to some people who will read this thread. Simply jump over the parts that don't apply.



I would like to say that as Dean says NDS and DirecTV® are two different entities but DirecTV® always try to have NDS interject on their behalf making it difficult to get information, even in a court. But in these threats it is DirecTV® directly who act because they want to get MONEY for a claimed loss!!!

DirecTV® and their lackeys have often used material that is illegally and improperly obtained to go against their own customers or anyone they can intimidate. This may WELL be the case in this instance. But they are often NOT successful as can be seen in the court dockets I have posted on legal-rights.

In the case of Vcipher, they (I was) were raided and information seized in 1998. That information was and is in the hands of the COURT and the court granted the RCMP permission to use it in the furtherance of an investigation of Vcipher. They did NOT grant the RCMP or ANY ONE any permission to give, sell or otherwise transfer this information to ANY other party. And since I have been acquitted of all charges concerning this, this property will be returned to me once the appeals process is over. In the meantime some of this information has turned up in Scott Wilsdon's hands (on behalf of DirecTV®). What is interesting is that the RCMP have sent my lawyers a letter stating THEY did not release it to anyone. If that is correct then how did this come into DirecTV® possession?

I have posted a large section on this at:

http://www.legal-rights.org/DTVBOX.html

and elsewhere on the legal-rights.org site so that people would KNOW that this information was improperly obtained and is NOT valid information and is rather FABRICATED, CONTRIVED and printed BY DirecTV® or their lawyers and is IMPROPERLY in their hands. This information should thus NOT be accepted as valid by any court since it is STOLEN PROPERTY and is wrongfully in DirecTV® possession. Furthermore the information is INCORRECT and erroneous.

I have recently filed suit against the RCMP and DirecTV® for over 55 million dollars and part of that is because of this stolen property. I cannot be sure HOW it was obtained by them but it was NOT given or transferred to DirecTV® and Wilsdon in any way by Vcipher or Avantec and its representatives or directors, namely ME.

This issue will be the subject of discovery and this lawsuit and people should NEVER accept this as fact because a great deal of the information is inaccurate and much of it involves INQUIRIES by people rather than actual sales. It can HARDLY be an offence of any kind to inquire about anything.

The advice to throw away a letter is VERY BAD advice and if such a letter is received it should be attended to by contacting a LAWYER. NEVER contact DirecTV® yourself because they will use any method to get information they want about you and then use it AGAINST you.

These people do NOT follow the law in Canada and several courts have cited them as LAWBREAKERS here. Certainly as it concerns Vcipher, or Northsat (Eddie or Dean Love) or Computer Shanty or Vector technologies or ANYONE, they should NOT be trusted in any way and are KNOWN by me to be unworthy of any trust and are NOT beyond BRAKING the law to obtain their ends. They actually are in POSSESSION of STOLEN property in the Vcipher case and that is a felony offence. A company of which I am the President, Avantec whizpoppits, Inc is the OWNER of material that was STOLEN from us (by someone) and that property is illegally in the possession of DirecTV® and Mr. Scott Wilsdon, their lawyer.

I am NOT in possession of information about Dean Love or any other company and I do not and am not speaking for them but I do believe Dean when he says his agreements were broken. I would think that if any of his past clients have received a DirecTV® letter, there can be no reason not to contact him with that information. He may well be able to assist you, so why not. They claim to have information but perhaps that information is being used improperly by DirecTV®. I would NOT doubt that for a minute, personally.

People should do what they want to do but I am simply commenting because I do have some idea of what they are CAPABLE of. And that itself may be useful information for people who have received their intimidation letters that state FALSELY that they have PROOF that something was used illegally when that is NOT the truth at all. How could they POSSIBLY KNOW that a programmer was used illegally when it may have many LEGAL uses as can be seen at the Microsoft site at:

http://www.microsoft.com/HWDEV/TECH/input/smartcard/default.asp

Even products that COULD be used illegally may not have been used in such a way and it is improper to claim that they have PROOF of that when they DO NOT. An invoice does NOT prove anything and there are hundreds of reasons why that could be FALSE, INCORRECT, and misleading.

I am aware of some people who purchased something they found out was illegal in their country and so they THREW it in the GARBAGE rather than act illegally. Yet DirecTV® would state in a letter to that person that they used it illegally to steal TV which they obviously did not do.

Anyway I have said all of this before and if people want to be intimidated that is their business but do NOT accept their statement that they have PROOF as TRUE because no invoice constitutes PROOF. People who DID NOT do anything illegal should stand up for their RIGHTS and get all the help they can with that in mind. And if Dean is willing to help someone by E-mail (who has received the DirecTV® letter) then I think that is worthwhile looking into by anyone. In any case NOTHING should be done by anyone who receives a letter without a legal opinion which is every ones right to obtain.

JMHO and YOU should do what you think is besthttp://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrk.gif

But DO NOT hesitate to contact a LAWYER.

A Happy, Healthy and Prosperous NEW YEAR to ALL!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/ttrkhappyday.gif

Thanks & Good Luck,

To The REAL King!!

Freedom has nothing to fear from the truth!
http://www.legal-rights.org/images/bllrbanner.gif

http://www.legal-rights.org/images/lrbanner.gif
Now open with lots of useful resources at your disposal AT:
http://www.legal-rights.org

Please REMEMBER OUR WAR HERO’S (http://www.legal-rights.org/remembrance.html) <-- Click here Please!


Please DONATE for the SUPREME COURT BATTLE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html) <-- Click here Please!

Por favor dona para la BATALLA EN LA SUPREMA CORTE (http://www.legal-rights.org/donation.html)<-- Haz Click aqui!