Tuesday, August 26, 2014

This guy has probably been festering all day waiting for me to approve his comment.  I saw it this morning while waiting on a veteran at Valley Regional - from there we went to the VA Clinic wherein he had a post cancer surgery follow-up.  We then did a very late lunch at Long Horns and then I had to take Bela for a belt.  That was fun.  At the Walmart I had the windows down - AC will be fixed tomorrow - and Bela is yelling out the window - "move everybody Bobby needs to park"  Her aunt and I were laughing so hard.
Anyway, here is the moron's post.  It is also posted below with the story on the Hasse/Morris hearing. When I saw it I decided to hold it until I could give it the recognition it deserves.
"Anonymous said..
You are so full of it Bobby, you are blind too then idiot! You never said anything of the letters not being signed you bozo! You are beyond idiotic and so is Murray for that matter.....now an email needs to be signed?! The delivery of ones email which needs pass code to use is not evidence of ones intent to deliver??? Stupid, plain stupid! Congress should just halt the search for the missing IRS emails......they were not signed!"

What is clear is, this anony never actually read my post for its meaning.  He was too angry over Hasse losing to even read and comprehend what I wrote.

I defy anyone to copy and paste wherein I said I  discussed the signature issue - it never happened.  What I said was, the issue would be whether or not Morris resigned.  That is the signature issue.

But this guy is so far gone with his anger he cannot even see I threw Hasse a bone.

I said he had the better attorney.  I said his attorney was pretty quick on his feet by raising the issue that lawyers  file  pleadings every day electronically without signing same.  I said if anyone deserved sanctions it was Hasse because Morris' Motion for Sanctions was totally without merit given the facts of the case.

I then went out of my way to provide his attorney the Texas Statute on the Uniform Electronic Transaction Act.

This is important because it addresses Judge Murray's concern.  Under Texas law, something can be considered signed, even though it was sent electronically if it meets the terms of the statute.

I am handing this to Hasse on a silver platter and this guy is too angry to see it.

I saw Cesar de Leon in action.  He is a steady as they go attorney.  I am certain he can fashion a Motion for Rehearing arguing the statute.  I do not write for the emotional morons - I write for the educated.

This moron seems to think anything sent electronically with someone's name on it means they sent it.  Wrong - very, very wrong.  I have access to several people's emails and send out information under their names all of the time.  I do it with their permission - but it is not written or sent by them.

This is why we have a law which provides for a standard for the court to consider when deciding if an electronic communication meets the requirements to be considered signed.

Even in criminal law the jury cannot just assume an email from John Doe threatening to kill someone is from John Doe.  There is an evidentiary process.  What this moron wants is the constitutional process concerning evidence be trashed because he says so.

Now, I was not at the original hearing.  I have no way of knowing how the evidence was admitted.  Because Hasse was there pro se it would not be unreasonable for Judge Murray to give his attorney a second bite at the apple.

It may not be necessary.  Hasse's attorney has a copy of the transcript.  If Morris admitted to the authenticity of the emails, then they are authenticated.  The next step would be for Cesar de Leon to file a Motion for Rehearing based on a question of law.  If the emails have already been authenticated it is then for Hasse's attorney to argue under the  Uniform Electronic Transaction Act, they are deemed signed.

Now I am not saying for sure the Act provides for same - but if there is a place which will provide him the argument it is in the  Uniform Electronic Transaction Act.

You see what the moron wants is for the constitution be abandoned as to the Rules of Evidence, and for me to outright create a map to Hasse's victory.  It is not enough I gave him the Statute which would allow Hasse to win.

Ah, but then Murray may go back to the jurisdiction issue.


Anonymous said...

I read the suit (Hasse's side) and it seems (correct me if I am wrong) that since the judge ruled that the email was not signed, then the suit for a declaratory judgement is trash and got dismissed as well. Where, if anywhere does the case go next, or is it dead unless it gets filed for appeal? I am not a lawyer, but that is how it looked to me.

Anonymous said...

"For the record, Barton and Montoya were not in the courtroom so any information they have is one sided from Hasse."
Posted by BobbyWC at 8:00 AM

Jim Barton August 26, 2014 at 2:19 PM

"I can't speak for Mr. Wightman's motivation. The report we received on today's hearing did not come from Tad Hasse as he claimed on his blog. He is simply in error."

Notice the difference, Barton did not use words such as idiot or moron. He did not accuse anybody of lying. The gentleman made a simple statement.

BobbyWC said...

Which you take as true such as his claim of 6 million pageviews. Given Barton's history is misleading and attack pieces I think my readers will find you as anything but credible.

Barton knows my motivation - it is called truth. He has no use for it which is why he cannot see it.

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

I said he has two options - appeal or a Motion for Rehearing.

Because I was not at the initial hearing and have not read the transcript I do not know if the emails were authenticated.

But before doing an appeal, he should consider a Motion for Rehearing if the emails were authenticated. He needs to argue the Act concerning electronic communications.

He can possibly win on appeal on the issue, but I can assure you the COA would prefer if Judge Murray were first allowed to consider the argument, and two it is possible Judge Murray will change his mind

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

You are an idiot and you are jealous one at that! Why can't you comprehend that there are more people viewing the other blogs, compared to you? Live with it bud, that is just a fact...a lot less people come to this propaganda blog,...(yours)..than the others....its that simple.

BobbyWC said...

And you know this because you surveyed the 200,000 people who live in Brownsville, let alone Cameron County, the LRGV and the country?

You actually believe Barton has 3 million more page views than Montoya?

You people seem to love to make a fool of yourselves with your moronic posts.

I actually invest in my page which is how I know my real numbers and nearly every business person who views it every day.

But you keep on believe "that is a fact" as it comes from the voices in your head, and see how far that gets you in a argument of substance

What is so lost on you is - you say no one reads or cares about what I write but you none the less seem compelled to read it every day while needing to post yet another stupid comment.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

As I read your blog often I felt I needed to make some clarification. I see the terms moron and idiot used by you and by those who critique you on a fairly regular basis. There is a great divide between moron and idiot. Surely at times one would fall into this area. The correct term between moron and idiot is imbecile. To not iclude imbeciles is a disservice or some form of discrimination. Please include imbeciles in future posts.

Anonymous said...

Moron, idiot, and imbecile were popular terms in psychology as associated with intelligence on an IQ test until around the 1960s. They were then replaced with the terms mild retardation, moderate retardation, severe retardation, and profound retardation. In addition to this, other factors besides IQ are now used in diagnosing these levels of mental deficiency. Therefore, as a champion of individuals with disabilities as you claim, it is certainly not proper for you to use such terms to criticize those that disagree with you.

BobbyWC said...

for someone who claims to have knowledge you do not seem to have any.

These terms fell out of favor as offensive to intellectually disabled individuals.

I actually prefer intellectually different.

These terms no longer have anything to do with one's true intellectual capacity.

They are terms used to describe people who by choice choose to act stupid as opposed to people who are biologically intellectually different.

People who choose to act stupid can actually have very high IQ's.

They only thing insulting to the intellectually different is you attempt to align these terms with them when civilized society has thrown them off as insulting

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

As correct as you can be, there still are mothers, fathers, brothers and sisters living today of those children who were given such labels to identify their disabilities prior to the 70's by the intellectual society of psychology. These individual hated the terms given to their loves ones and still hate those that practice the use of such terms even if those terms are not being used to identified intellectually different individuals.

Anonymous said...

THE COURT: And let me just be clear about one thing too, I was listening for one thing and I can't remember if you asked if he had seen it or if he sent this or transmitted it to somebody or not.
MR. HASSE: I asked if he had written it.
MR. HASSE: Did I not?
THE WITNESS: I think he said am I familiar with it. <<<<Misattributed should be THE COURT
MR. HASSE, PRO SE: Did you send it -- well, I can ask the question again.
Q. (BY MR.HASSE) Did you send that email?
A. I sent the original.
Q. Thank you, sir

BobbyWC said...

If at the time he was holding the email wherein he was resigning he new term - then it is authenticated without dispute.

I did not carefully review the Electronic Act - I'm not sure if it was saying admitting to the electronic document as having been sent by you is the same as a signature or if their is a conflict with the earlier manner spelled out as constituting a signature.

De Leon needs to review the Act and make his own decision. If he believes there is an argument, he then gets to a signature - but then Murray still gets to ask of the local party is the one which needs to be sued under § 201 - they are they ones who cannot refuse a resignation.

Then the next step is he a public officer?

If the above transcription of the hearing is accurate, it seems Judge Murray was trying to help Hasse out by insuring he asked the right questions - so I do not believe he has a hostile judge

bobby WC